Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

[Horatius]

Sure but since I have answered so many and you refuse to maybe you can answer mine first.

If you do not personally have the right or power to govern me without my consent, how can you hire or appoint or elect someone to do so for you?

Thanks!

Asked, answered, and, as expected, ignored months ago.

2- If a people have the power to elect a representative and due only to this agent relationship those elected have the right to hire peace officers on behalf of those they represent, would those they represent not have that power themselves? If not, where did the representatives get the authority to do so?

It's an emergent property of the large group dynamics known as "democracy". We give elected officials greater power than private individuals, since they've demonstrated an ability to get enough people to agree with them to win the election. Also note, they are then held accountable for their actions when in office by all sorts of mechanisms - the above mentioned lawsuits, the willingness of their hired police officers to refuse illegal orders, and facing the electorate at the next election among them.

 

[FreemanMenard]

You are harming every other citizen of Canada by attempting to avoid paying your fair share of taxes, and by encouraging others to avoid paying their fair shares. You are using fraud in your contracts by attempting to pay bills by drawing against your illusory "birth bond," even though you have been repeatedly informed that no such thing exists.

What makes you think I do not pay my fair share of taxes?

I like every one else made a choice. I chose to not have a SIN. They chose to have one. They are now able to collect benefits I cannot, and they have burdens I do not.

Just cause they chose in ignorance, failing to distinguish between 'Canada' a geographical area and 'CANADA' a legal entity does not generate obligations upon me to be just as ignorant or to bow to the rules of CANADA like they are the laws of Canada.

As for drawing upon the common wealth, that is my right. And there is no need for me to subject myself to anyone to do so. After all, I too own a part of this country.

 

[jargon buster]

What makes you think I do not pay my fair share of taxes?

The only taxes you pay are the ones you can't get out of, consumption taxes.

I like every one else made a choice. I chose to not have a SIN. They chose to have one. They are now able to collect benefits I cannot, and they have burdens I do not.

Quite happy for your dad to take advantage of the health service.

Just cause they chose in ignorance, failing to distinguish between 'Canada' a geographical area and 'CANADA' a legal entity does not generate obligations upon me to be just as ignorant or to bow to the rules of CANADA like they are the laws of Canada.

Not this nonsense again?
Rob, anything the government of Canada can enforce on you is a law.

As for drawing upon the common wealth, that is my right. And there is no need for me to subject myself to anyone to do so. After all, I too own a part of this country.

If you own a part of Canada please provide proof of claim stating which bit is yours.

 

[jargon buster]

..and he's gone again..two minutes after I post.
Maybe my post reminded him his dads still in hospital.

 

[beren]

If you do not personally have the right or power to govern me without my consent, how can you hire or appoint or elect someone to do so for you?

Via elections. Duh.

 

[tsig]

Sure but since I have answered so many and you refuse to maybe you can answer mine first.

If you do not personally have the right or power to govern me without my consent, how can you hire or appoint or elect someone to do so for you?

Thanks!

Rob there are many tasks that can't be accomplished as individuals so we gather in groups to do them, we call these groups governments and they are generally organized along regional lines.
Yes or no?


I'll stop there for now until I see that you've got the basics down.

 

[tsig]

What makes you think I do not pay my fair share of taxes?

I like every one else made a choice. I chose to not have a SIN. They chose to have one. They are now able to collect benefits I cannot, and they have burdens I do not.

Just cause they chose in ignorance, failing to distinguish between 'Canada' a geographical area and 'CANADA' a legal entity does not generate obligations upon me to be just as ignorant or to bow to the rules of CANADA like they are the laws of Canada.

As for drawing upon the common wealth, that is my right. And there is no need for me to subject myself to anyone to do so. After all, I too own a part of this country.

I thought you had explicitly disowned Canada. How can you draw on a government that you don't recognize? Try for a little consistency here.

 

[FreemanMenard]

Via elections. Duh.

And these people you elect/hire/engage have powers you did not? How does that work?

See beren elections is how you appoint someone to act on your behalf. It does not give them powers you never had to give in the first place.

DUH.

 

[FreemanMenard]

I thought you had explicitly disowned Canada. How can you draw on a government that you don't recognize? Try for a little consistency here.

It's what you thought. Maybe, just maybe what you thought was wrong from the get go?

What I abandoned was being a child of the sate.

 

[FreemanMenard]

Rob there are many tasks that can't be accomplished as individuals so we gather in groups to do them, we call these groups governments and they are generally organized along regional lines.
Yes or no?


I'll stop there for now until I see that you've got the basics down.

Yes.

But if no one in a group has the power to force someone who is not in their group to do something, the group does not either.
Yes or no?

For the purposes of this discussion, even though others will harp on using this example, think of a woman and a group of men. How many have to vote for forced non-consensual intercourse imposed upon the woman by the men, before it is not rape? Give me a number, or accept that there is not one.

(your turn, lets see if you will answer simply as well, or seek to divert or avoid)

 

[D'rok]

Title of thread: Rob Menard's FOTL Claims
Number of claims substantiated: 0
Partial list of claims:

- Your birth certificate is really a stock certificate that you can redeem for cash and/or services
- Security of the Person means a financial instrument that the government secretly holds based on your value as a slave
- Human beings are not persons
- Statutes can be ignored if you send notices to the authorities indicating that you don't consent
- Courts have no jurisdiction if you don't consent
- Silence is acceptance
- Notaries have all the powers of police, lawyers, and judges including the ability to convene a court
- All of the above is legal - i.e., it is the way the law really is.

Chance of forthcoming evidence: nil
Chance of forthcoming trolling ********: excellent

 

[D'rok]

Government isn't rape. Cut the idiotic sophsitry and provide evidence for your outlandish claims.

 

[D'rok]

Rob, I'm thinking of moving to BC and becoming a Notary. A few questions:

- How many beehives per year do you think I would have to inspect?
- Will the current mayor of Vancouver mind if I move into his office?
- How will I have time to perform all my many, many duties?

Thanks ever so much.

 

[JLord]

If you do not personally have the right or power to govern me without my consent, how can you hire or appoint or elect someone to do so for you?

There are many possible ways. One example would be that I could hire someone with a lot more power than me who can compel you to do things you wouldn't otherwise want to. So for instance if the entire US military decided to sell their services and I paid them to compel Rob Menard to do stuff I wanted. You would be effectively forced to live under my rules even though I alone could not effectively compel you to do so.

Another would be for me to get elected to government and then pass a law governing you. Then once again you would have practically no choice but to follow my rules if the police and courts were willing to enforce the law.

There are numerous possible examples that you have chosen to ignore, making it hilarious that you continue to ask the question as though there is no answer. Your credibility on this point is dropping rapidly.

 

[JLord]

think of a woman and a group of men. How many have to vote for forced non-consensual intercourse imposed upon the woman by the men, before it is not rape?

Rape is a legal or moral description for a behavior. It doesn't prevent someone from being governed without their consent just because a behavior can be described as rape. If a group of ten men going to a woman and saying "you have sex with us or we'll kill you" is in fact an example of someone being governed without their consent.

 

[D'rok]

Which duties authorized by which Act do you think this refers to? What, all of them? A Notary can perform any duty authorized by any Act?

IS that not what it says?

How do you read and interpret it? Now remember, read only the words that are there, and do not add any, ok?

I really, really like this one. I'm pretty sure this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard from the FOTL gang.

 

[sadhatter]

Sure but since I have answered so many and you refuse to maybe you can answer mine first.

If you do not personally have the right or power to govern me without my consent, how can you hire or appoint or elect someone to do so for you?

Thanks!

Wait, wait, now you are using power in your schtick? Remember the giant rambles you gave about power being evil, force of arms, etc, etc?

But you hit it on the head, its all about power, the head of the government is not going to come to your house and demand you play by the rules, he is going to send men , appropriately armed, and with appropriate training to do so.

Right, from a pragmatic standpoint, is by far secondary to power. The best, most utopian government, would fail miserably if they did not have the big men with big sticks to enforce the rules they have.

Can this be used against the people? Certainly, there are examples through history that show force being used by corrupt governments to harm folks, is it being done now, in north America? Only in the opinion of folks that think like yourself, which are in the vast minority.

The rest of us look at the way things are being run , after hearing your schtick and say " Well, it might not be perfect now, but that system would **** things up royally.". And as such are unwilling to engage in the bloody combat that would need to take place to remove this system of government.

I mean what do you think Rob? Let's say your facts are 100% correct. Do you think this corrupt, secretive, manipulative, downright evil government is just going to say " Well, you guys got us, it was a fun ride while it lasted, here are your rights."? No, even if what you were saying is correct, the way you are going about it, is profiteering, plain and simple. If you had one ounce of belief in your own garbage, you would realize, that no amount of legal magic is going to make this go away. That , like all tyrants in the past, this one will not be overthrown with angry posts on an internet forum , or legal wizardry, but through blood, sweat and tears.

Seriously, just the concept you promote of the evil government just saying " You got us, our bad." and happily folding, is just very...Piers Anthony in its absurdity. If they are as evil as you claim the solution you promote is not going to work. And if they are not, the solution you promote is unnecessary.

 

[Robrob]

And incidentally, I am well aware of my Dad, though I realize (as do others) your attempt to mention him is simply slimy, low and out of bounds. But it is expected of you by now...

So when you get the bill for his treatment, are you just going to write your secret code phrase on it or are you going to send actual cash?

 

[sadhatter]

Yes.

But if no one in a group has the power to force someone who is not in their group to do something, the group does not either.
Yes or no?

For the purposes of this discussion, even though others will harp on using this example, think of a woman and a group of men. How many have to vote for forced non-consensual intercourse imposed upon the woman by the men, before it is not rape? Give me a number, or accept that there is not one.

(your turn, lets see if you will answer simply as well, or seek to divert or avoid)

I want to specifically adress your " If no one in a group has the power..." argument , as it is very silly.

First i will start with a common phrase " A dozen mangy dogs can kill a lion.".

Lets say we have a group of 20 120 pound gents, and they want to make a 230 pound mma fighter take out trash. Any of these gents, individually, cannot make the man do anything. They simply do not have the power to do so. But the 20 of them, working together, can easily make him do any number of tasks he otherwise would not want to do.

Every premise you come up with, is just so absurd on its face. This one, is at least in the top 10.

How did they get this power? Because we let them, we say " We will let you do these things, and not rebel, as long as the things in question are not going against what we want on a level we find unacceptable. ". We let them impose penalties on folks who skip taxes, we let them arrest folks that have broken the law, and if we wanted to stop this tomorrow, we could.

We, in this case being the majority of Canadians. And the beauty of that is that it is a mutually beneficial relationship. We provide them with the money they need to run, and they provide us with the services, that allow us to live the rather awesome lives we do ( compared to the rest of the world.).

You do not get to decide what law everyone, including yourself follows. Not because of some magic words on robin blue paper, not because of legal wizardry, but because there is simply more of us, sure this could be a bad situation. You could be a jew in nazi Germany, but you arn't. Your a person who promotes a tiered society in which some pay and some don't, but both gain benefits from services the folks who pay do.

 

[jargon buster]

We provide them with the money they need to run, and they provide us with the services, that allow us to live the rather awesome lives we do ( compared to the rest of the world.).

+1
Menard knows how lucky he is to be able to live in such a beautiful country with some of the most lenient laws on the planet.

He doesn't really believe the nonsense he spouts, he knows that he is just spreading a lie to make money from gullible spongers who his waffle appeals to.