@grixit A burns lyric for the ssotl? How about “fir all that' an all that,
Strawman's a man fir aw that,”
@Hilfkreuzer Mowe (sp?) thank you very much for your welcome. I very much enjoy reading your updates on Canadian escapades. Hope you enjoy reading about my darling countrymen although the more I read the more I suspect they are rather more menard than clifford when it comes to action.
I intend to keep general upadtes on the SSotl in this thread and will open up threads on specific individuals when I have enough info on them to be worth sharing. As an aside I believe I have identified the guru and will be posting his delightful thoughts soon.
So having dug a little through the forums of the ssotl I have made a surprising discovery: I have found examples of both SSoTL criticising selfish behaviour and offering something that is dangerously close to actual advice on dealing with companies seeking diligence! I Know! Rest assured however there was ofc a nutter ready to write multiple paragraphs defending his right to litter with ..well I'll show you in a moment. And while the individuals seeking to prevent arrestment of funds were pointed to the correct forms they were also told to write alleged debtor and to just claim no contract and other rubbish.
Nonetheless this glimmer of common sense among the freemanary is interesting in that any notion of the individual owing a duty to society is rarely encountered in North American sovs/fmotl. I do wonder if the more socialist culture over here is somehow to blame. Now as a disclaimer I myself am no socialist and indeed have no strong political views either way: I'm a student more concerned with get
n quite validly be claimed are xenophobic small mindedness and a real victim culture also creates a sense of civic duty that perhaps is less prevalent in more individualistic societies.
The essential contradiction between wider duty to ones neighbours and freeman leeching is naturally hilarious, and leads to some note worthy exchanges here is an excerpt of my favourite so far where a leechy freeman wanting out of a fine for dropping a cigarette in public drops by to ask for an easy get out. Now to begin with we get some delightful word games about it being a charge not a fine and therefore not payable :S and of course no contract anyway. :S then this:
Permalink Reply by quaere verum on April 6, 2014 at 3:24pm
quaere verum :Why are you throwing away fag ends anyway? You are littering our country. You are dirtying the streets we all have to walk on. Stop moaning and do not drop litter in my country. I want to live in a clean and litter free country. Have you looked at the state of the streets lately, we are walking on a disgusting carpet of fag ends, chewing gum and spittle. Stop littering the streets. I have no sympathy.
The slower ssotl ignore this in favour of more word games until 'Freeman Stephen' a classic dunning kruger ssotl steps up prompting this exchange:
[/quote]
Freeman Stephen Excuse me but these streets used to be my streets as well and my grandparents were dropping the so called litter of cigarette douts on them long before you were born. What gives you the right to demand money from people for dropping cigarette douts on their OWN streets? You may not like it but that's no excuse for a legalised extortion racket. Can we demand money from you because we dont like your shoes using OUR streets - so long as we can get the local authorities to threaten violence on our behalf, it seems by your standards its perfectly moral for us to do so. I hope a fox does a shit on your doorstep and you run off to your violent enforcers complaining about dogshit going where its always gone. You dont even realise how absurd yoube become on all your political correctness because the most dangerous strert gangs in the world are patting you on the head and saying "good citizen".
These are not our laws. If it were possible for we the people to chop and change the laws as your violence threatening masters do, I think the least of our concerns would be a ban on biodegradeable cigarette douts which some people find aesthetically displeasing. I find the exercise of free speech by your kind aestheticilally displeasing but Im not calling on government violence to have you shut up. Its a harsh wake up call Im giving you but you really need to rethink your support for state violence, especially over a cigarette dout.
quaere verum I never once propagated state violence, or fines against littering. I am trying to get into peoples heads that this is our land and we have to look after it. We are a society and have to act as such. We cannot go around dropping litter whenever we feel it. To use the old adage "wid ye dae that in yer ane hoose". These streets are our house, we are all together as a people, as a nation, as a society and we should look after each others well being and not shit on each others doorsteps.
Talking of doorsteps, I would not bother in the least if a Fox shit on my doorstep. They are animals and do not have the powers of reason , they do as nature sets them to do. I am delighted that the Foxes are alive and have freedom to do this, as I said, without reasoning. I bet they do not shit in their own dens.
Freman Stephen Your far departed from nature. Its essential for foxs to shit around their dens to mark off territory and let other foxes know their whereabouts. Its the same for dogs when they aren't being carried about in a pooch pouch as a fashion statement. Far above the dogs, far above even us, theres a simbiance which exists between shit and the soil and the things that grow in the soil that we eat. Its natural that dogshit goes where nature intends it and its a manmade power trip to divert the course of nature for the sake of some contemporary aesthetic value - and Ill bet you thought it was about the poor children who might go blind by rubbing shit on their eyes. Its always about the children - the best emotional argument to propagandise any new utopian vision.
As for littering in my own house, you ought to see it. Theres a corner dedicated to chucking plastic wrappers between cleanups but Im not advocating people just fling their non degrading stuff all over the streets making it an impossible tax to clean up. Cigarette douts were never counted as litter until the anti-smoker politics started. Have a look at a photo of glasgow just 20 years ago. Do you think the responsable smokers threw their cigarette ends into bins containing combustable waste?
No they threw them on the pavement and stubbed them out with their shoes where the douts got rained on and flushed into the sewers where they decomposed as all plant matter will.
To call this littering is like your nevada desert turtle an excuse to impose political policy by the threat of violence. Same if you smoke in a pub. They tried non smoking pubs and people simply didn't want to use them enough - this didn't stop the state using its monopoly on violence to forcibly get the people to do the reverse of what they wanted.
Of course you didn't see the legions of police with truncheons, tazers and guns ready to attack any citizen slave who dared to disobey their government masters. You were too busy eating the steak you bought in a package at the supermarket perhaps wondering at primitive people who prefer instead to eat dead animal carcasses.
If you think your support for fines is not the advocation of state violence, you cannot see the wood for the trees. Every order, rule, regulation, mandate, ordinance, act and bylaw is a threat against every human being in this country. The threat isn't a punch on the nose but the threat ultimately of death, so this kind of power ought never to be abused by those who seek a materially pleasant appearing environment at the expense of a spiritually bankrupt society. Its not like cigarette douts or dogshit have the potential to cause a deadly sanitation crisis which would justify the threat of death that every statute makes.
Wasn't the death penalty abolished decades ago? Only as a direct punishment but indirectly lets consider the introduction of a new statute - " anyone wearing leather shoes in glasgow must saw their legs off".
Deliberately distasteful I know. Your guaranteed to find it an offensive "law" because it affects you, unlike smokers or dog keepers. So your walking down the street with leather shoes and your caught on cctv.A letter comes through the door asking for evidence that you've sawn your legs. After you reply that you haven't, they srnd you a fine for not sawing your legs off. You refuse to pay the fine. They call you for one of those "hearings" where they dont hear anything you have to say unless its "Ill pay".
Either you go or you dont, but either way, Its your streets, its your shoes and its your legs. You refuse to pay a fine under such an offensive law. They come to incarcerate you under this offensive law. You refuse to just surrender under this offensive law. They resort to violence to force you into incarceration under this offensive law. You use all means necessary to defend yourself from their initiation of force under this offensive law. If non lethal force cannot prevail against you, they will resort to deadly force and they will get a pat on the head for it after they put a bullet through your head for daring to defend yourself from the political violence of the establishment.
Every statute is a death threat and though you may see the "saw your legs off" statute as ridiculous, at least you now see the initiatory violence inherent in the system which sells itself to everyone a packaged steak almost in denial of the fact that its a dead animal carcass.
Government is sn extremely evil thing but so too are things like rape and murder and robbery and theft. When state violence is being threatened against people minding their own business harming no ones rights, its clear that the agenda is not law but politics hidden within the statutes that the morally ignorant call the law.
Full thread:
http://scottishsovereignsontheland.ning ... ncil-fines
Classic sov rant. Love it. 10/10.
but in all seriousness I do find it intriguing that there are some few among the ssotl with a modicum of common sense albeit with a complete lack of understanding of law.
Mind you I did find this awesome thread, its still in its infancy but seeing as most threads on ssotl get no responses theres always a chance that the towering intellect of freeman stephen won't ruin it:
Posted by Brian on June 28, 2014 at 10:30am in Articles on all aspects of Law for deCONstruction
Send Message View Discussions
Was wondering if anyone could help me out... Does the traveling/driving actualy hold up in court? Getting dragged into court for driving otherwise in accordance with licence for not displaying L plates while a friend was teaching me to drive...
Views: 35
Reply by Ben<NBR> on June 29, 2014 at 8:35pm
No it doesn't please don't use anything like in court...Normally you get warning first what happened during the stop for you to end up in court
http://scottishsovereignsontheland.ning ... ng-licence
Amazing eh! Hope springs eternal! Also nestled among the mountain of woo in their 'research materials' page is a link to a site offering a basic introduction to real law! English law admittedly but still! Its something! As well as a sight from a solicitors firm explaining how diligence works and offering real basic advice. We will return to see the extent some in this movement choose to twist this simple advice later
So then to summarise this expedition through wonderland: some of the ssotl are slightly less insane than their fmotl/sc brethren probably due to a more socialist culture however that said the vast majority of posts are ppl wanting to get out of fines. The victim mentality that marrs the national character seems to fuel them as much as anything else, however the Them is not the Tories but the Law Society (and the Banks, ofc its always the Banks). They are also into word games though not yet much latin sadly. Though there is a cracker of a canon = common= pope rulez the world thru the bankz theory we might eventually get round too. Not sure how much actual support that one has yet.
Apologies for the lack of contrasting fake ssotl law with real cases/statutes, that will come I promise, but is going to take a bit more time thought than these quick looks at the ssotl.
Apologies for the numerous spelling/grammer formatting errors. In my defense I am chronically lazy (Free Student on The Keyboard) fingers crossed the quote boxes worked
next update will probably include details of the unpleasantly petty Edinburgh Parking War and pictures of parking tickets with nonsense written over in red ink
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
yay! A4v! Yay! No contract!
That'll do for now,
The Nidhogg