Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
FreemanMenard said:
Why you spamming the board with a same question you have already asked and had answered?

Taxi Driver --- commercial.
Bus Driver ---- commercial
Transport Driver --- commercial.

Driving by definition is being employed as a vehicle operator for pay.
Click to expand...

So what am I doing when I operate my motor vehicle to go to work, go shopping, go to a movie, or just enjoy the experience of driving (not that I can afford such a thing anymore)?
 
FreemanMenard said:
Why you spamming the board with a same question you have already asked and had answered?
Click to expand...


Why are you spamming the board with the same nonsense that has already been disproven?

In any case, the only question in that post was, "why do you hate common law?". Can you link to the post where you answered it?
 
Jon. said:
Alright then, let's drop all the niggling about roads and vehicles and look at the big picture. How exactly would your Freeman society be organized? How would laws be made, and enforced? How would it pay its public officials, and undertake public works? How would it protect its citizens from threats, both external and internal?
Click to expand...

Well those are some deep questions, which unfortunately I do not have the time to answer at the moment, nor do I have all the answers even if I had the time. These things would have to be decided by the group, not imposed upon them by me, and as I do not claim to foretell the future, the questions are essentially unanswerable. Unless you think that in such a society I alone would have the right to decide these things.

But I tell you this, however we decided as a group to do it, it would not require deception or tyranny, nor the abandonment of the rule of law and equality.
 
Mojo said:
Why are you spamming the board with the same nonsense that has already been disproven?

In any case, the only question in that post was, "why do you hate common law?". Can you link to the post where you answered it?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you merely insulting me does not disprove my theories, and is not debunking, regardless of what the majority of the posters on this forum believe.

Read up. I said I do not.

I asked then why you hate equality. Care to answer my question now?
 
Jon. said:
So what am I doing when I operate my motor vehicle to go to work, go shopping, go to a movie, or just enjoy the experience of driving (not that I can afford such a thing anymore)?
Click to expand...

If you are not being paid to do those things, you are traveling.

Exact same actions, with one earning money and the other not.
 
FreemanMenard said:
Why you spamming the board with a same question you have already asked and had answered?

Taxi Driver --- commercial.
Bus Driver ---- commercial
Transport Driver --- commercial.

Driving by definition is being employed as a vehicle operator for pay.
Click to expand...
Wow... That's just... wow. :boggled:

I'd be ashamed if I even considered that for a second, let alone write that for all to see. Holy crap.
 
But I tell you this, however we decided as a group to do it, it would not require deception or tyranny, nor the abandonment of the rule of law and equality.
Click to expand...

I always love how gullible dimwits throw the word "Tyranny" around so often.

God Bless Alex Jones, and all who sail in her!
 
FreemanMenard said:
If you are not being paid to do those things, you are traveling.

Exact same actions, with one earning money and the other not.
Click to expand...

As has already been pointed out many times in this thread, that distinction is rejected by the courts. What makes you stick to this delusion?
 
Jon. said:
As has already been pointed out many times in this thread, that distinction is rejected by the courts. What makes you stick to this delusion?
Click to expand...

Because repeating that mantra makes that special mantra true. Or something.
 
Jon. said:
As has already been pointed out many times in this thread, that distinction is rejected by the courts. What makes you stick to this delusion?
Click to expand...

DVD Sales, Semenards, pretend Police forces, memberships to the dead WFS, $800 from mentally ill people and the fact that "Wolverine" fell for a very old scam himself but can't see it?
 
Last edited:
FreemanMenard said:
Well those are some deep questions, which unfortunately I do not have the time to answer at the moment, nor do I have all the answers even if I had the time. These things would have to be decided by the group, not imposed upon them by me, and as I do not claim to foretell the future, the questions are essentially unanswerable. Unless you think that in such a society I alone would have the right to decide these things.

But I tell you this, however we decided as a group to do it, it would not require deception or tyranny, nor the abandonment of the rule of law and equality.
Click to expand...

You spout some nice-sounding nonsense, but please explain how this would work. How would the "group" decide these things? Heck, how would the "group" even decide who is in the "group" and who isn't? Start with first principles: does it have to be consensus, or will a majority do? If majority, does it have to be a super-majority for some issues, or a simple one on all issues?

Look, what we're talking about is drafting a constitution. If you want to provide a draft of the constitution, great. If you want to just tell us how you'd figure out what goes into the constitution, that's fine too. At least it would be a starting point.

Tell you what. I have other things to do, and won't be back to the forum until tomorrow. Why don't you think about this overnight, and tomorrow I'll start a thread where you can set out your ideal Freeman society, since that's really kind of off-topic for this thread.

If you want, feel free to start the thread yourself before I get around to it.

I'm really intrigued by this kind of stuff. It's always easier to complain about the status quo ("They're governing me without my consent!") than it is to come up with a replacement for it. Let's see if you can take that next step.
 
I can't believe how misguided you ALL are.


A driver is a bit of software that allows a computer's operating system to correctly control a bit of hardware.

ANY other definition is wrong.
 
Jon. said:
You spout some nice-sounding nonsense, but please explain how this would work. How would the "group" decide these things? Heck, how would the "group" even decide who is in the "group" and who isn't? Start with first principles: does it have to be consensus, or will a majority do? If majority, does it have to be a super-majority for some issues, or a simple one on all issues?

Look, what we're talking about is drafting a constitution. If you want to provide a draft of the constitution, great. If you want to just tell us how you'd figure out what goes into the constitution, that's fine too. At least it would be a starting point.

Tell you what. I have other things to do, and won't be back to the forum until tomorrow. Why don't you think about this overnight, and tomorrow I'll start a thread where you can set out your ideal Freeman society, since that's really kind of off-topic for this thread.

If you want, feel free to start the thread yourself before I get around to it.

I'm really intrigued by this kind of stuff. It's always easier to complain about the status quo ("They're governing me without my consent!") than it is to come up with a replacement for it. Let's see if you can take that next step.
Click to expand...
It's called "Rob's Very Cunning Plan" and you can read all about it here:

http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=675

Be sure to check out Freeman Valley too:

http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?p=44466#p44466
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?p=44567#p44567

It will come as absolutely no surprise to you, I'm sure, that these are grandiose plans with the terms dictated absolutely by one man - Menard - and the unidirectional transfer of cash is involved. (Hint: the cash flow direction is not away from Menard).
 
beren said:
I can't believe how misguided you ALL are.


A driver is a bit of software that allows a computer's operating system to correctly control a bit of hardware.

ANY other definition is wrong.
Click to expand...
You're delusional.

"Driver" clearly refers to the eponymous golf club.
 
Bishop said:
While I agree with you, I don't think that discussing political philosophy is the best way to debunk freeman claims about the requirement of consent. The reason that Menard can't force any of us to pay him is because he does not have the ability to physically enforce it. If he did, then it wouldn't matter if we consented or not.
Click to expand...


Yes, but in these enlightened times, we care somewhat about the moral authority behind the use of force, and that moral authority arises out of the electoral process, where individuals have some say in the government that operates the day-to-day functions of the State.

And Menard and his ilk fail this test, which is why they reject its validity.



FreemanMenard said:
Now you are learning Grasshopper! That is exactly what a Freeman says to government agents who wish to claim authority to govern without consent. And since they can never do it, they are left wide eyed and frustrated.

There may be hope for you yet!
Click to expand...



Too bad there's no hope for you, because, as I said, Stephen Harper can show exactly how his authority to govern arises. Feel free to reject democracy, but don't be surprised if democracy then rejects you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom