Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
jargon buster said:
Yep, Rob claims to have a letter from the government acknowledging he is a FMOTL and free from the restrictions of statutory legislation, yet he has NEVER posted this letter on any forum and does not even have a copy of it in his pocket in case he gets stopped by a cop.

Apparently it is with his things hundreds of miles away from his present location.
Yes that sounds believable.
Click to expand...

He did once post it, however the image vanished when he was ridiculed for not being able to interpret it correctly. It was just the usual "I have received your letter" type of letter. Nothing more.

The original conversation still exists, minus the document of course.
 
Last edited:
Is it just me or are Menard's last nine posts eerily similar to all his videos, letters, and forum posts?

According to Black's Law Dictionary, (second edition), Yada means "Talker of donkey turd".
 
Yes, still no evidence that THE PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT have the right to govern those who do not consent.
Click to expand...

I believe an airline company called Westjet once stopped a halfwit in a silly hat from getting on one of their planes without his consent.

Would you like a link to the prison population of Canada as well?
 
ComfySlippers said:
Menard has reality on ignore.
Click to expand...

Really?
Let's test you and me.
Is 'the government' composed of people?
This is a question I do not ignore. I see people.

Are these people bound by the law, or above it?
I say they are bound by it.

This is the reality I see and choose to not ignore.

What about you?
Is the government composed of people bound by the law? Or do you wish to merely refer to 'The Government' ignoring the reality that they are people and bound by the law?

Answer this Comfy Slippers, or identify yourself as one who has reality on ignore.
Is the government composed of people bound by the law, or not?

(awaiting an attempted witty reply allowing Comfy to ignore the question, and the reality exposed by the only obvious answer)
 
Stacey Grove said:
Well, there's plenty evidence of failure. But, try as he might, Menard cannot produce one scrap of evidence of a success. It must be so frustrating for him.
Click to expand...

I have presented plenty of evidence, but you continually ignore it, just like you do the fact that 'the government' is composed of people bound by the law.
 
So any evidence that I can lawfully govern you without your consent?
Any at all?
Click to expand...

Yes, I stole your logo from the World Freeman Society and you got it taken of my site by using statutory legislation and as such you governed me without my consent.

Is that enough proof for you?
 
Last edited:
FreemanMenard said:
Really?
Let's test you and me.
Is 'the government' composed of people?
This is a question I do not ignore. I see people.

Are these people bound by the law, or above it?
I say they are bound by it.

This is the reality I see and choose to not ignore.

What about you?
Is the government composed of people bound by the law? Or do you wish to merely refer to 'The Government' ignoring the reality that they are people and bound by the law?

Answer this Comfy Slippers, or identify yourself as one who has reality on ignore.
Is the government composed of people bound by the law, or not?

(awaiting an attempted witty reply allowing Comfy to ignore the question, and the reality exposed by the only obvious answer)
Click to expand...

We all know that you like to think of yourself as Socrates reborn, but your pseudo philosophies are bunkum. Bunkum you label as "research" when in fact, truth be known, you have merely fallen for BS, believed it and started to preach it in order to continue your la-la life of denial.

You are a very silly boy.
 
Stacey Grove said:
No you haven't.
You have given us unsubstantiated stories, nothing more.
Perhaps in your world that is considered to be evidence. It wouldn't surprise me.
Click to expand...

Well lets start over then, instead of arguing.

'The government' is composed of people, and these people are bound by the law.
TRUE or FALSE.

Just answer that (or not if you wish to ignore reality) and we can start over from there.

The fact that you edited my quote, shows your propensity to ignore.

Here is the ENTIRE post:
I have presented plenty of evidence, but you continually ignore it, just like you do the fact that 'the government' is composed of people bound by the law.
Here is what you posted as my quote:
Originally Posted by FreemanMenard
I have presented plenty of evidence,
Click to expand...

Why edit out so much of my post and present it so far out of the original context?

Oh right.. YOU NEED TO IGNORE IT!

:D
 
Last edited:
Rob ,why on earth do you keep going over this same old ground, no one cares what your opinion is, it's not relevant.

By the way I have already given you an example of you governing me without my consent, care to address that?
 
FreemanMenard said:
Well lets start over then, instead of arguing.

'The government' is composed of people, and these people are bound by the law.
TRUE or FALSE.

Just answer that (or not if you wish to ignore reality) and we can start over from there.
Click to expand...

Evidence is what we ask for, Rob.
Not your theories on why your stuff should work, but examples of it actually working.
Save those stupid leading questions for the idiots that fall for your wordplay.
Give us evidence.
Oh, I forgot, you haven't got any.
 
jargon buster said:
Rob ,why on earth do you keep going over this same old ground, no one cares what your opinion is, it's not relevant.
Click to expand...
That's what cracks me up.
Does Rob really believe that if (after asking a series of leading questions) he can arrive at a conclusion that supports his beliefs, he can then claim that is how the law really is?
It's crazy.
 
Last edited:
See if i write yada yada etc on one of my utility bills will my bond pay for it or do i have to write 96 is the fix like you claim in one of your piss poor videos?
 
Stacey Grove said:
Evidence is what we ask for, Rob.
Not your theories on why your stuff should work, but examples of it actually working.
Save those stupid leading questions for the idiots that fall for your wordplay.
Give us evidence.
Oh, I forgot, you haven't got any.
Click to expand...

So you choose to ignore reality, by placing upon me the onus which was always yours.

Not leading questions, but simple reality.
Did you wish to address these questions, and examine reality, or just run away crying and moaning, like you just did?

Why must I give the evidence when I am not the one claiming the right to govern? All I have to do is deny, and then the onus is yours.

I Deny your claim.
Now show me your proof.

Oh wait it is YOU who has none, right?
And it is YOU who has the onus and duty.
But you wish to avoid it by claiming I need to prove something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom