Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is it that after I read that manifesto, the first thing I thought was - this'll end up in short order being just like Canada - a constitution, laws, police force, and economy minister, etc but with legal pot.

Then I realized that the first time they ask Ole Frank to share some of the 'shine he distilled and he invites them to perform an unnatural act with their hats, or the real police come to town for an extradition it'll go down faster than (self censored).
 
Stacey Grove said:
Rather than posing a series of leading questions designed to arrive at a "Gotcha" declaration, if you have a point to make, why don't you simply make it? Or does your point rely on somebody answering a series of leading questions in a certain manner?
Click to expand...

Because Bobby asks questions. He thinks that makes him “the professor"

FreemanMenard said:
Why do you assume that is my intent? Is it because if you were asking the questions that would be YOUR intent?

I am not trying to get to a gotcha moment, this argument is merely now percolating, and needs refinement. I did come across something, which is very interesting, and I am examining it now. I apologize for being cryptic, but I simply do not have my argument properly formulated yet.
Click to expand...

Oh, please! The professor has found something? I bet it ain’t a law book!

The endless question thing is the same thing Bobby teaches his marks to do at traffic stops and in court. When cornered it’s all he knows to do.

He is averse to questions asked of him because questions recall to him the countless times in his life when parents, teachers, sergeants, policemen, judges, etc refused to kiss his arse.
 
Last edited:
FreemanMenard said:
How do they do that without even mentioning them? :D

See there is a small problem you have. There is information I have which you do not. Things I know about myself you do not. Things I know about my reality you do not. I DO IT. And they recognize it. How can you tell me I do not have a right to do something which I do with impunity?
Click to expand...

I can say i violate the law of thermodynamics with impunity, does not mean that i do.

OR

If you do it with impunity, then you should be able to have hours of video of you doing it, real video not the hackjob edits, and whatnot freemen try to pass off as evidence. You should have a grinning freeman standing beside an officer, who is giving their name and id number, and saying clearly, that they cannot arrest you according to these laws due to the fact you are a freeman.

After all, with impunity does not mean "When i can get away with it.", it means " I do it when, where , and how i want." and if that is truely the case, you should have stacks of dvd's of you troll facing officers, who are giving information that can identify them, and saying you are right.
 
Garrison said:
I think Mr Menard is missing the important part of governing without individual consent; the bit where those doing the governing add the 'or else'. The 'or else' being the unfortunate consequences of failing to obey the laws of the nation you live in.
Click to expand...

He loves to do that, and when he gets backed into a corner, out comes " But force of arms isn't morally right. " essentially defeating his own point that he can do these things with impunity.
 
FreemanMenard said:
Thats right, cause travel does not involve commerce, but driving is a commercial activity and is using the public roads for private profit. Traveling is not. Thanks for understanding.
Click to expand...

Nope.

To anyone who isn't trying to mangle the english language A 'La 'The Human Centipede " to create a new horrid creature to do their bidding, it is quite obvious drive is intended to refer to the act of operating a motor vehicle.
 
Jon. said:
"Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short" is one apt description of life in such a society.

But you'd be able to smoke pot at least...
Click to expand...

You know, i have always thought that a dystopia would be the worst place possible for pot smoking folks. Yet menard seems to be advocating this very same thing.

I mean imagine mad max, handcuffing someone to the car, placing the lighter, but before he does so rocking a joint. His slight delay gaining him a backfull of shrapnel from the car.

"Baked Max" would seem like it would be a very short movie.
 
arayder said:
Because Bobby asks questions. He thinks that makes him “the professor"



Oh, please! The professor has found something? I bet it ain’t a law book!

The endless question thing is the same thing Bobby teaches his marks to do at traffic stops and in court. When cornered it’s all he knows to do.

He is averse to questions asked of him because questions recall to him the countless times in his life when parents, teachers, sergeants, policemen, judges, etc refused to kiss his arse.
Click to expand...

" We should hurry this up, the professor needs a wank." - Rik Mayall , Bottom live.


I would suggest whenever the urge hits him to post a new bit of freemanisim on here, he follow another piece of advice from the real hero of the people, Rik Mayal.

" Have a wank professor!" - Rik Mayall, Bottom live.
 
Menard historical question. At what point did he become a stone mason vs his previous career as a bartender?
 
D'rok said:
. . . [Menard] [y]ou spout off about equality and the rule of law whenever you don't get your own way. It is clear that you simply want to make your own rules, which, by definition, is contrary to the rule of law. And without the rule of law, equality is, for all practical purposes, impossible. Without the rule of law, only the tyrant is free. We don't like tyrants; therefore, we reject your rejection of the rule of law.
Click to expand...

This is worth reading again!
 
I think I may know where Rob's confusion with regards to driving comes from. It won't be a surprise to anyone to learn that it seems to come from his failure to understand that words can have more than one meaning, and that those meanings can change. You see, in centuries past, when livestock was moved to market for sale, it was herded along the roads. This was known as driving, and the person doing it was a driver. Basically, he's read a new page of his 200 year old book on law, and gotten himself all confused. Again.
 
azzthom said:
I think I may know where Rob's confusion with regards to driving comes from. It won't be a surprise to anyone to learn that it seems to come from his failure to understand that words can have more than one meaning, and that those meanings can change. You see, in centuries past, when livestock was moved to market for sale, it was herded along the roads. This was known as driving, and the person doing it was a driver. Basically, he's read a new page of his 200 year old book on law, and gotten himself all confused. Again.
Click to expand...


From what I gather, Rob and his ilk fail to realize that, apart from its being an American text, and the fact that it has been updated several times since the edition they like to quote, Black's is a guide to how courts have historically interpreted certain terms. It is in no way a guide to how courts are required to interpret certain terms.
 
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...

These are the very questions you need to answer to have any credibility.

How will your group decide? What if some members of your group don't agree with the decisions?
 
D'rok said:
Well, we have the big reveal. You too can send Robert Menard $125 a month and receive a fake $2500 debit card from the Association of Canadian Consumer Purchasers (aka Robert Menard).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyQSEcdY6Mc&feature=player_detailpage#t=1546s

Upping the scam to a whole new level.
Click to expand...

He's posted an ad for that video on the Vancouver Craigslist as well. I don't know whether he has spammed it onto other Craigslists; my search does not turn up any others at this point.
 
Oh my he going into financial instruments - the same thing that did in the Wyoming militia and Sovereign groups.

Basically what I would characterize as delusional economics
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom