May 23 - a firehose of bullshit!
Current time: 01-22-2018, 03:08 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: NonEntity
Last Post: pigpot
Replies: 32
Views: 11909

Post Reply 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
May 23 - a firehose of bullshit!
06-17-2015, 11:35 AM
Post: #31
RE: May 23 - a firehose of bullshit!
The legal term for that is "realizing theirror."

- NonE the severely deluded Sister Sleazious .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-18-2015, 08:12 AM (This post was last modified: 06-18-2015 08:16 AM by Farmer James.)
Post: #32
RE: May 23 - a firehose of bullshit!
So Marc, Do you still consider Jan and Clint "friends"?

I was reminded of a video(audio only) by a commentor on Gnostic media regarding Marc and Clint's alleged debate. If you can bare to listen to more clint, or able to fast forward past his rants, Mark Passio nails it in my opinion. The commentor Joshua took the time to write out what Passio said, which I do not have the time to do, so please excuse the hearsay (listen for yourself to verify)

Quote: Joshua Markus June 17, 2015 at 11:38 am SAYS:
I heard Passio on the Vinny Eastwood show with Clint and Bill Turner. Passio had a great analysis of this whole situation. The video is titled “Dangers Of The Freeman Movement…” You can hear Passio’s description at approx. 0:44:25. He said:

“…what I feel is the solution to all of this – regarding our understanding of Nature vs. Fiction – you have to look at it like this: there is no use of words, no intellectual constructs, no intellectual-only based understanding that will ever make a psychopath leave you alone in Nature, in the Natural world. And this is what we’re ultimately talking about here. We’re talking about the way people relate to other people through their behaviors. This is the part that I feel is neglected often in the whole Strawman/legal fiction/free-man-on-the-land movement, whatever you want to name it. Look at it as a simple example: would you try to make an effort to deeply understand all the intellectual aspects of how a con-man’s con game works? Would you go through the effort to try to really deeply understand how he defrauded you and then try to negotiate somehow with him how to reclaim what was wrongfully, fraudulently taken from you? Or would you just make a deep understanding within your being that a con-man is simply a criminal who had no right to ever do what he is doing or did, and never will have that right and then treat him as the criminal that he is. What seems the more realistic and natural approach?”

Additionally one of the youtube commentors points out:
Quote:Passio said it well:
Why spend so much time learning t[he] complex rules of he who enslaves you?

Well at the very least I hope this Clint/Jan fiasco has brought a bunch of new eyes and ears(and thinking minds) to the NO State Project. I did forsee that any additional chats with Clint would be a waste of time if and until he provided documented proof, which is clear that he doesn't actually have. I am glad Jan joined the party, great to see him embarass himself as a moderator and as both a Clint and Statist believer.

Quote:Farmer James Says:
May 24th, 2015 at 9:03 am
Marc, could I suggest that you do not bother having Clint back on until he presents facts and evidence to support his argument? Without that, it is just his say so. I for one prefer listening to you helping people during your shows, not providing a platform for unproven claims. As tantelizing as his rhetoric appears, let’s see the proof a cop, child protective services, IRS, etc, recognize his paperwork and immediately allow his one “free” friend to proceed unmolested. If it is so simple, why is Clint not saying he has done it, that he is free? The difference here is that your method gets right at the heart of the matter, the illegitamacy of Rulers and their arbitrary whims violently imposed upon peaceful people.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-19-2015, 04:39 AM (This post was last modified: 06-19-2015 05:23 AM by pigpot.)
Post: #33
RE: May 23 - a firehose of bullshit!
(05-25-2015 12:23 PM)Marc Stevens Wrote:  I didn't think Clint could support his arguments, I wanted to discuss the issues in real time and not deal with walls of text on skype. I think it's clear he did not support his arguments. He used many logical fallacies and the Gish Gallop. He moved the goal posts even though providing historical examples of an anarchist society are irrelevant to whether anarchist principals are rational. I gave an example he asked for and he dismissed it.

The claim to have a judgment that someone's citizenship has been changed to "private citizen" and they are no longer considered under government laws is dubious at best. Not that Clint is a bad guy, I just don't believe the claim. Why not release the document? What possible reason would there to be to keep it private? Wouldn't you want the judgment available for all the road pirates to see? Why hasn't Clint done it? And if so, he would speak from personal experience and not have to ask to make it public. I'd love to see the complaint/petition he filed, against what agent/agency and the responses. Was it state, federal? So many questions.

I laid out historical facts, such as there being people called "governments" before any constitutions, he claims I didn't give any facts. Then he says his definitions are evidence.

Bottom line, the facts clearly contradict Clint's claim it's all voluntary. You pay or you go to jail, comply or die. That is not voluntary and no amount of word smithing from the very criminals engaged in the coercion can change those facts. Clint's claim reminds me of a statement made to me by a bureaucrat, Susanne Small, lawyer with the California Franchise Tax Board, "It's not coercion when we, the government, force you to pay."

It's the same tactic, I don't understand the evidence, I have to learn the criminals' special language.
[Image: Bl7BwF-CMAAu6U-.jpg]

Hey Marc,

As to the shit I've been thrown at for the last couple of years from the "Commissioned Officers of the New Zealand Police Force" (or bullies with batons, tasers, mace, cuffs and anti-stab vests, steel capped boots, storm trooper apparel and a wagon behind them) the only crap has been from them and a Fijian Indian "Officer" identified as "Sam". No badge number or full name and rank.

Quote:Then he says his definitions are evidence.

From now on I'll be videoing everything, in the vehicles and at home. It's the only way to go. All the best folks. Smile

Clint's claim reminds me of a statement made to me by a bureaucrat, Susanne Small, lawyer with the California Franchise Tax Board,
Quote:"It's not coercion when we, the government, force you to pay."

Well if that's not a fight to fight, let no-one fight!

Nothing in this post is legal or lawful advice, it is only used for the sake of entertainment. Do not act on anything entered anywhere by the avatar known as pigpot.

All "rights" are reserved by this poster.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)