pigpot's Pot

[Jeffrey]

What specifically do you have a problem with in the way his trial conducted. Are you saying he wasn't behind Silk Road even though he admitted to it? Or that he was no longer admin of SR despite evidence on his computer showing he was still actively involved in it?

[rumpelstilzchen]

Point is where was his due process?

Please define what you understand "due process" to mean.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Well it'll only be a success when people like you change or die off.

So you admit you cannot provide one example.

How's that for an answer?

I would give it one out of ten. The reason being that you did not actually answer arayder's question. Instead you answered a question that he did not ask. arayder asked you to provide one example of a success he did not ask you when will there be a success.
Try answering arayder's question directly.

[pigpot]

Well it'll only be a success when people like you change or die off.

So you admit you cannot provide one example.

How's that for an answer?

I would give it one out of ten. The reason being that you did not actually answer arayder's question. Instead you answered a question that he did not ask. arayder asked you to provide one example of a success he did not ask you when will there be a success.
Try answering arayder's question directly.

This is anothers thoughts on matters concerning your question:

Source is here: https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=297331 I'm reckon you know "monteglenn"

01-09-2015, 05:28 PM #19
lesactive
Senior Member

lesactive's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 1,371

Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by monteglenn View Post
As I said before you're the one with the legal theory here, not I.
Not quite true. Your legal theory is that we are beholden to the state no matter what we do, so, you also have presented one. Can you prove that within the parameters I have laid out? Prove that political status (citizenship, personhood, taxpayer) is obligatory on men or women who are not breaching statutes.
Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong,
Ok
Quote:
but it sounds as if
iow, "if what you're saying is what I think you're saying..." but it's not. I was pretty specific in what I said, I tend to be careful like that. If you want to understand what I'm writing then pay attention to the words I use and the context within which they are employed.
Quote:
your
"you're"
Quote:
asserting that one can somehow exempt himself from the various legal obligations such as taxes,
not all taxes as some are already included in the price of consumables and others are added on. A tax on your labour is another matter altogether. While anecdotal to you, having not filed since '92, there's been no word from them since over 3 years ago when I tendered my offer of a 100% income tax rate.
Quote:
vehicle registration,
Not my concern.
Quote:
legal identification papers, etc...,
No one is required to carry gov't issued ID unless one is involved in a licensable activity. You know, an activity that, without one, would be unlawful.
Quote:
while still residing in that nation.
"Resident" is a legal status and thus, not one that I would claim and one that I am careful not to fall into. "Nation" is another term drenched in political status. Can ones' conscience be dictated to in a 'free society'?
Quote:
Your theory, your burden of proof. Show me one single court case in your nation of jurisdiction in which such an idea was upheld. Name one, just one.
You fail, possibly wilfully, to see the conundrum that I presented. If one doesn't claim the various statuses allegedly foisted upon you from birth (person, citizen, taxpayer, etc,) and doesn't breach their statutes or participate in their schemes of licensing and benefits then how would the courts notice someone who doesn't appear in their venue? You ask the impossible as such decisions could not exist for lack of appearance in their venue. Do you understand yet? A non-person gives no jurisdiction to the courts because the courts won't allow a non-person to appear and be recognized. Making sense yet? hrrrmm, try this: if one doesn't use the conceptual and legal tokens (playing pieces) then one is not playing the game.

I cannot prove that which cannot exist. I can only tell you what I believe and how I've employed it.Their move, and they haven't yet.

It ends with simply this and no more:

I cannot prove that which cannot exist. I can only tell you what I believe and how I've employed it.Their move, and they haven't yet.

Don't be so silly to ask me to prove that which doesn't.......... YET.

Also what does it matter that I can or can't. You don't win because of that... In the mean time I'll carry on thinking about it.

Here is one answer to the question. Before there were nation states. There you go problem solved. I win.

I can only tell you what I believe and how I've employed it.Their move, and they haven't yet.

That's where I'm at. I laughed at two cops who I told to piss of from my front door the other week. I thought when I was at my front door I'd stepped into a pantomime with these couple of idiots in fancy dress. I can only hope they never visit again (not that I give a shit either way) but if they do I'll have a proposition for them, it's called, "Which badge is real competition?" It works like this... They get to throw their badge at me and I get to throw my badge at them. At the end of the competition we agree with whose badge hurt more after being thrown, as in whose badge was more REAL. Who can throw it the hardest in essence...

Carry on with what you believe is the reality of one persons badge being "real" and another badge being not real. What the 'eff does "real" look like let alone be...

Cue Ademo... (Perceived profanity warning, at viewers discretion).

CopBlocking Parma (OH) Cop with "F the Police Sign"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GpmlJYzDRE

Laugh... I nearly sh1t myself. "Poot, Poot!" said Toad.

Here's a little of "Bronski Beat" and "The Communards" for you easy listeners out there. Take it easy people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB2FUkt_QXg

[pigpot]

Well it'll only be a success when people like you change or die off.

So you admit you cannot provide one example.

How's that for an answer?

I would give it one out of ten. The reason being that you did not actually answer arayder's question. Instead you answered a question that he did not ask. arayder asked you to provide one example of a success he did not ask you when will there be a success.
Try answering arayder's question directly.

Not long done it. Done.

[pigpot]

... he wouldn't be being true to his inner FOTL jackass.

Dean has NEVER claimed to be a "FOTL". What's your point then "notorial dissent"?

I enjoyed your ad hominem attack with your "jackass" comment. Well played. When are you inviting your mates over for the party in the sand pit.

Start again and deal in facts, not what you want to post tripe about.

A moved post. I expect nothing less though, it's a fact one must face up to if one posts here. There are some whiny little babies (I won't mention who) with their petulant antics that are highly laughable. They get other whiny little babies to advocate for them after throwing a tantrum because they didn't get their own way. I however do accept it's the nature of this site. People who post here are "Statists" (pardon the words used as it's like labelling all anti-statists FMOTL which is incorrect technically speaking) and others that come here such as anti-statists are not going to get the rub of the green. But I don't blow wind and p1ss about it like they do. Here is the likely drone from one of the simple minded adult posters I recently read (you know who you are), "I've known such and such for a while now and he's a really good guy and I'm going to drone on and on why he should be given his own thread and and and bore you all sh1tless because I've now changed to your side and sold out on froodem (which I find really hard to spell as I left school in Year 5 but still I tried hard) because I'm really boring and and and........."

Get a grip.

[pigpot]

Try answering arayder's question directly.

Try doing what I'm doing. I'm anti everything this site suggests ((yet thankfully I'm allowed to post here which is nothing to do with the site lackeys (like the posters such as "xyz" who are wanna be "top guys and girls") and only thanks to the Administrators and Moderators Ta for that)) and my posts are confined to (generally speaking) one thread as they get moved. I don't think I'm doing such a bad job answering everything I can and as quickly as I can.

If you want to grow a pair pop over to Marc Stevens forum and I'm sure as long as you abide by the rules there as I do here, YOU won't get banned. Do that and we'll see how long you last "mouth".

Otherwise cut your crap as I know this place comes with prerequisites but I smash peoples arguments, like you, everyday.

See you over on "Marc's" site "rumps" IF you have the "kahunas".

I'll wager a bet with you. You won't even "turn up"... "old boy". . "Mouth and no trousers".

Next word, "Joke".

From here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

Joke
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the form of humour. For other uses, see Joke (disambiguation).
"Jest" redirects here. For the horse, see Jest (horse).

A joke is something spoken, written, or done with humorous intention.[1] Jokes may have many different forms, e.g., a single word or a gesture (considered in a particular context), a question-answer, or a whole short story. The word "joke" has a number of synonyms, including wisecrack, gag, prank, quip, jape and jest.[1] To achieve their end, jokes may employ irony, sarcasm, word play and other devices. Jokes may have a punch line, i.e., an ending to make it humorous.

A practical joke or prank differs from a spoken joke in that the major component of the humour is physical rather than verbal (for example placing salt in the sugar bowl).

Is that you. No question mark. Rhetorical. Have a great day.

[pigpot]

He had a trial, evidence was presented that proved his guilt and he went to jail. That is due process.

Technically under this kind of rule, someone orders drugs on "facebook" or uses "facebook" to talk to a friend and then says hey, I want to buy some drugs through the messenger, then "facebook" is facilitating the communication of it and now ... Marc Zuckerberg should go to jail as well if we are playing by the same rules but obviously we're not playing by the same rules...

You still won't get it and the reason is either one or both of these two ideas and it's possibly two fold and it goes like this...

You work for "THEM", or as some people here who've sold out can be described as having been, too stupid to find their arse with both hands holding a torch in broad daylight.

More than that... these people are idiots. They never knew what the idea of freedom looked like. So how could they have ever thought about it or passed it on.

Go "Ademo".

[pigpot]

Picking at things...

"General warrant", "no particularity" ... "4th Amendment". Rights from unreasonable searches and seizures. "Had it been a filing cabinet"...

What a hoot! It's all sh1te!

[pigpot]

Point is where was his due process?

Please define what you understand "due process" to mean.

Looks like this: 18,745 Views.

Looks like this: 655 Likes.

Looks like this: 16 Dislikes.

I suggest you go to every youtube channel and tally both sides for and against each other. You and your cronies won't have enough ammunition to keep the people down. Look forward to it. It's not far away and the "Army" won't shoot their own families. It's done for the NWO... call "IT" what you will.

It's done for everyone who supported it as well. Be worried if you've supported it in whatever fashion. Oh! Dear....

[NG3]

Talking crap...

"Rice pudding", "Oat cakes"...



You hate humanity. Where's your black robe?



https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=297666



What do you make of this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnYvpfbnBik

Get a grip!...

[pigpot]

Talking crap...

"Rice pudding", "Oat cakes"...



You hate humanity. Where's your black robe?



https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=297666



What do you make of this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnYvpfbnBik

Get a grip!...

What don't you like. A piece of REALITY... Answers MY questions / points / stuff NOW. I ain't your piece of filth! You can be mine. bwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[pigpot]

DELETED -- Total duplication of previous inanity
AndyK

[pigpot]

DELETED -- Total duplication of previous inanity
AndyK

[NG3]

What don't you like. A piece of REALITY... Answers MY questions / points / stuff NOW. I ain't your piece of filth! You can be mine. bwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

So you think custard smells?



What about this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4AVVTZzqXs

You have to think for yourself not just believe the statist sh1te your told to believe!!1!

[Jeffrey]

Technically under this kind of rule, someone orders drugs on "facebook" or uses "facebook" to talk to a friend and then says hey, I want to buy some drugs through the messenger, then "facebook" is facilitating the communication of it and now ... Marc Zuckerberg should go to jail as well if we are playing by the same rules but obviously we're not playing by the same rules...

Are you joking Pigpot?

The primary purpose of facebook is not ordering drugs. Silk Road on the other hand, was explicitly designed for trading drugs illegally.

[AndyK]

With respect to PP's constant references to stuff he found on the Internet, allow me to refer him to the punch line of a viral TV commercial: "Bon Jour"

[rumpelstilzchen]

pigpot wrote:

I don't think I'm doing such a bad job answering everything I can and as quickly as I can.

Well that demonstrates just how deluded you really are.
You quote other people's questions but you don't actually answer them. You either respond to their question with an answer to a question they did not ask but you wish they had, or you respond with random words and meaningless gibberish. In all instances your response is not related to the question.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Point is where was his due process?

Please define what you understand "due process" to mean.

Looks like this: 18,745 Views.

Looks like this: 655 Likes.

Looks like this: 16 Dislikes.

I suggest you go to every youtube channel and tally both sides for and against each other. You and your cronies won't have enough ammunition to keep the people down. Look forward to it. It's not far away and the "Army" won't shoot their own families. It's done for the NWO... call "IT" what you will.

It's done for everyone who supported it as well. Be worried if you've supported it in whatever fashion. Oh! Dear....

pigpot you complained: "where was his due process" and when asked to define your understanding of "due process" you couldn't give an answer. That shows you don't even understand your own question. You are complaining about the lack of something when you don't even understand what that something is.
I can only assume you get off on making yourself appear so stupid.

[pigpot]

I can only assume you get off on making yourself appear so stupid.

Looks like this: 18,745 Views.

Looks like this: 655 Likes.

Looks like this: 16 Dislikes.

Remember the ratio above. Colossal.

Watch it (the video) and do the work for yourself.