pigpot's Pot

[NG3]

Part three.... WHAT REALLY.

Yes

[pigpot]

Wanna know what isn't found in the statutes or decisions? The obligation to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood where no crime has been committed. I challenge you to find it. Look through statutes, look through decisions. Best of luck to you and remember, courts have jurisdiction over persons only. The evidence you provide must explicitly imply that which I believe does not exist in the commonwealth. I'm not talking about crime, I'm talking about legal status.

This is the classic "shifting the burden" logical fallacy. He is the one who is fantasizing about obligation to be identified as the legal name (shades of DMVP), the status of personhood, and the jurisdiction of courts over persons only; but yet he and his acolytes (we're looking at you, pigpot) are demanding that, rather than them having to prove that their assertions are correct, WE must prove them wrong.

That ain't how it works, Folks.

The "Court" is yours "Pottapaug1938", you made the claim of "jurisdiction"... That's yours to prove. Nothing to do with me eh!

[arayder]

Oh, here see go again. . .being asked to disprove freeman theory which has already been disproved countless times before.

If he follows the freeman playbook, no matter how exhaustive the question is answered, Pigpot will simply ask another question and pretend to be the skeptical professor.

The question one has to ask is why Pigpot plays this game knowing full well that the courts have established jurisdiction over him several times already.

[Pottapaug1938]

Wanna know what isn't found in the statutes or decisions? The obligation to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood where no crime has been committed. I challenge you to find it. Look through statutes, look through decisions. Best of luck to you and remember, courts have jurisdiction over persons only. The evidence you provide must explicitly imply that which I believe does not exist in the commonwealth. I'm not talking about crime, I'm talking about legal status.

This is the classic "shifting the burden" logical fallacy. He is the one who is fantasizing about obligation to be identified as the legal name (shades of DMVP), the status of personhood, and the jurisdiction of courts over persons only; but yet he and his acolytes (we're looking at you, pigpot) are demanding that, rather than them having to prove that their assertions are correct, WE must prove them wrong.

That ain't how it works, Folks.[/quote]

The "Court" is yours "Pottapaug1938", you made the claim of "jurisdiction"... That's yours to prove. Nothing to do with me eh! [/quote]

No, Pigpot, it's YOURS to prove. You just commited the "shifting the burden" fallacy again. Not only that, if I decided to grant your ideas the respect of taking them seriously enough to try to disprove (which I decline to do), I would in effect be conceding that there is a shred of truth in them. As you will see here when we discuss the Wnuck and Crain decisions, to address these fantasies is to imply that they have some merit. For your reading pleasure, here are the cites to the cases:

Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984)
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/wnuck.TC.WPD.pdf

So, pigpot, if you want to try to convince the many experienced attorneys (who work with the law every day, and have been known to rack up wins against the government) and other professionals that your unorthodox ideas have any merit, YOU need to show us the proof. If you can't or won't do that, then don't bother -- and by the way, self-serving assertions, or links to YouTube videos, are not prooff. Case law IS.

[arayder]

Wanna know what isn't found in the statutes or decisions? The obligation to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood where no crime has been committed. I challenge you to find it.. .

For your reading pleasure, here are the cites to the cases:

Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984)
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/wnuck.TC.WPD.pdf

It would seem our stout, short legged mammal friend has nothing to say.

[Dr. Caligari]

Wanna know what isn't found in the statutes or decisions? The obligation to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood where no crime has been committed. I challenge you to find it. Look through statutes, look through decisions. Best of luck to you and remember, courts have jurisdiction over persons only. The evidence you provide must explicitly imply that which I believe does not exist in the commonwealth. I'm not talking about crime, I'm talking about legal status.

Your question is unanswerable, for several reasons. First, it is gibberish. What does it mean "to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood"? There is not likely to be any case that says that, any more than there is a case that says that it is required to be "the brindle porcupine on St. Swithin's Day." Those words simply don't mean anything in common English (or in legalese for that matter).

Second, the question assumes a proposition-- the one I put in bold-- which you have to prove before I attempt to answer you. Who says that "courts have jurisdiction over persons only"? Prove that to me and then I will attempt to refute your nonsense proposition. (In fact, courts can have jurisdiction over things which are not "persons"-- it's called "jurisdiction in rem." Secondly, there are legal "persons" who are not human beings, but there are no human beings who are not "persons.") But that's all getting ahead of things-- prove to me that "courts have jurisdiction over persons only," and then we'll talk.

[Pottapaug1938]

Pisspot seems to be among those poor deluded souls who, like a certain lawful money redeemer in Colorado, thinks that there is a difference between a legal name, a true name and so on; and whether or not a name is written all in capital letters is crucial. I can just imagine him in court on a default warrant, telling the judge "you sent the summons to PIGPOT. I am Pigpot, of the family Gormless."

[Burnaby49]

Let's be fair to Pigpot. We set some arbitrary rules about handling his postings and he has made no complaint whatever about them, even when I've perhaps done an excessive amount of file moving. And, unlike his postings on other sites, he has avoided profanity and real flame-wars. Good thing too. Either of those could get him banned and he seems to be having fun here goading you Pigpen Frolics Facilitators.

[pigpot]

Let's be fair to Pigpot. We set some arbitrary rules about handling his postings and he has made no complaint whatever about them, even when I've perhaps done an excessive amount of file moving. And, unlike his postings on other sites, he has avoided profanity and real flame-wars. Good thing too. Either of those could get him banned and he seems to be having fun here goading you Pigpen Frolics Facilitators.

To, "Bunaby49", Thanks. I'm only laughing due to the sh1te on other sites.

Nah! I ain't going to kiss your ass but thank you for being logical (in this aspect although we disagree over much else). You've had a pop at me and I'm still here. The whiny little bitches (together are trying to collude) are failing. I won't engage with them again.

I'm not here to upset and I don't whine and bitch like some or even try and advocate for whiny little people that want to come here and play by their own rules. The rules here are the rules here and some try and curry favour like they did over on the "WFS" but fail to do so.

Go check out who's been downgraded over there and also who's been up-graded. "terr-y" is up and someone else is down. Guess who??? Also his mate doesn't even post over there any more, plus they have a wonderful forum that comprises of themselves (two) as GATE KEEPERS, a pigeon and some others fart stink.

Even "their" own have abandoned them, and that is why they want to join "here". I want no part over with that sh1te, "I'm a freeman-on-the-land and I STILL want to be governed", oxy-moron crap.

They sold out, both of them and now they want to buy into the side of their previous enemy. DOUBLE AGENTS. Never to be trusted and only OUT for themselves. Otherwise known as sh1tehouses. At least I've picked a side. It's not Quatloos and it CERTAINLY NOT the liars.

Pick between a liar and a thief. Take the thief EVERYTIME. With the thief, at least you know where you stand. With the liar...................... Gotcha!

[NG3]

Either of those could get him banned and he seems to be having fun here goading you Pigpen Frolics Facilitators.

Facilitators?

We've not left him laying around

Leave a ball in the street & people will kick it

Eta. Why is he in the UK forum anyway?

He's not from here, not discussing issues relevant to here, shouldn't his "pot" be in a different forum?

[pigpot]

Either of those could get him banned and he seems to be having fun here goading you Pigpen Frolics Facilitators.

Facilitators?

We've not left him laying around

Leave a ball in the street & people will kick it

Is that it. I'm the only REAL advocate of anyone that thinks differently to you guys. That's like saying to the last Lemur, "Feck you, you destroying of vegetation little barstard. I'm gonna kill the feck out of you"... and then doing it.

You ARE sounding like you are stupid and thankfully people like "Burnaby49" have more "power" than you here. You seem all mouth over the internet but what IF I said, ("but I'm not"), that I would bite you to pieces if you confronted me physically (if you tried to initiate violence upon me) and tried to cause harm to me if you were the initiator of the violence.

What would I expect of "Burnaby49" in that instance? Would I expect him or her to defend me. Absolutely to the hilt. And I would defend he or she against you.

What are you talking about kicking people like a ball in the street. I'd might have said the same about your next generations but I won't as I have more humanity than YOU.

P.s. you can't measure humanity but you can be sized up like any other animal by another.

Fancy this, I hope not: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ntist.html

[pigpot]

Anyway back upon post after keeping those that need to keep upon guard (just think I'm helping you, be maintaining yours and all others guard) here is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJVHCZUL1k8

From 4:00 minutes on he is a "silly man". Ideas for explanation please. Reason IS WINNING!

4:20 "Somebody's got to protect people from assholes like you guys............ " PRESUMPTION WRONG....... PILE of sh1te.... The backlash IS COMING! Just wait. Push the people until xyz!

"Who have I ever harmed. Who am I ever going to harm?" Frog faced sh1t house tries to scare the reporter. Talks about a job. Terminology. "Alright asshole". Pig stink!

"Not all cops are bad like you make them out to be."

See "Frog", Wind in the Willows".

[arayder]

Wanna know what isn't found in the statutes or decisions? The obligation to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood where no crime has been committed. I challenge you to find it.. .

For your reading pleasure, here are the cites to the cases:

Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984)
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/wnuck.TC.WPD.pdf

It would seem our stout, short legged mammal friend has nothing to say.

I take it back. The even-toed ungulate of the family Suidae does have something to say.

The lengths he will go to in order to avoid the subject and derail the thread is amazing.

[pigpot]

Wanna know what isn't found in the statutes or decisions? The obligation to be identified as the legal name with the status of personhood where no crime has been committed. I challenge you to find it.. .

For your reading pleasure, here are the cites to the cases:

Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984)
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/wnuck.TC.WPD.pdf

It would seem our stout, short legged mammal friend has nothing to say.

I take it back. The even-toed ungulate of the family Suidae does have something to say.

The lengths he will go to in order to avoid the subject and derail the thread is amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QODDKJ2Ajh0

More people laughing at the "5-0" Filth and I'm just showing people one piece at a time.

You should NOT get pissed off about it. It's going to happen. The controllers are going to lose. It's not what I think. It's inevitable. It's already started. Disagree with it and you'll make you mark. You'll be............

[arayder]

The even-toed ungulate of the family Suidae has an active imagination.

I suspect he is reeling from the failures of his legal theories in open court and has begun to fantasize that the world will be remade to his liking.

The growth of the fantasy is understandable since at one point the pig of the family Suidae ranted to the judge that he was in charge of the court.

[NG3]

Either of those could get him banned and he seems to be having fun here goading you Pigpen Frolics Facilitators.

Facilitators?

We've not left him laying around

Leave a ball in the street & people will kick it

Is that it.

Yes

I'm the only REAL advocate of anyone that thinks differently to you guys

Only in your fantasy.

. That's like saying to the last Lemur, "Feck you, you destroying of vegetation little barstard. I'm gonna kill the feck out of you"... and then doing it.

No it's not

You ARE sounding like you are stupid

All these insults.

Calm down, take a deep breath.

You seem all mouth over the internet

All these insults.

Calm down, take a deep breath.

but what IF I said, ("but I'm not"), that I would bite you to pieces if you confronted me physically (if you tried to initiate violence upon me) and tried to cause harm to me if you were the initiator of the violence.

What would I expect of "Burnaby49" in that instance? Would I expect him or her to defend me. Absolutely to the hilt. And I would defend he or she against you.

Calm down, take a deep breath.

What are you talking about kicking people like a ball in the street.

Calm down, take a deep breath. I never said any such thing.

I'd might have said the same about your next generations but I won't as I have more humanity than YOU.

Calm down, take a deep breath.

You're not even making sense

P.s. you can't measure humanity but you can be sized up like any other animal by another.

Fancy this, I hope not: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ntist.html

Calm down, take a deep breath.

You're not even making sense

None of that relates to anything I've said.

And, unlike his postings on other sites, he has avoided profanity and real flame-wars.

MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you mug!

Top class sh1t head.............

YOU are a joke boy.

All these insults.

Calm down, take a deep breath.

I imagine Burnaby49 will only facilitate you for so long if you keep losing your cool like that.

[arayder]

Some folks put on their Star Fleet uniform and fantasize a universe where they can say "ENGAGE". Sometimes they go down to the convention center and say "Live long and prosper." to the like minded.

Then Monday morning comes.

It's no different for our wallowing visitor.

[hardcopy]

pigpot should be s lawyer. I'm surprised no one has mentioned it to him

[hardcopy]

pigpot should be a lawyer. I'm surprised no one has mentioned it to him

[daveBeeston]

You ARE sounding like you are stupid and thankfully people like "Burnaby49" have more "power" than you here. You seem all mouth over the internet but what IF I said, ("but I'm not"), that I would bite you to pieces if you confronted me physically (if you tried to initiate violence upon me) and tried to cause harm to me if you were the initiator of the violence.


What are you talking about kicking people like a ball in the street. I'd might have said the same about your next generations but I won't as I have more humanity than YOU.

Pigpot you are just like every other keyboard warrior you spout bile and threats and make "claims"that you would inflict harm on people if they ever met you in person while claiming that others have instigated violence and threats towards you(something that has not happened here at all).
I can say with 100% certainty that if we ever met in person you wouldn't act on your threats as it simply would not end the way you would want it to,i've dealt with far more hostile people than you (most of whom where armed) in very hostile lands im still standing they are not.

No one said anything about kicking people like a ball in the street and by making that statement you have shown what most people already know and that's that you ignore what is actually said in favour of what you want it to say(just like all other FOTLers).

You really should stop with the insults and thinly veiled threats it shows a lack of maturity and a lack of intelligence.