Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

[ComfySlippers]

On Friday I have a meeting with 50 people form a small town in NS, all of whom are ready to serve their notices and make their claims.

I doubt very much that there is such a thing as a town where 50 people believe your BS.

Should I be proved wrong about that you will have yet again lied to and conned people for money.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Will you be driving your car to this town on the highway?

 

[Border Reiver]

On Friday I have a meeting with 50 people form a small town in NS, all of whom are ready to serve their notices and make their claims./QUOTE]

I doubt very much that there is such a thing as a town where 50 people believe your BS.

Should I be proved wrong about that you will have yet again lied to and conned people for money.

Especially since all of the folk I know from NS tend to be fairly leery of spending money on something that's not guaranteed to work.

 

[D'rok]

Especially since all of the folk I know from NS tend to be fairly leery of spending money on something that's not guaranteed to work.

They should be even more leery given that the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia has already indicated that Menard's BS is guaranteed not to work.

http://canlii.ca/en/ns/nssc/doc/2008/2008nssc112/2008nssc112.html

Want your defence struck? Use a Menardian notice and make a Menardian claim as your defence. Guaranteed failure.

I think a letter to the Nova Scotia Barrister's Society is in order right about now.

 

[BobHaulk]

There is no limit to your BS and self-delusions is there? Cops know who I am, where I am, and what I intend to do. Unfortunately there is nothing they can lawfully do about it. But you keep making your "WE WON!" claims, this is what the hundredth time you have done so and been proven wrong, right? We are having a nice big gathering on Friday and the movement is growing here. Your problem is you think that because people give up trying to talk sense to the people here, on this forum, they have given up entirely.

On Friday I have a meeting with 50 people form a small town in NS, all of whom are ready to serve their notices and make their claims. But of course since it is not happening here on this forum, it ain't happening at all right?

Sheesh... you are so deluded in your constant claims of victory, always proven to be false.

Remember when you said I was too scared to ever post here again? Wrong weren't you?

Well, I have to prepare for my continuing and expanding actions now, have a great day.

Good luck to you Rob, i like a man who still tries despite everything. Ignore JB, he's just annoyed cause when he applied for freeman status with a notice of understanding he was told that he wasn't allowed it, he did appeal with a notice of nounderstandy but was still rejected. Upon filling other forms in like the 'Ridicule is nothing to be scared of" and the 'I really should do something worthwhile with my life but i'm taking the delusional way out' form was still rejected. His only hope now is if he bumps into the Queen while she's doing her weekly shopping and buys her a pineapple, two pomegranates and a pound of Kiwi fruit, this,i'm told is the ancient way of the fruit for freedom written clearly on the back of the magna carter. Though i have heard that if you know President Obama's real name and say it three times at midnight on the second leap year of every decade you can become illuminated and freedom will become your superhero power. A power so strong that people have been know to eat themselves in order to satisfy their need for smug self-satisfaction. It's true i've seen it on a video, mind you i've only seen the first thirteen parts the other thirty three parts are behind a paywall and cost 800 bucks to view.

 

[sadhatter]

There is no limit to your BS and self-delusions is there? Cops know who I am, where I am, and what I intend to do. Unfortunately there is nothing they can lawfully do about it. But you keep making your "WE WON!" claims, this is what the hundredth time you have done so and been proven wrong, right? We are having a nice big gathering on Friday and the movement is growing here. Your problem is you think that because people give up trying to talk sense to the people here, on this forum, they have given up entirely.

On Friday I have a meeting with 50 people form a small town in NS, all of whom are ready to serve their notices and make their claims. But of course since it is not happening here on this forum, it ain't happening at all right?

Sheesh... you are so deluded in your constant claims of victory, always proven to be false.

Remember when you said I was too scared to ever post here again? Wrong weren't you?

Well, I have to prepare for my continuing and expanding actions now, have a great day.

Your ego astounds me. You claim to be this messiah of the "real " law in the world and you spend time angrily posting to folks on the net. Couldn't this time be spent doing useful things, like maybe organizing freeman to all court protest/do freeman spells in court on certain days, or en masse, to really show everyone how much it works?

I've organized events since about age 12 , and i have to say the amount of work i put in to a punk rock concert at age 16 dwarfs what you do for your entire freeman movement, if you have the free time to post to individual criticisms of your methods online, as much as you do.

Maybe you just didn't contract to put much effort into the cause?

 

[FreemanMenard]

They should be even more leery given that the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia has already indicated that Menard's BS is guaranteed not to work.

http://canlii.ca/en/ns/nssc/doc/2008/2008nssc112/2008nssc112.html

Want your defence struck? Use a Menardian notice and make a Menardian claim as your defence. Guaranteed failure.

I think a letter to the Nova Scotia Barrister's Society is in order right about now.

More starwman arguments? My name is not mentioned in there at all, yet still you claim I am responsible. WOW.

CONCLUSION


[18] It is clear that the defendants, through their solicitor, consented to the deadline of April 1 for compliance

But you just ignore that, and then claim that I am responsible....

again, wow...

 

[Mojo]

FreemanMenard - Any interest in responding to some of the outstanding posts directed your way?

Perhaps like this one:

Hello again. You probably didn't notice this question when it was posted before:

Read the enabling clause in the statutes here in Canada. Why do you find the word 'consent' right in it, if consent is not required for them to be deemed as having the force of law? Hmmm?

Whose consent does it mention?

Here's a nice short statute where the word "consent" is easy to find: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-27.4/page-1.html

How about it? If you are having trouble with this, all you need to do is find the words "consent of" in that act and then copy and paste the eight words following them.

 

[FreemanMenard]

Your ego astounds me. You claim to be this messiah of the "real " law in the world and you spend time angrily posting to folks on the net. Couldn't this time be spent doing useful things, like maybe organizing freeman to all court protest/do freeman spells in court on certain days, or en masse, to really show everyone how much it works?

I've organized events since about age 12 , and i have to say the amount of work i put in to a punk rock concert at age 16 dwarfs what you do for your entire freeman movement, if you have the free time to post to individual criticisms of your methods online, as much as you do.

Maybe you just didn't contract to put much effort into the cause?

My Ego astounds you because I claim to be a 'messiah'? When have I ever claimed to be such? NEVER! YOU however claim I do so, and then ask I defend that position, that YOU ERECTED. You attack my 'ego' for beliefs I DO NOT HOLD. Strawman argument anyone?
Want an example in return?
I can't believe your ego, saying you are the most perfect human being on the planet, and fully able to determine everything anyone does.
(Please ignore the fact you never actually said that, just like you ignore the fact I never referred to myself as a messiah.)

Do you know what I do for the entire freeman movement, or is it possible, just possible, that you are not personally aware of EVERYTHING I DO? Do you claim to know EVERYTHING I do, or not? Cause if not, your argument fails. Badly.

 

[FreemanMenard]

Perhaps, but I would still like to encourage a response if he is still willing. I believe he did say he was going to take time to consider the points I raised but I haven't heard anything further. He may still be composing his response.

You will have to forgive me, the 'useless noise' (insults) to 'useful signal' (discussion) ratio is so high on this forum I may have missed your question. I do not feel like digging through the vile bile here to find it, so if you wish to re-ask please do so. Thank you.

 

[FreemanMenard]

Perhaps like this one:




How about it? If you are having trouble with this, all you need to do is find the words "consent of" in that act and then copy and paste the eight words following them.

Senate and House of Commons.
So what power do they have to consent on behalf of others, if those others do not consent to them being their representatives? What effect does that consent have? NONE. They can consent to that all they want, and they can bind with their consent, those who consent to them acting on their behalf. Their consent though does not bind others who do not consent, any more than you consenting to something binds others who do not consent to you representing them.

If I consent to Jimmy punching me in the face, can he then go and punch you and claim that my consent empowered him over you? YES OR NO please. (I bet you will not even answer the question though, choosing instead to insult even though I answered yours.)

 

[Border Reiver]

More starwman arguments? My name is not mentioned in there at all, yet still you claim I am responsible. WOW.


But you just ignore that, and then claim that I am responsible....

again, wow...

Perhaps not you directly, but you do advocate these positions and have yet to advise people that the arguments or positions that you are expounding on have no legal force or effect, and that reliance on the same is likely to end in unfavourable court decisions at best.

 

[Border Reiver]

Senate and House of Commons.
So what power do they have to consent on behalf of others, if those others do not consent to them being their representatives? What effect does that consent have? NONE. They can consent to that all they want, and they can bind with their consent, those who consent to them acting on their behalf. Their consent though does not bind others who do not consent, any more than you consenting to something binds others who do not consent to you representing them.

If I consent to Jimmy punching me in the face, can he then go and punch you and claim that my consent empowered him over you? YES OR NO please. (I bet you will not even answer the question though, choosing instead to insult even though I answered yours.)

The Senate and House have the authority granted them by the British North America Act (1867), and the Constitution Act (1982) to pass laws for the governance of Canada - Civics 101.

The laws they pass have jurisdiction throughout Canada - and yes, they even govern you. Look how the federal regulations caused you to have to forgo travelling by air a few years ago. Your consent wasn't required then, and still isn't today.

Could jimmy punch me in the face if you gave your consent for him to punch you? Yes he could. The question is does he have the ability to do so without retaliation?

We've already answered you about this consent to be governed nonsense of yours, and provided a concrete example from your own life experience.

 

[D'rok]

More starwman arguments? My name is not mentioned in there at all, yet still you claim I am responsible. WOW.

Do you know anyone else peddling this Notice of Intent and Understanding and Claim of Right crap?

Does any of this ring a bell?

Whereas it is my understanding a society is defined as a number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that for something to exist legally it must have a name, and, ...

Whereas it is my understanding Section 32 of the Constitution Act limits it to members and employees of government, and, ...

Whereas it is my understanding that it is lawful to abandon one’s SIN, and,

Whereas it is my understanding people in Canada have a right to revoke or deny consent to be represented and thus governed, and,

Whereas it is my understanding if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist free of government control and statutory restraints, and, ...

Whereas it is my understanding that if one has lawful excuse one may choose to not obey a court, tribunal, statute, Act or order, and that this factual truth is expressed in Sections 126 and 127 of the Criminal Code of Canada, and, ...

Whereas a Freeman-on-the-Land has lawfully revoked consent and does exist free of statutory restrictions, obligations, and limitations, and, ...
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
Whereas it is my understanding that I can use a Notary Public to perform duties found under any Act including thus they have the power to hold court and hear evidence and issue binding lawful judgments, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a Notary Public can also be used to bring criminal charges to bear against traitors, even if they hold the highest office, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I have a right to use my property without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it, and ...

Whereas it is my understanding a summons is merely an invitation to attend and the ones issued by the Nova Scotia Securities Commission create no obligation or dishonour if ignored, and,

Whereas it is my understanding peace officers have a duty to distinguish between statutes and law and those who attempt to enforce statutes against a Freeman-on-the-Land are in fact breaking the law, and, ...

Furthermore, I claim that the courts in Nova Scotia are de-facto and bound by the Law and Equity Act and are in fact in the profitable business of conducting, witnessing and facilitating the transactions of security interests and I further claim they require the consent of both parties prior to providing any such services...

Furthermore, I claim my FEE SCHEDULE for any transgressions by peace officers, government principals or agents or justice system participants is FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS PER HOUR or portion thereof if being questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed or otherwise regulated and FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS PER HOUR or portion thereof if I am handcuffed, transported, incarcerated or subjected to any adjudication process without my express written and Notarized consent...

Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein or make their own counterclaims must respond appropriately within Fourteen (14) days of service of notice of this action. Responses must be under Oath or attestation, upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury and registered in the Notary Office herein provided no later than Fourteen days from the date of original service as attested to by way of certificate of service.


[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] Failure to register a dispute against the claims made herein will result in an automatic default judgment securing forevermore all rights herein claimed and establishing permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence forevermore barring the bringing of charges under any statute or Act against...

I guess it's just a huge coincidence that they filed documents that are exactly word for word your idiotic teachings.

Will you be telling any of your marks on Friday that if they follow your advice they will fail?

But you just ignore that, and then claim that I am responsible....

again, wow...

I guess the court didn't recognize their withdrawal of consent, eh? What a shock. When will you stop selling the lie that it is possible?

Keep throwing your customers under the bus, Menard. They don't matter to you after you've fleeced them do they?

 

[D'rok]

Perhaps not you directly, but you do advocate these positions and have yet to advise people that the arguments or positions that you are expounding on have no legal force or effect, and that reliance on the same is likely to end in unfavourable court decisions at best.

Yes, him directly. Their Notice of Intent, etc. is word for word copied from his template.

He is responsible.

 

[FreemanMenard]

Perhaps not you directly, but you do advocate these positions and have yet to advise people that the arguments or positions that you are expounding on have no legal force or effect, and that reliance on the same is likely to end in unfavourable court decisions at best.

They consented.
The arguments do have force and effect, and have worked numerous times. That does not mean it works all the time, as (I know this will be tough for you to understand) all cases are different. And it is clear that you are not party to all my discussions, and thus cannot reasonably state on what I have or have not 'advised' people on. OR do you claim to have an all seeing eye, and are aware of EVERYTHING I have ever said to others, when you were not there?

 

[D'rok]

They consented.
The arguments do have force and effect, and have worked numerous times. That does not mean it works all the time, as (I know this will be tough for you to understand) all cases are different. And it is clear that you are not party to all my discussions, and thus cannot reasonably state on what I have or have not 'advised' people on. OR do you claim to have an all seeing eye, and are aware of EVERYTHING I have ever said to others, when you were not there?

They ran your FOTL defence by the book and it was struck unceremoniously.

Cite a single case where it was successful. Just one.

 

[Mojo]

If I consent to Jimmy punching me in the face, can he then go and punch you and claim that my consent empowered him over you? YES OR NO please.

You give your consent for him to do something and he then does something that you haven't consented for him to do? I would say that your consent doesn't empower him to do that.

That's one of the worst attempts at a strawman argument I've ever seen.

 

[jargon buster]

Well here he is again, I hope one of his marks from Friday is reading this forum.

Where is the meeting Rob?
It's not advertised on facebook (your only haunt at the moment)
Why isnt it on your mrmittee page?
http://www.youtube.com/user/mrmitee

Why dont you let that poster know when you are next going to be in England?
Is it for my trial?
Hows your shark lawyer by the way? Can he still smell blood?

 

[Stacey Grove]

Cite a single case where it was successful. Just one.

He never has, he never will.
He can't