Robert Arthur Menard FOTL (Freeman on the Lam)

[notorial dissent]

Bobby is and always was a VERY small time grifter, and not really a very good one at that. It doesn't mean he is any less guilty of the crime, just that in the scheme of things that while he is a boil on the nether reaches of society, he is a teeny tiny insignificant minorly annoying boil and not worth the bother and expense of a criminal prosecution. A civil trial, providing you could find someone to do it, would be even more expensive and what would be the point since he has nothing with which to make the victim whole, he's already done spent, drunk smoked it away. As someone above pointed out, if he goes down for anything, other than probably public intoxication/drunk and disorderly, it will be over the C3PO thing, that was a little too public and a little too over the edge for him to slide, but since he skipped bail, unless they happen to trip over him the trial will just be held in limbo. He's really not worth the expense of trying to locate and extradite, do they even do that in Canada? What it and his life all comes down to is best summed up by an old saying of my grandmother, "He isn't worth the powder it'd take to blow him to hell."

[arayder]

Bobby is and always was a VERY small time grifter, and not really a very good one at that. . . .What it and his life all comes down to is best summed up by an old saying of my grandmother, "He isn't worth the powder it'd take to blow him to hell."

The last time I checked he had raised $0 for the goat. So that's not working for ole Bobby, either.

If Bobby was 25 instead of 52 I'd be inclined to think he might find his way, become good at something and make a place for himself in the world.

Instead he's a middle aged comedian, inventor, freeman legal expert who isn't funny, makes stuff that was old 20 years ago and doesn't know jack about the law.

[Hanslune]

Instead he's a middle aged comedian, inventor, freeman legal expert who isn't funny, makes stuff that was old 20 years ago and doesn't know jack about the law.

I still think he might have a career opportunity in being either a religious guru or a subject for medical experiments.

[Burnaby49]

We don't know who he suckered out of $200 for debit cards.

He's also in Quebec (or was)

We know Wilfred Leger was in on it with Menard. Bobby better keep his friends close.

I think Menard's relationship with Leger goes deeper than just friendship. In some areas they are fellow travellers. Because I'm a nosy bastard I googled the telephone number at the end of Menard's NinjaGoat video. It led a couple places, but this is my favorite:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100909222 ... osark.com/


Note Wifred's name at the bottom. There are a number of items of interest on this page but let's start with the first, the Andros Ark;

THE VISION OF ANDROS ARK is to build a totally independent community with all urban services and amenities. Our own power system, the “Kearns Disintegrator” which, operating 24 hours, day and night, is far more environmentally efficient than wind or solar power. Andros has ample water and even supplies Nassau in this essential for life. To be fully self-sustaining, we have agronomists and sylviculturists to develop the already designed "Integrated Agro-forestry Enterprise", WITH EXTENSIVE JOB CREATION FOR A VIBRANT VERTICALLY-INTEGRATED COMMUNITY. That we will have all levels of EDUCATION is a no-brainer. And finally, so important for self-sufficiency, a FULL-SERVICE HOSPITAL complete with all INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE services. Being close to the continent in A TAX-FREE ENVIRONMENT, this would bring MEDICAL TOURISM to the country.

We have the qualifications: our medical tourism program is called NATIONAL HEALTH SHIELD, and members of our PHYSICIANS & SCIENTISTS FOUNDATION have spent months in Ireland where world-wide accreditation for medical tourism is centered. Ralph Idema has been president of this “Integrative Medicine” Foundation for 22 years = human resources.

International partners from the Orient intend to develop an extreme high-end resort with classical villas, condominiums, hotels and for that “boomer market,” retirement facilities. NOTE THAT HOME OWNERS CAN GET “PERMANENT RESIDENCY CERTIFICATES” that also entitle them to a regional TRAVEL DOCUMENT that has strong benefits for certain nationals.

Andros Ark leaders have spent their lifetimes preparing for this venture. It may take 5 years to develop a significant start. Ralph Idema with partner Jim Brown started development of the successful Sapodilla Village in The Turks and Caicos Islands in 1980. Total completion and build-out took 25 years. "We have done it before!"

Wow! They even have their own super-magic power system with the macho name the "Kearn Disintegrator"!! Sounds like something futuristic. So what is it? Essentially a gabage burner that some Nova Scotia inventor thought up in the 1980's but which went absolutely nowhere until a Canadian aboriginal band, to their great regret, decided to give it a try. A total failure.

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/2015/0 ... s-landfill
http://www.sixnations.ca/UpdateWasteMan ... ch2015.pdf
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/ ... -1.3085717
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -1.3051947
http://www.tworowtimes.com/news/local/s ... ator-work/
http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/2015/0 ... rator-deal

KWSG is apparently still trying to flog their white elephant but the very sparse website doesn't indicate anything done on it since a claimed successful prototype test in 2000. It doesn't look good when a project that has been ongoing for about 30 years has an artist's representation of a working power plant rather than a real one.

http://kwsg.ca/

Google "Andros Ark" and you get absolutely nothing, even more of a failure than its pollutant spewing power source.

Leger's name on the bottom is associated with some gold based credit card scheme. No idea what but it's success can be determined by typing "TOKI Gold Merchant card" in Google. Nothing. The page also has Leger as president and founder of TOKI FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL. So what's that? Well, it's website went through a bunch of stages:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100509004 ... -intl.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20110207115 ... -intl.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20120802002 ... -intl.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20131219171 ... -intl.com/

I like the first one because a) it's in english! and b) it promises me I can accumulate GOLD! But later the Toki International website redirected me here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20061027164 ... .finad.ca/

WHAT IS FINAD
FinAd is NOT an investment, but the PURCHASE of a Marketing System. There is no R.O.I., no profit, but rather, INCOME generated by ACTIVE OPERATION of our Marketing System. (FinAd undertakes to sell the Memberships on behalf of clients by way of a signed Performance Bond; of course, clients can elect to become active and sell Memberships as well, for extra income.) However, for our Tax Deferral Customers, WE DO THE WORK FOR YOU and your subsequent income generates future tax payable, which is what pleases the CRA, so this is only a tax deferral. Our Accountant issues your T-4 slip and YOU PAY – LATER! That’s called a DEFERRAL. Businessmen and accountants like that, because in contrast, those aggressively-sold "tax shelters" where the gov't gets nothing, do come back to bite you in the behind. With FinAd’s T-4’s, you pay tax up to two years later – a deferral. You pay the tax back. No re-assessements. No worry.

FinAd is really a HOME BASED BUSINESS and so for straight salary earners, the Accountant suggests registering a $60 Sole Proprietorship. This can be done online at http://www.cbs.gov.on.ca/obc/english/4tg2aw.htm. Or just join any MLM to qualify as a business for BUSINESS EXPENSES; (many of us are already registered in one network or another). What makes FinAd "real" for the CRA (Revenue Canada) is that IT GENERATES REAL INCOME - you saw my first pay sheets at the breakfast table: $133 net income for my first Membership sale in April, exactly as predicted. In the typical $5,000 example, leveraged by our $15,000 Operating Agreement (a credit instrument), your cash outlay is $5,000, your total expense is $20,000 for the typical $8,000 back in March – but – we sell 100 Memberships and you net $13,300 back, and receive a T-4 tax slip because you made money with us.

FinAd is NOT a "Charitable Donation" tax shelter like our competitors! AS A REAL BUSINESS, we can generate far more real income to charities (AND NGO's) than those "borderline" donation programs. (1) by flowing the 20% commission through to charities and (2) from our virtual interactive Golf Game Tournaments (with 400,000 active players worldwide many supporters pay $20 "Greens Fees" to the Charity, because our fifty Fortune-500 client companies provide $50,000 US prizes, with Jaguar also providing 32 Jags as prizes). With such strong prize incentives to enter the Tournaments, major US hospital charities and the United Way benefit in the standard fundraising way, with NO TAX RECEIPTS NEEDED. Even Associations and NGO’s can raise funds this way.

Now, as a retired Canada Revenue Agency auuditor I've had experience with a few schemes like this, and they all end up in a pile of grief for the taxpayers who try them. The explanation for the scheme is here;

In the typical $5,000 example, leveraged by our $15,000 Operating Agreement (a credit instrument), your cash outlay is $5,000, your total expense is $20,000 for the typical $8,000 back in March

What this means is that you give them $5,000 and they bill you for $20,000 of expenses they claim are legit business expenses that you can write off. The $8,000 is your supposed tax refund on the claimed $20,000 business loss. But how do you pay for the remaining $15,000 of fake expenses? You don't! That's the magic "$15,000 Operating Agreement (a credit instrument)". They claim to finance the fifteen grand for you through a promissory note of some kind that you conveniently never have to pay off. This is very much like the Fiscal Arbitrator schemes already well covered in Quatloos;

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=9713
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=9949
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=10196
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=10041
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=10024
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=9804

Found those on a quick search, there may be more. Fiscal Arbitrators conned gullible people by claiming they could write off huge business expenses that FA made up out of nothing for them. The only one who thought it wasn't a great idea was the Canada Revenue Agency. The main difference is that the FA scheme did not include fake debt to balance the actual cash payments made by suckers to the amount of the claimed expenses. FA just told the marks that they could claim it

But this scheme must be legit, they have an accountant's opinion letter saying it is all ok;

COVER LETTER TO TAX OPINION BY SONEGO BOIVIN & ASSOCIATES
MANAGEMENT and TAX ACCOUNTANTS

The FinAd Marketing Membership “NEW TAX STRATEGY APPROACH” represents program documents deposited with the Management Accounting firm of Sonego Boivin and Associates, 240 Michael Copeland Drive, Kanata (Ottawa) Ontario, Canada. Senior Accountant Eric Sonego has informed FINAD that there are NO TAX ISSUES, and, as FINAD has re-structured its product to reflect Sonego Boivin structuring advice, it “complies well within the rules and guidelines of section 9 of the Income Tax Act.” FINAD is not a “Tax Shelter” rather, it is an effective “Tax Assisted Strategy.”

Tax Opinion CLICK HERE to view the official Opinion by Sonego Boivin and Associates.

Agreement Letter, from FinAd president Ralph Idema indicating compliance with Sonego Boivin & Associates Tax Opinion for FinAd.

Although if you click on the link;

https://web.archive.org/web/20061027165 ... etter1.pdf

the opinion seems pretty sparse. I've read a lot of accountant's opinion letters on tax schemes and in those this wouldn't even count as an executive summary of a larger review. But hey, with a solid reputable accounting firm like Sonego Boivin and Associates giving even a scant opinion the deal must be pretty kosher, right?

Whoops!

Statutory Offences

Eric Sonego

Eric Sonego (Sonego) was convicted on August 18, 2009 on two offences of practising as a public accountant and holding himself out as a public accountant during the two year period ended May 29, 2009 while not licensed under the Public Accounting Act, 2004 (the Act).

During the two-year period ended May 29, 2009, Sonego, while not licensed as a public accountant under the Act, carried on accounting work under a variety of registered and unregistered business names, including “Sonego, Boivin & Associates” from offices located at 240 Michael Cowpland Drive, Suite 102, Ottawa, Ontario. He held himself out as being licensed as a public accountant or using a designation indicating or implying that he was licensed as a public accountant by advertising on a website in a manner indicating that he was able to provide auditing services.

Sonego was fined $5,000 for each offence, plus a Victim Fine Surcharge which amounted to $2,500. The fines were to be paid to the court within four months of the conviction date. Sonego was also subject to a probation order for a period of one year requiring that he:

(1) not commit the same or similar offences;
(2) appear before the court as and when required;
(3) notify the court of any change in his address.

Sonego undertook to provide the Council with reasonable access to all of his books and records and files for a period of two years from August 14, 2009.

Sonego was again convicted on April 29, 2013 of the offence of practising as a public accountant while not licensed contrary to section 13-1-a of the Act. He was fined $75,000 plus a victim surcharge of $18,750 with one year to pay.

In addition, it was ordered that for a period of 24 months from April 29, concurrent to any other probation order, that Sonego shall:

(1) not commit the same offence or any related or similar offence;
(2) appear before the court as and when required;
(3) notify the court of any change in his address.

http://www.pacont.org/statutory/indexericsonego.php

Keep in mind that all this information comes from the phone number that Menard wants you to call to give him free money for his toy truck. So you actually can actually judge a man by the company he keeps. Leger and Menard, a match made in heaven.

[arayder]

Leger was/is the chief operating officer for the ACCP.

He was the one Menard had receiving the $200 membership/sign up fees and more importantly he was supposed to have had access to member's bank accounts so as to draw out the $250 monthly fees.

Menard told everybody that the membership fees were non-refundable but that no monthly fees would be accessed until the ACCP was fully functional. Nobody knows if Menard and Leger kept their word on this, or if they started drawing money out of subscriber's accounts even though the ACCP never went beyond the usual Menard big talk stage.

Looking at the Andros Ark site and the "gold" cards at the bottom of the page makes me wonder if Leger was supposed to be the link to the production of ACCP cards.

[k1w1]

BTW, if you want to stay around here, knock off the name-calling.

BTW, K1W1, the question you have studiously avoided is the complicity of your silence about Menard's scams during your tenure on the WFS forum.

That must be a sore spot since you are reduced to phony challenges and name calling in an attempt to change the subject.

You are just too precious. I call a group of people clowns for trying to ascribe a fraction to victimhood (which is patently absurd) and you complain it’s “name calling” and then threaten me. I’m sure if I called a bunch of Freeman clowns for saying something stupid as part of their reasoning you wouldn’t have any objections -- just your little group you have a problem being labelled clowns when they say something stupid, eh. And of course it’s perfectly alright for people to make disparaging remarks about me, like happened earlier, eh. Yeah, I smell the stench of double standards…

And then I listen to convoluted bullshit reasons about why you zealots think the Law Society wouldn’t be interested in someone who might be illegally practising as a lawyer or why the Police might not want to investigate a fraud.

And poor old arayder, every time it dawns on him what sort of people he’s trying to defend as victims he says I’m “moving the goal posts”. I think he might just be tired.

And what the heck are you babbling about my “tenure” at WFS forums? I’ll point out that it’s you who thinks Bobby starting a group or people subscribing to a group Bobby started is wrong or a scam -- I happen to believe people have a right to do those things. And if people decide to go off and commit some crime or offence, then what do you imagine I could have done about that as a registered user of the WFS forums? Huh?

Not only do you move the goal posts, mate, you turn the whole field around and try and make out I’m kicking your way. You make me laugh… clowns make me laugh, too.

[LordEd]

And of course it’s perfectly alright for people to make disparaging remarks about me, like happened earlier, eh. Yeah, I smell the stench of double standards…

No double standard. If you see other Freeman posters on the board you'll note they all received equal treatment. Those with better clarity of argument and expression are even accepted. Also note you and them haven't been banned out of hand.

I’ll point out that it’s you who thinks Bobby starting a group or people subscribing to a group Bobby started is wrong or a scam -- I happen to believe people have a right to do those things.

Would you prefer to be in the victim category or the "know it's crap so not a victim" category?

[wserra]

I’m sure if I called a bunch of Freeman clowns for saying something stupid as part of their reasoning you wouldn’t have any objections

In point of fact, I would - if they were here, as are the people you called "clowns". It's hard to start a flame war with someone who isn't here.

And of course it’s perfectly alright for people to make disparaging remarks about me, like happened earlier, eh.

Where was that, eh?

And I note you didn't bother to answer any of the substantive points I and others made, preferring to play the victim. Perhaps you bought stuff from Menard?

[arayder]

. . . what the heck are you babbling about my “tenure” at WFS forums? I’ll point out that it’s you who thinks Bobby starting a group or people subscribing to a group Bobby started is wrong or a scam -- I happen to believe people have a right to do those things. And if people decide to go off and commit some crime or offence, then what do you imagine I could have done about that as a registered user of the WFS forums?

Y1w1, you still haven't explained why you sat silent while Menard conducted the scams you now say you recognize as being just that.

Or are you going to go on with your comically contradictory and already dismissed fall-back-puny excuse that fraud is protected free speech?

Proceed. . . .

[k1w1]

So evidently thus far the only person we know who has joined this particular group of Menard’s is this joker Leger, and it’s quite obvious he’s no victim, which rather proves my point.

I think you’ll find that anyone who joins this group is essentially going to be no different than that ratbag Leger. They aren’t victims of a fraud.

The potential victims in this case aren’t the people who might join the group, it’s the merchants and trades people who those ratbags will be disposed to rip off. But I doubt any merchant or tradesman will actually be fooled by any of it, so they’d be victims of attempted fraud.

Now if any of those ratbags tried to claim in court (when they get tried for attempted fraud or whatever they’ll be guilty of) if they tried to claim in their defence that they were acting in good faith at the time of the offence, they will get shot down just like Sydel did and for just the same reasons. Those ratbags aren't victims of Menard.

Wes, is it alright to call someone a "freetard" but not a "clown"? Is one "name calling" but the other not? (Anyway, quite frankly I don't care what people call me so long as they don't call me Late For Dinner... or Frankly.)

Ayrader, you still haven't explained what you think I should have done about something that happened at WFS. I'll also note that you've been a registered user of the same forum: So what did you do about it? Did you report it to the relevant authorities if you had reason to believe a crime was being committed?

[k1w1]

Arayder, with all due respect, I’m pretty sure there’s never been anything illegal happening at WFS -- nothing I’m aware of anyway.

Let's say someone (and just for the hell of it let’s call them Bobby -- no, it’s not your Bobby! Just similar) Bobby writes a book telling how he once robbed a bank, describing the tools and method he used (in this case it was a stick-up knife made of marshmallow and a blindfold for disguise -- yes, that absurd -- although he doesn’t mention about how he got caught and did jail time for it), and then some beady-eyed fellow who’s short on cash reads the book and decides to go off and rob a bank just like how our Bobby described he did it… and of course gets caught.

Now this Bobby didn’t do anything illegal when he authored and published his book, and neither is he in any way responsible for anyone who reads his book and then goes off and tries to rob a bank with marshmallows and a blindfold. And the same thing applies to your Bobby and anything he wrote at WFS or any other public forum.

But you go even further, arayder: you seem to be suggesting that because I may have also read Bobby’s book means I’m in some way complicit in what some third party did, or that I could have done something to stop them deciding to rob a bank.

That’s just absurd!

[arayder]

So evidently thus far the only person we know who has joined this particular group of Menard’s is this joker Leger, and it’s quite obvious he’s no victim, which rather proves my point.

I think you’ll find that anyone who joins this group is essentially going to be no different than that ratbag Leger. They aren’t victims of a fraud.

You are changing the facts to fit your argument. We know there were a handful of ACCP subscribers.

Leger was helping to run ACCP and had control of the members accounts. That's why Bobby called him the chief operating officer and never referred to him as just another subscriber.

Your point fails on the facts.

The potential victims in this case aren’t the people who might join the group, it’s the merchants and trades people who those ratbags will be disposed to rip off. But I doubt any merchant or tradesman will actually be fooled by any of it, so they’d be victims of attempted fraud.

You have a point in that had the ACCP ever gotten going some merchants may have been harmed as well as the ACCP members themselves. You are right though most merchants would have suffered no more harm than having to deal with a delusional freeman at the sales counter and having to put a cart load of goods back on the shelf.

Now if any of those ratbags tried to claim in court (when they get tried for attempted fraud or whatever they’ll be guilty of) if they tried to claim in their defence that they were acting in good faith at the time of the offence, they will get shot down just like Sydel did and for just the same reasons. Those ratbags aren't victims of Menard.

Again, you misrepresent the facts. The fact is the ACCP subscribers paid their membership fees but never got a card and never got a chance to try to use the ACCP method. This means your "they're just like Sydel" argument doesn't hold water.

Ayrader, you still haven't explained what you think I should have done about something that happened at WFS. I'll also note that you've been a registered user of the same forum: So what did you do about it? Did you report it to the relevant authorities if you had reason to believe a crime was being committed?

You could have at least said something about Menard's scam, which you now admit as wrong. If you had done so it might have helped pierce the veil of Menard's lies before he got money out of the ACCP subscribers. Clearly, you did nothing because you wrongly thought fraud is legally protected free speech.

While you sat on your hands, myself and others helped to stop the ACCP from getting going. Not to brag here because Bobby's not exactly the Donald Trump of freemanism and he tends to let projects die on the vine as soon as he gets Moose Head money.

Let's say someone. . .writes a book telling how he once robbed a bank, describing the tools and method he used. . .and then some beady-eyed fellow who’s short on cash reads the book and decides to go off and rob a bank just like how our [writer] described he did it… and of course gets caught.

Now this [writer] didn’t do anything illegal when he authored and published his book, and neither is he in any way responsible for anyone who reads his book and then goes off and tries to rob a bank. . .And the same thing applies to your Bobby and anything he wrote at WFS or any other public forum.

Again you change the facts to fit your argument. Menard didn't just tell a story about how he had used the ACCP and then walk away. He gave the dupes who signed up a plan for using the ACCP, promoted the plan and took their money for membership. Then he walked away.

But you go even further, arayder: you seem to be suggesting that because I may have also read [the] book means I’m in some way complicit in what some third party did, or that I could have done something to stop them deciding to rob a bank.

That’s just absurd!

When you are not busy re-writing reality and creating false analogies your other task seems to be putting words in other people's mouths. My position is that you did nothing while Menard victimized ACCP subscribers.

But I have to say that watching you whine and pretend to be a victim is entertaining.


---------------
Dope Clock II
It has been 219 days since Robert Menard announced the revival of the Association of Canadian Consumer Purchasers. So far there is no documentation of a successful purchase using Menard's system

[wserra]

Wes, is it alright to call someone a "freetard" but not a "clown"?

Hmm. [Searching board for "freetard".] Ah. I assume you mean this post by "Philistine".

I can't say that I've followed this thread all that closely. Still, when discussing posters on a board belonging to someone who believes that world leaders are shape-shifting lizards, all manner of sobriquets are presumptively appropriate. I didn't read that as applying specifically to you. If you do, however, who am I to argue?

Philistine, please don't call names.

[LordEd]

You didn't answer my question. You said you believe freemen are allowed to do certain things. This site has many cases to show arrests for those things.

Are you a victim of freemanism, or do you just know they have no basis in law and play anyway?

[k1w1]

Let me take a moment to try and clarify some things here.

First, I do not nor ever have subscribed to any of David Ickes crazy ideas (actually, I’ve been banned from that forum).

Secondly, my so-called “tenure” at the WFS forum does not mean I identify as a Freeman or that I subscribe to Freeman ideas. I do not. Certainly no one on that forum would ever accuse me of being a Freeman follower -- quite the opposite. In fact you’ll find that a number of them over there (and I’m still a registered user there) actually hold me partly responsible (and quite rightly) for Meta the arch-Freeman getting banned and not having a voice there … and for pigpot getting banned… and JackieG (although that mealy-mouthed sod has since been allowed back to spout his rubbish).

So apparently that’s what I’ve been doing over at WFS. I also do my level best to try and explain to the folk there why I think they’re wrong rather than just offhandedly tell them they’re wrong, which is all you lot ever seem to do. That might be why they’ve tolerated me over there for years even if they don’t really like what I say, whereas you lot tend to get yourselves banned within your first few posts.

Now here. I came on this thread and disagreed with arayder on a specific thing: I disagree that the people he listed previously or people like them are victims of Rob Menard. Furthermore, I doubt that the people who might sign up to this latest scheme of Menard’s are victims or potential victims of Menard. And nothing anyone has said has convinced me otherwise. I don’t see how anyone who joins this scheme and carries through with it and tries to rip off a tradesman or merchant could then turn around and claim that all along they were acting in good faith. I think you’ve totally misjudged these people and their intentions.

Arayder, if you do indeed believe those people are victims of Rob Menard then you should contact the relevant authorities. As much as you’d like to think so, you sitting around on an obscure website will not do anything to help any alleged victims: that’s not “speaking out”. You should take your information to the relevant authority and let them decide if Rob Menard has a case to answer in regards to those people who you allege are his victims. You’ve effectively done nothing to stop Rob Menard from doing anything -- in fact you’ve probably only encouraged him. And I doubt that anything you’ve done has discouraged anyone who potentially is of a mind to sign up to the scheme… again, you probably only encourage them further.

And Wes, don’t be dense. Who do you think that “freetard” comment was specifically targeted at? And who specifically do you think I was calling a clown when I wrote “like you clowns are trying to do…”?

But like I said, I don’t care what people call me (and I certainly didn’t complain about being called a freetard). However I do object to being treated unfairly, which is how I saw it when you accused me of name calling after I called a group of people clowns and you implied you might ban me for doing that.

LordEd, I don’t know what you mean. I believe people who call themselves Freeman are just as entitled to do what any other person is entitled to do -- you or I for instance -- and I don’t think I’ve ever suggested otherwise, not here or anywhere else.

[LordEd]

I don't know your history or involvement in freemanism other than that you stated you are a WFS participant and that you "happen to believe" the things Mr. Menard's groups do (ACCP/C3PO/travelling/other?) are things people have a right to do.

I’ll point out that it’s you who thinks Bobby starting a group or people subscribing to a group Bobby started is wrong or a scam -- I happen to believe people have a right to do those things.

If I did read your beliefs right, then I'd state that those around here generally believe they do not have those rights.

If you do actually believe that you can write on the back of a receipt and call it paid, say some words and be a peace officer, drive without a license because you aren't operating in commerce (or whatever the correct terminology is), or can opt-out of laws in some fashion, AND are wrong about those beliefs, is it because you are a victim of that belief system?

Perhaps it would be better if you re-stated exactly what you think Mr. Menard's groups do that they have a right to do and use that as an example to carry further.

Oh, and to address this:

So apparently that’s what I’ve been doing over at WFS. I also do my level best to try and explain to the folk there why I think they’re wrong rather than just offhandedly tell them they’re wrong, which is all you lot ever seem to do.

Note that when we're talking on-point, many points or ideas that are being stated as facts are linked to canlii and relevant case results, or reports generated by Burnaby from sitting in-court to witness the results.

Example in this thread, go back to page 30 of this thread (randomly picked) where there was discussion about peace officer status. I put up the idea that a T4 would be needed for legal employment, and Jeffrey countered with a case indicating that the word "employ" did not require payment.

It did degrade to a bit of monty python and other fun, but if you want to bring up a specific point, I'm sure we can come up with a few quotes to indicate flaws in the argument.

[LordEd]

Oh and for clarity, I tend to use "freeman" as a generalization to those who follow a variety of similar belief systems. Anything under OCPA pretty much. The person claiming to be a freeman is optional. It seems to be out of favor these days since Meads anyway.

[Wake Up! Productions]

Oh and for clarity, I tend to use "freeman" as a generalization to those who follow a variety of similar belief systems. Anything under OCPA pretty much. The person claiming to be a freeman is optional. It seems to be out of favor these days since Meads anyway.

Being relatively new here, it astounds me at the patience that you guys have with freeman guru sympathizers. If "k1w1" or "pigpot" was on my Youtube channel, I would have BLOCKED them in a heart beat.

In my short time here I have had one "run in" with the "authorities" of Quatloos, to which I immediately BACKED DOWN with my tail between my legs. True, on Youtube I create controversy all over the place, but here I don't wish to create controversy. I look at Quatloos as a way to further my self-education.

So, I guess that my question is, why do you entertain them at all? It makes for pages upon pages of useless arguments - with many of them being OFF TOPIC.

[arayder]

K1w1, I don't think I need a lecture from you on how I ought to deal with Robert Menard. Myself and others have helped chase him into his hole while you have sat on your hands. Your presumption is that myself and others have not alerted the authorities and various merchant associations as to where Menard is and what he is up to.

You'd do well to talk about what you know.

You can opine that you aren't a freeman all you want. But your real problem, which you don't want to talk about, is that you have fostered the false notion that fraud is protected as free speech. This is how you have tried to enable Menard out of one side of your mouth while the other side says he's a low life.

[Hanslune]

Oh and for clarity, I tend to use "freeman" as a generalization to those who follow a variety of similar belief systems. Anything under OCPA pretty much. The person claiming to be a freeman is optional. It seems to be out of favor these days since Meads anyway.

Being relatively new here, it astounds me at the patience that you guys have with freeman guru sympathizers. If "k1w1" or "pigpot" was on my Youtube channel, I would have BLOCKED them in a heart beat.

In my short time here I have had one "run in" with the "authorities" of Quatloos, to which I immediately BACKED DOWN with my tail between my legs. True, on Youtube I create controversy all over the place, but here I don't wish to create controversy. I look at Quatloos as a way to further my self-education.

So, I guess that my question is, why do you entertain them at all? It makes for pages upon pages of useless arguments - with many of them being OFF TOPIC.

I have always sought out odd thinking fellows, from extreme politics, pyramidiots, UFOist, Moon landing theorists, JFK CTs, SovCits,etc. I like to see how minds torture facts and logic to arrive at ridiculous conclusions and then fight tooth and nail to defend said positions.

Information on how the freeman mind 'works' and comedy gold!