Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.

What needs explaining?
The so called lay adviser is that well known conman Ray St Clair aka Baron Richecourt aka Gary Martin Beaver plus many more made up grand titles.

Let's start with the introduction. There are two incorrect claims.

1. Magistrate courts apply admiralty law.
2. A magistrate must produce his/her oath on demand.

Perhaps you could give us some evidence that proves those claims are true?
 
Last edited:
I'll just leave this here for you to enjoy
http://servantofthelight.com/content/view/251/305/

I see he dives straight into the deep end:

In the 12th Century, Nicholas Sheakspeare the true "Father of English" also known as Pope Adrian IV—reputedly the first and only English Pope of the Catholic Church was instrumental with King Henry II (1133 – 1189) in the formation of a uniquely "English" brand of hybrid Anglaisé-Latin to form the legal framework of English. The foundation of the Roman cult of law within Britain, of a two tier legal structure, was first introduced by the Roman Catholic knights Templar who established the Temple bar 10 February 1185. The bar is a "stake or rod of iron used to fasten a door or gate,” to hold the contents secure.

:eye-poppi
 
But isn't soliciting donations to hire this lawyer tantamount to an admission that that court order does apply to him, something he has steadfastly denied?

If any of his nonsense is true, why can't he just use Freeman Magic in court? Why does he need any money at all?

Yes, you are right.

Menard doesn’t mind one bit claiming that the courts have no jurisdiction over freemen. Yet it doesn’t seem to bother him one bit to insist on access to the courts when he feels he has been wronged.

Menard’s sycophants won’t have any more trouble rationalizing him getting a lawyer to represent him in a court he calls make believe than they have in explaining away his twisted use of statute law to justify a private militia and a consumer credit scam.

I don’t think we know that Menard intends to, or will be able to, get a lawyer. Lawyers cost money that will eat into Bobby’s take. It may be difficult to get an attorney to go along with what looks to be an implausible attempt to take a judge to court over a decision for which the judge has immunity from suit.

This wouldn’t be the first time Menard has talked big about legal action, raised donations for such. . . . only to have absolutely nothing happen except “work sessions” at the Denny’s breakfast buffet.
 
I like that video, it shows fat conman Ray St Clair putting another suckers neck on the line in court.
Did you know ray lives in a £650,000 house and pays his council tax?

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/47429039/Raymond-St-Clair---The-Real-Story---Part-1
http://www.realscam.com/f11/ray-st-clair-real-story-49/index2.html

PS What do you believe the video shows?

Ah! the old attack the person not the data syndrome.

Yes we know you can't attack the data so in order to make a response that appeases your comfort zone, you make something up and attack that.

Yes been there seen it before.
 
What needs explaining?
The so called lay adviser is that well known conman Ray St Clair aka Baron Richecourt aka Gary Martin Beaver plus many more made up grand titles.

Let's start with the introduction. There are two incorrect claims.

1. Magistrate courts apply admiralty law.
2. A magistrate must produce his/her oath on demand.

Perhaps you could give us some evidence that proves those claims are true?

How come he gets away with not being fined? Any explanation?

You didn't explain when previously asked.

So here we go again

Anyone care to explain this?

Who they are and what they call themselves is not an explanation

Try again only harder this time.

The guy clearly gets away with not being fined, how does he do this?

Oh and can I just say that if your answer is that the whole video is faked then it is faked with the complicity of genuine police officers, they have been recognized.
 
Last edited:
He had a liability order granted against him by the court.
He lost.

On the other hand...
My concern with cromleckderennes is that he seems to believe a crime has been committed by the defendant hence him "getting away" without being fined.

I thought freemen didn't recognise statute law and as such couldn't possibly be found guilty of anything as the laws don't exist.
Im confused by cromleckderennes stance, does he believe in the freeman theory or not?
 
Ah! the old attack the person not the data syndrome.

Yes we know you can't attack the data so in order to make a response that appeases your comfort zone, you make something up and attack that.

Yes been there seen it before.

It's very widely known, and a bit blatantly obvious tbh, that Ray St Clair is a silly conman.
 
"Well sure, this guy is a known con man, but this is legit, right? Right?"



Yes, it's a classic woo misunderstanding of the ad hominem fallacy. "Attacking the person" is only a fallacy when the attack is based on an irrelevant characteristic.

Sadly for cromleckderennes, a person's history of proven fraud is directly relevant to the question of whether or not they're currently engaged in fraud.
 
How come he gets away with not being fined? Any explanation?

You didn't explain when previously asked.

So here we go again

Anyone care to explain this?

Who they are and what they call themselves is not an explanation

Try again only harder this time.

The guy clearly gets away with not being fined, how does he do this?

Oh and can I just say that if your answer is that the whole video is faked then it is faked with the complicity of genuine police officers, they have been recognized.

I don't want to breach JREF rules, but post-count + gibberish tends to = sock / gullible / Menard
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Fezzed One likes show up claiming to have a seeming freeman win that he says needs explaining in light of the debunking freemanism has gotten.

Sometimes the story is about something the poster has heard about at work. Sometimes it’s something the poster claims to have pulled off as a neophyte using Menardian strategies.

One give away is that in these forays the poster mainly asks leading questions (a favorite freeman ruse) and a never directly answers questions put to him.

These conveniently unverifiable tales range all the way from the poster’s claim that he beat a parking ticket in New York City, to him knowing several unnamed co-workers living large, paying no taxes and driving around with freeman license plates.

The other give away is that the stories no more pass the smell test than did Fezboy’s tall tale about using his freeman brilliance to back down an unnamed Vancouver cop who caught him guzzling beer on the sidewalk.

I suspect the idea behind these tales is to give freemanism some sort credence. The concoction of such fantasies is not limited to Menard. Indeed these “I fought the law and won” stories have been aped by such Menardian sycophants as Keith (call me Kathy) Thompson and David Kannler.
 
So as not confuse, from this thread , I feel the content more suitable for this one.

---

Originally Posted by Stacey Grove
It had to happen. O'Collins is as nutty as a fruit cake. No wonder yozhik is an avid follower.

This is my favourite bit. ....
Quote:
Again the pirates and privateers are openly and knowingly lying to the people they claim to uphold as the proof and method of how admiralty law is applied to each and every one of us- is breathtakingly simple and obvious- (1) we each require a birth certificate and registration and (2) we are birthed in hospitals that literally means a military establishment and legally is treated itself as a "vessel"- with hospitals both "commissioned" and "launched" and with people formally "admitted" "onboard" and discharged.

Seriously, its like a big merry-go-round.
One bunch of numpties fall for it, grows up, forgets about it and then the next platoon of numpties fall for this nonsense.

Gurus and really bad creators of CT websites need to realise that fooling the gullible and illiterate is not something to be proud of.
Hardly makes you "a wolverine"

(I'd address that at you Menard, Hi btw, but tbh you're even more numptier than your marks!).

So, to follow on, here follows my first post, (as a dimwit who believes conmen on YouTube), which I would post on Rob's 3-member WFS or over at the DIF FOTL-Waffle Thread, a mecca for free speech of course, ...if I were allowed to.


Ahem....
---

Use iz all sheepz.
I canz prove it. Surch CumfiSlpaz on Utoob.
He haz the truth and can proof it.

Did YOU KNOW?
If yu has 2 arms then you r a victim of tirany?

Luk it up!!!!!!!!


arm
2 [ahrm] Show IPA

noun
1.
Usually, arms. weapons, especially firearms.

2.
arms, Heraldry. the escutcheon, with its divisions, charges, and tinctures, and the other components forming an achievement that symbolizes and is reserved for a person, family, or corporate body; armorial bearings; coat of arms.

verb (used without object)
3.
to enter into a state of hostility or of readiness for war.

verb (used with object)
4.
to equip with weapons: to arm the troops.

5.
to activate (a fuze) so that it will explode the charge at the time desired.

6.
to cover protectively.

7.
to provide with whatever will add strength, force, or security; support; fortify: He was armed with statistics and facts.

8.
to equip or prepare for any specific purpose or effective use: to arm a security system; to arm oneself with persuasive arguments.

If u kant c it u r blind. itz all theyre in frunt ov u.
Do yoor doo dilgenss.
Im not doing yior werki for yew.
The pTb are wonting to remove our armz!
Here is a random link toa Alix Jonz video to proof it.

Wayke up sheepul!
__________________
___
Sincerely and without malice aforethought, ill will, vexation or frivolity,
Comfy: of the family Slippers
Footwear-on-the-Loungefloor
___

---

And so, from the minds of people who believe in Menard and his ilk's BS...

I take it you are not familiar with the concept called "boiling frogs".

Trading Nukes has been illegal from the start, but that did not stop Is.Ra.El. Once the black market was established Pakistan and others followed. Prohibition has not and will never work. Prohibition only makes the price go up. Alcohol, Drugs, weapons, food, gold, silver, diamonds, oil…

Is = Isis (moon goddess)
Ra = Amun Ra (sun god, age of Aries, the ram) Not to be confused with Torus the bull that Moses destroyed.
El = Nephilim Giant (the father of all gods)

What does it spell? (Israel)

And you thought the Hebrews were monotheistic.

--

One born every minute :)

ETA: Just to clarify;

Potato:

Pot - the stuff you cant afford to smoke.
At - Where you are now.
0 - What you are now.

You see, anyone can play childish word games. Unfortunately the dimwits who fall for this nonsense fail to realise that word games mean nothing out of the playground.
 
Last edited:
elmer-fudd.jpg

I was dwiving, its totawy differwent , I am a fweeman on ver wand.
No contwact, no consent.
 
I find it amazing that a group of "people" can "do their research" to such an extent that they can find various obscure snippits of legal components to hash together into theories that take time to untangle and point to the contradictions, yet are completely surprised when the result is living in a court room, home is foreclosed, and/or wind up in a jail cell.

Seems like my home province of BC is a popular location for them. Love reading this thread to see more "successes".

("People" defined in the sense that most use when referring to human beings, and "do their research" defined as lurk on internet forums, website with really big text or colourful fonts, or youtube videos.)

For some reason, I think about 'the matrix' plot when I think freeman. If I was an evil corrupt government, I would create some belief system for the 'uncontrollable' to dedicate all of their efforts into. The freeman theory is perfect in that:

a) They are 'generally' harmless in a violence sense
b) They talk/work in an easily identifiable fashion
c) They present themselves in a way that makes them look paranoid or insane.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom