pigpot's Pot

[pigpot]

No one is saying that the present isn't based on the past but the past is a fixed event and you cant change it.

But that's where you're wrong.

Sorry to disappoint you but you can't change the past. It's happened. It's over.

if a "Court" is a true Court, a real Court, a Court of record then all that needs to be done is present the facts.

That doesn't change the past.

You can argue about the past in a court, if you wish, but not change it.

In this case the point you're arguing about "divine right" has already changed, so not only would you be arguing about an historical event that you can't change but also a redundant point that's irrelevant because it's already changed historically.

I'm not changing the past at all. I'm challenging it correctly with logic, proving it's wrong and mounting a challenge as to the "legitimacy" of what is now, the present. I have no wish to change the past only to PROVE that it is wrong.

Go look at John Anthony Hill's case. The "Crown" versus... No answer for that eh!

It doesn't matter what this "divine right" tripe is all about. It matters or not if it is logical or not.

Please don't try and shift my words and change my direction as it doesn't come across as if you want to play fair. I'm all about fairness.

It's a little like "negro" slavery. Completely wrong in every aspect. It doesn't make it okay for a "Court" to say, "What was done was done. Everyone is ordered to move on from the past and let bygones be bygones."

It just doesn't happen like that for some people. If that makes me one of those people then so be it.

You didn't respond to my point "NG3" though.

I'll put it here again for you as you seem to be having some difficulty responding to it:

I'd like to be on my way from here and only need agreement with the idea that some people with badges get to do what some OTHERS can't and use force as a medium to convey their wishes / demands.

[NG3]

It doesn't matter what this "divine right" tripe is all about.

Finally you get something right!

Serious question, were you not taught this stuff at school age?

They used to teach it in most schools

[ontobserver]

I'd like to be on my way from here and only need agreement with the idea that some people with badges get to do what some OTHERS can't and use force as a medium to convey their wishes / demands.

That's partly correct. Those with badges are empowered by society to enforce the laws (yes, potentially through the use of force). Those laws are not the "wishes/demands" of the officers, they are the wishes/demands of majority of society. Most people understand this! If you don't like the laws, go somewhere that has laws that suit you better.

Alternatively, we have an election in Canada in a couple of months...why don't you form a political party with a platform to abolish all of those laws you disagree with. If your new party can get a majority of seats in the legislature, then you have the mandate of society to make those changes.

Fortunately, I don't think your candidates would get more than a handful of votes in any riding. Most of us WANT to have the legal system we have. Many of the laws are in place to deter people from doing things that would put them or others in danger (eg. traffic laws). Are there laws that are little overbearing? maybe, but the majority of them make sense to the majority of the citizens. Are there improvements that could be made to the system? quite likely, but saying the current system is "illegitimate" is just insane.

Wanting to have all of the benefits of society such as health care, roads, a legal system based on facts (as opposed to a lynch mob "grand jury"), safe food & water, electricity, the technology you are using to make your incoherent ramblings, etc., without wanting to obey the rules of that society is just hypocritical.

[Pottapaug1938]

I would suggest that, although a monarch is not elected to the throne by his or her people, he/she reigns with their collective assent. Consider the case of King Edward VIII as the marriage crisis of December 1936 came to a head. In the old days, the King could have followed in the footsteps of his ancestor, Henry VIII, and simply commanded that he be allowed to wed Wallis Simpson; but in 1936, he could not get even the British Parliament to consent to such a marriage, whether Wallis was to become Queen or accept a lesser morganatic status. The parliaments of the various Dominions were even more opposed to the King marrying Wallis.

The preesent Queen fully understands that she is Queen only because her people wish her to be so, and that if her people wished to switch to a republic, there is little which she could do to stop that from happening. So, in effect, the Queen is not much different from, say, the American government, in that both exist by the collective consent of the governed, and that withdrawal of that collective consent would end their power.

[NG3]

There you go piggy, the last two people have shown far more patience to explain it than I did, but if you still don't get it then hit those history books. I'd advise starting at the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and then working forward, step by step to the Canada act of 1982.

You'll be a little less confused then.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Go look at John Anthony Hill's case. The "Crown" versus... No answer for that eh!

FYI he has his own thread here:
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=9476

And as for you complaining to NG3 that he has not replied to your question, I would like to remind you that I have asked you five, yes five questions in this thread, and you ran away from every one of them.

[Pottapaug1938]

Go look at John Anthony Hill's case. The "Crown" versus... No answer for that eh!

FYI he has his own thread here:
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=9476

And as for you complaining to NG3 that he has not replied to your question, I would like to remind you that I have asked you five, yes five questions in this thread, and you ran away from every one of them.

He has run away from every single question put to him. He either ignores them, answers with irrelevancies, answers by attempting to shift the burden of proof, or answers with what he considers to be remarks full of wit (he's half right on that).

[ProfHenryHiggins]

No one is saying that the present isn't based on the past but the past is a fixed event and you cant change it.

But that's where you're wrong. if a "Court" is a true Court, a real Court, a Court of record then all that needs to be done is present the facts. If the present is based upon the past and the past is incorrect or wrong or without fact then the present state of affairs is incorrect and procedure cannot logically continue.

Would you agree or disagree with this logical statement. If you disagree please show me how a right can be made from a wrong?

Pigs, do you even know what the phrase "court of record" means? Try opening a dictionary - not even a legal dictionary necessarily, but a regular one such as might be used in an English class on creative writing - and look the term up.

Also, considering that courts originated as part of royal ceremony and custom, you're anchoring your arguments in something that you claim that you don't believe in. Without a firm foundation, your logic falls into the wild blue yonder like a whiff of dandilion seeds in a breeze.

[pigpot]

Well this has done quite well, much better than my go at getting into "JREF" (international skeptic) supporters or whatever they are now called. Suffice to say nothing has been agreed upon here but that is okay.

To quote, "ontobserver" at » Mon Aug 10, 2015 1:06 am"

That's partly correct. Those with badges are empowered by society to enforce the laws (yes, potentially through the use of force). Those laws are not the "wishes/demands" of the officers, they are the wishes/demands of majority of society.

Thank you for honesty and your thoughts. From what I see the "No State Project" is the only way forward for HUMANITY at the moment. Forget Marc Stevens et al. This is the only way to go to the edges of this world and make it succeed. Competition will fail and collaboration will succeed. This divisive bullshit is the stuff that keeps us apart and people need to think about the legacy they leave "their" others after it's DONE.

So I'd like to keep up my registration here and pop back and forth when I feel I can or need to. It maybe tomorrow or six months time. As and when.

Thanks "Wes" and cheers for your hospitality.

"Burnaby49" a star.

Cheers and thank you for now.

[wserra]

From what I see the "No State Project" is the only way forward for HUMANITY at the moment.

No ego problem there.

[pigpot]

From what I see the "No State Project" is the only way forward for HUMANITY at the moment.

No ego problem there.

You seem like we could have a drink "Wes"...

08-07-2015, 08:48 PM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2015 08:52 PM by pigpot.)
Post: #113
pigpot Offline
Senior Member
****
Posts: 608
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 1
Warning Level: 50%
RE: Over on Quatloos...
"WEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS"

Come and play "WESSSSSSSSSSSS".

Two Thumbs Up

I need help setting up my own site. You could see this as divide and conquer but I don't. Marc's given his advice and I think Marc has done great. I don't give advice (in the main / or whatever way) like Marc does or doesn't. Marc's WAY ahead of my thinking (I realise that he is light years away from the others and I also understand that Marc doesn't need or want smoke blown up his ass)...

So there it is... Have an opinion!

[wserra]

From what I see the "No State Project" is the only way forward for HUMANITY at the moment.

No ego problem there.

You seem like we could have a drink "Wes"...

pigpot walks into a bar with a frog on his shoulder. Bartender looks up and says, "Hey, where'd you get that?" Frog says, "Stevens' board. They got lots of 'em."

[rumpelstilzchen]

pigpot walks into a bar with a frog on his shoulder. Bartender looks up and says, "Hey, where'd you get that?" Frog says, "Stevens' board. They got lots of 'em."

pigpot walks into a bar with a frog on his head. Bartender looks up and says, "Hey, where'd you get that? Frog says, "It started as a boil on my bum.

[AndyK]

Just for the record, PP, light years are a measure of DISTANCE, not time.

Also, if you're interested in the success of a "No State Project," you should take a tour of Yemen or Somalia.

[NG3]

Just for the record, PP, light years are a measure of DISTANCE, not time.

Also, if you're interested in the success of a "No State Project," you should take a tour of Yemen or Somalia.

I was in Algeria during the troubles in the 90's when great swathes of the country were stateless. I wouldn't wish what I experienced on my worst enemy.

It's easy for daydreamers to dream, fortunately most of those who don't think their fantasies through don't act on them, but just sit and gas about them online instead.

[Hyrion]

light years are a measure of DISTANCE, not time

Actually - it's a measure of both - the distance traveled at a specific speed in a specific time.

Specifically: traveling at the speed of light for one year = 1 light year.

Ironically, as I vaguely understand the science behind it, apparently the speed of light isn't so constant after all.

[pigpot]

light years are a measure of DISTANCE, not time

Actually - it's a measure of both - the distance traveled at a specific speed in a specific time.

Specifically: traveling at the speed of light for one year = 1 light year.

Ironically, as I vaguely understand the science behind it, apparently the speed of light isn't so constant after all.

That was for "AndyK".

[pigpot]

Not anarchy. More like chaos. Big difference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvqVxgw1Eck

[pigpot]

That's a local story here to me and as far as I know there's no sov angle to it, the guy's just a low level non violent crook. What does concern me about it, and not a little, is why a University of Cincinnati Police officer is doing running traffic stops several blocks off the campus of UC, and turning a no front plate traffic stop into a fatal shooting. The cop was one of those guys who should never be a cop,l and was himself what I would imagine was just a few stops short of joining the local militia kind of guys....

That worked then. Thanks to the people who made the rules.

[pigpot]

Thankfully the leaders are in charge and the faithful will always buy into their cartoons.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... nders.html

http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.p ... 09&page=29

Do you think any of these images have been photo-shopped?