Allen Boisjoli has been kidnapped!

[Burnaby49]

Robert Menard is in heaven. He thinks he is relevant again with his brilliant legal analysis;

https://www.facebook.com/robert.menard. ... 4649032945

He's even in a news video, even if ever so briefly;

http://globalnews.ca/news/2958002/these ... terrorist/

And Belanger has been revived from the dead!

Edward Jay Robin Belanger

John is a smart man but is without faith and the truth..John would have you believe you can get virginity fornicating with a prostitute or by using a fraud obtain clean hands..all mans code is a commercially owned instrumentality of usury and enslavement and if you respect it's person by using it your deemed a sinner

Edited · Like · Report · 1 hour ago

https://m.facebook.com/comment/replies/ ... v&refid=52

It's like they all have a new lease on life.

[SteveUK]

Well, with the season of expensive good will approaching, they need to get their PayPal donations/ go fund me/ paid seminars up and running again perhaps.

[arayder]

Robert Menard is in heaven. He thinks he is relevant again with his brilliant legal analysis. . .

Boisjoli is Runnin' Robert with a set.

In his heyday Menard used to send letters to any authority figure who crossed him threatening to sue the pants off them. Of course he never did. Menard's had an experience similar to Allen's by being banded from playing lawyer in B.C. The difference is Menard followed the court order like a good little plantation slave, while Boisjoli fought back.

Down deep Menard must be really jealous. Boisjoli is doing all the things and more Bobby threatened, but never did!

On Facebook when Menard isn't word parsing or giving out mis-information he's busy making it seem he's Boisjoli's advisor!

But you are right, Burnaby, this is a boon for Bobby. He can pontificate in support of Boisjoli and pretend he's the freeman Johny Cochran. If it gets too hot or if Boisjoli starts becoming unpopular in freemandia (he's an obnoxious bully after all) Bobby can just walk away.

------------
Dope Clock: It has been 51 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[eric]

more difficulties for Boisjoli...
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/crime/n ... ppointment

[Burnaby49]

I wrote up Powell's antics here;

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10814

[eric]

Thanks, I wasn't paying too much attention to Boisjoli at the time. However, it was in today's newspaper so I thought it appropriate to mention..

In his conclusion, Rooke directed that a copy of his decision be sent to the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General for review and “possible response to the activities of Boisjoli and Powell.”

No criminal charges have been filed against Powell, but Alberta Justice confirmed Thursday that he is no longer a notary public and that the matter had been “dealt with” last year.

[arayder]

In another of his stunning lies Menard told a CBC interviewer that Allen Boisjoli is being prosecuted in an attempt to "outlaw social change".

See 1:20 of the first video: http://globalnews.ca/news/2958002/these ... terrorist/

The plain fact is Boisjoli is before the court because, among other things, he filed a phony $225,000 lien against the house of the peace officer who gave him a speeding ticket in 2015. That's hardly seeking mere social change. It's more like a vengeful attempt at the ruination of somebody just doing their job.

The really sickening thing about this latest Menardian lie is that countless times during the promotion of his phony peace officer core, the The Canadian Common Corps of Peace Officers or C3PO, Menard expressed sympathy and support for working peace officers and even pledged that the C3PO would help them in their duties.

Now Menard is using another of his lies to back Boisjoli, who sought the financial ruin of an every day peace officer writing a simple speeding ticket!

I used to think it was just Menard's brain that became addled by decades of Mooseheads.

It turns out he's pickled his moral compass too!

There is no lie Menard won't tell in an attempt to get his narcissistic mug in front of a camera!

------------
Dope Clock: It has been 51 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[Burnaby49]

While I stand in awe of Menard's brilliant legal analysis I do have a few comments that might help him to fine-tune it. Firstly, if you are claiming to do an analysis of a section of the Criminal Code of Canada, it would be helpful to base your analysis on the correct, most recent version of the provision you are reviewing. The version of section 423.1 that Rob has posted in his FaceBook analysis is outdated. It was amended in July last year.

This is what Rob posted;

423.1. Intimidation of a justice system participant or a journalist

423.1 (1) No person shall, without lawful authority, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) with the intent to provoke a state of fear in

(a) a group of persons or the general public in order to impede the administration of criminal justice;

(b) a justice system participant in order to impede him or her in the performance of his or her duties; or

(c) a journalist in order to impede him or her in the transmission to the public of information in relation to a criminal organization.

Prohibited conduct

(2) The conduct referred to in subsection (1) consists of

(a) using violence against a justice system participant or a journalist or anyone known to either of them or destroying or causing damage to the property of any of those persons;

(b) threatening to engage in conduct described in paragraph (a) in Canada or elsewhere;

(c) persistently or repeatedly following a justice system participant or a journalist or anyone known to either of them, including following that person in a disorderly manner on a highway;

(d) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, a justice system participant or a journalist or anyone known to either of them; and

(e) besetting or watching the place where a justice system participant or a journalist or anyone known to either of them resides, works, attends school, carries on business or happens to be.

Punishment

(3) Every person who contravenes this section is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than fourteen years.

This is the current version;

Intimidation of a justice system participant or a journalist

423.1 (1) No person shall, without lawful authority, engage in any conduct with the intent to provoke a state of fear in

(a) a group of persons or the general public in order to impede the administration of criminal justice;

(b) a justice system participant in order to impede him or her in the performance of his or her duties; or

(c) a journalist in order to impede him or her in the transmission to the public of information in relation to a criminal organization.

(2) [Repealed, 2015, c. 13, s. 12]

Punishment

(3) Every person who contravenes this section is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than fourteen years.

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/r ... pletePos=1

The elimination of subsection 423.1(2) may not affect your analyis Rob but citing a repealed provision of the law does make you look somewhat sloppy in your research and less than professional.

One other point Rob. You base your analysis on this claim;

This section is normally used to bring charges against people who try to tamper with a jury or harass a journalist.

Elements of the offence.
There are four elements to this offence:
1) It must be done without ‘lawful authority’.
2) It must be done with intent to provoke fear in others.
3) This fear must be intended to impede them in the administration of justice, fulfillment of duties, or, transmission of information to the public.
4) It must consist of any of the prohibited conduct.

This section is meant to protect users of the justice system. It is intended to protect against jury tampering and intimidation of journalists by criminals and organizations who do not use lawful means.

I have no idea on what basis you have determined that a section labeled "Intimidation of a justice system participant or a journalist" is restricted to protecting jurors and journalists. However the Criminal Code explicitly states, in the definition of Justice System Participant at the beginning of the Code, that the intent of 423.1 is to include a much wider range of possible participants than your analysis considers.

justice system participant means

(a) a member of the Senate, of the House of Commons, of a legislative assembly or of a municipal council,

(b) a person who plays a role in the administration of criminal justice, including

(i) the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and a Minister responsible for policing in a province,
(ii) a prosecutor, a lawyer, a member of the Chambre des notaires du Québec and an officer of a court,

(iii) a judge and a justice,

(iv) a juror and a person who is summoned as a juror,

(v) an informant, a prospective witness, a witness under subpoena and a witness who has testified,

(vi) a peace officer within the meaning of any of paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (e) and (g) of the definition peace officer,

(vii) a civilian employee of a police force,

(viii) a person employed in the administration of a court,

(viii.1) a public officer within the meaning of subsection 25.1(1) and a person acting at the direction of such an officer,

(ix) an employee of the Canada Revenue Agency who is involved in the investigation of an offence under an Act of Parliament,

(ix.1) an employee of the Canada Border Services Agency who is involved in the investigation of an offence under an Act of Parliament,

(x) an employee of a federal or provincial correctional service, a parole supervisor and any other person who is involved in the administration of a sentence under the supervision of such a correctional service and a person who conducts disciplinary hearings under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and

(xi) an employee and a member of the Parole Board of Canada and of a provincial parole board, and

 (c) a person who plays a role in respect of proceedings involving

(i) security information,

(ii) criminal intelligence information,

(iii) information that would endanger the safety of any person if it were disclosed,

(iv) information that is obtained in confidence from a source in Canada, the government of a foreign state, an international organization of states or an institution of such a government or international organization, or

(v) potentially injurious information or sensitive information as those terms are defined in section 38 of the Canada Evidence Act; (personne associée au système judiciaire)

A touch more all-encompassing than you imply in your somewhat less than authoritative analysis.

[Jeffrey]

Maybe my memory's hazy, but what is the point of deconstructing the section of the Criminal Code if, as Menard has previously claimed, it does not apply to Boisjoli and/or he can simply opt out of it?

[Burnaby49]

Maybe my memory's hazy, but what is the point of deconstructing the section of the Criminal Code if, as Menard has previously claimed, it does not apply to Boisjoli and/or he can simply opt out of it?

We've all seen how well that approach has worked. Particularly for the Poriskyites.

[notorial dissent]

Maybe my memory's hazy, but what is the point of deconstructing the section of the Criminal Code if, as Menard has previously claimed, it does not apply to Boisjoli and/or he can simply opt out of it?

Gives Bobby a chance to bloviate and pretend to meaning in his otherwise useless and wasted life??????

[eric]

Maybe my memory's hazy, but what is the point of deconstructing the section of the Criminal Code if, as Menard has previously claimed, it does not apply to Boisjoli and/or he can simply opt out of it?

I understand your point, but this section of the CCC may be the "big stick" to put an end to a a lot of the FMOTL movement in Canada. The instigators of arbitrary liens, etc, a tactic borrowed from the US sovereigns, could therefore be successfully prosecuted. Remember the Alberta Court of King's Bench?
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10455&p=201256&hilit=king#p201256

justice system participant means
(v) an informant, a prospective witness, a witness under subpoena and a witness who has testified,

BTW, perhaps I am revealing too much, but greetings to Derek and Kumar who occasionally read Quatloos. Perhaps the Crown is just picking the low hanging fruit by going after Boisjoli so that they can set a precedent in Alberta.

[arayder]

Maybe my memory's hazy, but what is the point of deconstructing the section of the Criminal Code if, as Menard has previously claimed, it does not apply to Boisjoli and/or he can simply opt out of it?

Phony freeman scholars like Menard are not "deconstructing" statutes. They are just cherry picking the language of the law in pathetic attempts to justify wife beating (Allen Boisjoli), drunk driving (Dave Goyns), threatening cops (Dean Clifford and Allen Boisjoli) and having sex with drug addled teenagers (Robert Menard).

They are the very reason society has law.

[bmxninja357]

This is not a rob or dean based thread.

Just saying
Ninj

[Burnaby49]

When Cody Haller called out to the Freeman community to do whatever they could to assist Allen Boisjoli in his time of need he made this plea for civility;

This being said.. we should not let this be reduced to a pissing match nor should it end up as a battle of egos. We have before us an opportunity to band together and help to make a stand that has the potential to defend that which I believe each and every one of you can respect to some degree.

We have a chance here to make some positive change and stop a precedent from being made that is detrimental for each and every one of us.

I am sure that in the ripples that may start here can also shead a positive light on the movement as a whole rather than the usual defamation we have grown accustomed to.

. . . . .

Once again folks.... egos at the door.

We have already discussed jurisdiction, pro se vs Sui juris. This is not about arguing or who is right or wrong but rather bringing information and perspectives in order to help a decision that could invariably affect us all.

Thank you all for your time and support.

I have faith in each and every one of you to Unite and come together under a worthy cause.

https://www.facebook.com/cody.haller.79 ... nref=story

Good luck with that! It took only a day for Boisjoli's purported supporters and advisers to turn on each other like a pack of rabid weasels and leave our paper terrorist abandoned. Boisjoli's been thrown overboard as the battle of raging egos takes over. Unite? Come together? These guys have always been incapable of any serious planning or self-discipline but this display is amazing even by their own abysmally low standards. Parakeet Belanger is going nuts, obsessively banging out gibberish postings as fast as his fingers can work the keyboard and Menard has lumbered on the scene just to face accusations that he steals tips from waitresses. This is the Menard squabble, at least at the moment, the discussion is evolving fast;

Robert Menard David Jones-Cook
I am also a legend in my own mind too though.


David Jones-Cook Robert Menard
I have been aware of that from the first moment I encountered you,


Robert Menard David Jones-Cook
I have mastered the ability to cause the humourless, arrogant, and self-absorbed to misjudge and dislike me on our initial meeting. Saves me trying to be friends with asshats.

PS- I AM LEGEND!


David Jones-Cook Robert Menard
granted that you made a contribution to the cause but now you can confess to stealing tips as well


David Jones-Cook
p.s. also tell those assembled here of your behaviours at Paul Chauvin's, Yup! You're a legend all right for being a mooch and a thief


Robert Menard
You mean when my Father was dying, I was in a bad place in my life and financially, and he helped me? As for being a thief, if you have no proof, then you are being maliciously defamatory. Paul and Val love me. And I them.


Robert Menard
I trust that anyone reading your accusations will get to know you before giving your words any weight. I am sure once they do, they will see the lonely, angry, irrelevant old man you are, and give your words no weight. Paul has blocked you but is still my friend.

PS- I AM LEGEND!


David Jones-Cook Robert Menard
Yes, Paul blocked me but long before he did he also told me of you wearing out your welcome at his place. as to your suppositions about me, and that is all they are, they are unprovable or the opinions of those like yourself that paint others black so that they might appear white and do it behind my back, hardly standup folks, That your father was dying has no bearing on your act of petty theft and for you to use it an an excuse show your distinct lack of character


Robert Menard David Jones-Cook
Out of curiosity, what petty theft are you referring to? Have you stopped taking your meds?


David Jones-Cook
As it was told to to me by a close friend you were at a gathering when you pocketed the tips meant for a server. There can be no denial on your part that you have alienated many that believed in you, By your using the old lawyers gaff of planting suspicion you have yet again shown your true character


Robert Menard
That absolutely never happened and as someone who has made my living on tips as a waiter, bartender, and Maitre'D, is not something I would ever do. Also, I am not a thief. But hey it was told to you by a close friend, so it must be true. As for planting suspicion, that is exactly what you are doing here, using hearsay. So maybe it is YOU showing your true character, for all to see.


David Jones-Cook
Maybe, as anyone who has studied psycho-linguistics can tell you, is also, when used in the manner you do, is a weasel word


Robert Menard David Jones-Cook
You are clearly a source of division and seem to constantly seek to create disunity and dissuade proper discussion. I understand you have been repeatedly banned from many groups for this very same thing. You either have some personality defect which causes you to do this without being aware of it, or you are doing it purposely with hidden intent.


David Jones-Cook Robert Menard
There is no question to my being band and blocked That part is accurate. What is not accurate is your guess work as to why, and it is that guess work that trips you up

You being the pot that called the kettle black Also have your share of being blocked as well as abandoned by supporters and backers, have you not?

You once were a fighter for Justice, and had an international reputation and now?


Paul Chauvin
Pay no attention to him Robert. We are still friends. What David says, he puts in his own words and I love you like brother. You know you are welcome and have a place to stay at my house.

This is none of David's business and I regret some chats we had and will not waste my time any further with his antics. He's blocked from me for many reasons.

David should concentrate on the only thing he can change and that would be himself.


Robert Menard David Jones-Cook
Every fighter needs to occasionally duck back and reload. I am far from done fighting, even though I may have changed strategy.

See that? That's what he's been doing since his ignominiously scuttle from from his Toronto Criminal trial almost two years ago. Ducking and reloading! I thought he was just guzzling beer and fulminating in a squat in Quebec but it turned out he was strategizing. He must be ready to unleash some great stuff on the Ontario judicial system!

Paraclete Belanger has made so many posts that I'm not going to waste time re-posting them all. In general gibberish like this;.

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
being the watchman is an honor and curse you get to sit high but not to rehearse but to blow the horn loud you better be sure cause a watchmans eyes sharp it has to stay pure so keep up the stand and never lay down as a watchman forever with an eye all around

But being a Christian Minister and God's Watchman, he is always right and it is his job to chastise the ungodly. So he was generous in gratuitously parceling out comments like these;

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
John is a smart man but is without faith and the truth..John would have you believe you can get virginity fornicating with a prostitute or by using a fraud obtain clean hands..all mans code is a commercially owned instrumentality of usury and enslavement and if you respect it's person by using it your deemed a sinner
Like · 2 · September 22 at 7:48pm · Edited

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
I know Allan and his issue and his main problem as any who know him is he cannot keep a civil tongue in his head..he is a bite back brash condescending arrogant bully that undoubtedly has motive to be angry but seems to care less that he is feeding their power when he acts that way..I and many others tried to help him by explaining you get more flies with honey than vinegar but he prefers the piss and vinegar despite the obvious negative results....I am suspicious of one so defiantly ignoring wisdom and logic that you by your actions are bearing a benefit to a renegade system to be able to label a complainer as a terrorist...Thats what Allen is doing...Me thinks thou protests in foul nasty anger to much!
Like · September 23 at 7:36am

Belanger seemed to have an animus against someone called Kaz;

Cory Black
[12} I find myself in agreement with the Crown’s submission that even if one assumes that Mr. Crischuk is sincere in respect of the religious beliefs that he has espoused, his mistaken belief that the Income Tax Act is not applicable to his conduct is a mistake of law. In R. v. Klundert, (2004) 2004 CanLII 21268 (ON CA), 187 C.C.C. (3d) 417, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that a mistaken belief that a statute is invalid or otherwise not applicable to the accused’s conduct is a mistake of law.
Like · September 23 at 1:40pm

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
yah I know Kaz that idiot
Like · September 23 at 1:42pm

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
he never refuted the assumption he is a person
Like · September 23 at 1:42pm

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
i was councilling him but he refused to listen then I found out he was a revenue Canada employee for 25 years
Like · September 23 at 1:43pm

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
he was in bed with the crown the whole time
Like · September 23 at 1:43pm

Cory Black
'The prerogative remedies are exceptional in their nature and should not be made available to those who sleep upon their rights.' "
Like · September 23 at 1:44pm

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
I know him very well

So I looked Kaz up and, unfortunately, I have to agree with the Paraclete on this one. Kaz is Kaz-Chester Crischuk and these two cases involve him.

R. v. Crischuk, 2010 BCSC 716
http://canlii.ca/t/29w67

R. v. Crischuk, 2007 BCPC 470
http://canlii.ca/t/20phz

And he comes across as, yes, an idiot. Although I suspect that Belanger's animosity is partly fueled by professional rivalry since Kaz was in the same business of flogging biblical gibberish as Belanger.

[11] The main defence advanced by the accused is that he refused to file the Income Tax returns as required pursuant to the requirements within the timeframe authorized because to do so would conflict with his religious beliefs. The accused asserts as a proposition that the Queen is constitutionally, contractually, morally and ethically bound to uphold the Christian principles set out in the Bible. He argues that statutes which advance the faith are binding but if statutes derogate or diminish the faith they are not binding. He suggests that the Income Tax Act derogates the faith and the principles of the Holy Bible and his religious beliefs and is therefore of no force and effect. He furthermore asserts that where there is a conflict between a statute and the fundamental principles of the Christian religion, the former must give way to the latter. He argues that the taxation system embodied in the Income Tax Act supports usury, which is contrary to fundamental biblical principles and specifically is contrary to his religious convictions and beliefs. Therefore, he argues, he is under no obligation to participate in the taxation system, which would include the filing of tax returns. He also makes the surprising argument that taxation, biblically, of necessity and pursuant to the rule of law, must be voluntary. He suggests that forced taxation is theft. Interestingly, in the accused’s volume entitled “Under Protest, Duress and Intimidation – Challenge to Jurisdiction “, filed in the Registry April 5, 2007, at page 6, para. 28, it is stated that Mr. Crischuk does pay sales and gas taxes, however, this is only because of the extreme difficulty present in refusing to pay them. It would appear therefore that that extreme difficulty trumps his religious conviction. I conclude that if it were extremely difficult for Mr. Crischuk to refuse to pay income tax, he would also then pay income tax notwithstanding his religious convictions.

[12] I find myself in agreement with the Crown’s submission that even if one assumes that Mr. Crischuk is sincere in respect of the religious beliefs that he has espoused, his mistaken belief that the Income Tax Act is not applicable to his conduct is a mistake of law. In R. v. Klundert, (2004) 2004 CanLII 21268 (ON CA), 187 C.C.C. (3d) 417, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that a mistaken belief that a statute is invalid or otherwise not applicable to the accused’s conduct is a mistake of law.

But then somebody went after our parakeet and brought up some awkward shared past history;

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
Bonnie I know Kevin and he is a fraud!!
Like · September 23 at 7:30am

Pierre de Chanteloup
Hey. Remember when I took you out and got you drunk and you told me you had NO Credentials as a 'priest' or 'minister' and you said that you just 'read the bible when you were in jail'? I'm the guy that the news doesn't mention when they talk about 'Boyardee' going to jail for months. He trapped me, a former soldier at his property and left for more than 24 hours, took the only water supplies and disconnected the internet. Bet that story never got out huh? Remember when you told me the statute of limitations on war crimes was changed to 'two weeks' and then giggled like a smug little girl? Remember every time I brought up the language code I found via Dennis Fetcho and told you he was a professional linguist and you would mock EVERY SINGLE TIME "yea but is he a cunning linguist"? Remember how every single one of you (in your little group of seeming controlled opposition freaks) knows about the Rome Statute violations and tried to sharft me and make sure No One ever found out about it? How about your 'God' is the Hindu Trimurti (which came before the Trinity). How about Generation Ordinative Destructive forces (G.O.D.) or Brahma Vishnu Shiva. Creation Maintenance Destruction. How about Brahma had a wife named Saraswati and with a simple shift you get A-Brahm and Sara. The "head" of gods family and that Sara Abrahm is the Cerebrum and yet another allegorical story about the Human Brain and medicine. How about s.atan is pi, L U cypher or Lucifer is pi and I LLuminatus is Pi Code. Every one of you knows it since I told you all years ago and you seem to have done everything you can to black ball me and ignore those things. FOR YEARS. How about TIBULLUS from 55 B.C. saying that the 'god' of the BIBLIOS HELIOTECH or Book of the Sun in ALLEGORY is SATURN EL or EL. How about the fact that such is taught at Yale by Professor Christine Hayes or at Exeter University by Professor Francesca Stavrakopoulou or the three BBC specials on EL - the god of the BIB EL or Book of EL? So again, its a book of allegorical stories since it was easier to pass on stories to people that couldn't read or write. A book about OPTICS (God is Light 25 times in the BIB EL) and a book of astronomy and medical knowledge. All in Allegory. How about 12 Disc I Poles or 12 A Post of ELs surrounding a Sun Marker or Gnomon or He's Us (there was no J and Psalm 82:6 / John 10:34) "Ye are gods" since we all have EL or the force of Life or Light within us. We are after all VESSELS or VESSE (VASE or Container) for EL moving thru the 'waters of the Earth' (Air is a gas and all gasses are FLUIDS) and that All is Admiralty Law and Contract (even the proverbial 'devil' obeys contract law) or Commerce Law of the Sea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzBAFoCqtRc . So tell everyone, why did you change your name from 'Minister' to 'Paraclete'? and then, without attacking me or acting indifferent or without claiming that you can't understand or comprehend what was said here and finally without using any logical fallacies, try to prove what I have said here wrong. Before I go, how about it says within the governor generals (corporation sole) website that the office is 'de facto head of state', so would that make the M&M (chocolate covered bullshit or should I say BAELshit) report, apparently nothing but 'empty calories'? I say I can see the fear in it and if you read 'between the lines' its more important what is NOT said, rather than what is spewed or written in its 'spell'. I paraphrase 'oh what a tangled web is weaved when someone is practicing to deceive' Now, Dance, but 'have a nice DEI'

Note the absence of any kind of advice to Boijoli in all this? Menard and Belanger are just like parasites attaching themselves to a convenient host. Allan is irrelevant to that so screw him.

[notorial dissent]

footl's check their egos at the door, has Cody been smoking the cheap stuff again? The only thing I find harder to believe that Boisi having supporters is him ever taking advice from anyone about anything. He already knows it all so why should he have to bother listening to the hoi poloi?

Menard and the parasite have been living off the footl crowd for eyars, like parasites as they live off of the host and give nothing back in return, or in fact damage the host, sometimes irreparably, as both of them have done time and time again. The problem is that the footl crowd is too dumb and disorganized to figure it out or even to really compare notes. Speaking of Darwinianism in action.

[arayder]

This is the same dog and pony show we got each time Clifford got busted.

The freeman gurus jockeyed for position. . . trying to come up with the coolest legal theory. . . and every freeman with a key board spread misinformation like it was cheap peanut butter.

------------
Dope Clock: It has been 53 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.

[grixit]

Ok, how do Allen Boisjoli's supposed supporters advocate for him? "We are calling for freedom lovers everywhere to take a stand against the persecution of a man whose name we're not allowed to mention. Sign up here."

[notorial dissent]

Good point, although since his current legal strategy seems to amount to sticking his fingers in his ears and humming you're not the boss of me I'm not sure just how much support they could possibly be. Although that does largely seem to be the footl strategy anyway when it comes right down to it.

[arayder]

Good point, although since his current legal strategy seems to amount to sticking his fingers in his ears and humming you're not the boss of me I'm not sure just how much support they could possibly be. Although that does largely seem to be the footl strategy anyway when it comes right down to it.

This is the time when freemen gurus, freemen and freemen-lites go all out to bolster their William Wallace fantasies.

It's kind of sad this time. It's one thing to assert the freeman way in the case of a peaceful man trying to change society, but standing up for a guy's "right" to financially ruin the traffic cop who ticketed him is about as misguided as it gets.

------------
Dope Clock: It has been 54 days since freeman guru Robert Menard promised to bring legal actions to secure precedent setting judgments. So far there is no documentation of a single legal action by Menard.