Response to Lawyers Weekly by Poster Boy Rob

Hello and good day! I am Robert Menard, a Freeman-on-the-Land, part-time comedian, and happy go lucky social activist. Some call me a shit disturber. Some leave out the last word.

Recently an article in Lawyers Weekly which can be found here: written by Jeremy Hainsworth and published on March 29th, 2013 made reference to the Freeman-on-the-Land movement, (more…)

NZ Government ‘Plans to Seize Bank Accounts’ Cyprus-Style!!

National is planning a Cyprus-style solution for New Zealand …The National Government are pushing a Cyprus-style solution to bank failure in New Zealand which will see small depositors lose some of their savings to fund big bank bailouts, the Green Party said today. Open Bank Resolution (OBR) is Finance Minister Bill English’s favoured option dealing with a major bank failure. (more…)

By the ‘Consent of the Governed’ Film

By the ‘Consent of the Governed’ Film

A Film by Steve: Bates which took almost 9 months to make covering the multiple aspects and uses of the term, ‘consent of the governed’. Consent is something members of the World Freeman Society have revoked by Claim of Right. (more…)

Dean Clifford Arrested

Interview with a witness to Freeman on the Land Dean Clifford being arrested on private property in Manitoba. He was accused of spinning out and regaining control of his truck on private property. (more…)

Duke Franz of Bavaria…German, Catholic, Anti-Nazi and true heir to the British throne


Act repeal could make Franz Herzog von Bayern new King of England and Scotland


Gordon Brown is considering repealing the 1701 Act of Settlement as a way of healing a historic injustice by ending the prohibition against Catholics taking the throne.

But doing so would have the unforeseen consequence of making a 74-year-old German aristocrat the new King of England and Scotland.


Without the Act, Franz Herzog von Bayern, the current Duke of Bavaria, would be the rightful heir to the British Crown under the Stuart line.


The bachelor, who lives alone in the vast Nymphenberg Palace in Munich, is the blood descendant of the 17th-century King Charles I.

“If it [the Act] goes then the whole Catholic line is reinstated,” said Prof Daniel Szechi, a lecturer in early modern history at the University of Manchester.

“Franz becomes the rightful claimant to the throne. We would just exchange one German family for another one.”


The Act was introduced as part of the power struggle between Parliament, the Christian churches and the monarchy, then dominated by the House of Stuart.

It prohibits any Roman Catholic from having access to the throne, even through marriage. Once a person marries a “Papist” they shall be “for ever incapable to inherit, possess or enjoy the Crown”, it asserts.

The legislation effectively severed the Stuart line of succession, a family who favoured Catholicism, and switched it to their distant relatives the Hanoverians, from which our current Queen descends. James II, the son of King Charles, fled into exile.

Read more here: WFS Public Forums Articles

Britain’s voodoo monarchy

The succession bill puts a ludicrous spin of equality on an institution that’s inherently unequal.

Villagers Preparing for Jubilee Celebration

How to make monarchy less discriminating? You can’t. Monarchy is the ultimate discriminatory institution, because, as Graham Smith of Republic points out, it discriminates against everyone in Britain who does not wear the crown. Even so, the coalition government has presented republicans with, seemingly, the ultimate moral conundrum, as it presents the succession to the crown bill, which will supersede the Act of Settlement of 1701. (more…)

The royal veto has no place in a democracy

Letters ’That the Queen blocked a bill about the procedures by which the state decides to go to war, one of its most serious acts, is almost beyond belief.’

Even more extraordinary than the fact that a veto over new laws and proposed bills exists and is exercised by a ceremonial monarchy in what we erroneously believe to be a modern meritocratic democracy, is the fact that this item has not made the front page, has escaped editorial comment and has not made the national news (Secret papers show extent of senior royals’ veto over bills, 15 January).

That the royal family has power to subvert the parliamentary democratic process in such areas as military authority and civil partnership is, to say the least, surprising. That they also have direct influence over “laws affecting hereditary revenues, personal property or personal interests of the crown, the Duchy of Lancaster or the Duchy of Cornwall” is surely relevant to the debate over tax evasion, tax avoidance, and now, bankers’ bonuses deferred to reduce tax.

The royal family is the manifestation of the enduring privilege that lurks within the institutions of our nation, so perhaps we should not be surprised. But we should be surprised and disappointed that this has not made more waves in the media, especially the Guardian. It should matter to everyone, especially when the Cabinet Office has gone to such lengths to avoid revealing matters that are of such far-reaching public interest.
Philip Murphy
Stalybridge, Cheshire

• That it should require real investigative persistence with freedom of information requests to uncover the role of the Queen and Prince Charles in approving legislation passed by parliament is extremely disturbing. To learn that, in what we thought was a constitutional monarchy, the Queen blocked a bill about the procedures by which the state decides to go to war, one of its most serious acts, is almost beyond belief.

Less serious, but still breathtaking, is the fact that the two royals appear, as landowners, to have been able to entirely dictate the rules covering their own, enormous, landholdings. The need for a written constitution, transparently implemented, has never been clearer.
Natalie Bennett
Leader, Green party

• If it hadn’t already proved difficult, the contents of Tuesday’s Guardian make it impossible to continue believing that we live in a democracy. The royal family, supported by the civil service, have supremacy over parliament, to their own benefit; Michael Gove is ignoring the wishes of parents, staff, governors, and his own election promises to hand a school over to a private company (Parents’ anger at school takeover, p11); Andrew Lansley is breaking election promises and forcing clinical commissioning groups into privatisation contrary to the wishes of 80% of the electorate and local patients (Letters). And the sad thing is that we can do nothing about it. How they must laugh at us.
Jefrey G Pirie
Totnes, Devon

• Thanks to Tanya Gold for having the guts to expose the limitations and dangers of the privileged royalty (Our voodoo monarchy, 12 January). But simultaneously the Guardian gives extensive sycophantic coverage to the Duchess of Cambridge. And this is nothing compared with what will follow once the baby is born.

Read more here: WFS Public Forums Articles

Secret papers show extent of senior royals’ veto over bills

The extent of the Queen and Prince Charles‘s secretive power of veto over new laws has been exposed after Downing Street lost its battle to keep information about its application secret.

Whitehall papers prepared by Cabinet Office lawyers show that overall at least 39 bills have been subject to the most senior royals’ little-known power to consent to or block new laws. (more…)

High house prices? Inequality? I blame the Normans

Nearly four years ago, I began writing a novel, set in the aftermath of the Norman conquest of 1066. Before I began to write, I spent six months sitting in the Bodleian library poring over books and journals to familiarise myself with the period. I soon realised that, apart from the story of the Battle of Hastings that everyone learns at school, I knew hardly anything about the impact of the conquest. (more…)

Lighthearted Police Rant

Ranting about Police and Corporate Policy at the expense of Public Peace. Robert Menard shares a lighthearted discussion about the powers that be (Corporate Government). Visit or if you have something great or educational to share about this YouTube video, please do below! (more…)

Judge refutes ‘idiotic’ claims

Litigants reject court authority

Alberta’s courts should take steps to combat growing abuse of the legal system by “vexatious litigants” who reject state and court authority, a top Court of Queen’s Bench justice says. (more…)