Galvanize and overthrow the corrupt and murderous administration of White Lesbian Annise Parker in Houston, Texas USA on November 8, 2011. Galvanize and send all the crook$ on Houston City Council packing with her !!!
Truth if the matter is no sources are cited, nothing is proved. It's all assertions. "Do your own due diligence"? Well, I've been studying this for countless hours on end for weeks - and much of this is false. For instance, Go look up "understand" in all 8th editions of Black's Law - you will find it only appears in editions 3-8, and it means "to comprehend'. "Person"? Defined as "human being". Go check it out for yourself.
@ScottONanski When Robert talks about a 'human being' he is speaking in English not legal lease so please don't get them mixed up. Also in black laws dictionary 8th edition page 1162 [2. An entity (such as a corporation) that is recognized by law as having the rights and duties of a human being.] Notice it says 'recognized by law' as a human being not by statutes (or in fact/defacto). Also if you looked on his forum see the templates it refers to you as flesh and blood. Define human see MONSTER.
Please explain EXACTLY how he is lying. Give us some PRECISE examples.
Oh, and if you're going to parrot what the "debunker" states, I need to see some official documents and how, in a real life situation, they debunk what Menard is saying. Otherwise it's just speculation, and we haven't progressed.
@sfiorare What's the difference between accepting what the article ("The Freeman on the Land myth: Debunked") states as fact, and what this man (Robert-Arthur:Menard) says?
Don't give me the "one is fact and one is not" argument because unless you've actually studied AND pleaded such cases in a court of law, you have no more of an idea than most people do.
Show me jurisprudence/documents.
I have none, stating otherwise, but I'm not as confident as some pretend to be.
@sfiorare copy and paste this in to youtube search:
Freeman Council Tax The Take Down Begins part 1.mp4
then
Freeman Council Tax The Take Down Begins part 2.mp4
Then lets see if you think it is a scam. Watch them all the way through and educate yourself. Debunked I seriously don't think you will even attempted to debunk this unless your ready with all your fiction and then I will destroy it peace by peace with common law.
@sfiorare Did you watch the videos it is no good syaing it is a scam because I have done my research and why are so many people joining Robert Menard if he is scamming people?
@sfiorare Also don't tell me it is a scam because I know of a freeman in the UK who stands up for the people, note I said people not person and he has stopped children being taken away. I am done with you I have better things to do than try to change an ignorant mind, one who chooses to be enslaved so go ahead and complain about taxes and civil rights and civil liberties O sorry revocable privileges because one day you will see you can count on that!
@sfiorare The explain are you a people or a person and why? So misinformation is what you sent me that is what you said right. It is not evidence it is misinformation about the link to freeman debunk okay so now you are contradicting yourself.
@sfiorare Okay sorry for that I did make a mistake by saying that and I will admit when I'm wrong. So this then means your referring to the videos I told you to search for, so in that video you saw a freeman actually in a court room talking to the magistrates and clerk (and it ain't Robert Menard). So tell me how is that not evidence the man did not go to jail did he? So you refuse to accept this but you would listen to hearsay of a blogger that even people commenting said he was brainwashed!
@sfiorare I am sorry but I read some of this BS and no proof there what so ever. This made me laugh 'It is simply a coincidence, based on the fact that the stock market generates so many new mutual fund numbers'. Funny how any legal fiction sorry 'person' as you like to call them can put those numbers in and funny enough a stock is shown, I repeat anyone! Also you haven't looked at any of the videos, are you that ignorrant that you refuse to look at the evidence.
Vatican-Pope-Jesuits-illuminati-NAZIS-CFR (luciferian jews) run the world. All secret societies, organized religions ruled by an elite bloodline, same bloodline ruling from Egypt 2 Rome British (European) Empire - America Empire (1913 Fed Reserve. Presidents & King stand at whim of the real power which is the priest hood (Priests - Bishops - Cardinals - Pope) standing behind the throne - trying to form it's one world luciferian gov't.
Yes, true Revolution happens in one's mind and in their heart. Those are the two places in which those who "think" that they are in authority, cannot get to.
@superbrendal The Great Things which are going to happen is that I am NOT going to accept the fact ever that the estate of my person dead fraudulently created complicit by the State of Arizona is acceptable. Barack Obama is going to be exposed as the fraud he is (we do not even know his real name) and be indicted along with his DHS Janet Napolitano and the many engaged in numerous frauds and harassments using my person.I AM NOT DEAD. Why is my co of Zenadev being used by Obama attorneys re fraud
Does anyone know which law dictionary is the standard for the United States court system? If so, does this dictionary apply to legal terms everywhere English is spoken, or just the United States?
@rockerbox0 if you don,t know about gravity you might think it doesn't apply to you. but it still does. I just had a judge dismiss a ticket becouse he said "I find that the state of az could not provide proper identification for the accused capital letter man or legal entity. i almost fell off the chair." I used this video and on by the antiterrorist on standing. Im also a free man by way of the tim turner program. freedom yell .com . so laugh all you want. your still sucked up by ignorance.
does anybody know a good site of COMMON LAW and how to exercise it? i have a court appearing on tuesday for a stupid ticket. please help, i have a rough idea of how i need to present myself, but the only thing i am slightly worried about is the DO's and DON'ts as in, what i need to avoid doing/saying in a corporate court, to avoid this deceptive contractual world. anybody?
Go and learn about The Restore America Plan with Sam Kennedy and Tim Turner. It is the most amazing approach I've seen fro you to become free from oppression and tyranny. This is the amazing group working to restore the De Jure [Original] American Republic where all your rights and freedoms are in tact. These brave and intelligent men lawfully noticed all 50 Governors to take a new oath to the people and not swear allegiance to a corrupt defacto bankrupt UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
One application to be seen as a Intervenor in court being rejected has nothing to do with Freemanery. He rejected an argument that did not mention Freeman at all. You might as well argue that he rejected a Catholic argument, or a white mans argument and using the same logic now claim it as proof that all Catholic arguments are wrong.
in the application, you identified yourself as a "Freeman-on-the-Land." you claimed that "The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society" was concerned with the way court proceedings were instigated, conducted and that the requirement of clear and informed consent was not being properly procured.
i assumed this was a freeman argument. how was it not?
more importantly, why didn't you use a freeman argument? you certainly promote them heavily.
Anyone believing in man's justice is either blind or sold or sold pretending to be blind.
I don't judge you as you judge me (without any facts publicly :), I have nothing against you, I am not replying to you but to your text.
Your text is lying or is too short ?
Prove me delusional if you can, you won't even try with facts, maybe you'll try with qualifiers only blinds will swallow... and I'll debunk you anytime, anywhere, anyway, anyhow.
This stuff isn't taught in school and for good reason. They wan't us to be dumb and easily controlled. The last thing they want is for people like you knowing the truth. It shows you who has the pwoer and it's not them it's you, they are the ones who don't want a revolution.
What we think of today as laws, are in fact not laws, they are STATUTES - they simply have the application of enforcement of law (i.e. the force of government/judicial justification to act upon an indivudual as though said individual had violated a law). CANADA is a Corporation, a private Co. with employees who registered (abandoned) their Lawful Rights to work for CANADA, and hence sibject to this Co. Rules and Regulations, or, STATUTES.
People often hold onto unabated belief systems, often even if they maladapticw and cause pain to themselves, and especially others. When information enters one consciiousness that challenges the very constucts of one's belief system, it instigates cognitive dissonance and will often manifest in very malapdative projection and reflects the ego's frailty. This is a clear cut example and I do forgive you but will not offer another cheek, I offered you the truth instead. Look above.
I should have also mentioned supercilious and condecending ploys are remitted by the same intent, simply a different manifestation than those previously mentioned and observed by me, and exhibited by you.
If I were illiterate, I wouldnt be able to write down the very words you are alluding to purport as baseless. The very nature of my intent was articulated quite succicntly. The very nature of its essence is also a reflection of anything you wish to consider within yourself and is reflected by the every insults you attempt to throw at me, a projection shining quite clearly. Your denial will not allow that to enter your waking conscioussness at the moment, but upon reflection, it may.
Anyone who is knowledgeable of law especially gods law and our rights as humans please contact me as I would love to learn more and share ideas with you.
FREEDOM! They were forced to free the dumb=freedumb=freedom They were highly educated. ITS TIME WE ALL EDUCATE OURSELVES AND OUR CHILDREN! THEY ARE TERRORIZING OUR MINDS AS ALWAYS!
I think most of us would agree that capitilsm is not the problem. It's USURY i.e. INTEREST that is causing most of the problems today. This is all because of the banks power to issue and create money. A small number of people have the power to control us and we need to do something about it. Any suggestions?
FMOTL are out-laws they feel that there are to many laws and they are right, but! Statutes apply to all of us unfortunately. If you Go down the road that they are suggesting you will have to give up your SSN/SIN, drivers licence, plates on your car ownership/title of your house, and on an on. No one will want to hire you with-out SIN number! The only way you will be able to make money is give seminars and PYRAMID schemes.
Statutes apply to those who consent to them. An example is registration. You cannot be made or forced to register your property. Once you do register that property you have given away your rights thus you have consented to be governed by that statute law that relates to the property you volunterily registered.
ok. I have looked at the TPUC (dot) org site. Let's say you have filed your 2 affidavits with QE2 and opted out of the madness. Can you then access funds in your pension account ? Also what about medical / hospital access. I have lots of questions I need answering but love the concept.
My apologies Doggeiman, I misread. And thank you, for finally providing some documented proof towards the outcome of rob's arguments. He appears to use theories favoured, ineffectually, by the patriot and Aryan rights movements.
The reason is that people are finding remedy and freeing themselves from the deceptive and soul sucking system they do not wish to be a part of. Maybe you do wish to be a part of it; that is your choice. I hope it works for you. Others too have the right to choose and they can decide to not be a part of it. Or can they not? These concepts work and have brought many remedy. NUI and COR and Fee Schedule KICKS ASS!
So the only thing you will accept as proof is a court citation? What if these concepts are designed to AVOID court and thus there is never a coutt citation of a successful action, because success results in no court transcript?
I know of many people who have avoid court entirely and kept their rights and there is no court citation, as none was created by this process. Court is for those with conflict; this is how we avoid conflict and thus court.
I am receptive to proof generally. Do you have some?
I asked for a court citation because your arguments reference legal concepts, where court outcomes measure an arguments efficacy.
For example, you state consent is required for a statute to have force of law. However, Canadas criminal code is a statute. A s.230 charge - eg. causing death while committing arson - is not influenced by the accused's refusal to consent to the code. Arrest occurs regardless, for court consideration.
The Criminal Code distinguishes between 'every one' and 'any person who'. So do I. I do not think that one can avoid liability by using the denial of consent if one actually harms another and there is a proper claimant as in that case it states 'every one' and that would include even Freemen, unless they wish to be outlaws. Removing or including something from the Criminal Code does not render it lawful or not. It is merely a codification.
You continue to avoid my question. Do you have proof that your theories work?
The criminal code is in fact a statute: R.S., 1985, c. C-46
Are you saying that statutes aren't lawful if they use the words 'any person who'? But they're lawful if they use 'everyone'?
If so, is s.123 of the Motor Vehicle Act lawful?
It says "the peace officer may direct traffic according to his or her discretion, despite anything in this Part, and everyone must obey his or her directions."
Yes the CC is a statute, it is also a codification of previously existing law.
I would assume all sections of all Acts are lawful, yet they may be limited in their applicability and it is the application of them outside the legislative framework which is unlawful. You fail to distinguish there.
If a Police man is acting as a peace officer to preserve and maintain the peace then yes all would be compelled by law to follow his directives if reasonable.
you give garbled legal instruction to the public. yet you refuse to demonstrate if your theories work.
i conclude that you lack credibility and are not a responsible advocate.
folks,
those struggling with oppressive canadian state action might check out pivot legal society. pivot gives initial advice on cop confrontations, including when you can say no to cops: see their "rights cards" section on their website
You who hides behind a fake name tell me I lack credibility? Care to identify yourself first or should we assume YOU LACK CREDIBILITY?
You are entitled to your opinion, even though it is based on a lack of information and those who have used the things I teach successfully, have a right to theirs.
You brag about outsmarting officials, encourage use of your successful theories and yet refuse to prove they work. Instead, you goad me into unsafe behaviour I will not release personal details to YouTube.
How does my alias change my point? Without proof you are merely posturing, while those who take your advice might be penalized.
Fyi: Driving on a public highway without a licence IS punishable at common law - R. v. Mansour [1979] 2 SCR. 916; Hendrick v. Maryland (1915) 235 US 610
And traveling on a public highway without being a driver but a traveler is still a right. I distinguish between a driver and a traveler. That distinction is apparently too difficult for you. Please do not talk to me about driving on the highway unless you can and are willing to think and distinguish between two similar yet different ideas.
I do not think I brag, I merely repeat what has happened. Nor do I refuse to prove they work.
I have done so repeatedly and have no need to do so again.
"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky. 731, 17 S. W.(2d) 1012,66 A.L.R.1378; and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. Smith, 155 Va. 367, 154 S. E. 579, A.L.R. 604.
Rob's last argument proves that Robs theories dont work:
-Rob cites American case law. It doesnt bind Canadian courts.
-Rob quotes obiter, which doesnt even bind US courts. Only stare decis binds.
- Rob omits relevant info: The Thompson case also notes that the city may restrict travel on pubic highways in the interest of public safety if the restriction is not arbitrary.
Rob, you say you aren't refusing to provide proof your theories work. Then give us evidence, not rhetoric.
I am an audience member seeking creative ways to be free of hierarchical state government shackles. I came across your site.
Requesting proof is fair given that (1) you advise people towards actions that might harm them if youre wrong and (2) you arent credible
You arent credible because (1) you dont defend your theories coherently or accurately and (2) you side step the question of proof by going on the offensive (in big scary upper case)
So you want me to provide 'proof' to millions upon millions of unknown people. Who will decide if the proof is achieved, me or you? Or do we vote?
Sheesh, go live under your rock if you are so happy there. I know it works and have been proving it repeatedly to those who engage me to act for them. I am not acting for you, so have no obligations to you.
Rob, life under a rock is the only way I could be receptive to your ideas.
I fear for those who, being fairly frustrated with our oppressive government regime, would turn to you for help. You who, as demonstrated by this conversation, aren't credible enough to admit the limits of your knowledge or theory.
For proof doesn't require a vote. It merely requires one demonstrable situation where your theory has successfully and overtly defied state legislation. As you claim it can.
You start by admitting that you are unreceptive to the ideas. The express your own fear and an opinion that I am not credible. How can you tell, if you decide at the offset to reject any ideas presented. You say you want proof but now admit that you will not accept it when it comes, as you would have to live under a rock. No one is asking you to do anything. Those not fearful can try if they want and find the proof you think they should have before they start.
Your own words above state:Rob, life under a rock is the only way I could be receptive to your ideas.
So you are not receptive is the implication.
How many people and times would you say I have to prove truth? Having done it numerous times already, I see no need to provide it to you, or anyone for the hundredth time.
I do not care if you believe me or not. you are not seeking to hire me, I do not know you, and I simply do not care what nay sayers believe.
if you were to read this entire conversation you would see that i have provided proof.
though clearly you give a very powerful argument on rob's behalf :).
and yes. i am scared. those who aren't scared of government power, i.e. the illegitimate carriers of deadly weapons and fiscal power, are arguably stupid. the government can kill you and/ or lock you up, remember? be cautious.
Rob fuck these losers there sound like they are scared. deal not with the weak. Im in america n i would love to know how to put this into action because something has to be done to end the modern day slavery without the bars. Insight please??
LOL something tells me that the people who'd actually be interested in a 'debate' between a lawyer and a freeman kook would be unpersuadable anyway. Look up "idiot legal arguments" on goog*e.
um, that would be like debating a retarded chimpanzee. Tell you what, let's put our money where our mouths are. You simply live your life with your legal theories, and I'll live my life with mine, and in 20 years we'll see who's broke and/or in jail. I'll bet money it ain't me.
but you could hunt and fish without restriction. You could grow your crops on you own land. Their intent is to get you into cities where you are helpless. do some research. stop accepting the bullshit they use to deceive you. If you don't you are completely responsible.
you're a grunt and you are sounding ridiculous. Your a slave to the monetary system...good luck with that...the bottom of the monetary system is about to fall out..again..good luck with that..
yeah I have a law dictionary, einstein. Bought it when I went to law school to study REAL law, not fantasy crap. If you guys weren't so lame you'd be hilarious. Actually, you're hilarious anyway. ;)
Care to debate these things in a proper forum and under full commercial liability? We can video it and make it public. I will claim I cannot be governed without consent and you claim we are all serfs of your society. If I win your rep as a lawyer is shot, as you will lose to a Freeman with no formal legal training.
mrmitee, are there case citations available where any of your theories have seen fruition? or are they simply theories at this point? i am curious to read any instance where the freeman "person" concept has been argued in court.
Galvanize and overthrow the corrupt and murderous administration of White Lesbian Annise Parker in Houston, Texas USA on November 8, 2011. Galvanize and send all the crook$ on Houston City Council packing with her !!!
MayorGalvan1956 4 months ago
we in UK have been slaves for long time, this is so important!
in scotland , a woman had her two kids removed and one was'nt registered or certified
which had to BE RETURNED! its real folkes!
siders143 7 months ago
were can order these video?
sanddocon 8 months ago
In England, one is obliged to register the birth of a child within 6 weeks of birth.
goatmanjohn 10 months ago
Truth if the matter is no sources are cited, nothing is proved. It's all assertions. "Do your own due diligence"? Well, I've been studying this for countless hours on end for weeks - and much of this is false. For instance, Go look up "understand" in all 8th editions of Black's Law - you will find it only appears in editions 3-8, and it means "to comprehend'. "Person"? Defined as "human being". Go check it out for yourself.
ScottONanski 11 months ago
@ScottONanski When Robert talks about a 'human being' he is speaking in English not legal lease so please don't get them mixed up. Also in black laws dictionary 8th edition page 1162 [2. An entity (such as a corporation) that is recognized by law as having the rights and duties of a human being.] Notice it says 'recognized by law' as a human being not by statutes (or in fact/defacto). Also if you looked on his forum see the templates it refers to you as flesh and blood. Define human see MONSTER.
avelx 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You're lying! ...See how easy it is to say that.
Please explain EXACTLY how he is lying. Give us some PRECISE examples.
Oh, and if you're going to parrot what the "debunker" states, I need to see some official documents and how, in a real life situation, they debunk what Menard is saying. Otherwise it's just speculation, and we haven't progressed.
Once again, I'm only looking for answers.
KMA645 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Freemen . Freeforums . org -- A Forum where American Freemen uncover the "Secrets" of Law & Commerce
judoFLIPchopCHOPchop 1 year ago
Worth watching visit youtube view other 10 parts
bongowizard 1 year ago
@bongowizard - only if you like lies
sfiorare 1 year ago
@sfiorare Please elaborate.
KMA645 11 months ago
@KMA645 - google: "The Freeman on the Land myth: Debunked"
and read about the liars that call themselves freemen and sovereigns
sfiorare 11 months ago
Comment removed
KMA645 11 months ago
Comment removed
KMA645 11 months ago
@sfiorare What's the difference between accepting what the article ("The Freeman on the Land myth: Debunked") states as fact, and what this man (Robert-Arthur:Menard) says?
Don't give me the "one is fact and one is not" argument because unless you've actually studied AND pleaded such cases in a court of law, you have no more of an idea than most people do.
Show me jurisprudence/documents.
I have none, stating otherwise, but I'm not as confident as some pretend to be.
I'm STILL searching.
KMA645 11 months ago
@KMA645 - menard is lying
sfiorare 11 months ago
Comment removed
KMA645 11 months ago
@sfiorare - everyone is subject local, state and national laws
sfiorare 11 months ago
@sfiorare, can you please explain why is Menard lying ?
mateous11 11 months ago
@mateous11 - menard is lying to make money
google: "The Freeman on the Land myth: Debunked"
and read all about how the scam works
sfiorare 11 months ago
@sfiorare copy and paste this in to youtube search:
Freeman Council Tax The Take Down Begins part 1.mp4
then
Freeman Council Tax The Take Down Begins part 2.mp4
Then lets see if you think it is a scam. Watch them all the way through and educate yourself. Debunked I seriously don't think you will even attempted to debunk this unless your ready with all your fiction and then I will destroy it peace by peace with common law.
avelx 4 months ago
@avelx - it's a scam
sfiorare 4 months ago
@sfiorare Did you watch the videos it is no good syaing it is a scam because I have done my research and why are so many people joining Robert Menard if he is scamming people?
avelx 4 months ago
@avelx - what a joke, i've followed menard for years, he's a scammer
sfiorare 4 months ago
@sfiorare Also don't tell me it is a scam because I know of a freeman in the UK who stands up for the people, note I said people not person and he has stopped children being taken away. I am done with you I have better things to do than try to change an ignorant mind, one who chooses to be enslaved so go ahead and complain about taxes and civil rights and civil liberties O sorry revocable privileges because one day you will see you can count on that!
avelx 4 months ago
@avelx - it's you that's ignorant, i am as far from being a slave as possible
sfiorare 4 months ago
@sfiorare The explain are you a people or a person and why? So misinformation is what you sent me that is what you said right. It is not evidence it is misinformation about the link to freeman debunk okay so now you are contradicting yourself.
avelx 4 months ago
@avelx - you really have to be an idiot to play those semantics games
there's no contradiction in what i've said
sfiorare 4 months ago
@sfiorare Okay sorry for that I did make a mistake by saying that and I will admit when I'm wrong. So this then means your referring to the videos I told you to search for, so in that video you saw a freeman actually in a court room talking to the magistrates and clerk (and it ain't Robert Menard). So tell me how is that not evidence the man did not go to jail did he? So you refuse to accept this but you would listen to hearsay of a blogger that even people commenting said he was brainwashed!
avelx 4 months ago
@KMA645 - you're deluding yourself
google: "His 'Straw Man' Free, a Scammer Finds the Rest of Him Isn't"
sfiorare 4 months ago
@sfiorare
pop up mad corporate missinformation!
no solid facts or evidence presented in my view.
MrFreemanontheland 11 months ago
@MrFreemanontheland - that's to be expected from nut cases like you
sfiorare 11 months ago
@sfiorare I am sorry but I read some of this BS and no proof there what so ever. This made me laugh 'It is simply a coincidence, based on the fact that the stock market generates so many new mutual fund numbers'. Funny how any legal fiction sorry 'person' as you like to call them can put those numbers in and funny enough a stock is shown, I repeat anyone! Also you haven't looked at any of the videos, are you that ignorrant that you refuse to look at the evidence.
avelx 4 months ago
@avelx - it's not evidence, it's misinformation
sfiorare 4 months ago
Vatican-Pope-Jesuits-illuminati-NAZIS-CFR (luciferian jews) run the world. All secret societies, organized religions ruled by an elite bloodline, same bloodline ruling from Egypt 2 Rome British (European) Empire - America Empire (1913 Fed Reserve. Presidents & King stand at whim of the real power which is the priest hood (Priests - Bishops - Cardinals - Pope) standing behind the throne - trying to form it's one world luciferian gov't.
truthknowledge. Com
truthknowledge. com/The_System. php
MopDMTBARTL 1 year ago
The music is annoying to the utmost. Will listen with volume off.
PHANTOMSLAYER777 1 year ago
INFOWARRIOR FRMO PORTUGAL:
Guys vote with your wallets, live with your hearts, we must win with love alone, otherwise we are only iniciating the next corrupt society.......
manelmariarodrigues 1 year ago
time will not change as we want to still
skys and oceans shall do as they will
ive yet to live my whole life its feel
and i stand before a wide world to heal
MrScrichter 1 year ago
or maybe teamlaw.net
MrScrichter 1 year ago
you might like truthi nlaw.net .. atleast my u.s. friends
MrScrichter 1 year ago
Spanish speakers need a good translation.
We are out of this information. Can not find subtitles anywhere.
somomono 1 year ago
a few tokes
SevenLeggedWalrus 1 year ago 4
cant see shit capn
NotMadeByMe 1 year ago
this guy's awesome
NoPrivacyANYMORE10 1 year ago
Yes, true Revolution happens in one's mind and in their heart. Those are the two places in which those who "think" that they are in authority, cannot get to.
CrazyHominids 1 year ago
I really think "in der Halle des Bergkonings" was the rave music of the 1800's :)
philateliceun 1 year ago
Many eyes are opening. Thank you Rob for sharing. Great things are going to happen, and its been a long time coming.
superbrendal 1 year ago
@superbrendal The Great Things which are going to happen is that I am NOT going to accept the fact ever that the estate of my person dead fraudulently created complicit by the State of Arizona is acceptable. Barack Obama is going to be exposed as the fraud he is (we do not even know his real name) and be indicted along with his DHS Janet Napolitano and the many engaged in numerous frauds and harassments using my person.I AM NOT DEAD. Why is my co of Zenadev being used by Obama attorneys re fraud
HoneySiegalSurvivor 1 year ago
about damn time people are waking up from this nightmare
adam3176 1 year ago
Does anyone know which law dictionary is the standard for the United States court system? If so, does this dictionary apply to legal terms everywhere English is spoken, or just the United States?
DireSpring 1 year ago
Ballantine's law dictionary lists human being thusly, Human Being: see (Monster) I swear, I couldn't believe it either!
justaman6972 1 year ago
two and a half days, so why did you register your child so soon?
kevrs2 1 year ago
This guy is a crazy Candian so his wacko ideas don't work in the U.S.
RetSquid 1 year ago
oh yes it does!! it worked perfect for me.
rockerbox0 1 year ago
@rockerbox0
LOL!!! Nice try but a clear lie. Go ahead and try a 'bill of exchange' and you will end up in jail for fraud.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@rockerbox0 if you don,t know about gravity you might think it doesn't apply to you. but it still does. I just had a judge dismiss a ticket becouse he said "I find that the state of az could not provide proper identification for the accused capital letter man or legal entity. i almost fell off the chair." I used this video and on by the antiterrorist on standing. Im also a free man by way of the tim turner program. freedom yell .com . so laugh all you want. your still sucked up by ignorance.
rockerbox0 1 year ago
@RetSquid the U.S. is so far gone and is a police state, such a shame when all they preach is freedom
CH1P52 1 year ago
@CH1P52
No, it's not. If it was, places like this would not exist.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid
CH1P52 1 year ago
whats the name of the composition in the beginning of this video, i know i remember it from fantasia but i cant remember what part
lwanatt 1 year ago
@lwanatt In the Hall of the Mountain King, from the Peer Gynt Suite by Edvard Grieg!
YossarianTheMeerkat 1 year ago
does anybody know a good site of COMMON LAW and how to exercise it? i have a court appearing on tuesday for a stupid ticket. please help, i have a rough idea of how i need to present myself, but the only thing i am slightly worried about is the DO's and DON'ts as in, what i need to avoid doing/saying in a corporate court, to avoid this deceptive contractual world. anybody?
freshest007 1 year ago
@freshest007 Google: t.puc. Take it from there...Are you sure you need 'appear' at court?
Jamunbreakable 1 year ago
@freshest007 go to the web page
the peoples united community
jasonspinmaster 1 year ago
What is the song called at the beggining
Godsmack0Believe 1 year ago
@Godsmack0Believe In the Hall of the Mountain King
mrmitee 1 year ago
Go and learn about The Restore America Plan with Sam Kennedy and Tim Turner. It is the most amazing approach I've seen fro you to become free from oppression and tyranny. This is the amazing group working to restore the De Jure [Original] American Republic where all your rights and freedoms are in tact. These brave and intelligent men lawfully noticed all 50 Governors to take a new oath to the people and not swear allegiance to a corrupt defacto bankrupt UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
dennishalsey1962 1 year ago
WOW!
unsheepled 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment antizionist removed by Hollywood and Obama aprouved by Bush & Clinton !
NB : nancy Pelosi got wet reading this !
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Zionist will soon be removed by GO_ :)
Israel flag is OFFICIALLY AGAINST GOD
any Zion pawn willing to prove me wrong here ?
Comment removed by logical rational THINKING described as "terrorist" per Zionist LIARS against humanity
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
User removed by Zionist ROBOT
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment removed by USER
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment removed by a Zionist false Jew from the synagogue of satan as per apocalypse 2:9 and 3:9
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment removed by an IDF GIYUS web war server acting as a remote robot to kill humans, harvest human organs then crash Wall Street
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment removed by "Megaphone Desktop Tools" user of Zionist religion getting orders from GIYUS (Jesus in Hbrew)
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Comment removed by Zionist web soldier hating humans who will shoot a few kids tomorrow morning in a Gaza school
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment removed by GIYUS server made in Israel
911allo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
comment removed by Big Brother
911allo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
comment removed by user
911allo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why is a typical lorelax1 comment showing "Comment removed by user" ?
same for crazy4canada ?
is this a GIYUS Megaphone artifact ?
911allo 2 years ago
Comment removed
lorerax1 2 years ago
i dug around and found a canadian case showing that judges reject "freeman" arguments in court.
freeman "Robert-Arthur Menard" had an application dismissed by the BC supreme court.
here's how to look it up on a legal database.
- search "canlii" and click on the main site
- click english
- in "full text" paste "United States of America v. Emery"
- click the first result that comes up.
voila! this is called "proof". freeman types seem short on it, typically.
backaround 2 years ago
One application to be seen as a Intervenor in court being rejected has nothing to do with Freemanery. He rejected an argument that did not mention Freeman at all. You might as well argue that he rejected a Catholic argument, or a white mans argument and using the same logic now claim it as proof that all Catholic arguments are wrong.
mrmitee 2 years ago
forgive me mrmiteee.
in the application, you identified yourself as a "Freeman-on-the-Land." you claimed that "The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society" was concerned with the way court proceedings were instigated, conducted and that the requirement of clear and informed consent was not being properly procured.
i assumed this was a freeman argument. how was it not?
more importantly, why didn't you use a freeman argument? you certainly promote them heavily.
backaround 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Youtube threads are similar to Obama,s State of the Union speach :)
911allo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Crazy4canada removed her comments ?
I guess it's because Canada does not exist but is a colony :)))))
911allo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Here is a top Zionist Megaphone comment :)
911allo 2 years ago
Common law is a fantastic law in my belief
Fight4Privacy 2 years ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
that's only because you don't believe in God
911allo 2 years ago
What do you know about me that's makes you so confident to say I don't beleive in God?
Fight4Privacy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
because you put fanatic and God in the same sentence
911allo 2 years ago
Your delusional mate.
Fight4Privacy 2 years ago 4
Anyone believing in man's justice is either blind or sold or sold pretending to be blind.
I don't judge you as you judge me (without any facts publicly :), I have nothing against you, I am not replying to you but to your text.
Your text is lying or is too short ?
Prove me delusional if you can, you won't even try with facts, maybe you'll try with qualifiers only blinds will swallow... and I'll debunk you anytime, anywhere, anyway, anyhow.
I got this vaccine against lies : faith :)
911allo 2 years ago
I came cos I thought it said "Beer Free" :-( it was Be Free
RevolutionaryJam 2 years ago 2
most of the times top 3 comments are from Zionist fags, ever notice d?
911allo 2 years ago
Comment removed
lorerax1 2 years ago
great guy but he sounds just like dr evil off austin powers
jjbeez56 2 years ago
@jjbeez56, Agreed. He's awesome. And yes, hahah he does!
SupHobagg 2 years ago
That is why you can sue cops or judicial officers under Title 42 Civil rights violations. They are acting under color of law not law.
Rainy809 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey guys please check out my channel I've had a few big successes in the USA
antibrainwash 2 years ago
This stuff isn't taught in school and for good reason. They wan't us to be dumb and easily controlled. The last thing they want is for people like you knowing the truth. It shows you who has the pwoer and it's not them it's you, they are the ones who don't want a revolution.
mlh8723 2 years ago 38
@mlh8723 Same reason they dont teach critical thinking. Its an almost 100% effective lie detector.
criticalthinking[dot]org[dot]uk
Elephantintheroom01 10 months ago
Comment removed
crazyforcanada 2 years ago
What we think of today as laws, are in fact not laws, they are STATUTES - they simply have the application of enforcement of law (i.e. the force of government/judicial justification to act upon an indivudual as though said individual had violated a law). CANADA is a Corporation, a private Co. with employees who registered (abandoned) their Lawful Rights to work for CANADA, and hence sibject to this Co. Rules and Regulations, or, STATUTES.
tnd240 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
crazyforcanada 2 years ago
People often hold onto unabated belief systems, often even if they maladapticw and cause pain to themselves, and especially others. When information enters one consciiousness that challenges the very constucts of one's belief system, it instigates cognitive dissonance and will often manifest in very malapdative projection and reflects the ego's frailty. This is a clear cut example and I do forgive you but will not offer another cheek, I offered you the truth instead. Look above.
tnd240 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
crazyforcanada 2 years ago
Comment removed
crazyforcanada 2 years ago
I should have also mentioned supercilious and condecending ploys are remitted by the same intent, simply a different manifestation than those previously mentioned and observed by me, and exhibited by you.
tnd240 2 years ago
Comment removed
crazyforcanada 2 years ago
If I were illiterate, I wouldnt be able to write down the very words you are alluding to purport as baseless. The very nature of my intent was articulated quite succicntly. The very nature of its essence is also a reflection of anything you wish to consider within yourself and is reflected by the every insults you attempt to throw at me, a projection shining quite clearly. Your denial will not allow that to enter your waking conscioussness at the moment, but upon reflection, it may.
tnd240 2 years ago
Through false self-identification does the boundless fall into bondage.
Rob, Thank You for your work.
ToYouWhoHaveEars1 2 years ago
Anyone who is knowledgeable of law especially gods law and our rights as humans please contact me as I would love to learn more and share ideas with you.
mlh8723 2 years ago
I think we all need to learn what our god given rights are.
mlh8723 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I loved this! Thanks
XxXxINSIGHTxXxX 2 years ago
FREEDOM! They were forced to free the dumb=freedumb=freedom They were highly educated. ITS TIME WE ALL EDUCATE OURSELVES AND OUR CHILDREN! THEY ARE TERRORIZING OUR MINDS AS ALWAYS!
millersxtremedepot 2 years ago
I think most of us would agree that capitilsm is not the problem. It's USURY i.e. INTEREST that is causing most of the problems today. This is all because of the banks power to issue and create money. A small number of people have the power to control us and we need to do something about it. Any suggestions?
mlh8723 2 years ago
FMOTL are out-laws they feel that there are to many laws and they are right, but! Statutes apply to all of us unfortunately. If you Go down the road that they are suggesting you will have to give up your SSN/SIN, drivers licence, plates on your car ownership/title of your house, and on an on. No one will want to hire you with-out SIN number! The only way you will be able to make money is give seminars and PYRAMID schemes.
seventy18 2 years ago
Or barter for trade, like the "good ol days" It's something quite simple, depending on your occupation. Works for me. : O)
greatlaw 2 years ago 5
Comment removed
mlh8723 2 years ago
Statutes apply to those who consent to them. An example is registration. You cannot be made or forced to register your property. Once you do register that property you have given away your rights thus you have consented to be governed by that statute law that relates to the property you volunterily registered.
mlh8723 2 years ago
29,315 views 03 September 2009
SystemPause 2 years ago
ok. I have looked at the TPUC (dot) org site. Let's say you have filed your 2 affidavits with QE2 and opted out of the madness. Can you then access funds in your pension account ? Also what about medical / hospital access. I have lots of questions I need answering but love the concept.
WTU208 2 years ago
Exactly what the govt uses to take citizens into Socialism. Thanks Friend!
CATTSTACEY 2 years ago
jesus is a fake
pipesbitch 2 years ago
"idiot legal arguments" is just a search term that will bring up a list of hundreds of failed sovereign/patriot arguments. I didn't name it.
Doggieman1111 2 years ago
My apologies Doggeiman, I misread. And thank you, for finally providing some documented proof towards the outcome of rob's arguments. He appears to use theories favoured, ineffectually, by the patriot and Aryan rights movements.
backaround 2 years ago
hey, whatever floats your boat
Doggieman1111 2 years ago
Comment removed
backaround 2 years ago
The reason is that people are finding remedy and freeing themselves from the deceptive and soul sucking system they do not wish to be a part of. Maybe you do wish to be a part of it; that is your choice. I hope it works for you. Others too have the right to choose and they can decide to not be a part of it. Or can they not? These concepts work and have brought many remedy. NUI and COR and Fee Schedule KICKS ASS!
Rob Menard
mrmitee 2 years ago
I agree that the system is deceptive, soul sucking and that we should seek remedy against it.
I disagree that your concepts work. Please prove me wrong. Provide me with a court citation demonstrating that your strategies have brought remedy.
If you can't, you appear to be coaching individuals to adopt legal positions that may reap harsh civil and criminal penalties. For them, not you.
backaround 2 years ago
So the only thing you will accept as proof is a court citation? What if these concepts are designed to AVOID court and thus there is never a coutt citation of a successful action, because success results in no court transcript?
I know of many people who have avoid court entirely and kept their rights and there is no court citation, as none was created by this process. Court is for those with conflict; this is how we avoid conflict and thus court.
Peace eh?
Rob
mrmitee 2 years ago
I am receptive to proof generally. Do you have some?
I asked for a court citation because your arguments reference legal concepts, where court outcomes measure an arguments efficacy.
For example, you state consent is required for a statute to have force of law. However, Canadas criminal code is a statute. A s.230 charge - eg. causing death while committing arson - is not influenced by the accused's refusal to consent to the code. Arrest occurs regardless, for court consideration.
backaround 2 years ago
The Criminal Code distinguishes between 'every one' and 'any person who'. So do I. I do not think that one can avoid liability by using the denial of consent if one actually harms another and there is a proper claimant as in that case it states 'every one' and that would include even Freemen, unless they wish to be outlaws. Removing or including something from the Criminal Code does not render it lawful or not. It is merely a codification.
mrmitee 2 years ago
You continue to avoid my question. Do you have proof that your theories work?
The criminal code is in fact a statute: R.S., 1985, c. C-46
Are you saying that statutes aren't lawful if they use the words 'any person who'? But they're lawful if they use 'everyone'?
If so, is s.123 of the Motor Vehicle Act lawful?
It says "the peace officer may direct traffic according to his or her discretion, despite anything in this Part, and everyone must obey his or her directions."
backaround 2 years ago
Yes I have proof enough for myself.
Yes the CC is a statute, it is also a codification of previously existing law.
I would assume all sections of all Acts are lawful, yet they may be limited in their applicability and it is the application of them outside the legislative framework which is unlawful. You fail to distinguish there.
If a Police man is acting as a peace officer to preserve and maintain the peace then yes all would be compelled by law to follow his directives if reasonable.
Peace.
mrmitee 2 years ago
rob,
you give garbled legal instruction to the public. yet you refuse to demonstrate if your theories work.
i conclude that you lack credibility and are not a responsible advocate.
folks,
those struggling with oppressive canadian state action might check out pivot legal society. pivot gives initial advice on cop confrontations, including when you can say no to cops: see their "rights cards" section on their website
menard, conversely, is a waste of time
seek freedom through knowledge
backaround 2 years ago
You who hides behind a fake name tell me I lack credibility? Care to identify yourself first or should we assume YOU LACK CREDIBILITY?
You are entitled to your opinion, even though it is based on a lack of information and those who have used the things I teach successfully, have a right to theirs.
They outnumber you by quite a margin.
Rob Menard
mrmitee 2 years ago
You brag about outsmarting officials, encourage use of your successful theories and yet refuse to prove they work. Instead, you goad me into unsafe behaviour I will not release personal details to YouTube.
How does my alias change my point? Without proof you are merely posturing, while those who take your advice might be penalized.
Fyi: Driving on a public highway without a licence IS punishable at common law - R. v. Mansour [1979] 2 SCR. 916; Hendrick v. Maryland (1915) 235 US 610
backaround 2 years ago
And traveling on a public highway without being a driver but a traveler is still a right. I distinguish between a driver and a traveler. That distinction is apparently too difficult for you. Please do not talk to me about driving on the highway unless you can and are willing to think and distinguish between two similar yet different ideas.
I do not think I brag, I merely repeat what has happened. Nor do I refuse to prove they work.
I have done so repeatedly and have no need to do so again.
mrmitee 2 years ago
"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky. 731, 17 S. W.(2d) 1012,66 A.L.R.1378; and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. Smith, 155 Va. 367, 154 S. E. 579, A.L.R. 604.
mrmitee 2 years ago
Rob's last argument proves that Robs theories dont work:
-Rob cites American case law. It doesnt bind Canadian courts.
-Rob quotes obiter, which doesnt even bind US courts. Only stare decis binds.
- Rob omits relevant info: The Thompson case also notes that the city may restrict travel on pubic highways in the interest of public safety if the restriction is not arbitrary.
Rob, you say you aren't refusing to provide proof your theories work. Then give us evidence, not rhetoric.
backaround 2 years ago
"Then give us evidence, not rhetoric."
Define 'us' first, if you will. else you ask I serve an 'us' which is undefined.
WHO ARE YOU?
Rob
mrmitee 2 years ago
Sure.
Us = your YouTube audience
I am an audience member seeking creative ways to be free of hierarchical state government shackles. I came across your site.
Requesting proof is fair given that (1) you advise people towards actions that might harm them if youre wrong and (2) you arent credible
You arent credible because (1) you dont defend your theories coherently or accurately and (2) you side step the question of proof by going on the offensive (in big scary upper case)
Got proof?
backaround 2 years ago
So you want me to provide 'proof' to millions upon millions of unknown people. Who will decide if the proof is achieved, me or you? Or do we vote?
Sheesh, go live under your rock if you are so happy there. I know it works and have been proving it repeatedly to those who engage me to act for them. I am not acting for you, so have no obligations to you.
Peace.
Rob
mrmitee 2 years ago
Rob, life under a rock is the only way I could be receptive to your ideas.
I fear for those who, being fairly frustrated with our oppressive government regime, would turn to you for help. You who, as demonstrated by this conversation, aren't credible enough to admit the limits of your knowledge or theory.
For proof doesn't require a vote. It merely requires one demonstrable situation where your theory has successfully and overtly defied state legislation. As you claim it can.
Best regards.
backaround 2 years ago
You start by admitting that you are unreceptive to the ideas. The express your own fear and an opinion that I am not credible. How can you tell, if you decide at the offset to reject any ideas presented. You say you want proof but now admit that you will not accept it when it comes, as you would have to live under a rock. No one is asking you to do anything. Those not fearful can try if they want and find the proof you think they should have before they start.
mrmitee 2 years ago
Comment removed
backaround 2 years ago
i haven't started by admitting i am unreceptive to ideas. i have been consistently receptive.
but you consistently refuse proof. is your US case citation, the one that has no jurisdiction in canada, and which you misinterpreted, all you have?
because i press you for substance, you tell me i live in fear. true, i do fear wilfully blind ignorance. it's called 'dogma'.
in the alternative, i welcome examples of succesful, revolutionary strategies. you still haven't provided a single one.
backaround 2 years ago
Your own words above state:Rob, life under a rock is the only way I could be receptive to your ideas.
So you are not receptive is the implication.
How many people and times would you say I have to prove truth? Having done it numerous times already, I see no need to provide it to you, or anyone for the hundredth time.
I do not care if you believe me or not. you are not seeking to hire me, I do not know you, and I simply do not care what nay sayers believe.
mrmitee 2 years ago
mrmittee, review this discussion in its entirety.
it shows i was in fact receptive. but then tired of your circular avoidance techniques.
it shows a lack of substance to the "truth" you spread, publicly, via your youtube videos and other materials.
"hundredth time"? please. only fools and cowards refuse to admit the limits of their knowledge.
happy twisting, weasel. i am done with this conversation.
backaround 2 years ago
And I should take you seriously when you call me a weasel why?
mrmitee 2 years ago
you sound stupid take a hike loser your opinion is worthless here show up with some proof.
pipesbitch 2 years ago
pipesbitch,
if you were to read this entire conversation you would see that i have provided proof.
though clearly you give a very powerful argument on rob's behalf :).
and yes. i am scared. those who aren't scared of government power, i.e. the illegitimate carriers of deadly weapons and fiscal power, are arguably stupid. the government can kill you and/ or lock you up, remember? be cautious.
backaround 2 years ago
Rob fuck these losers there sound like they are scared. deal not with the weak. Im in america n i would love to know how to put this into action because something has to be done to end the modern day slavery without the bars. Insight please??
pipesbitch 2 years ago
you are asleep and don't know it. Your fault
artsychic2000 2 years ago
ad hominems won't help your "idiot legal arguments"
Doggieman1111 2 years ago 2
LOL something tells me that the people who'd actually be interested in a 'debate' between a lawyer and a freeman kook would be unpersuadable anyway. Look up "idiot legal arguments" on goog*e.
Doggieman1111 2 years ago
you haven't done the research..who is the idiot
artsychic2000 2 years ago
actually, artsychic, doggiman appears to have done the research. in the alternative, please provide yours.
backaround 2 years ago
It would be nice if the words were readable.
DumblyBrilliant 2 years ago
um, that would be like debating a retarded chimpanzee. Tell you what, let's put our money where our mouths are. You simply live your life with your legal theories, and I'll live my life with mine, and in 20 years we'll see who's broke and/or in jail. I'll bet money it ain't me.
Doggieman1111 2 years ago
but you could hunt and fish without restriction. You could grow your crops on you own land. Their intent is to get you into cities where you are helpless. do some research. stop accepting the bullshit they use to deceive you. If you don't you are completely responsible.
artsychic2000 2 years ago
you're a grunt and you are sounding ridiculous. Your a slave to the monetary system...good luck with that...the bottom of the monetary system is about to fall out..again..good luck with that..
artsychic2000 2 years ago
Comment removed
cat001979 2 years ago
yeah I have a law dictionary, einstein. Bought it when I went to law school to study REAL law, not fantasy crap. If you guys weren't so lame you'd be hilarious. Actually, you're hilarious anyway. ;)
Doggieman1111 2 years ago
Care to debate these things in a proper forum and under full commercial liability? We can video it and make it public. I will claim I cannot be governed without consent and you claim we are all serfs of your society. If I win your rep as a lawyer is shot, as you will lose to a Freeman with no formal legal training.
Got the balls to accept this challenge Doggieman?
Let me know!
mrmitee 2 years ago
mrmitee, are there case citations available where any of your theories have seen fruition? or are they simply theories at this point? i am curious to read any instance where the freeman "person" concept has been argued in court.
backaround 2 years ago