Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Horatius said:
The difference is, Ricky sometimes wins. :D

NSFW:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MrlEvYtl44
Click to expand...

The key difference i find, that makes ricky likeable, and the fotl crowd obnoxious is as follows.

Ricky, not to mention his friends and relatives , knows and admits he is lying. ( though obviously not to the people being lied to.) He has no illusion to the moral high ground, he just says whatever he thinks will get him out of the situation. And his justifications for things ( " If you arn't stealing, and i am not stealing, who is stealing?) , are in fact just justifications.

The fotl crowd on the other hand, does the same things but tries to wrap it all up in some legal mysticism and say " Aha! i caught you on that one.". And actually try and convince others and themselves that they are not just doing the best thing for them, but the legal, and moral thing.

It is one thing to be an admitted vagabond, if only to those you hold close. It is another thing entirely to try and have the benefits of being a vagabond ( smoking pot, not paying for things, not working, etc.), but claim to be a paragon of moral behaviors.
 
Meanwhile back on Ickes solzhenitsyn offered to take up Rob on his six question challenge,
Robs response
Nope. Am working on a reply for you, but it is Monday and I have much to do. Please be a little patient I will try to post it later.
Click to expand...
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
He doesn't have his questions ready, Im sure he's over on that other idiot Marc Stevens site to brush up.
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059892035&postcount=81
 
or maybe a trip to the bottle bank.
jna0786l.jpg
 
If you have seen this video before I apologise.

If you haven't seen it before and watch it... I apologise even more!

This video is 2.5 hours long and demonstrates how these nutjobs waste court time with their frivolous nonsense.

The Judge is officially the most patient man in the world btw. He keeps having to deal with these dingbats on a regular basis. Especially Ian Freeman, who seems to live in Judge Burke's Court.

You will not be able to manage the full 2.5 hours; it is so excruciatingly embarrassing.
Certainly whenever stoned-girl gets up to question you will need to fast-forward.

Now whilst Menard would do a Menard and claim that these fools are not following FOTL-Poo... they in fact are.

YouTube

You can view more of the same at FreeKeene's Channel

ETA: Not directly Menard related, but its the same horse-dung and I'm sure they've bought his DVDs that he doesn't profit from or offer legal advice in.
 
Last edited:
There is a fantastic moment 2h25m.
(Yes, I really did watch the whole thing).

Judge: "Do you have any intention of paying the $624?"
Freeman: "I do not pay money to criminal organisations"
Judge: "Based on comments like that you now owe £1024. Fine or prison?"

Only in America, (no offense intended;)), would muppets like these be allowed to waste Court time and then be given a choice of sentence!
 
Hes done it again :D

he now claims
The way I look at it, that Charter is for the Government and it's employees and defines what rights they have, and The Bill of Rights for the people.
Click to expand...
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059894066&postcount=137
So if the Bill of Rights is for the people, that includes him I suppose, look at its definition of the "law of Canada"
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-12.3/page-2.html
"Law of Canada" defined

(2) The expression "law of Canada" in Part I means an Act of the Parliament of Canada enacted before or after the coming into force of this Act, any order, rule or regulation thereunder, and any law in force in Canada or in any part of Canada at the commencement of this Act that is subject to be repealed, abolished or altered by the Parliament of Canada.
Click to expand...

So by definition statutes do apply to Mr Menard after all.
 
I'm relatively new to FMOTL theory/woo but isn't that what they always seem to be getting at? That they have none of the responsibilities of citizenship (taxes, paying your bills, having proper licenses/identification) but fully expect all the benefits?
 
PGH said:
I'm relatively new to FMOTL theory/woo but isn't that what they always seem to be getting at? That they have none of the responsibilities of citizenship (taxes, paying your bills, having proper licenses/identification) but fully expect all the benefits?
Click to expand...

That's about it, without going into all their claptrap about Courts actually being ships at sea etc.


ETA: Think of it like a special club exclusively for lazy no-hope pot-smoking rule-breaking gits.
A club where you can say things like:
Ive got enough skills to start an internet business but because of the governments seige against people who refuse to use banks, Im stuck.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
the main flaws in Robs argument are as follows
Here are some excerpts from his posts
The way I look at it

Also, I do not believe

in my view.

I think
Click to expand...

Unfortunately what he believes to be the truth no one else shares that opinion, well no one in Government anyway.

He simply reads statutes and mis-interprets them to suit his agenda.
What he needs to do is write to Parliament and ask them if they agree with his interpretation, if they do great, if they don't then admit he was wrong.
 
To be fair to Coco Menard, although he likes to claim he has discovered all these legal secrets he is merely copying other conmen who have gone before him.

I think "Johnny Liberty" was one from the mid '90s.

This doesn't alter the fact though that it has been proven hundreds of times, in Court, to be total bullwangle.

An interesting place to read about these low-lifes Court apperances (U.S) is HERE.
Sovereign Citizens but same crap.

They even discuss Menard in the archives, oh look- a mrmitee posted there.

A nice quote from there:
True, the funniest things I have come across in recent years are the Canadians going on about "Sovereignty" and the UCC like it actually had anything at all to do with them, and then we get the Aussies and Brits doing the same thing now, which is equally funny since as pointed out, there is only ONE Sovereign in that equation, and the last I heard, she don't share.
Click to expand...
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=6922#p117196
 
JOHNNY LIBERTY LOSES HIS
June 01, 2006
John David Van Hove of Hawaii has been a promoter of "soveriegnty" theories. He has published videos and given seminars on the topic under the name "Johnny Liberty." His website is down, but it is cached here. You may have to watch the video to find out for sure -- I haven't -- but one of the attractions of "sovereignty" seems to be that you stop paying taxes.

He must have made a mistake filling out his sovereignty application. He has pleaded guilty to federal tax fraud and was sentenced Tuesday to 27 months in prison. He will also serve three years supervised release and have to pay $400,000 in restitution to "investors he defrauded," according to a Department of Justice press release (no link yet).
Click to expand...

http://www.rothcpa.com/archives/001921.php

Yup another success story for the freeman/sovereign movement.

It looks like this nut may become active again soon, his supervised release is up
 
Last edited:
ComfySlippers said:
That's about it, without going into all their claptrap about Courts actually being ships at sea etc.


ETA: Think of it like a special club exclusively for lazy no-hope pot-smoking rule-breaking gits.
A club where you can say things like:
Click to expand...

Essentially toss any consideration for others aside, and think of exactly what you would want in society if effects on others had no meaning. Now repeat ad nauseum that the law supports these things, and bam, your a freeman.
 
To be fair he doesnt sell goods offering legal advice either. Ever. Anywhere.
http://shop.worldfreemansociety.org/

Robert Arthur Menard of North Vancouver has been prohibited by the Supreme Court from appearing as counsel, preparing documents for use in proceedings, and identifying himself in any way that suggests he is a lawyer. He was also ordered to pay costs
Click to expand...
 
I know its been discussed endlessly, but the fact that Menard still promotes this particular lie annoys the hell out of me.

Even if all the rest of his claptrap were true, this one is so dumbfoundly wrong and disproven that it makes me wonder if that thing he wears on his head is hiding some sort of lobotomy scar.

http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=168927

Originally Posted by johnny botwright
I have heard it said that the number on your birth certificate is in fact an account number, a goverment gilt, bond opened and traded by the goverment in your name, and that you can approach the ministry of finance to access the funds in this account, if the funds are to be used to improve your situation circumstances, and the communities.

any one know if this is in fact the case,? or taken this action? johnny
Click to expand...

Menard replies (my Bolded):
With the exception of course of the words 'REVENUE RECEIPT' right on the back of the BC, along with the words TREASURY USE ONLY.

One must ask who received what revenue, from whom and where is it now?

Also logic dictates that the resources of the country belong to the people of the country and if there is no mechanism or means being employed to monitor dispersion of the wealth it is a sign of theft.

Plus there are the loads of people who are using it to discharge certain debts, like student loans, mortgages and other consumer purchases.
Click to expand...


No there are not. There never have been. There never will be.
The inventor of the Birth Bond scam went to prison multiple times for fraud, conspiracy, forgery, corruption etc, yet still these con-artists blatantly lie about it.

I can understand how Menard got caught in the "Government out to get me" trap but of all the Scams out there he could have chosen a less stupid one to sell to the gullible. You need to be unbelievably stupid to believe the Birth-Bond crap.

ETA: Look at every conversation you can find from the last thirty years about the scam:
"Oo, Ive just read about this Birth Bond, is it true?"
"No, it is a scam"
"Wot u seying man i now itz troo coz ive dun it. Open yoor eyez sheep."
"Can you show some evidence that it works?"
"Itz not for mee to pruve. Try it yooself. I own a manshun and dont pay tax."
"Could you prove that?"
"SHUT IT. YOU FEWL"
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom