hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Moderator: Burnaby49

arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by arayder »

webhick wrote:bmx, do you realize that WFS is violating the Kunena terms of use by removing the backlink? The developers don't get paid for their hard work and denying them credit for their work is like pirating software. Please implore the powers that be restore the backlink.

So am I to understand that the WFS is violating one of the few agreements they have by removing authorship attribution of the system they use for their forum, thus violating their General Public License? One wonders if the folks at Kunena know about this?

I said "one of the few agreements" because WFS probably has some sort of arrangement with the manufacturers of Bobby's little pretend badges.

One wonders if the folks who made Bobby's badges know he's using them to impersonate police officers?
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by notorial dissent »

Magic Eightball says: "Prol'ly not!", to both.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Jeffrey
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 3076
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 1:16 am

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by Jeffrey »

If I may quote Xabre from WFS:
Free money is not what this is about ,this about obligation
WFS is violating one of the few agreements they have by removing authorship attribution of the system they use for their forum
This is really where you guys have a credibility problem because WFS is CLEARLY about getting free money and avoiding any obligations.

The movement started with Mary Elizabeth Croft trying to get free money by defrauding a credit card company. In subsequent years we have Rob Menard attracting people to WFS by promising free electricity, free hamburgers and literally free money by tapping into the "security of the person".

We have Chief Rock at Idle no more trying to get out of child support obligations and literally taking his cell phone contract, writing in new numbers and thinking that shit is legitimate.

Meanwhile, not 5 days earlier Xabre is on WFS trying to weasel his way out of having to pay off his car loan. AGAIN, TRYING TO GET A FREE FUCKING CAR.

https://worldfreemansociety.org/forum/4 ... e-contract

And I don't think we even have to get into how many mortgage elimination scams have been pushed by WFS and general Freemen/SovCit groups. Even Dean Clifford got into the game by promising free housing and shit with his land stewardship program.

Why even associate yourself with people like that?
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by arayder »

Jeffrey wrote:. . .Xabre is on WFS trying to weasel his way out of having to pay off his car loan. AGAIN, TRYING TO GET A FREE FUCKING CAR.

https://worldfreemansociety.org/forum/4 ... e-contract
Then he says, ". . . people. . . think we represent. . . Freeloaders, Tax dodgers, loser's, Junkies, Drunks, Dead beat Dads, Domestic Terrorists,. . People with authority problems etc."

So not paying your freely entered into car loan isn't being a freeloader?
LordEd
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 908
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 3:14 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by LordEd »

This article from WFS particularly sticks out in my mind: https://public.worldfreemansociety.org/ ... hoot-a-cop
If you have the unalienable right to be armed, then you have the right to KILL ”government” agents who try to disarm you. If you have the right to not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures, then you have the right to KILL “government” agents who try to inflict those on you.
Would you care to comment on this article? I presume this article is of interest to freemen as it was posted page 1 for a period of time and is still archived.
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by webhick »

arayder wrote:
webhick wrote:bmx, do you realize that WFS is violating the Kunena terms of use by removing the backlink? The developers don't get paid for their hard work and denying them credit for their work is like pirating software. Please implore the powers that be restore the backlink.

So am I to understand that the WFS is violating one of the few agreements they have by removing authorship attribution of the system they use for their forum, thus violating their General Public License? One wonders if the folks at Kunena know about this?
Yes. I'm not sure what they'd do about it. phpBB refuses to provide support to any forum lacking appropriate credit. Kunena would be well within their rights to do the same but they don't appear to.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by arayder »

LordEd wrote:This article from WFS particularly sticks out in my mind: https://public.worldfreemansociety.org/ ... hoot-a-cop
If you have the unalienable right to be armed, then you have the right to KILL ”government” agents who try to disarm you. If you have the right to not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures, then you have the right to KILL “government” agents who try to inflict those on you.
Would you care to comment on this article? I presume this article is of interest to freemen as it was posted page 1 for a period of time and is still archived.
bmx can speak for himself.

