Dean Clifford - A Tale of Two Gurus

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

This review is going to be a bit different from the way I usually comment on Canadian OPCA / Freeman-on-the-Land / Sovereign Citizen characters, because unlike other instances I do not have highly reliable sources on which to draw, such as reported case law. My principle subject, Dean Clifford, has remained a somewhat elusive individual, but one with a large, somewhat amorphous footprint.

Turning Dickensian, this could be called a Tale of Two Gurus, as the histories, success, and failure of its two main actors, Robert-Arthur: Menard, and Dean Clifford, are closely intertwined. These two are the leading Freeman-on-the-Land gurus, and while I have not observed them in open conflict, they nevertheless are clearly rivals. The rise of one has been accompanied by the ruin of the other.

I’ll start in 2008. Menard’s career extends years before that, but I do not think I am a person particularly well positioned to comment on that pre-history. Suffice to say at this point Menard’s star was ascendant. His home organization, the World Freeman Society (http://worldfreemansociety.org/), was growing at a hefty clip, and had a very active user base within Canada and other countries. He had begun recruiting members of his private police force, the Canadian Common Corp Peace Officers (http://www.c3p0.ca), had outlined a vision for a bold new society in his book “Rob’s Very Cunning Plan” (it isn’t), begun collecting funds for seizure of a area that would become Freeman Valley, was travelling and speaking across Canada, and flogging his merchandise to an eager customer base, both online and in person.

Around this time a new Freeman organization emerged in Winnipeg, FreeManitoba.com. The website is now defunct, though there is an essentially inactive remnant at http://wwwfreemanitoba.ca. The leading personality (and perhaps founder) of FreeManitoba was a new figure, Dean Clifford. Clifford communicated almost exclusively by the tried and true ‘dude with whiteboard’ motif, and cut a significantly different impression than Menard. Their personalities and approaches diverged in two particular ways.

Clifford rarely said he had the answer, but talked about trying things out, moving through A4V, various Freeman schemes to negate state control and escape tax. Menard always said he had the answer – just follow my advise and everything works. Here’s the paperwork, the magic steps, etc.

Their perspectives also were different. Menard has always been based in a leftist, ‘hippy’, ‘occupy movement’ perspective, and while he rails against The Man, it’s all very much ideological, and resistance is secondary to forging a Menardian Utopia. All peace and love, let us construct ‘Earth Ship’ houses built of out recycled wastes like old tires on our FreeSteads, grow our own food, sing, and dance.

Clifford, on the other hand, positioned himself as a blue-collar dude who had woken up, had enough, and was going to get everyone out from the yoke placed by malevolent forces. His approach was confrontation – he’d fought off the CRA, the cops, and you could too.

At least to the casual observer that would seem to be where Clifford's career as a counter-state resistor had begun. But unknown to his Freeman customers and myself, Clifford had first learned of and developed his ideas in a separate subculture, the Canadian Skinhead, NeoNazi and White Supremacist communities. This fact only recently was broadly disseminated thanks to a combination of disgruntled Skinhead ex-customers, and anti-racist monitor organizations. The most detailed information is courtesy of Anti-Racist Canada:

• http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.ca/20 ... es-to.html
  
  http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.ca/20 ... ested.html

In a sense this is not really a surprise – the White Supremacist community was for a long time a primary marketplace in Canada for De-Taxer concepts. Early gurus David-Kevin: Lindsay (extensively profiled in Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 at paras. 100-108) and Eldon Warman (http://www.detaxcanada.org) had long marketed to this community, though at present belief and support among White Supremacist groups is pretty limited, as they have had many opportunities to watch the failure of these ideas at close quarters. In fact, it’s not unusual to see these ideas openly mocked in forums such as Stormfront.org.

So this is where Dean (aka "Sovereign") came from, and then abruptly emerged into the Freeman-on-the-Land limelight. Clifford now makes no mention of his racist background, and while he is, in certain senses, a ‘kinder, gentler Dean’, he still remains a far more militant personality than Menard. In fact, Clifford has much similar in his attitudes and operations to the old-school U.S. Sovereign Citizen gurus who emerged from a similar context, however he's smart enough to know that he will lose much of his customer base if he expresses overtly racist attitudes - it's just not that popular in Canada.

In the intervening years Menard and Clifford’s relative positions have shifted. While Clifford has until recently not opted for large-scale self-promotion and product marketing, he has continued to maintain a lecture circuit, first with FreeManitoba and subsequently with his own website (http://www.deanclifford.info) and other affiliates such as "Time 4 The Truth" (http://www.time4thetruth.info/). Dean's home website offers subscription-only services, though notably its customer base has begun to complain that they’re not getting anything for their money: http://forums.deanclifford.info/index.p ... or-awhile/

Instead, Dean has been extremely active on various Internet ‘radio’ feeds, and any google search will turn up dozens of recordings and videos. One could imagine he’s drumming up business…

As Clifford’s reputation has grown, Menard’s fortunes have sunk. That has been a consequence of a number of factors.

One is that Menard has for years been promising grand developments, just around the corner, but give me some cash now please. The failure to produce has, it appears, led to serious donor fatigue from his once enthusiastic core audience. So has been a steady stream of in-court failures, which Menard has essentially ignored. The trials and tribulations experienced by Menard are well documented in a JREF forum thread, which has exhaustively tracked the characteristic lifecycle of a Menard scheme: it appears, is promoted, cash is gathered, then silence follows. All while his customers plead publically for assistance, until their messages are deleted or they are denounced as ‘shills’.

This is not to say that Clifford has met with success, but rather his failures have not led to nearly as much public attention. A number of months ago I detected an interesting Facebook group:

• Gurus of the Freeman Movement Exposed: http://www.facebook.com/groups/441314415949645

The group’s purpose:

This group is being started and run on the premise of exposing the wins and losses of the "gurus" of the freeman movement. There will be no discussions of opinion, simply a stating of facts in regards to tangible wins and losses in order to have a neutral viewpoint in assessing the risks associated with following advice from the "gurus" of this movement.

The group name has been changed from "The Freeman Movement Exposed" to "Gurus of the Freeman Movement Exposed" to clarify that it is not the entire Freeman movement which is being deemed a fraud here; rather, it is a few individuals who have attached themselves to that movement.

It is within the scope of this project to present genuine wins to be weighed against the disasters wrought by the incautious advice of the "gurus".

At present this group is closed, but for awhile anyone could read its contents. At that time I discovered that the admins, Bill Noble and Trevor Sydorenko, had been customers of Clifford and they detailed their and other failures. It appears most of these failures had occurred in Clifford’s old Skinhead circles, and had remained somewhat compartmentalized.

A second difference was activism. Menard has basically not taken any active public steps (at least ones that had any effect) in years. Menard was hit in 2008 with an injunction by the British Columbia Law Society to stop playing lawyer, and he actually seems to have complied. The closest he had subsequently come to ‘taking on The Man’ was a 2012 attempt to initiate a lawsuit against his JREF critics, which of course came to nothing.

(In typically Menardian fashion he posted scans of various documents that he claimed would be used to extract key Internet tracking data - on review it was quite obvious these alleged court orders had never been filed.)

In contrast, Clifford at least claimed to interact with police (successfully), and appeared in court defending persons such as his brother. A quite fanciful account of that is found here, see the November 21 and 23 entries: http://private-person.com/blog/recent-c ... does-rcmp/

Then the Meads v. Meads decision appeared. The responses of the two gurus was extremely different. Both gurus soon released video rebuttals:

• Menard: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFNiYHlk_3E
  
  Clifford: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY2fhF0qzK0

Menard’s was, to say the least, wishy-washy. Menard now claimed to never have said he had a foolproof scheme for success – quite the opposite, claimed the only way to win was to stay out of court instead of seizing it with Freemanish authority, and openly agreed that major Freeman-on-the-Land concepts such as Fee Schedules were illegal and invalid! Menard completely ceased appearing on his own World Freeman Society website, and his supporters soon began to complain about how he appeared to be drunk, stoned, or both on his Youtube videos.

Clifford, on the other hand (and true to his ‘heritage’), went for the Big Lie – deny everything! Freemen win all the time – then the Men In Black disappear the files! Judges are actually actors! The fact we got this decision means … we’re winning, as the authorities must be scared!

But the decisive event that has brought Clifford to the forefront of the Canadian Freeman-on-the-Land movement was his arrest in February 3, 2013 by the RCMP for an assortment of motor vehicle offences and resisting arrest. Now, there has never been an official report on this incident (at least of which I am aware) so all we have to go from are various Freemanish types raving back and forth at each other. Tons of hysterics in the Canadian Freeman-on-the-Land circles. Whatever will happen to Dean!?!

I’ll point you to some sources:

• Drunken Menard and Clifford buddy video interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1cYrkMgaZg
  
  More Menardian mumbling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojqMUW134lo
  
  An ongoing review of events and stuff from Clifford’s own page: http://deanclifford.info/2013/02/09/fre ... -manitoba/

And if you look around there’s lots and lots more – everything from fund raising, to letter writing campaigns, etc.

Now, here’s what I can reconstruct with some confidence:

• 1. Clifford was arrested by the RCMP for various charges and his vehicle was seized.
  
  2. Clifford refused bail and so was detained in remand. This is usually described as a ‘maximum security prison’, but really it’s just a kind of crummy provincial detention facility.
  
  3. Clifford was released on March 1 after charges against him were stayed by the Crown.

Unsurprisingly, Clifford has since played this up for all its worth, claiming that his release was solely because the Crown backed off once they realized had inadvertently detained a mighty Freeman-on-the-Land. Also unsurprisingly, as this has been the first vaguely plausible success the Freeman movement has had in years, Dean has become a positive celebrity, in Canada and abroad.

So that’s where we sit. Dean is our up-and-coming guru. He’s fought The Law and won, suppressed his dark past, and if he can keep stringing his customers along he may have a nice comfy arrangement for years to come.

And he’s a man of simple needs. To quote his former customer, Trevor Sydorenko:

he doesn’t want freedom… he wants a free ride, as do all others who follow him… none of them want to work on their own, they all want dean to tell them when to jump and how high…. and dean craves the attention of the masses to boost his deflated ego.

every second word out of his mouth is.. “CRA will pay for that” and “CRA has a secret money stash, one that I have never seen proof of, nor anyone else i know has seen proof of… but i know it exists and i want my invisible money

he hasn’t been through shit all, he lies, cheats, steals and lives off other peoples hard work.

Dean only works when he absolute has to, the rest of the time he spends it on fad diets, in jail, driving to bogus conferences, and hitting on women half his age

Ah, the Life of Riley!

As I noted, this has been to a significant degree a retrospective based on my own observations. I would be pleased to follow up with details or sources on any points.

SMS Möwe

[JamesVincent]

Dean only works when he absolute has to, the rest of the time he spends it on fad diets, in jail, driving to bogus conferences, and hitting on women half his age

You mean it's wrong to hit on women half your age? I'm screwed....

[notorial dissent]

SMS Möwe, thank you for that breakdown of your two premier crazies. I will have to admit to having been familiar with Menard, but only just, and the other one not at all.
I still have to admit to getting the giggles every time I see some Canadian guru trying to peddle what is essentially recycled, and usually badly, US TP gobbledegook. I had always thought, with the wealth of English, and Canadian too I suppose, law to play with that they could have at least come up with something a bit more original than trying to depend on epic fail UCC arguments and the like that don't work down here either. I'm particularly fond of the ones who insist on referring to the IRC as being definitive for Canadian tax matters. I'm equally sure the Revenue Canada officers who get to deal with them find it amusing and annoying at the same time. I guess I shouldn't be surprised though, since a number of your current comedy sources got their start down here and moved north when it either got too hot for them, or they completely lost their audiences here. Still, I'm sorry for the export.

I will admit my sad lack of knowledge of what goes on up north, although some of my family did come in through Canada, and/or were early settlers there, and some have even gone back. I have enjoyed reading your posts on the subject, and look forward to the further shining of the spotlight of reason on your domestic crazies.

[The Observer]

Interesting narrative. And it parallels much of what has transpired here in the US among our protestor/sovereign citizen movements. In one particular way is how the guru deals with the law standing in the way of his/her theory. And it essentially boils down to two scenarios:

(A) The guru pretends that the law allows for a person to avoid their responsibility for taxes, driver's licences, fees, etc. This is either explained by twisting or misinterpreting a statute, citing a repealed/expired/out-of-date statute, or simply creating a statue out of thin air. Or they will fall back on citing a court ruling or case laws to accomplish the same (and again twisting, misinterpreting, or creating a ruling, or citing an ruling no longer legally relevant). Some of the biggest gurus who have done this have been notables such as Irwin Schiff, Bill Benson, Larken Rose, and Pete Hendrickson.

(B) The guru pretends that there is a method apart from operation of government that allows a person to separate themselves from the law or otherwise make the law no longer apply to them. This functions along either relying on pseudo-political/religious philosophy, laws of defunct or extinct governments, or again, just stuff that the guru creates off the top of their head as though it has much more substance than the dandruff flaking off their scalp. This is where the soverign, the Freeman, the Moorish and other similar type movements have operated.

Each have their obvious (or should be obvious, but the size of the victim list seems to belie that) fallacies and neither has worked at all in any manner that would suggest it can be repeated by others. I think the sovrun movement is getting the upper hand over the TP movement during the last few years only because it is able to avoid the legal system a little longer than those that try to adopt the law. So it may appear to the marks that Freemen are the better bet. It also helps that the sovrun is seen as taking a position opposite of the government as opposed to being seen trying to operate within the bounds of the government. Given that many of the big fish in the tax protest movement have been nailed and jailed, it does not reassure the potential victim that the tax protest movement has it right.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

SMS Möwe, thank you for that breakdown of your two premier crazies.

My pleasure!

I still have to admit to getting the giggles every time I see some Canadian guru trying to peddle what is essentially recycled, and usually badly, US TP gobbledegook. I had always thought, with the wealth of English, and Canadian too I suppose, law to play with that they could have at least come up with something a bit more original than trying to depend on epic fail UCC arguments and the like that don't work down here either.

Well, to be fair, they occasionally do get a little inventive. In particular, David-Kevin:Lindsay has attempted to concoct schemes that are truly 'Canadian'.

Some other attempts are a little more ... dubious ...

Menard a few years ago promoted a concept he called "96 Is Your Fix", sometimes alternately named "96 Is The Fix". I don't think it has been documented on Quatloos. 96 Is Your Fix takes the idea that there is a bank account one can access by mysterious means from A4V, and combines that with the Bills of Exchange goofiness, specifically the Canadian rules and documentation for paying bills, as standardized by the Canadian Payments Association.

Long and short of it, Menard says that if you see the number "96" in the lower right corner of a bill, such as a utility bill, then you can with magic techniques, pay for that from the secret bank account. Initially he said that was an account linked to your birth certificate (a la A4V) but subsequently changed the explanation to you have to target the Federal government's Consolidated Revenue Fund.

Here's the introductory videos for both the original 96 Is Your Fix, and 96 Is Your Fix 2.0:

• Classic Coke: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8AF6OQUaIw
  
  New Coke: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL0revtwAVs

Needless to say, it doesn't work, and pretty quickly Menard moved onto another scheme. The video's are still on Menard's Youtube channel, but to the best of my knowledge he's not referred to this concept in years.

These videos do a very good job of illustrating some elements of the Menardian approach. Very non-confrontational, very folksy. He stresses using these techniques for doing things like paying for utility services and other 'necessities', rather than getting rich quick. This is very typical of Menard's socialist / leftist perspective, and why he was and remains quite successful in the 'hippy' slice of the Freeman-on-the-Land community.

Now, if you want to see what happens when Rob gets all hard-core and tries to target the same audience group, here's a sample video from the Occupy Movement's Nova Scotia wing:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXZqo8p4N2Q

Unless you want to watch frolicking Occupistas, skip forward to about 4:20 minutes in.

And at 7:39 a challenger appears - Yellow Balloon. Which will fascinate the Occupistas, bring a smile and glee to there visages: Ranting Unkempt Man in Fez, or Balloon?

Yep, you guessed it. Balloon.

SMS Möwe

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Interesting narrative. And it parallels much of what has transpired here in the US among our protestor/sovereign citizen movements. In one particular way is how the guru deals with the law standing in the way of his/her theory. And it essentially boils down to two scenarios:

(A) The guru pretends that the law allows for a person to avoid their responsibility for taxes, driver's licences, fees, etc.

...

(B) The guru pretends that there is a method apart from operation of government that allows a person to separate themselves from the law or otherwise make the law no longer apply to them.

... I think the sovrun movement is getting the upper hand over the TP movement during the last few years only because it is able to avoid the legal system a little longer than those that try to adopt the law. So it may appear to the marks that Freemen are the better bet. It also helps that the sovrun is seen as taking a position opposite of the government as opposed to being seen trying to operate within the bounds of the government. Given that many of the big fish in the tax protest movement have been nailed and jailed, it does not reassure the potential victim that the tax protest movement has it right.

I agree, absolutely. We are seeing the same progression.

Here, category A were the Canadian gurus of the De-Tax movement: David-Kevin: Lindsay, Eldon Warman, Russell Porisky, Daniel Lavigne, Tom Kennedy. Porisky is in jail and his followers are being mopped up. Warman and Lavigne appear pretty much retired. Kennedy continues his "usury free" web and meeting activities, but they seem to attract almost no interest.

Our 'hard case' in this group is Lindsay. He's been at this for what now, over 15 years? Still going, though his audience is now all but gone. But, stick him in prison, and when he comes out he goes right back to promoting his concepts and sneering at the CRA.

Category B: the Freemen-on-the-Land gurus Menard and Clifford. The overwhelming majority of OPCA activity in Canada is of this kind, at least from what I can directly and indirectly observe.

That said, here's a weird tidbit: in the last six months the area where I operate has seen, of all things, a flurry of David-Wynn: Miller documents! I'd never seen one before 'in the flesh' - and suddenly we had a handful! And some had been produced by persons I would have formerly put in the Freeman-on-the-Land category.

Taking your model, Observer, does this mean that these folks have opted for 'Crazy Alternative World View #2' when 'Crazy Alternative World View #1' has flopped? Maybe...

I wonder at the kind of circumstance that would lead any person to bet the farm on the Immortal King of Hawaii.

SMS Möwe

[notorial dissent]

That bit of Menardian silliness is basically a combination of redemption and a very skewed idea of what bills of exchange are, the 96 bit is different. It is the sort of thing that doesn't put you too high in the sights as it were, unlike some of the stuff they throw at the tax man, which means they probably get away with it for longer.

I do find the dichotomy interesting between your big two.

I'm kind of surprised that you haven't been inflicted with Miller's brand of crazy before now, as I was thinking he was hiding out in Canada for some reason. His stuff is really way out there, and generally almost impossible to deal with since it is all incomprehensible for the most part if you have a true practitioner.

[Chados]

Möwe-

My guess is that David Wynn Miller's "Quantum Language" is going to be the next sovereign fad. It won't last, because Quantum Language makes normally incomprehensible sovereign documents even more indecipherable than usual and they all get file-13'd as junk mail from the off. Christ, they've tried everything else down here. We've been having rumors in my jurisdiction of another de jure grand jury kicking off but so far they've been quiet. Of course, the time limit for the state to disprove their various contentions about how they can form their own justice system in their various documents hasn't run yet, that won't be til next month.

Turning to the matter at hand so as not to derail the thread, it comes as no surprise to me that you see a white hate influence in your Canadian sovereign theorists. That's where it all got started. The original Posse Comitatus, the granddaddy of it all, was a white nationalist crew. Which is why I always get a blast out of black guys who are all up in this nonsense. They have not the vaguest that they're just like that Dave Chapelle skit about the blind black guy who was a KKK Imperial Wizard . I had this one black sovereign dude who was not a Moor, he was an old-fashioned UCC-based sovereign, who went down the good old traffic-court road and ended up in general felony when he started threatening cops with fake sovereign court liens. No "Bey" in his name anywhere. I kept wanting to pull him aside at pretrial hearings and ask him whether he'd actually *read* the Reconstruction amendments to the Constitution that did things like...outlaw slavery...and whether he REALLY thought that none of the Amendments after the 10th were viable at law. He was quoting from all these mainline, racist as hell gurus, too. It really was pathetic. His grandma-poor lady-pulled me aside after a hearing derailed for the tenth time and told me "don't you understand? He crazy!" I felt so sorry for her. He ended up on probation with his liens stricken from the official record, and has not been heard from since then.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

So I realized I have been unfair in my commentary concerning Menard and his limited creative contributions to the Canadian Freeman zeitgeist. In addition to “96 is your Fix”, Menard also made another breakthrough which has to have been one of the most unintentionally amusing missteps I have encountered from a Canadian guru: “The Security of the Person”.

Mind you – wildly amusing to legal professionals – but I strongly suspect The Security of the Person worked just fine with its target market! The meme had that perfect mix of misdirection, actual legal terminology, and the promise of a huge, huge payoff.

This occurred during Menard's A4V phase, and resulted in a series of Youtube videos which I see Menard no longer personally hosts online. And I don’t think I’ve seen him argue this particular scheme in years. No matter - the videos can all be viewed at this individual’s Youtube site: http://www.youtube.com/user/Ephesians61024

And here’s the first one in the series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yl2zjqiPKE

So – down to business - The Security of the Person. It flows from a part of the Canadian Constitution, section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Do you see it!? Do you see it!? The hidden revelation!? Right to life – ok – the state can’t kill you. Liberty – can’t put you in jail. Security of the Person? Well, what does “security” mean?

Black’s Law Dictionary (4th edition – that should be old enough):

SECURITY. Protection; assurance; indemnification. The term is usually applied to an obligation, pledge, mortgage, deposit, lien, etc., given by a debtor in order to make sure the payment or performance of his debt, by furnishing the creditor with a resource to be used in case of failure in the principal obligation. The name is also sometimes given to one who becomes surety or guarantor for another.

And we all know a “person” is the proverbial Strawman!

My god! It’s embedded right in the Canadian constitution! Everyone has a right to the “Security” - a.k.a deposit lien on Canada – of their Person – a.k.a. The Notorious Strawman!

So, Menard makes this ‘breakthrough’ in 2009, and upon revealing The Truth, the legally trained community just loses it giggling. By this point “security of the person” has been interpreted judicially innumerable times to mean “both the physical and psychological integrity of the individual”: for example R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 SCR 30, Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1993] 3 SCR 519, Winnipeg Child and Family Services v. K.L.W., 2000 SCC 48, [2000] 2 SCR 519.

• [Aside #1: all very interesting cases for those with an interest in human rights litigation: Morgentaler concludes Canadian women have a right to access abortion; Rodriquez denies a terminally ill woman the right to a doctor-assisted suicide; Winnipeg Child relates to when a child can be seized from a parent in a non-emergency scenario. But I digress.]
  
  [Aside #2: the really pesky part of section 7 is the last bit, “principles of fundamental justice”. The drafters thought that meant “procedural justice” but for some reason used different language. The Supreme Court of Canada has ever since been ‘discovering’ new principles of fundamental justice which have gone WAY beyond procedural justice and left this part of the Charter one of the most ill-defined bits of Canadian constitutional law.]

Ok, enough of that real law stuff. Back to Menard. I take it from the fact he hasn’t flogged this scheme in years that he realized he made an idiot of himself. What is a little sad is that to the best of my knowledge none of his minions actually took the procedurally correct approach to the Menardian interpretation of section 7, and made a Charter constitutional application to get their security. Presumably a mandamus application to demand the state pay for stuff, like your taxes, out of the Security of the Person. Or give you a whopping huge stack of cash.

• [Aside #3: if that had happened there would be a wonderfully fascinating/stupid argument that come into play. Canada's constitution has a proviso on the individual's protected rights, that those are only guaranteed "... subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." Now, wouldn't that make a fun argument? Is it a "reasonable limit" for the Corporation of Canada to refuse to hand over the Security of the Person on demand?]

Instead, Menard advised filing pretty typical A4V-ish paperwork which everyone in the Real World ignored.

So that’s the saga of The Security of the Person.

Well almost. There’s a parallel provision in the 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights, but that legislation has been interpreted back in the 1980’s as having no binding effect. So it’s immaterial. The Freemen-on-the-Land sometimes argue the Bill of Rights, but as noted, that’s easily ignored. And much less inadvertently amusing.

SMS Möwe

[Chados]

That...is *hilarious.* It's built into the Canadian constitution! Look! It's my strawman!

[The Observer]

Taking your model, Observer, does this mean that these folks have opted for 'Crazy Alternative World View #2' when 'Crazy Alternative World View #1' has flopped? Maybe...

I would go one step further and suggest that when CAWV2 fails, our asinine adherents will go back to some other version of CAWV1, and then when that crashes, hook up again to another CAWV2 offering, in a demented Ouroboros cycle. Why? Because the marks/victims/fools are being persistent in their belief that they can get something for nothing and/or that they are the true masters of their destiny. Their greed and their dislike of authority are simply powerful enough to sweep them forward time and time again.

[notorial dissent]

Because "Insanity/stupidity/gullibility(take your pick) is the repetition of the same experiment expecting a different result each time?" -Albert Einstein- more or less
in other words, your average TP.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

As the season comes to a close it seems a good time to review how Robert Menard has spent his summer, and continued within his role as a leading light in the Canadian Freeman-on-the-Land movement. In a sense it has been a busy time. Many interesting projects and plans have been announced. Let's review the results.

First, Menard has taken his first stab at crowd-sourcing with "Synergy Property Stewards" (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/syner ... ?c=pledges). Rob said he is squatting in someone else’s abandoned home and then explains that he would like to hire homeless persons with trades skills to fix up the place. But you give him the money.

His goal? $10,500 in two months. Today (September 1, 2013) saw the end of that window. In total, $125 was collected for the SPS project.

Well, perhaps a bit less than that. I am a sometimes suspicious person and I noticed that of the only two donors, 1 x $25, 1 x $100, that the latter is a “smenard1”. Second, making a donation to the SPS project brings prizes – for example, if one donates $100, you get this:

Meads Vs Meads FIXED

Meads vs Meads is a judgment and reasons for judgment issued by an Associate Chief Justice in Alberta by the name of Rooke. Relying on neural linguistic programming techniques, he draws an ugly picture of the people who stand for their rights. By replacing key NLP words with descriptive statements, Mead VsMead FIXED is a hilarious and revealing look at the mindset of one of Canada's most notorious judges. Includes comedic commentary. THIS IS IN PDF and will be emailed to you.

My guess is Menard took a text copy of Meads v. Meads and simply did a ‘find/replace’ to add in some dirty words. The SPS program offered 100 donors this fine prize. Yet none was claimed by “smenard1”. My conclusion is that Rob tried to “prime the pump” with $100 of his own cash, making the total take $25, or 0.24% of the target amount.

Synergy Prosperity Stewards had, at one point, its own Facebook Group. Rob appears to have deleted it, and all mention of the crowd sourcing effort from his Facebook page.

After that not so auspicious start let’s move on to Rob’s “Association of Canadian Consumer Purchases”, a project which is discussed in some detail in this message thread (viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9326). In summary, Rob claims to have learned that if you write “consumer purchase” on a bill, such as a grocery bill, and perhaps some other magic language, that bill is transformed into a security that will be paid by the Bank of Canada.

On August 7, 2013 Menard claimed he was going to demonstrate this very technique in Calgary, Alberta for those who wished to observe the process in action (http://www.facebook.com/robert.menard.5 ... 7532498664):

Robert Menard
August 7 at 12:02pm

Tomorrow in Calgary the Consumer purchase project will be once again paying for meals using consumer notes. Penning a letter to the Mayor and Chief of Police now. Video to follow.

John Quicktree Muellers
hey let me know where and when I would like to meet up !
August 7 at 12:32pm

Robert Menard
Sure John... we will be meeting on 17th Ave
August 7 at 1:02pm

…

Mike Gerrow
How did it go? Looking forward to the video.
August 9 at 5:36pm

Sadly, Mike is still waiting for an answer, and if John Quicktree Muellers saw something, he’s not talking. No video either. Huh. Wonder how that turned out? Or how long it will be before Rob deletes this Facebook post, too.

Next we have Rob’s “FREEDO GATHERING” that “should be amazing!”, scheduled it seems for last weekend (http://www.facebook.com/robert.menard.5 ... 3372500080). This event is described as:

ANNOUNCING HUGE GATHERING OF FREEDOM ACTIVIST AND LIBERTY LOVERS! By Invitation Only. On the weekend of August 23rd, there will be a three day gathering of some of the most active freedom and liberty lovers. DC, RAM, MEC, PS, MS, MMcM, PV, and a host of others, including Native Elders and along with a couple of dozen of the up and comers in the movement. The purpose is to establish unity and develop strategies and share ideas. It will be held at a very nice resort just outside of Vancouver with swimming pool, tennis courts, awesome fire pits and plenty of space. Food and accommodation will be provided at a cost of $250 for the weekend. If you wish you can bring a tent and halve your cost to attend. Food is all organic with most grown on site in the resort's garden. NO ORGANIZERS ARE MAKING ANY MONEY FROM THIS!!! If you think you should be invited, please contact me. SPACE IS LIMITED! This is a chance to learn about exciting developments and projects, network with others of like spirit, share perspectives, speak with legal professionals, and have some fun. If you think you should attend, let us know. We have a dozen or so spaces still available.

A week has gone by and I have wondered – how did that turn out? Two persons, Brian Alexander and Preston Piotrsson, said they definitely wanted to attend – and curiously in the last week neither has commented on the no doubt historic result of this gathering. Neither, oddly, has Rob.

Again, I am perhaps a small-minded and suspicious person … but something seemed odd to me – why are the other “most active freedom and liberty lovers” identified only by initials? I am guessing the “DC” is probably code for “Dean Clifford”, and “MEC” for “Mary Elizabeth Croft”. Did these very important persons attend Rob’s Freedo Gathering?

First, Mary Elizabeth Croft. For those unfamiliar with this individual, she occupies a 'patron saint' position in the Canadian Freeman-on-the-Land hierarchy, having written the stirring work “How I Clobbered Every Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known To Man … a spiritual Economics Book on $$$ and Remembering who you are”, which is a ‘foundational' document for Freeman-Freethink. (It can be downloaded here (http://www.spiritualeconomicsnow.net/so ... w_I_08.pdf) for those who enjoy such esoterica.)

Most curiously, when I visit Ms. Croft’s blog page, “Spiritual Economics Now” (http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/), I see she makes no mention of a trip to the Vancouver area. Instead, I found this post date August 12, 2013 (http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/?p=401). In a way it’s quite remarkable, so I’m going to reproduce it in full:

Why We Can’t Win

Those who know, don’t tell; those who don’t know, sell.

That wraps up our problem, however, here are the details. We have met the enemy and it is we. We are now competing with one another, never mind with those whose intent it is to destroy us. There is dissension among the ranks. Those who charge their fellows, i.e.: those of us whose intent it is to end the fraud, have become the perpetrators of the fraud.

I received this Skype message from a fellow I’ve know for years and who, I thought, was intending to assist us.

“This info. is NOT for everyone. I have spent a many of hours (sic) on this stuff and am NOT about to give it all out for free. U feel me?”

I have heard approximately the same words from scores of people who continue to charge for their information. We have ALL put, at least, “many hours on this stuff”, and, at most, YEARS, yet, I could list dozens of people who are continuing to charge for information –info which NEVER gets us anywhere. I’m not saying the info is inaccurate; I’m saying it is never the complete story. Very few people are willing to assist others with the entire ‘process’. I continue to be appalled by those who want payment for either the time they spent on research or that which they discovered. We all want information, yet, it seems as if some want it not to use, test, and then to spread the word, but to sell. To all who claim, “I spent years investigating”, I say, “You did that because you wanted to do it; we did not commission you to do it, nor did we claim we would pay you for the answer if you found it.” I wrote a book which took me a long time –more time to edit than to write. Reading, dozens of times, to be clear about what I had written, was difficult, yet, I persevered. I notice that very few people bother to edit their work. Most of what I have seen, as “the solution”, is such bad grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure that I wouldn’t know if it were accurate or not. Some of it is almost indecipherable!

So, I shall simply say it again: Do NOT pay anyone for information or time, unless you are CERTAIN s/he has completed the “process”, s/he has tested it and won, many others have tried it and also won, and s/he is willing to spend his time doing it FOR you. Those are many criteria to meet. I have paid very few people for alleged ‘exigent’ information, but even at that, it is all to no avail.

Tip: no one has the answer. Maybe Marcus has, but since he isn’t letting anyone know what he did, yet, –fee or no fee– we’re still without the answer. Let’s face it; if anyone has prevailed, in whatever area, then he would not need to charge anyone. I don’t know of anyone who, for having used someone’s information and prevailed, wouldn’t be willing to compensate the author a percentage of his win for his win. Since I have NO proof of any successes, albeit I have heard some sensational grapevine stories, this suggests that, even if there were a solution, we aren’t going to get it. We are, virtually, on our own.

The Crown Prosecutor revealed that those in the “truth movement” who charge are a huge source of derisive amusement for them. She said, “We don’t have to do anything; you’ll destroy each other.” Those who charge are doing to their fellow man what the banks are doing to all of us. In my book, I wrote what a bloody lie this excuse for charging is, “If people don’t pay for it, they don’t appreciate it.” Nonsense! We were never meant to ‘pay for’ anything; and don’t think you are off the hook by saying, “I don’t charge a fee; I only request a donation … and that donation is $500”. Donations are voluntary, not demanding. Stating an amount is charging. Bank fraud will continue, as those who charge are as culpable as the bankers.

We’ve ALL put time and energy into this project, so, are we going to share, or will you join the extortionists? The banks’ plan is to destroy us by slowly pulling cash from circulation, so we end up killing each other for it. There IS a ‘they‘ and there IS an ‘us’. “Us” are those who charge their fellow man for information which will not result in anyone’s freedom.

The stories I have heard about people, in desperate situations, paying money to the ‘gurus’ –wolves in sheep’s clothing– and getting nothing for it, would curl your hair. If we, who appear to be on the same team, are NOT, then to what have we to look forward? If you gurus want “money”, then get a job. Quit fleecing your teammates.

To give Ms. Croft credit, I have never found any evidence that she has ever held a seminar for cash, or has attempted to sell her book. It’s always been free.

Well, how about Dean Clifford? He usually carefully tracks what he does on his webpage (http://deanclifford.info/category/news/). Let’s see – anything for the August 23-25 weekend? How odd – no mention that he is attending any Freedo Gathering in Vancouver. Nor do I see any comment about his trip to Vancouver on his Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/saoirse.nabas).

As for those other ‘initialed’ persons, my only other guess is that “RAM” is “Robert Arthur Menard”, himself.

Again, call me suspicious, but I am very skeptical the “Freedo Gathering” ever occurred. And anyone who contributed $250 for those “invitations” … maybe didn’t get what they paid for.

Ah well, perhaps next summer, Mr. Menard.

SMS Möwe

[The Observer]

As the season comes to a close...

Sovruns/freemen have a season? Who knew?

Here in the US, the sovruns are year-round. I guess the Canadian sovruns, due to the cold weather, go into hibernation.

The bright side to this is that the Canadian court system will get a relief from filings until next spring.

[Burnaby49]

As the season comes to a close...

Sovruns/freemen have a season? Who knew?

Here in the US, the sovruns are year-round. I guess the Canadian sovruns, due to the cold weather, go into hibernation.

The bright side to this is that the Canadian court system will get a relief from filings until next spring.

He obviously meant the silly season; not that seasonal changes preclude them from being moronic year-round.

From Wikipedia:

In the United Kingdom, Ireland, Israel, and in some other places, the silly season is the period lasting for a few summer months typified by the emergence of frivolous news stories in the media. The term was coined in an 1861 Saturday Review article,[1] and was listed in the second edition of Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (1894) and remains in use at the start of the 21st century. The fifteenth edition of Brewer's expands on the second, defining the silly season as "the part of the year when Parliament and the Law Courts are not sitting (about August and September)". In the United States the period is referred to prosaically as the slow news season. In Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, the silly season has come to refer to the Christmas/New Year festive period (which occurs during the summer season in the Southern Hemisphere) on account of the higher than usual number of social engagements where the consumption of alcohol is typical.

[grixit]

As the season comes to a close...

Sovruns/freemen have a season? Who knew?

Sovereign Season! Freeman Season! Sovereign Season! Freeman Season!

[Pottapaug1938]

As the season comes to a close...

Sovruns/freemen have a season? Who knew?

Sovereign Season! Freeman Season! Sovereign Season! Freeman Season!

I say it's both, and I say... hit 'em with whipped cream pies in the face!

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

It seems a little sad to me to see how far Robert Menard has slipped away from having any relevance within the Freeman-on-the-Land movement.

The litigation against Chief Rock Sino General by the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia has come to his attention (see viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9377), and as a consequence Mr. Menard posted this on his Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/robert.menard.5 ... 7310852686):

http://lakecountrynotary.com/?p=70
Hey ChiefRock Sino General - What they do not mention is that there is NOTHING in the Notary Act which states that only members of the Society of Notaries Public of BC can provide Notary services. They do not have a monopoly on that at all.

Well, let’s see how that claim holds up. First, the legislation in question is the actually the “Notaries Act” (RSBC 1996, c 334: http://canlii.ca/t/8488).

The title “Notary Public”, and the status of “notary public” are restricted to either members of the "society" (the Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia) by s. 16(1), or persons appointed by British Columbia provincial cabinet (ss. 15, 16(2)):

16 (1) A person who is a member of the society may use the style and title of Notary Public in and for the Province of British Columbia and is a notary public.

(2) A person appointed under section 15 may use the style and title of Notary Public in and for the Province of British Columbia. …

Section 18 of the Act lists the jurisdiction of a notary:

18 A member enrolled and in good standing may do the following:

• (a) draw instruments relating to property which are intended, permitted or required to be registered, recorded or filed in a registry or other public office, contracts, charter parties and other mercantile instruments in British Columbia;
  
  (b) draw and supervise the execution of wills
  
  • (i) by which the testator directs the testator's estate to be distributed immediately on death,
    
    (ii) that provide that if the beneficiaries named in the will predecease the testator, there is a gift over to alternative beneficiaries vesting immediately on the death of the testator, or
    
    (iii) that provide for the assets of the deceased to vest in the beneficiary or beneficiaries as members of a class not later than the date when the beneficiary or beneficiaries or the youngest of the class attains majority;
  (c) attest or protest all commercial or other instruments brought before the member for attestation or public protestation;
  
  (d) draw affidavits, affirmations or statutory declarations that may or are required to be administered, sworn, affirmed or made by the law of British Columbia, another province of Canada, Canada or another country;
  
  (e) administer oaths;
  
  (e.1) draw instruments for the purposes of the Representation Agreement Act;
  
  (e.2) draw instruments relating to health care for the purposes of making advance directives, as defined in the Health Care (Consent) and Care Facility (Admission) Act;
  
  (e.3) draw instruments for the purposes of the Power of Attorney Act;
  
  (f) perform the duties authorized by an Act.

Activities that are deemed to be those of a notary public are specified in s. 17(1):

17 (1) A person acts as a notary public if the person, for or in expectation of a fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect,

• (a) draws, prepares, issues or revises a document that is intended, permitted or required to be registered, recorded or filed in a registry or other public office or that is a will or testamentary instrument, or
  
  (b) holds himself or herself out as qualified to draw, prepare, issue or revise a document referred to in paragraph (a).

Further, the Notaries Act, s. 48 creates a penalty for persons who engage in the functions of a notary public (ss. 18, 17(1)) without authority (ss. 15, 16), or for a person to claim to be a notary public without having authorized status to do so.

48 (1) A person must not

• (a) act as a notary public without being authorized to do so under this Act,
  
  (b) hold himself or herself out as authorized to act as a notary public without being authorized to do so under this Act, or
  
  (c) if the person is a notary public, practise outside the geographic area to which the person's practice is limited or practise in any way contrary to a limitation or condition to which the person's enrollment or commission is subject.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence, and is liable on conviction to a fine of not more than $2 000.

Trying to not be particularly unkind, but frankly this is, well, pathetic. The legislation is explicit. Menard has offered no insight into his claim, he just makes a bold proclamation. There is no attempt as in the “96 is your fix” or “security of the person” schemes to construct a structure for his claim. Instead, Mr. Menard posts this message and then announces he’s off on another road trip to points east.

However, that seems to be the state of affairs. Mr. Menard has not held a for-pay seminar in quite some time. His other efforts, as discussed above, are unsuccessful and then quickly suppressed when possible.

Menard was one of the first OPCA gurus to seriously capture the potential of Internet video, yet he has not unloaded a new video on his “mrmitee” Youtube page (http://www.youtube.com/user/mrmitee) in many months, and the last was a 27 second video of him displaying documentation to prove he had been arrested and charged with an offence!

And, perhaps a bit bold, but the years have taken quite the toll. Compare his appearance in this video, “The Magnificent Deception” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y4To_ABKoo) (he is first on camera about 16:10). Now look at a more recent video, in this case Menard commenting on Dean Clifford’s arrest (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1cYrkMgaZg). Time has not been kind.

I have to wonder how much longer this will continue. Even the media’s attention has turned away from him to Dean Clifford. The widely disseminated Canadian Press article by Dene Moore illustrates that (viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9536).

This all leaves me a little curious – will Robert Arthur Menard become viewed as a sort of moribund figurehead of the Freeman-on-the-Land movement, much as Eldon Warman remains recognized as a notable and honoured figurehead of the first generation Detaxer community? Or is Menard fated to be viewed as a 'has been', a crank, much as David-Kevin: Lindsay?

Time, and a fickle consumer base, will tell.

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

In the yellow balloon Occupy video he looked, and sounded, like a burned-out ranting bum.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Just a little illustration of the two faces of the Canadian Freeman-on-the-Land movement. Two videos both recorded in the last week by the old and new vanguard:

• Robert Menard: http://globalnews.ca/video/832893/inter ... rob-menard
  
  Menard is interviewed by a mainstream media talk show. He's actually in much better shape than usual - no fez, shaved, and, at worst, twitchy. Emphasis? We're just peaceful people exercising our rights.
  
  Dean Clifford: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbWKnQ3Gfr4
  
  Muscular Freemanism, telling you Canadians to get lost - you are the lazy welfare bums, not me, I'm a blue-collar hero. Notably at 2:40-3:00 Clifford boasts of how he has assaulted police officers and there is nothing the authorities can do about that. Why? He is that powerful.

That's our duality. What is also interesting is that each guru plays to a specific faction. It will be interesting to see how that plays out, over time.

SMS Möwe