Robert Menard

[arayder]

Despite his protestations to the contrary, Bobby is pretty much a good little planation slave.

The B.C. courts tell him to stop playing lawyer and he obediently does so.

The airlines tell him he needs I.D. to fly on their planes and he dutifully gets other freemen to drive him around Canada.

He gets pulled over and ticketed, keeping his C3P0 badge and decoder ring in his pocket, like the good little citizen he is.

A paper pushing prosecutor in the Vancouver courts tells him to stop doing his dine and dash routine and Bobby boy does just as he's told.

He needs his daddy's insurance money so he betrays everything he's taught other freemen and, like a good little government lackey, coughs up his SIN.

Bobby, look at me. . .sit. . .stay. . .

[arayder]

It seems our boy once again not so subtly suggests to freemen that they go out and do things he, the King of the Couch, has never had the stones do anything more than talk about.

After Bobby shares a Facebook posting about standing up for one's rights, originally posted by a rather main stream conservative American on her page, a libertarian responds:

"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees..."

To which Menard replies:

"No, it is better to shoot from a prone position, using plenty of cover and concealment."

Putting aside that shooting from prone is something Bobby learned about in the Canadian government's army, the last time he made a fist wasn't to strike a blow for freedom.

Robby the Bobby might opine that he's really a peaceful man who made a slip of the keyboard. But in light of his recent calls to arm the C3PO (not that he's gonna' furnish the guns) the message is clear.

Subsequent posters got the idea and replied:

"and ammo.....lots of ammo"

"or a tank. tanks work well against most other ordinance"

The question remains why Bobby, the "Director of the WFS" and creator of the C3PO doesn't arm himself first?

Well, Bobby?

[LordEd]

Menard is on a bit of a tirade on Facebook. Possibly a turf war with Scott Duncan. Also re-challenges Mowe to answer his question (which I believe we covered off a few dozen ways, guess he missed those).

Maybe he's getting hungry again and needs some more victims.

[notorial dissent]

Maybe he's drunk his way through Daddy's money, or else hasn't gotten it yet.

[arayder]

Menard is on a bit of a tirade on Facebook. Possibly a turf war with Scott Duncan. Also re-challenges Mowe to answer his question (which I believe we covered off a few dozen ways, guess he missed those).

Maybe he's getting hungry again and needs some more victims.

Maybe he's drunk his way through Daddy's money, or else hasn't gotten it yet.

Yeah, it's. . .Duncan vs Menard - The Toronto Smack Down 2014!

Scott Duncan claims Menard is lying about his theories of legal tender. It seems Duncan blames Menard for the loss of his condo in Toronto over a dispute regarding membership fees. It seems Duncan used Menard's theories by unilaterally ending his membership agreement with the condo association. At one point on Bobby's Facebook page Scott said he was going to send a seductive lady around to get close to Bobby and stick a knife in his kidneys.

Menard responded by saying he didn't at first know what Duncan was complaining about, eventually opining that Duncan can't know if he was lying since Scott can't determine what Menard believed to be true. Bobby ends one of his derisive Youtubes by drooling over Duncan's wife Tara.

Watch out for the knife, creepy Bobby!

The Formerly Fezzed One goes on to imply in the comment section that he called the RCMP on Scott over the threat.

Why Robby the Bobby didn't send a C3PO, or just make the collar himself is a puzzlement.

The debate between Scotty and Bobby has become a battle royal for supremacy of the Toronto freeman sandbox as the two pseudo-intellectuals argue over how many freemen can dance on the edge of a looney.

But for Bobby there's another, bigger issue at hand. . .he's never demonstrated that his Association of Canadian Consumer Purchasers (ACCP) has any applicability in the real world.

The debate begs the question of whether Bobby's self-created consumer notes are a valid medium of exchange. Bobby understands that if the freemen rank and file get the idea he doesn't know legal tender from his arse they might well figure he doesn't know what consumer credit is either.

Indeed freemen might figure that every Menard project, including the Ninja Goat, won't get any further than Bobby's failed attempt to use a phony credit note during his Burnby dine and dash.

[notorial dissent]

My what an all too charming pair of what I'm not sure. I suspect they deserve each other, but....

I think it is really more of a littler pan than a sandbox to be perfectly honest, at least judging by what I've seen so far, an old, well used, seldom changed one in fact.

[Jeffrey]

Duncan blames Menard for the loss of his condo in Toronto over a dispute regarding membership fees

I'm amazed he could afford a condo to begin with.

[arayder]

Duncan blames Menard for the loss of his condo in Toronto over a dispute regarding membership fees

I'm amazed he could afford a condo to begin with.

One suspects the "dispute", rationalized by freeman theory, occurred at the same time the couple struggled to pay the mortgage and condo fees.

The question of whether the couple first went crazy or embraced freemnary is unanswered.

Either way you slice it Bobby Menard has been about as much use to the couple as he has been to every other dupe he has gotten over on.

It appears that Duncan has at least caught on to the fact that Menardian theory did him absolutely no good at all.

[GlimDropper]

I'm not going to wade through trench warfare of a facebook battle but I'd be surprised if Scott was blaming Rob for the loss of his (Scott's) condo. Scott is trapped between his whole "I am never wrong" ego trip and the "they were SoOooo corrupt that they didn't care that I'm never wrong" excuse that has to sound, even to his core followers as a clear echo of every time every other sovereign/freeman guru loses a real court case.

Let's hear Scott's side of the condo crises in his words and those of his wife. [Link] So Scott and his wife owned what I'm sure was a really nice condo in Toronto. Scott publicly dissolved all contracts, real or implied, with Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 983 in 2009. Yet despite this fact the condo association believed that Scott and his guests still needed to follow their rules. Thus what on paper seemed like it could have been a very simple matter of having the friends who were checking in to care for some cats while Scott and his wife were on vacation file some manner registration while they were using keys and key cards accessing the common areas of a 20 story building turned into a situation where Scott gets locked out of the building and later it seems, his condo being sold without his consent.

It would be hard to understand how something like this could happen, except Scott was so kind to record an example of his conversational style. It's easy to see why his intellect (while considerable) and attitude fall full flat in the real world but score points with certain personality types on facebook. BTW, while I can't prove it I am almost certain Scott has posted to this forum. In fairness to him "tycho-brahe" was addressing three points, the law, money and crypto currencies and I will credit his knowledge of (most aspects of) BitCoin as being far greater than my own (I don't care about it) but his opinions on law and money were commented on in the link above and really aren't outside the ordinary "law is contract" crap with the only possible innovation being that using BitCoin (or other crypto currencies) is THE way to remove yourself from THEIR jurisdiction.

That's a bit of an oversimplification but Scott recycles many of the usual sovereign/freeman mythology with just a little different spin and a good deal more aggravated narcissism. The one thing I hold in his credit is he doesn't seem to charge for his.,..."wisdom". Where he is happy to rail against the "FreeDumbers" the main difference between him and Robert Menard is that Scott puts the emphasis on "Free" while Robert places it on "Dumb". But there clearly is some overlap. Scott has claimed that his response to the loss of his condo was to place liens against every condo in the 20 story building he used to call home.

But in the end they are both still promulgating the same discredited ideas, even if they use slightly different words.

[notorial dissent]

I think it comes under the heading of idjits is idjits, and does what they does.

Anyone who thinks Bobby is a genius, let alone knows what he's talking about is an idjit second class, anyone who follows Bobby's instructions, is an idjit first class.

I don't deny that he is a fraud and a con man, lying coward is what I think I usually call him, but anyone who takes him seriously is just too damn dumb to be out by themselves and has sucker stamped plainly and glowingly on their foreheads for all to see.

[JamesVincent]

I read through what Tara Duncan had written and looked at some of the crap Scott had posted and it seems to me that the only thing they did was...... nothing. They did absolutely nothing. They talked a lot of smack and smackdown and then did.... nothing. Tara writes at one point of them sitting in their condo while a hearing was being held since they were "afraid" to go to court. I'm sure most of you are familiar with the concept in civil court of when the defendant doesn't show to defend himself the Judge pretty much grants whatever it is that the plaintiff asked for, within legal limits. Well, while Tara was nestled in her condo, sticking her fingers in her ears chanting, "I DO NOT CONSENT, I DO NOT CONSENT" and Scott was busy being not wrong to every one around him (but not in court), the plaintiff's attorney walked into court after filing his client's demands and the Judge said, "Mr. Duncan, do you agree.... oh wait, he's not here... so ordered.". Most law firms in that position would present a bill on the high end in the hopes of forcing the plaintiff to negotiate down to a more reasonable amount. No negotiations needed here since no one bothered to show up.

Tara's own words,

During early correspondence with Douglas H. Levitt WE, not Scott, were advised that Scott's case was groundless; that we should hire counsel as WE (again) were clearly out of our depth and putting ourselves in jeopardy. Both of us, not just Scott, were advised to report for mediation with the firm of Horlick, Levitt, Di Lella thereby enjoining both of us to the legal action; otherwise we were advised of their intention to cost us a lot of money and eventually take our home.

I do not know which she put such a stress on both of them being on the legal paperwork since, I would assume, they were married and the condo was joint property.

So the opposing law firm actually took the initiative to tell them they should look for an attorney (probably cuz it's easier to negotiate with another attorney since they actually KNOW the law, or they could have been being nice, who knows) and they refuse cuz..... I dont know why, they just did. Apparently Mrs. Duncan made a little bit of moolah from her report, nothing on what Scott did that I saw, an attorney would not have been hard to find. If Canada is anything like the US when it comes to HOAs and COAs there are attorneys out there who specialize in just these sorts of litigations and thrive on them, sometimes doing them pro bono since they hate the way these associations normally run. Would not have been hard to find a competent attorney to represent them in any case. Every bit of the fees they were assessed would never have happened (since all of them basically boiled down to no one even attempting to defend against them), they wouldn't have lost their condo, their lives would not have been ruined (and considering I saw nothing about Tara on Scott's Facebook... possibly their marriage as well?) and everyone could have lived happier ever after. But no..... we had to run down the rabbit hole and pull it in after us.

This situation reminds me so much of some others that I've run into over the years that it's disgusting. I've had the (dis)pleasure of dealing with a HOA years ago and seen what they can do firsthand over something trivial and I had a buddy of mine have his refi pushed off for 3 years over his HOA refusing to admit it was one (very long story, that, but the mortgage company refused to refi without proof that he paid his yearly fees) and I have sympathy for anyone dealing with them. BUT.... to have that situation come up and not even defend against it? After you do something like that arguing with Menard over his definition of anything makes you look like the village clown arguing with the neighboring village clown over what brings a bigger laugh, hitting yourself in the crotch or hitting yourself in the testicles. Your both doing the same stupid thing, all it is is semantics.

The funniest part of the whole thing is Tara said the plaintiffs attorneys advised her that Scott's position was groundless. His position wasn't groundless, he made it groundless with his theatrics and stupidity. The next funniest thing? They made no attempt, that I've seen, to sell the condo and move. Not happy where you are? Go somewhere else.

edit: BTW, should we have a separate thread for Duncan?

[JamesVincent]

BTW, while I can't prove it I am almost certain Scott has posted to this forum.

Good catch GD. I agree with you, it seems like the same attitude and NDs description of him matches what we have seen so far.

[arayder]

. . . they wouldn't have lost their condo, their lives would not have been ruined (and considering I saw nothing about Tara on Scott's Facebook... possibly their marriage as well?) and everyone could have lived happier ever after. But no..... we had to run down the rabbit hole and pull it in after us.

Duncan's story and his behavior on some of his Youtubes brings to mind the University of Alberta project "look[ing] at the individual experiences of people who have beliefs that may be encompassed by the term Freeman on the Land." See this Quatloos thread:
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10032

Most freemen's attempts to ruin their own lives are over traffic stops. This one is over a condo. Sometimes it's a child custody matter.

I think the freemen and women who show up in these stories have a very low ability to handle the stresses of life. . .the stuff the rest of us grit our teeth and get through. . .speeding tickets, home owner's associations bent on control, child custody courts, taxes, etc.

I have always maintained that there is group of freemen who we never see in the news, who stay calm and cope with life. But the bunch we see profile here have histories of lost jobs, ruined relationships and needlessly disastrous run ins with the cops and the courts.

The subject of this thread, Bobby Menard, preys on these poor folks by offering them what seems a simple way out of their troubles. Bobby and the other gurus get by because the freeman subculture often confuses fast talking with knowledge and intelligence.

Th irony is that the solutions offered by Bobby Menard not only don't work, but call for the sort of poise under pressure failed freemen sadly lack.

It's further irony that freemen wannabes are being duped by this zero-for-life, couch sitting lush without any of the abundance and freedom he has promised them.

[AndyK]

In my opinion, the freemen, sovereigns, SOME tax evaders, etc all fall into the:

"I'm not a failure. I'm in this mess because it's someone else who's conspiring against me."

category.

They find it much easier to blame their problems / situation on THEM who are out to get the losers.

Throw into this viewpoint a high degree of gullibility, a low understanding of all the mumbo-jumbo thrown at them, and an overpowering need to do SOMETHING to improve their situation and you end up with the various cases we see here.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

... BTW, should we have a separate thread for Duncan?

Probably. I suspect Scott will continue to be a substantial presence in Canada's OPCA community for the next while, and he does seem to advance a set of concepts that are distinct from anyone else.

That, and his ideas seem to have had a distinct appeal to a significant group of persons.

SMS Möwe

[arayder]

From another thread:

Watching freeman guru after freeman guru pretend that he or she has nothing to do with the sorry state of of freemanary and the ensuing back biting chaos is like watching so many clowns rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Any attempt by Bobby Menard to run from the clown circus he's helped create is laughable.

Of course, the self proclaimed "director" of the World Freeman Society will opine that he's had nothing to do with the disintegration of the freeman movement.

Denying responsibility is par for the course for ole Bobby. He's never accounted for a dime of donated money. Nor has he explained the failures of freeman valley, the C3PO, ACCP or any of his projects except to say there could have "reasonable explanations" for their dismal demises.

On the Ickies forum Bobby even faked an endorsement of freemanism by an Irish law firm!

Some director he is, eh?

Menard's denied any hand in the ruination of Lance Thatcher, John Morkunas, Alexander Ream and others.

His tortured rationalization of how he used his SIN to get his daddy's insurance money is one for the record books!

Now that the narcissist Menard has manipulated his new "friend" Steve Bass into bashing Dean Clifford and every other freeman guru, ole Bobby thinks he's on easy street.

But we all know better.

[arayder]

Robert Menard's latest failed plot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkEDOuH8fzg

At 1:20 "We have guys with guns too" -- Robert Menard

[notorial dissent]

Who, if they are as sharp as what we've been seeing, are unquestionably of more danger to themselves than to anyone or anything else, except maybe their feet.

[arayder]

Who, if they are as sharp as what we've been seeing, are unquestionably of more danger to themselves than to anyone or anything else, except maybe their feet.

Menard promised that his core of freeman vigilantes would receive training and technical assistance. So far there is no evidence of any such training. One suspects Menard collected enough money from the "project" to get a few Moose Heads and moved on.

The absence of any firearm training to C3POs would make the issuance of firearms to them an act of criminal negligence.

[notorial dissent]

Since I am more than certain that they wouldn't spring for anyone really competent, I shudder to think of who they might, in theory, put to doing it. Training implies organization, and intent, something that FOTL in general and World Freeman or whatever in particular seem to be woefully lacking.

In other words, as they say in Texas, Bobby baby is all hat and no cattle.