But, I'll note that while the Larken Rose article was posted during freemnary's anything goes period, the director of the World Freeman Society, Robert Menard, overreacting to a routine, nonviolent traffic stop, has recently advocated that his vigilante C3POs arm themselves for protection from the police.

One suspects Mr. "I-Ain't-Got-No-Original-Thoughts" Bobby Menard got the idea from reading Rose's article after a bong hit.

One has to feel trepidation that more impressionable freemen will arm themselves while Rose pontificates and Menard plays with his goat.
davids
Farting Cow Emeritus
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 6:03 am

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by davids »

bmxninja357 strikes me as a guy who is fairly intelligent, at least in relation to the average freeman groupie. However, for some reason, he wants to fit in with that crowd and use that label. This is despite him espousing beliefs which are contrary to theirs at several points in this thread. He really isn't one of them, in my opinion, because he doesn't believe enough of what they do. But for some reason, he's trying be as much of one as he can be, without sounding like a completely blindered idiot, like they do (as a generality). I suspect that with further education or experience he would be even more reasonable.

Sorry to analyze you BMX
LordEd
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 908
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 3:14 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by LordEd »

Part of my interest in the 'freeman' phenomenon is the social aspect; probably because I'm generally a geek have less of an understanding of people than analytical logic.

BMX has been around for a bit now and seems to have largely escaped the 'adversarial' beginnings and seems to be in a cooperative position now, especially notable in the "watch a freeman ruin his life" thread seeking to aid the situation from both ends.

So I ask bmx, has your view or expectations of quatloos changed?

And I ask quatloos general, has your views or expectations of bmx changed?
Hyrion
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 660
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:33 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by Hyrion »

bmxninja357 wrote:
LordEd wrote: I would also point to R v Duncan (http://canlii.ca/t/fwsm0) which <snip>
this is something i have said previously in that i dont bother to remember or cite cases <snip>
That's too bad. I presume you're not remembering or citing because you don't even bother to review.

If you were reviewing the cases, you could understand better how individuals (such as Manard) is representing their perspective. Or perhaps a more appropriate term is: misrepresenting.

I'm not saying you should stop being his friend - that's your decision to make.

I have a friend who's a habitual liar, it's just who he is. There's even been situations where one minute he says one thing and a few minutes later the exact opposite. Knowing that he lies constantly, I'm able to take what he says with a grain of salt instead of relying on it as the truth. Such knowledge helps avoid all manner of negative drama on myself.

It's my humble opinion that - at best - Manard is seriously delusional on the Law. At worst, he's deliberately misrepresenting it.

Perhaps if you reviewed the cases Manard cites relative to the opinion he's expressing... you'd have a much clearer understanding of whether or not you could trust his legal reasoning even if you don't understand why he says what he says.

And I've found it certainly helps to keep notes on ones observations in such conflicts for quick and easy reference.
dont bother to remember or cite cases
That really is too bad.... knowledge is power and if you're not willing to build a base of what you believe to be factual knowledge it'll be far easier for others to mislead you - whether or not they're doing it consciously.
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by arayder »

Hyrion wrote:I have a friend who's a habitual liar, it's just who he is. There's even been situations where one minute he says one thing and a few minutes later the exact opposite. Knowing that he lies constantly, I'm able to take what he says with a grain of salt instead of relying on it as the truth. Such knowledge helps avoid all manner of negative drama on myself.

It's my humble opinion that - at best - Manard is seriously delusional on the Law. At worst, he's deliberately misrepresenting it.

. . .if you reviewed the cases Manard cites relative to the opinion he's expressing... you'd have a much clearer understanding of whether or not you could trust his legal reasoning. . .
Hyrion, are we to understand, your deliberate misspelling of his name aside, that you say Robert Menard is a liar, or at best a fool?

Be that the case it would not bode well for those falling under Bobby's spell. Are you saying that those approaching the spider's web would do well to examine the long train of people Fezboy has disappointed. . .his sisters, Megan, Elizabeth, and all the girl friends he's f'ed and forgotten?
Hyrion
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 660
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:33 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by Hyrion »

arayder wrote: Hyrion, are we to understand, your deliberate misspelling of his name aside, that you say Robert Menard is a liar, or at best a fool?
Doh!!! And I even went back to a post I remembered to double check the spelling. Ah well... it doesn't do well to trust in someone else's mistype especially when your instincts tell you that's wrong and you ignore them at that point :oops:

Should have searched for menard first, many many many more hits.

As for my humble opinion with regards Menard's perspective... I think you underestimate the worst case scenario if "is a liar" is considered worst case in your interpretation of what I stated.

As for fool being best.... I guess that depends on the scale you use with such terms as fool, idiot, dimwit, lost-touch-with-reality....
bmxninja357
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:46 am

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by bmxninja357 »

there is but two reasons you find this thread back bumped up.
\1 was i wrong?
2 should new guys expect different?

i am not nor was i from the word go here to cause troubles. as always i simply wish the best for others as well as myself.

was i or am i so wrong?

i have an issue to bring forward later based on an ongoing court case( not mine). i might as well hone the barrels and brush the steed lest i be made a fool.

in looking back we had some fantastic debates. and im glad.

peace
ninj
whoever said laughter is the best medicine never had gonorrhea....
bmxninja357
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:46 am

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by bmxninja357 »

simply for greater clarity; upon review,

i still can not see nor have i been presented any evidence contrary to Canada being owned by the people of said land or any law made by said people to the contrary.

i actually think a dispute may be a international incident.

peace
ninj
whoever said laughter is the best medicine never had gonorrhea....
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by arayder »

bmxninja357 wrote:simply for greater clarity; upon review,

i still can not see nor have i been presented any evidence contrary to Canada being owned by the people of said land or any law made by said people to the contrary.

i actually think a dispute may be a international incident.

peace
ninj
If I recall correctly the questions of what is meant by "owned" and "the people" were generally ignored.
bmxninja357
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:46 am

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by bmxninja357 »

Well the people of canada seems fairly self explanatory. They have a thingy that identifies them by name and country of origin.

And this indicates they must share ownership and responsibility for that country. Or do you have any evidence of ownership being someone other than the people?

Peace
Ninj
whoever said laughter is the best medicine never had gonorrhea....
User avatar
NYGman
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:01 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by NYGman »

Let's invert that, maybe I missed something but was there ever any evidence to show Canada was owned by the people of Canada or any law made by said people to the contrary. for that matter, can there be a claim of ownership upon a country by a any group of persons? Why is the ownership of a country an issue? Maybe in a true Feudal Kingdom you would have ownership of the country by the King, but even if the desolve the kingdom I don't believe there would be an ownership claim over the whole.
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein

Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by notorial dissent »

Ninj, I'm sorry your statement really does not make sense on altogether too many levels. I really can't tell if you are arguing philosophy, definitions, or what.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by arayder »

bmxninja357 wrote:Well the people of canada seems fairly self explanatory. They have a thingy that identifies them by name and country of origin.

And this indicates they must share ownership and responsibility for that country. Or do you have any evidence of ownership being someone other than the people?

Peace
Ninj
We can talk about ownership later. I simply am trying to determine if we agree on the notion that "the people" are a body politic self organized under a government.
User avatar
NYGman
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:01 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: hi guys! im commonly known as bmxninja357....

Post by NYGman »

I would think he is defining "the people of Canada" by their citizenship, regardless of residence.

However, would this include children of a Canadian Citizen, when born in another country, who has yet to return to Canada, and register. For Example, If a woman is a Canadian, and is also a US permanent resident, married to a US Citizen. She has a child, born in the US, but to a Canadian Mother, does this baby count as Canadian, for purposes of "the people of Canada", assuming the Mother is considered "the people of Canada"? Would this analysis change if she were a US Citizen and a Canadian Citizen, assuming Canada allows dual nationalities? What if that baby grew up, and had a child of her own, would they be included? How many generations? Does this dilute their ownership share?

So while I think the answer is simple, the devil may be in the details, but then, does it really matter?
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein

Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.