Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Last edited:
Rob seems to have found the courage to answer the question on "what is the law?"
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059807761&postcount=1
It has took him ten years to come up with this answer
What Is Law?

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.

Easy eh? Expresses clearly that it is based upon individual rights, thus individual consent would matter, and is limited in scope and power.

Easy eh???
Why of course its easy Rob, especially when you plagiarise the writings of Bastiat :rolleyes:
http://www.constitution.org/law/bastiat.htm

Did he really hope to pass this work off as his own?
A quick advanced Google search show that he has stolen quotes and tried to pass them off as his own work, what a "rotter"

So in a nutshell what Rob believes "the law" to be that binds all the people and the courts of Canada is the "opinion" of a 19th Century French Economist.
 
Last edited:
backpeddling Menard has been here and knows his secret is out

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059807865&postcount=5
I am not referring to either.

Have neither of you ever heard of Bastiat? Have you never read his essay "The Law"? It is standard for people studying law. First year law school stuff...

They are all his words, and form the foundation for much of the 'law' nowadays. So by rejecting them, you reject what most Judges and lawyers have accepted. :P

Another shot in the foot as well, he seems to be of the opinion now that the things that lawyers and Judges accept are now OK.
Yet Judges and lawyers are in on a massive conspiracy?????
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't be so quick to assume that Menard got $3k from his scam seminar. This is the same idiot who is constantly begging for money to barely get by, if he could bring in that kind of money from marks he would be holding more scam shows. I'm sure he made a few hundred from it, but remember the target audience are the mostly mentally delusional who have no money to begin with.
 
Menard via JB said:
They have some issues they want my advice on and are paying me $2K for about 10 hours work. Pretty good eh?

What possible issue in any jurisdiction would require 10 hours of FMOTL work? One could teach all practical aspects of FMOTL to an average high-school graduate in less than 35 minutes. The whole shebang is simply "if stopped by the police, then say this thing but not that thing. If it goes to court, then say this thing but not that thing."
 
Last edited:
The whole shebang is simply "if stopped by the police, then say this thing but not that thing. If it goes to court, then say this thing but not that thing."

and always closes with, "if they ignore you its them thats acting unlawfully and although you get fined or go to jail never forget that you were right."
 
What possible issue in any jurisdiction would require 10 hours of FMOTL work? One could teach all practical aspects of FMOTL to an average high-school graduate in less than 35 minutes. The whole shebang is simply "if stopped by the police, then say this thing but not that thing. If it goes to court, then say this thing but not that thing."

Somehow I don't think that is the FMOTL target demographic.
 
What possible issue in any jurisdiction would require 10 hours of FMOTL work?
Robs been studying this for over 10 years and still cant make a fist of it.

He still hasn't got past the withdrawal of consent issue.
I agree that a high school grad could easily see it for what it is in 35 minutes though.
 
lets see shall we..

Rob..."You can withdraw your consent to be governed and as such ignore any statutes you choose"
Grad...." Really, what happens when I get arrested?"
Rob..."They cant arrest you as long as you don't contract with them"
Grad..." errr... right, so what happens when they put handcuffs on me and put me in the van?"
Rob.."They will be acting unlawfully"
Grad "unlawfully in line with the law???"
Rob.." I have a DVD package for $250 if you want to know any more"
Grad .." I bet you have, I will leave it thanks"

Yup ... 35 minutes was a little generous.
 
Last edited:
serious..
You need to read up on some freeman "success" stories.

even when they are fined/imprisoned they still see it as a victory because it shows the courts and Judges to be corrupt :eye-poppi

they win every time, ..thats the beauty of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom