Tender For Law Likes Us! They Really Like Us!

[Burnaby49]

I was perusing the facebook page of Tender for Law,which Mowe mentioned here;

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9391&p=162587&hili ... aw#p162587

and what did I find but praise, if indirect, for Quatloos! Apparently you need to be at least mentioned on Quatloos to be anybody of consequence at Tender for Law. However if you want to be a really cool kid with street creds you need to get your very own Quatloos discussion thread. Leigh of the House of Collins has one so she's earned her right to strut;

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9593

Of course they try and hide any overt show of affection by dismissing us with offhand phrases like "It is a sick lawyers site" and "Its just a bunch of statist cock suckers" but we know what they really mean. On to the Quatloos name dropping competition!

Chris Evan - Scott Duncan...seems your Notice of Mistake made Quatloos.....
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9391
Leigh OftheHouseof Collins - Everyone is at Quatloos, Chris.
Chris Evan - Oh shit....I am there too.
Chris Evan - You too Gail Marie
Leigh OftheHouseof Collins - EVERYONE of US.
Pete Daoust - WHERE ARE WE EXACTLY ?
Chris Evans - Derek Hill....you are there too....
Derek Hill - What do you mean?
Chris Evan - Quatlooske
Derek Hill - wtf....i didnt register there. If i did i never went back
Leigh OftheHouseof Collins - I don't think so, Chris. I see you and Hill are mentioned but I don't see any pieces done on ye like Dean and Dean and Chief, and/or ME
Chris Evan - Dude...its just a bunch of statist cock suckers bashing our attempt at freedom
Leigh OftheHouseof Collins - It is a sick lawyers site.
Chris Evan - No ... no pieces. Just named in the comments
Derek Hill - im mentioned
Leigh OftheHouseof Collins - /www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/search.php
Derek Hill - eh i see.

Note - I had to edit my original entry because I stupidly left out the Tender for Law Facebook link, sorry. Here it is;

https://www.facebook.com/groups/tenderf ... 168686052/

[The Observer]

"It is a sick lawyers site"

This has me concerned. Up to this time I thought Quatloos was founded to discuss scams and tax fraud, I didn't realize that it was actually for lawyers who were sick. I am not even sure how many post here, let alone how many of them are ill. How long has this been going on? And how serious is it?

Could we get a count of hands of lawyers who are sick and come to Quatloos because of their illness? It would probably help if you could provide a testimonial of how Quatloos is helping you to come to terms with your condition(s).

[LordEd]

Not a lawyer, or even in any form of legal position, so my degree of disease won't help the stats.

Is this a quarantine? Mr. Flibble would be very cross.

That, and I don't know if the King of the Potato People made the correct oaths at coronation...

[Burnaby49]

"It is a sick lawyers site"

This has me concerned. Up to this time I thought Quatloos was founded to discuss scams and tax fraud, I didn't realize that it was actually for lawyers who were sick. I am not even sure how many post here, let alone how many of them are ill. How long has this been going on? And how serious is it?

Could we get a count of hands of lawyers who are sick and come to Quatloos because of their illness? It would probably help if you could provide a testimonial of how Quatloos is helping you to come to terms with your condition(s).

I'm currently fighting a cold, does that count? However, since I'm not a lawyer I'm not relying on Quatloos for a cure. Tomorrow I start on a six day Washington-Oregon pub tour. That will do the job.

[Lambkin]

In the patois of today's young Internet denizens, they are trying to say how much they like and admire Quatloos.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sick

man, that quatloos is sick yo

[Burnaby49]

Was it something I said?

I can't get on to the Tender For Law Facebook page any more. It shows for a moment then my computer screen goes blank. I'm assuming this is the result of an impressively quick response to being highlighted in my posting. At least it shows they visit us frequently. Well they are still welcome to peruse Quatloos whenever they want even if access is a one-way street in their world. Plot on, Leigh OftheHouseof Collins!

[webhick]

Try clearing your cache.

[Burnaby49]

Try clearing your cache.

Just did, still same. Being a technological idiot I had no idea how to do it so I used Google instructions. For IE 8 it told me to go to "safety" then to "delete browser history". Instructions told me to unclick the box "preserve favorite website data" but I decided to nuke everything. Still can't get on Tender for Law, half a second and blanked out. Other Facebook sites work fine.

[Burnaby49]

I've been outed over at Tender For Law! They've figured out who Burnaby49 actually is! I'm Dan Wilson. The name doesn't ring a bell but it must be true, Scott Duncan says so.

Better start at the beginning with this odd posting on the Tender For Law Facebook page;

https://www.facebook.com/groups/tenderf ... 415562492/

CORPUS DELICTI” The MOST IGNORED LEGAL CONCEPT!
The circle-jerkers at Quatloos have been scouring the 1960 CANADIAN BILL OF RIGHTS for what is supposedly my own "crazy" position that for a CRIME, there must be an INJURED PARTY. They LOVE cherry-picking, or just plain ignoring the maxim of CORPUS DELICTI! Even their precious "Justices" agree with me!

That's a MAXIM OF LAW, and they are reading the WRONG DOCUMENT, but let's just cover the CASE LAW. These are the first few I found. There are literally THOUSANDS. Go look.
I tell people to STAND UNDER THE 1960 CANADIAN BILL OF RIGHTS, because THE FUCKING CHARTER REMOVES CORPUS DELICTI! THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS (UK CANADA ACT - 1982) REMOVED CORPUS DELICTI in those sections they don't teach in school. They actually CENSOR the sections after the "APPLICATION OF THIS CHARTER" section in Canadian Public Schools.
You idiot Quatloos readers can go fucking look for yourselves. At least look at the RIGHT DOCUMENT, and fucking google before you talk out of your asses. AND FOR FUCK'S SAKE STOP FUCKING LYING ABOUT ME!

Odd because we at Quatloos have pretty much ignored Scott for months. I have no idea what he's on about with his rant about our scouring the Bill of Rights. Then he posts proof that he's right about whatever he's arguing in respect to Canadian law by citing American cases and statutes. Huh?

Of course when you talk about "circle-jerkers" there is no group more deserving of that description than Scott's own little band of acolytes so they immediately started praising his legal analysis then move on to Quatloos;

Scott Duncan If suddenly Quatloos goes silent... assume I had something to do with it. They seem to want to talk about me, and lie as much as they can get away with.

First they Lie and say I didn't pay my mortgage. It was PAID OFF.

Then they lie about what I say.

Well they have my attention. They can prepare for things they THINK are Illegal, and MAYBE even line a lawyer's pockets!

Mr. Kirov, these guys are yours. 90 days' expenses. That's UNLIMITED BUDGET for 90 days. Take these fuckers down.
June 20 at 8:38pm

Pete Daoust For these fruitloops lurkers. If Scott Duncan is asking Erich Kirov to take fruitloops down, well Mr. Kirov must have ALL the abilities to complete the task. You must know this, right fruitloops?
June 20 at 9:03pm

Scott Duncan Here's my prediction, if Erich picks up this gig:

1: Quatloos will experience something that AT FIRST GLANCE will APPEAR "illegal/unlawful" but when they seek remedy, nobody will do anything, so they will shop around for a LAWYER!

2: An unscrupulous scumbag ambulance-chaser will attempt to get a retainer and then bury them in "preliminary" work billing.

3. When the Quatloos idiots see they are being fleeced, the lawyer will suddenly say "nothing illegal was done".

4: I laugh. A lot, because fuck you.
June 20 at 9:17pm

And then moved on to me;

Chris Evan <sniff, sniff>. It smells like Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson in here.
June 21 at 5:11am

Scott Duncan Doesn't it though?
June 21 at 6:59am

Pete Daoust Hey, Danny Boy !!!

Do you realize EVERYTHING you say, every single word you write, will definitly be used AGAINST you ?

Do you realize WHO I am ?

Do you realize you've lost, since the very beginning ?

Fucking loser !!!!

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
June 21 at 7:07am

Scott Duncan That's just "crazy" talk
June 21 at 7:13am

Scott Duncan The problem with Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson and his ilk, is that they can't see beyond next week, much less grasp concepts like Ethereum, and Blockchain applications (Like bitcoin), and what it is doing and WILL do to the current system. They would rather laugh at some free-dumber getting hurt for "Not respecting authority", all the while, never even grasping the outer edges of what pieces of shit they are.

All of them would laugh at you being harmed because of magic parchments written by strangers. They think it's ok to hurt people who "don't have lights on their bike" because the magic parchments say so.

...I've always thought it's ok to hurt people who hold that value system. We all have our moral crosses to bear.
June 21 at 8:25am

Scott Duncan Notice that the Quatloos folk are DEAFENINGLY SILENT about how I TAUGHT YOU TO BUILD YOUR OWN FUCKING BANK!

They are equally silent on what we are DOING with that technology.

Cyprus! Anyone remember when it was going to be fucking bank-pocalypse?

...then nothing?

THAT'S ALL AQUILAE! ALL OF IT! TWO THIRDS OF THE NATION'S CURRENCY IS NOW ON A FUCKING BLOCKCHAIN!

...and it's ALL connected to ugly red, white, and black vessels.

The work I've done has ALREADY CHANGED THE WORLD!

Men who are younger, smarter, and more creative than me, took a simple proof-of-concept and made it into things I could never HOPE to even conceive.

Gavin and Vitalik of Ethereum are good examples. These guys are going to replace LAW with what they are building.

The fact that they would even presume to have an opinion on "bitcoin" just guarantees that I will have something of their own making to rub in their collective faces, and make them look REALLY short-sighted and stupid.

INB4 "There's no way we could have known"

INB4 "It was a different time! You can still do FIAT transactions with what's left of government, so you weren't TOTALLY right"

INB4:"** Insert excuse for being a 'have-not', here **"
June 21 at 8:45am


Scott Duncan Erich has very compelling evidence that Quatloos member "Burnaby49" and Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson are one and the same.

I'm NOT ready to call him Burnaby LIEN-YOUR-NAME 49 yet, but the evidence Erich just gave me, seems pretty compelling!
June 21 at 5:35pm

Kent Barrett Where did Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson ever get to? His argument for liening the name was very compelling. Croaky appreciated him explaining that there are no judges in Ontario, and wants to learn more from Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson. Ribbit.
June 21 at 4:50pm ·

Scott Duncan Without Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson, there is no Croaky

June 21 at 5:05pm

Scott Duncan We can just use Quatloos to drive the lessons forward if Burnaby LIEN-YOUR-NAME 49 is real
June 21 at 5:57pm

Scott Duncan ...if they survive Erich, that is.
June 21 at 5:57pm

Since I'm now Dan Wilson I tried to find some information about him. And failed totally.
I have no data on a Dan Wilson. If this is some evil co-conspirator of ours he's pretty well hidden.

Frankly, I'm a little confused by Scott's outburst directed at Quatloos, because as far as I'm aware no one on here has been slagging Scott and the Tenderizers of late let alone "paraphrasing" Scott. Did someone forward Scott something from a different source? Strange. I'm not aware of any data relating to Duncan's mortgage on Quatloos. Perhaps Scott is lumping all of his critics together as members of Quatloos?

[notorial dissent]

There you go again Burnaby, winning friends and influencing people, even if it is as your alter ego none of us, including you, have ever heard of, besides, I thought you were supposed to be off drinking several pubs dry, far more important, not to mention enjoyable, than whoever this is.

I'll top that by saying that I really can't remember ever even hearing of Scott Duncan, let alone saying anything nasty, or worse, truthful about him. I mean really, WTF is he, other than another foul mouthed, limited vocabulary, feeble minded FOTL type?

I hate to disturb his obviously overblown and overinflated ego, but I don't think any of us even really know who he is, let alone have been talking about him.

[guilty]

Same here. I hadn't heard of him before I read his outburst last night. I searched Quatloos and found a handful of mentions in old topics, but usually just as an aside. I was going to suggest that his recent rant must surely elevate him to a topic of his own, but I see that Burnaby has already obliged.
What is Scott's story? What on earth is he babbling about?

[eric]

I've been outed over at Tender For Law! They've figured out who Burnaby49 actually is! I'm Dan Wilson. The name doesn't ring a bell but it must be true, Scott Duncan says so.
Since I'm now Dan Wilson I tried to find some information about him. And failed totally.
I have no data on a Dan Wilson. If this is some evil co-conspirator of ours he's pretty well hidden.
Frankly, I'm a little confused by Scott's outburst directed at Quatloos, because as far as I'm aware no one on here has been slagging Scott and the Tenderizers of late let alone "paraphrasing" Scott. Did someone forward Scott something from a different source? Strange. I'm not aware of any data relating to Duncan's mortgage on Quatloos. Perhaps Scott is lumping all of his critics together as members of Quatloos?

Nothing else to do at 3 AM so I amused myself by journeying over to Tender For Law. Being true conspiracy theorists they have even created a "group within a group" to ensure that only true believers can get in on their discussions. It's something called Simudrones and here's a link:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/8673416 ... ?pnref=lhc
From what I can understand of their ramblings, Dan Wilson was some guy they were arguing with on Dean Clifford's page. My brain can only handle so much so I'm not going to slog through that mess to figure out why they hate him so much. Here's the relevant part of the conversation:
"Simu-Drones are inevitably BANNED from Dean Clifford's page, that's a FACT.
28 December 2014 at 15:20 · Like · 2

David-Paul Sip Adrian there are a few of us who haven't been booted from his page. A few months ago there were many in the TTFL who were there. To be clear I do not waste any time there. It just so happens that I went to remove myself and discovered a post from Dan Wilson which reminded me of why I have not removed myself. The value? Well if there is any it would be to monitor the activity of those that mean the Admiral harm like that fucktard government agent Dan Wilson.
28 December 2014 at 15:23 · Edited · Like

David-Paul Sip True Pete...if I spent ANY time there I would have already been banned. So for now it seems Dan Wilson is stalking Dean Clifford instead
28 December 2014 at 15:24 · Edited · Like

Pete Daoust So here's your first MISSION, as a Simu-Drone David-Paul Sip, I want you to manage on getting banned from that Christian pahe "

[Jeffrey]

I must mea culpa here.

I ran into Scott online and he started ranting saying the 1960 bill of rights states that only if there a victim does something become a crime. So I guess now he's pulled a quick one and now claims it's a maxim and not in the 1960 BOR as he originally claimed.

And as to Duncan, I believe he's a popular mystery figure, even Mowe could only scratch the surface. I think Burnaby has a copy of his preliminary research on Duncan. Quite the enigma.

[wserra]

You see what Duncan pinned to the top of his FB page, right?

To all the NON MEMBERS reading and asking to join:

You will never join this group. EVER. You are too lazy/stupid to figure out the rules. You are too lazy/stupid to join.

Unless you are female and offering up your cunt, you have NOTHING of value to contribute. Period.

Shut up and read. Joining has NO BENEFIT and I am NOT interested in your input. YOU HAVE NO SECRETS TO TELL!

If you request to join, you will be blocked, and you won't even get to READ this group, and you already know that we are the ONLY ones who tell the truth. You already know that, or you wouldn't try to join. The only reason you'd WANT to join would be to comment.

...you had 2 years to do that. The way you become a member is clearly spelled out in the ABOUT section. If you bother us with member requests, we will simply block you from the group completely. Be grateful that the group is even public.

THE TENDER FOR LAW is not a fucking "community" and only exists because it serves my agenda. You are not worthy of a voice here, and to give you one DIMINISHES THOSE WHO EARNED A VOICE HERE.

Quite the charmer.

[eric]

You see what Duncan pinned to the top of his FB page, right?

To all the NON MEMBERS reading and asking to join:
You will never join this group. EVER. You are too lazy/stupid to figure out the rules. You are too lazy/stupid to join.
Unless you are female and offering up your cunt, you have NOTHING of value to contribute. Period.
Shut up and read. Joining has NO BENEFIT and I am NOT interested in your input. YOU HAVE NO SECRETS TO TELL!

Quite the charmer.

Hmmm, personally I would just call him a rather nasty little man with an over-inflated sense of his own importance. Let me see, a Toronto boy, been around long enough that he can recognize the area down around the old Tip Top building and Front Street. Believes he is God's gift to computer science but from what I can tell has only audited a few CS 101 courses. Stirs up trouble on various FMOTL sites by claiming:
a. they have stolen his ideas;
b. they aren't radical enough;
c. various people are agents of the government or CIBC bank.
Basic strawman/natural person arguments with one novel self addition - the "affidavit of mistake". Self appointed admiral of his own fleet under mercantile law. Somehow he has obtained a small group of followers who enjoy being abused by him.

[Jeffrey]

I believe the casual misogyny may be linked to his earlier misadventures in the porn industry.

[GlimDropper]

I'm pretty sure he's just trolling and it worked. "Hooray, Quatloos isn't ignoring me."

If Scott actually wished to discuss his opinions with us there is nothing to stop him. His tycho-brahe posting account isn't banned. It would seem he isn't really interested in talking to us but he never really seems to talk to anybody, Scott likes to surround himself with people who are happy to be talked down to by him. I stop by his Tender for Law group on occasion just to see if Scott will ever post any independently verifiable proof of his version of OPCA theories winning a court case, needless to say he hasn't.

One minor correction for Mr. Always right:

First they Lie and say I didn't pay my mortgage. It was PAID OFF.

I don't know that anyone here ever claimed you didn't pay off the mortgage on your condo and if they did what the basis of that claim is. What we have pointed out is that you took an utterly pointless dispute with your condo management firm and with your own unique blend of calm headed reasoning and personal charm found yourself and your wife out on the street. Our first documented success for Scott's tender of law theories. I know it's hard to understand how such a trivial "key card" issue could end up in such a colossal cluster fudge but it helps when you consider just one small sample of Scott's debating style.

[Jeffrey]

By the way Scotty boy, before copy pasting bogus case law, you should try reading it:

“For a crime to exist, there must be an injured party (Corpus Delicti) There can be no sanction or penalty imposed on one because of this Constitutional right.” Sherer v. Cullen 481 F. 945:

That quote appears nowhere in the Cullen decision:

http://openjurist.org/481/f2d/945/sherar-v-m-cullen

In fact it appears to be a common fake quote used around multiple Freeman and SovCit websites based on a search for the quote / case on Google. I'm sure the same applies to the rest of the cases Scott cites.

“With no injured party, a complaint is invalid on its face”. Gibson v. Boyle, 139 Ariz. 512

Same thing, the quote appears nowhere in the case decision:
http://www.leagle.com/decision/19836511 ... v.%20BOYLE

More importantly, it appears to be a civil wrongful death case following a major car accident, so this wasn't a case that was thrown out on the basis of a lack of injured party.

[Burnaby49]

I have to confess I know little about Duncan and his motley crew. I'm not really that interested in him. I'm fully employed following the Vancouver area Freemen without bothering with a Toronto loon. This is why I was surprised by his little rant about me. I did feature him and his band of sycophants a while ago but it was only in respect to their comments about Robert Menard's GoFundMe efforts;

https://www.facebook.com/groups/tenderf ... 3919920875

Scott has a very high, pathologically high, opinion of himself. This is from a recent Tender For Law Facebook posting I may or may not get around to writing up;

As most of you are aware, the entire JUDICIARY across CANADA cringes when they hear the name "Scott Duncan"; and NOTICE OF MISTAKE has been particularly effective in fighting these parasites. So why does my shit work, and that of the FREE-DUMBERS does not? Simpletons in the GOVERNMENT and the FREE-DUMBERS alike, often try to equate my value system with that of the FREE-DUMBERS. It doesn't take long to find out this is not true, but few people make the effort.

I have been a thorn in THE LAW SOCIETY's side for decades. Long before the FREE-DUMBERS ever set foot in a COURT ROOM, I was terrorizing JUSTICES and LAWYERS alike. What they had to spend weeks researching, I had resting comfortably in my head. I didn't PRACTICE LAW, I had MASTERED it (and now I'm kicking myself for not making this article a Doctor Who theme, as THE MASTER is WAY cooler than any Star Wars Character!) I was LICENSED to do it, and I was a key part in neutralizing JUDICIAL power grabs, in the 90's, and 2000's. I did so, because I promised to, as part of the terms that facilitated the dissolving of an earlier obligation. When I sign under oath, I follow the terms to the letter. One might even say "religiously". I don't break the law that I paid for.

None of this bombastic raving is of any particular interest to me. He claims to have found how to "CRUSH" Meads v Meads.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/1176344949098642/

However his explanation is more rantings about how great he is rather than any analysis of how he actually did any crushing. Things like this;

It's time to stir the pot - disturb some shit as it were, stoke the fire, prime the forge, enrich uranium in a centrifuge...shit like that. In order to accomplish this noble goal I'm going to do something that, on the surface, seems disgusting. I'm going to arm the FREE-DUMBERS WITH THE KNOWLEDGE TO CRUSH MEADS V. MEADS. If you're really lucky, I'll try to squeeze in some "Nazis" too. [Please be patient with typos, and spelling, as it was dictated to very tired women. We are going through it and fixing it when we have the time.]

As the ADMIRAL of "War and Knowledge", this shit is second-nature to me; but it occurs to me that it might not be obvious to you. The thing is, I, like you, am just a semi-evolved chimp that made it this far. I don't possess any mental powers that you don't, and none of what I'm telling you is hidden.

At this particular phase in the engagement, it's largely irrelevant what these people think. I have become a bit of a problem in the past decade, and the LAW SOCIETY's "Empire Strikes Back" (I'm A New Hope...get it?) is Meads v Meads, declaring a FREE-DUMBER's arguments nonsensical and literally MAKING UP A NAME/LABEL out of thin air ("OPCA Litigant"), and declaring Mr Meads was "one of those". If I was in that JUSTICE's position I would have done it too. There is absolutely no chance of APPEAL without the very arguments in question being nullified. Only a PERSON can be a PARTY in a LEGAL ACTION, and Mr Meads is DENYING that he is a PERSON in the matter before the court. You will remember the JUSTICE OF THE PEACE saying to KOOK OF GAIA, "You are either him, or you are his AGENT". Keep in mind that the courts will try to tell as much truth as they possibly can. The SUPERNUMERARY position of a JUSTICE allows a JUSTICE to be an "activist". JUSTICE Ian NORDHEIMER (Judge*), JUSTICE Lauren MARSHALL and JUSTICE Susan HIMEL are good examples. These "JUSTICES" have demonstrably made a concerted effort to make sure the lie of the LAW SOCIETY affects people in the real world as little as possible.

The normal Scott Duncan Gibberish. I haven't yet bothered to read the Facebook posting all the way through so I don't know if he actually has anything relevant to say about Meads.

He has a small but very devoted following. He kicked the majority of people off of Tender For Law a while ago. As far as I can tell because of insufficient ass-kissing. The quote posted by wserra is typical, an obscenity filled rant about how wonderful he is.

So Scott, if you want to believe that I consider you worth enough of my time that I'm actually stalking you across the internet and following your postings to any degree feel free to indulge in the fantasy. If you want to bolster your paranoid dreams of your own importance by believing I'm actually somebody called Dan Wilson obsessing about you go ahead and indulge. I'll pay more attention to you if and when you finally become at least of some modest significance in the Freeman world.

[wserra]

you took an utterly pointless dispute with your condo management firm and with your own unique blend of calm headed reasoning and personal charm found yourself and your wife out on the street.

That is quite a story, up there with those numbnuts who manage to turn a ticket for running a stop sign into thirty days in jail.

just one small sample of Scott's debating style.

What an asshole. I would have hung up on the guy early on.