• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bishop said:
Okay, that's fair enough. I guess I just got a little bit worried when I saw the last few posts.
Click to expand...



As jsf said, it really comes down to a question of style, and substance. "The Freeman on the Land belief structure, as promoted by, say, Robert Menard, is a complete scam, as proven by the utter failure of these alleged "Freemen" to succeed in any actual action in any actual courtroom" would be acceptable.
 
And hes back..............
Quick question Rob....when/if I recieve my summons to court (of my choosing UK of course ;)) can I send in a fee schedule of £10 million to be paid upon my attendance and participation?
If yes, have you got it, if no ,why not?
 
menard wrote
JB says that if you refuse to consent to the terms of a contract he presents, (and thus do not consent to his rules) he can then refuse to consent to contract law, (he calls it 'Freeman Philosophy) and have the terms of the contract enforced.
Click to expand...

I really dont know what your talking about Rob.
Let me just for old times sake explain your own concept to you.
You feel you can refuse to consent to my rules and act as you please.
If I say I dont consent to you imposing on me by forcing your rules on me (your non-consent) then I have no choice in the matter?
How does that work?
Your non-consent has to be agreed by another party or it doesnt exist, there is no contract.
Now as for the government having a contract with you, they have it because you live within its jurisdiction, its that simple, if you wish to remove that consent you need its agreement.

Great to have you back by the way :D
 
FreemanMenard said:
Well, I can't force them to arrest me, or take me to court, nor do I purposely and willfully break the law or harm others. I do exercise my rights, have been doing so all summer and have not been hassled at all, even though they saw me traveling down the road in unregistered and unlicensed truck, and knew exactly where I was the entire time. ...
Click to expand...

FreemanMenard said:
Well, its been fun, but I have to go now. Have to travel back to my land, in my truck. ...
Click to expand...

This is the part that cracks me up. This guy is so proud that he (apparently) has evaded what, a hundred bucks or so worth of vehicle fees, just by spending years acting like a lunatic? Well, good for you!
 
menard wrote
I do exercise my rights, have been doing so all summer and have not been hassled at all, even though they saw me traveling down the road in unregistered and unlicensed truck, and knew exactly where I was the entire time.
Click to expand...
If you were in an unlicenced unregistered truck you were a passenger (you dont have the belief on your own argument to do it yourself), if you are suggesting you were driving thats a break from your ten year habit of not driving/controlling a vehicle.

Its basically a lie Rob, and you know it.
PS
I hope this doesnt break forum rules, Im not attacking the arguer by calling him a liar, Im saying hes posted a lie, its up to him to back up that statement with evidence.
 
jargon buster said:
menard wrote

If you were in an unlicenced unregistered truck you were a passenger (you dont have the belief on your own argument to do it yourself), if you are suggesting you were driving thats a break from your ten year habit of not driving/controlling a vehicle.

Its basically a lie Rob, and you know it.
PS
I hope this doesnt break forum rules, Im not attacking the arguer by calling him a liar, Im saying hes posted a lie, its up to him to back up that statement with evidence.
Click to expand...

Better yet Menard, write to the police station and tell them that on x day at location y you will be there in your unregistered truck and invite them to try and arrest you - invite the news too. Get that proof you so desparately need
 
Haven't looked a this thread for some time but nothing seems to have changed. A freeman says so-and-so had his taxes written off, his parking ticket voided, or his restaurant bill comped but surprisingly is unable to provide any evidence of such; if you want to find out you need to do the research yourself.

Ho, hum.
 
Rob Wrote
Can't, for I have no victims.
But there are plenty of people, who are not 'my victims' who have used them successfully.

Of course you will not believe it even if they told you to your face, would you?

http://www.youtube.com/user/syndrah#p/u

Contact him and ask him about getting paid.
Click to expand...

Thats the same guy who claimed he had success with A4V on WFS.
He started a thread about paying for a Pizza by sending the bill back A4V, when people asked him for some proof he deleated the entire thread.
 
One could teach twelve monkeys, thru Youtube, to perform open heart surgery... if he were a good enough teacher with enough time.

Hans said:
By the way Menard

How come you don't force a showdown on your 'beliefs' in a court room? Tell them you will violate rule x, do it in a way they have to arrest you then show us how you walk out of court a freeman.
Click to expand...

How about we just see which part of this diagram you guys don't UNDERSTAND or don't ACCEPT....

Spirit of Law
- Self-Determination --> Spirit of Individuality
- History: Law/Rights/Honor --> Spirit of Humanity

Process of Law
- Due Process: Notice & Opportunity to Respond, Inquire
- Contracts: Consent, Acquiescence, Fraud
- Records: Form your own; Submit all responses & evidence to BOTH the judge & court reporter.

Effect of Law
- Political Status: Jurisdiction, Citizenship, Nationality, Allegiance, Authority
- Commercial Status: Corporations, Agent in Commerce
Click to expand...

Most of you guys seem to be think you know some stuff, so what concepts are missing from this big picture? Or are these words meaningless to you?
 
Last edited:
all you have to do Grndslm is prove your 'theory' in court - please go do so and save the philosophy for after you win.....
 
http://www.suijurisforum.com/subject-matter-jurisdiction-t421.html

I did win. The case was Dismissed WITH PREJUDICE.

I could likely go back and get some rewards for my damages, but I'm not interested at the moment. Bigger fish to fry.

The issue at hand was whether a judge had authority to lock me up for NO REASON. He did not. I specifically told him, "I do not consent. I object. I decline to contract." Then he released me 10 or 15 minutes later and let me choose from two rigged options, so I too the easy one -- probation. The judge then told me that I could not appeal, which was a lie. I was able to do it and won.

I didn't gain anything, but 10 or 15 minutes in a jail cell against my consent and with NO REASON could get me something, I'd imagine. Just not worth it. I'd rather just smile at the judge every time I see him and know that I'll be watching him.
 
Hans said:
all you have to do Grndslm is prove your 'theory' in court - please go do so and save the philosophy for after you win.....
Click to expand...

Which part of this...

Spirit of Law
- Self-Determination --> Spirit of Individuality
- History: Law/Rights/Honor --> Spirit of Humanity

Process of Law
- Due Process: Notice & Opportunity to Respond, Inquire
- Contracts: Consent, Acquiescence, Fraud
- Records: Form your own; Submit all responses & evidence to BOTH the judge & court reporter.

Effect of Law
- Political Status: Jurisdiction, Citizenship, Nationality, Allegiance, Authority
- Commercial Status: Corporations, Agent in Commerce
Click to expand...

... do you think is a theory? That was my initial question for you, Mr. Smartypants.

Is "Due Process" a conspiracy theory? Not "Law & Politics"?

Are Notice, Inquiry, Contracts, Consent, Acquiesence, Fraud, Records, Third-Party Court Reporters, Jurisdiction, Citizenship, Nationality, Allegience, Corporate Persons, just theories???

:covereyes

Don't look now!!!!
 
grndslm said:
http://www.suijurisforum.com/subject-matter-jurisdiction-t421.html

I did win. The case was Dismissed WITH PREJUDICE.

I could likely go back and get some rewards for my damages, but I'm not interested at the moment. Bigger fish to fry.

The issue at hand was whether a judge had authority to lock me up for NO REASON. He did not. I specifically told him, "I do not consent. I object. I decline to contract." Then he released me 10 or 15 minutes later and let me choose from two rigged options, so I too the easy one -- probation. The judge then told me that I could not appeal, which was a lie. I was able to do it and won.

I didn't gain anything, but 10 or 15 minutes in a jail cell against my consent and with NO REASON could get me something, I'd imagine. Just not worth it. I'd rather just smile at the judge every time I see him and know that I'll be watching him.
Click to expand...

Your link just points to a post you made on another forum so all we still have is your word on it.
 
grndslm said:
Which part of this...



... do you think is a theory? That was my initial question for you, Mr. Smartypants.

Is "Due Process" a conspiracy theory? Not "Law & Politics"?

Are Notice, Inquiry, Contracts, Consent, Acquiesence, Fraud, Records, Third-Party Court Reporters, Jurisdiction, Citizenship, Nationality, Allegience, Corporate Persons, just theories???

:covereyes

Don't look now!!!!
Click to expand...

Let us know when you get a court to agree with your theory
 
grndslm said:
Which part of this...

Spirit of Law
- Self-Determination --> Spirit of Individuality
- History: Law/Rights/Honor --> Spirit of Humanity

Process of Law
- Due Process: Notice & Opportunity to Respond, Inquire
- Contracts: Consent, Acquiescence, Fraud
- Records: Form your own; Submit all responses & evidence to BOTH the judge & court reporter.

Effect of Law
- Political Status: Jurisdiction, Citizenship, Nationality, Allegiance, Authority
- Commercial Status: Corporations, Agent in Commerce
Click to expand...

... do you think is a theory?
Click to expand...


You are right, it isn't any kind of coherent theory.
 
grndslm
I think you have been watching the "Moors in court" you tube videos
I was under the impression subject-matter jurisdiction can be challenged at ANY time."
Click to expand...

Thats exactly the same defence they use everytime, Im surprised you didnt quote the case number, they always do.

PS it doesnt work for them either
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom