Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robs now lost it and is off on a rant about killing puppies or not killing puppies :confused:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149956&page=2

forget the "killing puppies" Rob and replace it with "driving a car whilst untaxed uninsured and de-registered"
That fact you dont do that means you consent to governments control over you as you have accepted their jurisdiction and authourity.

Now you could prove me wrong by actually getting into a car couldn't you?
 
D'rok said:
And once again we have the classic Menard technique of "make up my own definitions for well established concepts". In this case, the rule of law. Let's see how he does.

The rule of law "states" nothing of the sort. Several people have already gone to the trouble to explain this clearly and simply. Like rumpole in that very thread:



And Horatius in this very thread:



And I posted the SCC's opinion of the rule of law in Canada:



The three elements of the rule of law are:
1. The supremacy of law
2. A body of positive law
3. Public power is legitimate only if exercised lawfully

Number 1 is what rumpole and Horatius are referring to. No one is above the law. Even those who administer it and those create it. Especially those who administer it and those who create it.

Number 2 means *gasp* statutes and the body of precedents known as common law. (The issue in the Manitoba Language Rights Reference on this point was that all of Manitoba's statutes were English only - a violation of the constitution).

Number 3 means that governments can't rule by fiat or by the will of the royal sovereign. Combined with number 1, it means we are ruled by laws, not men.

In Canada, the SCC also conjoins the "rule of law" with "constitutionalism" into a single, dual-aspect principle. The second aspect of that principle - constitutionalism - is this:



The constitution is the supreme law of the land. Statutes and common law are the body of positive law. Both combine to form the normative order of the rule of law in Canada. This normative order binds government, and no government action is legitimate if not sourced in this normative order.

Compare that with the FOTL version:

Which is the rule of men, not laws. FOTLers hate the rule of law and wish to be rid of it. They wish to be above the normative of order of Canada (in Menard's case). They want a line item veto on the law, and they grant to themselves the power of choosing which laws apply to them and which do not.

This is no different than the divine right of kings and has no place in modern, democratic societies.
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on. This needs to find its way into a thread over there to encourage them to think for once.
 
I see Micklemus has tried to explain the rule of law in simple terms but Yozhik and Herald Holmes seem incapable of getting it. Numpties.

They are so programmed to query and gainsay everything that I'd be surprised if they even get out of their bedrooms in the morning.

"That's not a door, it's a conspiracy by TPTB to convince me that it's a door and I'm having none of it"

Try hurling yourselves out the window instead guys... :rolleyes:
 
jargon buster said:
I hope they stumble across Blacks definition on Robs WFS site
http://www.blacks.worldfreemansociety.org/2/R/r1047.jpg
It would appear that its a legal principle... now does that mean its not a real law?
I cant keep up with these lot
Click to expand...

Yes, this "real law" concept that Herald The Caveman and Rob Retard have started today is a total new one on me. Is it an offshoot of the strawman? Does there have to be a flesh and blood law somewhere or something?

Still, as Herald himself has just said,

stupid is forever, I have to agree
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Elizabeth I said:
To be fair, many (most?) of those unfortunate people have serious mental and/or emotional problems and are grasping at this incoherent philosophy in an attempt to make sense of what looks to them like a dangerously disordered world deliberately out to get them personally. That doesn't make the people like Menard, who are profiting from their misfortune, any less despicable, but does perhaps explain the desperation of his victims.
Click to expand...

Maybe but i think they are mostly badly educated and have low I.Q and are not necessarily suffering mental problems.
 
D'rok said:
Let's pause a moment and give a few thoughts to the latest victim of the FOTL con game.

Icke member "Earthicastar" has bought the entire package - notices, claims, fee schedules...you name it. She's been using those "tools/tech" to try and stop a pending foreclosure. Her final notice to vacate was on Tuesday. Since Tuesday, all has gone quiet from this member. I think it is safe to say that she has been evicted and is now homeless. Perhaps an update will be posted soon.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149145

Well done Menard, you fraud. I don't care if Menard isn't personally involved in this particular case. He is of the same species of ******* as whoever it was that profited off of selling Earthicastar down the road.

This is what FOTLism does to people. This is the human wreckage it leaves behind. And this is exactly the kind of thing that many decent and dedicated lawyers, yes lawyers, devote themselves to fighting - namely, by representing the interests of the little guy against the state and against corporations. Earthicastar should have found a lawyer to help her.

Instead, she put her trust in charlatans, con artists, and worthless pseudo-legal ********.
Click to expand...

I've located a rather interesting Judgement relating to the earticastar 'situation'

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/caedce/1:2010cv01871/215063/7/
 
D'rok said:
Let's pause a moment and give a few thoughts to the latest victim of the FOTL con game.

Icke member "Earthicastar" has bought the entire package - notices, claims, fee schedules...you name it. She's been using those "tools/tech" to try and stop a pending foreclosure. Her final notice to vacate was on Tuesday. Since Tuesday, all has gone quiet from this member. I think it is safe to say that she has been evicted and is now homeless. Perhaps an update will be posted soon.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149145

Well done Menard, you fraud. I don't care if Menard isn't personally involved in this particular case. He is of the same species of ******* as whoever it was that profited off of selling Earthicastar down the road.

This is what FOTLism does to people. This is the human wreckage it leaves behind. And this is exactly the kind of thing that many decent and dedicated lawyers, yes lawyers, devote themselves to fighting - namely, by representing the interests of the little guy against the state and against corporations. Earthicastar should have found a lawyer to help her.

Instead, she put her trust in charlatans, con artists, and worthless pseudo-legal ********.
Click to expand...

I've located a rather interesting Judgement relating to the earticastar 'situation'

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/caedce/1:2010cv01871/215063/7/

The horror, the horror :mad:
 
gtm said:
I've located a rather interesting Judgement relating to the earticastar 'situation'

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/caedce/1:2010cv01871/215063/7/
Click to expand...
In addition, Plaintiffs set forth numerous fanciful claims, based on incorrect, incomplete, and superseded snippets of state and federal law, as well as their personal religious beliefs. In particular, Plaintiffs’ allegations that the government can never take its citizens’ property demonstrates a profound misconception of the nature of a mortgage as a debt secured by the borrower’s property.
Click to expand...

Ouch.
 
A review of the extensive history of Plaintiffs’ actions, individually and collectively in state court, the Bankruptcy Court, and the federal district court, leads this Court to the inescapable conclusion that Plaintiffs bring this action in the absence of good faith and with the sole intent of delaying and vexing the Defendants.
Click to expand...
Plaintiffs apparently believe that declaring an actual or assumed basis to rescind the mortgage agreement is sufficient to protect their interests and forestall foreclosure or ejection. Plaintiffs are wrong. To accomplish a valid act of rescission, Hill was required to tender the full amount due to GMAC. She did not do so.
Click to expand...
More ouch.
 
...and here's Bill with the news
"two people were today killed in an armed shootout with police....."

You can see it already.
 
jargon buster said:
...and here's Bill with the news
"two people were today killed in an armed shootout with police....."

You can see it already.
Click to expand...

"Poster on Dave Icke forum indited for aiding and abetting murder, forum itself is being investigated."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom