Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread is being talked about over at TPUC, heres what being said
http://tpuc.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=39651&start=4080
It appears Rob Menard is having much fun over at James Randies forum.

Good old Jargonbuster attempting to give him a hard time, along with a few others.

It is a long thread but I went through it completely but it is still ongoing...

From what I read Rob is coming across as the most mature over there and answers all their questions very clearly but they do not do same for him.

In fact it is very childish behaviour against him and many false claims to their gaining victory over him.

Well worth a read...
Click to expand...
He must be having a laugh :D
 
You know, JB, I hate to sound like I agree with Menard or anything, but do you really need to monitor and report on him like this? I'm all for con artists being called out publicly if they're trying to pull another scam (like the "stolen laptop" farce), but there's no need for you to give us a running commentary on every post that he makes on another forum.

No offense meant, by the way. I just think you're being a little bit overzealous.
 
but there's no need for you to give us a running commentary on every post that he makes on another forum.
Click to expand...
You could put me on ignore and also stop reading this thread if you feel its an issue.
 
Bishop said:
No, I don't think it's an issue. Just a bit unnecessary.
Click to expand...

Its called keeping him in the public eye. People like this thrive by dropping out of the spotlight and coming back with a renewed schtick, by consistently making sure his idiocy is pointed out, JB, is helping to stop that from happening to menard.
 
sadhatter said:
Its called keeping him in the public eye. People like this thrive by dropping out of the spotlight and coming back with a renewed schtick, by consistently making sure his idiocy is pointed out, JB, is helping to stop that from happening to menard.
Click to expand...

Do it. I appreciate it. Am about to release a new work and would love as much public awareness as possible. I have no doubt the people on this forum will reject it without examination though. But guess what? I do not care if you folks reject it while embracing your ignorance. It is expected of you by now.
 
FreemanMenard said:
I do not care if you folks reject it while embracing your ignorance. It is expected of you by now.
Click to expand...
In fact, you do not care so much that you just had to come and tell everyone about this wonderful new work and how you don't care what we think about it.
 
Rob, how many times have i told you , you have to keep below the radar if you want to make any money from the gullible, you can't keep coming on here and other forums making a fool of yourself because you can't verify your claims.
I guess your ego just won't let you do it though.

PS I loved the video of you being upstaged by a ballon, any more like that would be appreciated.
 
Paul said:
In fact, you do not care so much that you just had to come and tell everyone about this wonderful new work and how you don't care what we think about it.
Click to expand...

Did you miss what I was replying to? :rolleyes:


Oh wait, your argument is that my words are not a response to someone else's at all, but I just came here for no other reason then to share that I have a new work being completed.


PS- I do not care what you think about it, and I am willing to bet that one and all here will reject it upon a cursory examination without any regard for the law and statutes it is based upon. I have no doubt the people here will call it freeloading without examination.

I do care about the lurkers though, and them seeing how you all reflexively reject it highlights your weakness and inability to fairly weigh and decide.

It ain't about what you, or the members of this forum think. That does not mean the only people who read this forum are members though. And it does not mean what those non-members think is not important.

Too bad you are so fixated on attacking me you can't see the difference.
 
FreemanMenard said:
PS- I do not care what you think about it, and I am willing to bet that one and all here will reject it upon a cursory examination without any regard for the law and statutes it is based upon..
Click to expand...
Just hypothetically (because we know this could never, ever happen...right?) what if there are authoritative decisions from, say, the Supreme Court of Canada, or even from any level of court in Canada, that completely refute your outrageous attempts at statutory interpretation? Will you carry on selling your materials without any regard for the laws that you pretend they are based on?

And are you coming up with any new material this time? Or are you just repackaging the same crap that has already been authoritatively refuted by the Canadian courts?

Will you have the courage of your convictions and try any of your own advice this time? Or will you continue to rely on patsies to take the fall for you?

I'm sure the lurkers would love to know.
 
Just hypothetically (because we know this could never, ever happen...right?) what if there are authoritative decisions from, say, the Supreme Court of Canada, or even from any level of court in Canada, that completely refute your outrageous attempts at statutory interpretation? Will you carry on selling your materials without any regard for the laws that you pretend they are based on?
Click to expand...

You do not even know what those interpretations are, yet label them as outrageous. Welcome to the RANDI forum, lurkers.

And are you coming up with any new material this time? Or are you just repackaging the same crap that has already been authoritatively refuted by the Canadian courts?
Click to expand...

Do you still beat your wife? (asked of someone who has never done so) To answer your very loaded question requires the acceptance that what was previously shared was crap.


Will you have the courage of your convictions and try any of your own advice this time? Or will you continue to rely on patsies to take the fall for you?
Click to expand...
To answer requires one to accept the last aspect, again, "Will you still beat your wife?" No way to answer this without agreeing that I was relying on patsies, which was never true, but that is how the people here try to make points, dear lurkers. Either answer (YES or NO) will seem to agree with your incorrect assertion that I rely upon patsies.) Again, welcome to the RANDI forum, Lurkers.


I'm sure the lurkers would love to know.
Click to expand...
The Lurkers with a brain see you asking loaded questions which cannot be answer without accepting your misconceptions.
FAIL!
 
Last edited:
Lurkers, notice how they attack the position, without any knowledge of what it is. This is the standard operating position of the people on this forum.
 
Bishop said:
Just like you're about to sue that airline.

Just like you're about to sue the law society.

Just like you're about to prosecute JB.
Click to expand...

Just like Rob promised this over a year ago:

Also have some legal action lining up to settle a certain issue. I wonder how ole JB will feel with a court ruling that states flat out that individual consent is required, and his mantra this last two year has been wrong, and the things I espouse are proven true.
Click to expand...
How's that case going, Rob?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom