Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Paul said:
Non loony reporting from the Wirral Globe.
Click to expand...


Hey, go look at who the first comment is from!




JLord said:
What is the significance of this?
Click to expand...


I know for things like paying rent and condo fees, it's sometimes possible to "withhold" your payments if the other party is in breach of the lease or condo agreement. However, this usually involves paying it into an escrow account that will cover the rent or fees owed once the dispute has been resolved. This shows your intent to pay, while still putting financial pressure on the delinquent party.

So, if he's really "withholding" his tax, he should be able to show an escrow account with the proper amount in it, to be turned over once the UK no longer supports the wars he's ostensibly opposed to.
 
Just wanted to point out for anyone unfamilar that commentor Prussian Blue is undoubtedly a Hitler hugger. Prussian blue (ferric ferrocyanide) is a residue that formed on the walls of the gas chambers. :mad:
 
JLord said:
According to the article:



What is the significance of this?
Click to expand...

If its anything like the US, the anti-tax protestor sect tries to make their shenanigans publicly acceptable/noble by claiming that the government is engaging in some sort of terrorist action by being involved in some foreign conflict. Thus, since the soverign government also has laws that say supporting terrorism activities are illegal, giving the government any money puts you in violation of the law. It lets them do a little "look im being a noble person and your the evil terrorist government" story.

The problem is, and has always been, that you are not entitled to withhold money from the government (I don't care what government it is, everyone with a tax system has had someone pull this and ruled similarly) because you disagree with its policy or perceive the government of engaging in some sort of criminal action. If you genuinely think the government, as he claims, is engaging in terrorist activities because of its foreign policy (he thinks the Iraq war was terrorism I'm sure) then there are other methods to seek redress from the government which you are entitled to take.
 
LightinDarkness said:
The problem is, and has always been, that you are not entitled to withhold money from the government (I don't care what government it is, everyone with a tax system has had someone pull this and ruled similarly) because you disagree with its policy or perceive the government of engaging in some sort of criminal action. If you genuinely think the government, as he claims, is engaging in terrorist activities because of its foreign policy (he thinks the Iraq war was terrorism I'm sure) then there are other methods to seek redress from the government which you are entitled to take.
Click to expand...



However, if they were "withholding" their tax by paying it into an escrow account as I described above, they'd at least have some moral authority for their actions. As it is, he's probably just keeping the money and spending it on coke&whores, so he's somewhat less noble.

I could see myself getting to a point where I might take actions against a government that the government in question would consider illegal (take a look at the French Resistance, for example), but if I were to do that, I'd expect to take my lumps. I certainly wouldn't be whining about how I "Don't consent to this!" and only doing things that benefit myself while inconveniencing the government not at all.

That's the thing these guys don't get about people like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who engaged in civil disobedience. They expected to be arrested. That was part of their plan.
 
Brian1709 said:
An update on our hero.

Leaving aside the rhetoric. It seems he failed to turn up for a hearing last week, a warrant was issued for his arrest and he was taken before a magistrate and given 21 days in prison.

http://www.ukcolumn.org/article/update-arrest-roger-hayes
Click to expand...

I'm gobsmacked.

Our hero Menard, the Canadian conman who doesn't understand Canadian Law, is posting his theories about English Law in..... The Wirral Globe ?!? :jaw-dropp

I fully imagine that Roger Hayes is sitting in his cell laughing and saying
"The joke is on you. You have imprisoned my all-caps name. I, the human being, am still free.
(And I'm not bankrupt)"

Menard... you are a complete and utter tool and a laughing stock.
I know you think that you are a comedian, what you consistantly fail to recognise is that people laugh at you because of your stupidity.. not your stand-up skills.
(How you could even manage stand-up is amazing with all the bullet holes in your feet)
 
Last edited:
I thought the whole point was to avoid arrest, now it's taken as a given.

FOTL = Jails R Us.
Click to expand...
A new day has dawned in fmotlville has it not.
We have been telling Menard to 'change the record' for a while now, Im surprised he went this way though.

Maybe its his way of getting people to submit to his C3POs
 
Last edited:
Keep up the great work guys on keeping Menard and the fmolt on the move, on the defensive and from growing - by displaying their ignorance to the public

An aside I was looking at some notes I made back in the 90's about SC. A number of lower profile zealots of SC were later found murdered by 'persons unknown', could that have been assassinations of SC promoters by those they had beguiled into losing their assets and going to jail?

I just have three lines of text...were a number of lower level SC promoters killed off in this manner?
 
Last edited:
Horatius said:
However, if they were "withholding" their tax by paying it into an escrow account as I described above, they'd at least have some moral authority for their actions. As it is, he's probably just keeping the money and spending it on coke&whores, so he's somewhat less noble.

I could see myself getting to a point where I might take actions against a government that the government in question would consider illegal (take a look at the French Resistance, for example), but if I were to do that, I'd expect to take my lumps. I certainly wouldn't be whining about how I "Don't consent to this!" and only doing things that benefit myself while inconveniencing the government not at all.

That's the thing these guys don't get about people like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who engaged in civil disobedience. They expected to be arrested. That was part of their plan.
Click to expand...

I think you certainly would appear more genuine and be much more likely get people to support your cause if you did something like you describe. As you say, holding it in escrow at least demonstrates a willingness to pay.

However, from my expert googling the IRS considers it as someone simply not paying their taxes - even if its in escrow - like any other tax denier. I would guess but don't know that every other country does the same, although I have no way of knowing, perhaps other people could chime in on UK where our current FMOTL crazy was taken to jail.

There are of course other real ways to seek redress, and you can protest by not paying taxes - but only if you don't owe them according to the IRS. There are examples of people quitting their jobs to protest the war since that way they would be considered below the threshold for taxation. Perfectly valid, and although I think thats nuts at least those people have true conviction and I can respect that. But I've found cases of IRS successfully bringing cases against people for all the below:
- Owing taxes and not paying them because the tax denier disagrees with government policy, usually wars.
- Paying the amount you owe in taxes to charity instead of the government as a protest of policy.
- Underpaying taxes by whatever % the war budget makes up of the overall budget.
- Refusing to pay unless you receive a guarantee that the tax money will not be used in a war.

Interesting list of IRS actions against war protestors:
http://www.warresisters.org/convicted_wtr.htm
 
LightinDarkness said:
However, from my expert googling the IRS considers it as someone simply not paying their taxes - even if its in escrow - like any other tax denier. I would guess but don't know that every other country does the same, although I have no way of knowing, perhaps other people could chime in on UK where our current FMOTL crazy was taken to jail.
Click to expand...



Yes, as I said, it gives you moral authority, not necessarily legal authority. If you want to convert the one into the other, well, that's where politics and PR come into it. Neither of which tax protestors in general seem very good at.
 
Escrow accounts are not really very common in the UK. The only situation in which I think most people would encounter one would be in a mortgage, and then the escrow is just the solicitors' client account, used to hold the purchase price of the property from when the money is disbursed by the bank and when the transaction is completed. Ongoing escrows like you get in US mortgages for tax and insurance are not usual in the UK. Suggesting that this is just another idea that Hayes pinched from across the Atlantic (he also uses it in his unlawful bank spiel).

I can't recall a reported case on tax protests in the UK, but in the past people refusing to pay council tax on the grounds that increases were unfair, have been imprisoned. I think that it makes no difference whether Hayes put the money in escrow or not: if he's got to the stage of committal for non-payment, it has already been determined by the court that he owes the money. That he has still not paid it is clearly "willful" non-payment.
To be honest I was a bit disappointed that Hayes was arrested for council tax rather than in relation to his unlawful bank activities, which have a much greater potential to harm the public. The original article in the UK column was a good laugh though. So much hyperbole...
 
Aulus Agerius said:
To be honest I was a bit disappointed that Hayes was arrested for council tax rather than in relation to his unlawful bank activities, which have a much greater potential to harm the public. The original article in the UK column was a good laugh though. So much hyperbole...
Click to expand...



Well, nothing in this prevents them from also charging him with banking fraud, but I suspect it's a lot easier to prove tax evasion. The banking fraud would probably rely on the victims coming forward, and as we've seen, Fotlers are quite incapable of seeing they're being victimized.
 
taken from WFS
http://public.worldfreemansociety.o...sted-charged-tried-in-secret-court-and-jailed

Danny and his team will submit an application for Habeas Corpus tomorrow morning, at the High Court in Manchester, which can be found in the new "Civil Justice Centre".

The application will be heard under "Supreme Court Order 54".

The hearing is at 10am, and we would like to ask that as many people as possible turn up to witness the application and support Danny and his team.

Roger (and we) would also like to express his/our appreciation for the fantastic support.
Click to expand...
I hope the writ is written in ALL CAPS or they wont know who they mean.
Also
Donate to the Roger Hayes welfare fund. Visit lawfulbank.com the donate button is under the video one of Lawfulbank portal tickelo is managing donations lawfulbank.com/
Click to expand...
cherr..ching.
 
Does anyone else notice that everytime a FOTLer winds up in jail they always pull this habeas corpus stunt even though its NEVER WORKED.

What they think will happen: That if they march into court with enough supporters with an elaborate FOTLer style writ in small letters (not acknowledging THE NAME of course), that the judge and court staff will flee and release the prisoner, and they will waltz out of jail without consequence.

What always happens: They attempt to intimidate the court with a handful of LOUD and harassing supporters who drive the court staff insane, look like idiots by not knowing what habeas corpus ACTUALLY is when they present their little signed in blood writ, and then they get laughed out of court. This is because the FOTLer has already been before a judge, and thats all habeas corpus does - is demand that you get your time in front of the judge and that the court determine they have a right to hold you (which they did when issuing the sentence).

It never works, it never has worked, but they keep on doing it. Its the definition of insanity. And of course when this fails, they will claim it snot because they don't understand how it works but the court is simply lying and refusing to acknowledge their true freeman status.
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
I wonder if the application will be as successful as this one.
Click to expand...

I hope the judge for our FMOTLer is as blunt as this one:

The basis of the claim brought by the Claimant appeared to be that he had not given his consent to the proceedings in the Magistrates' Court and that such consent was necessary. Further, he seemed to assert that his consent was necessary for a term of imprisonment to be imposed. His McKenzie friend sought to challenge the basis of my jurisdiction. He also sought to criticise the behaviour of police officers who had been involved in the incident giving rise to the arrest of the Claimant and his subsequent remand and appearance in court.

I have no doubt that this claim is entirely hopeless. I am satisfied, completely, that the Claimant was convicted by a competent court of a criminal offence and that the sentence imposed upon the Claimant was entirely lawful. In those circumstances there can be no basis for the grant of the writ of habeas corpus.
Click to expand...

Yep...just as successful. Also, frankly, I am surprised the court even had the hearing. I thought one of the first things they did when putting you before a judge was determining whether you could be held. Otherwise couldn't they just constantly do a petition for this just to play with the court?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom