existentialist
Tired and unemotional
And whoever finds fugitives in the bathroom, anyway???I like the courageous bit just before that: "I hid in the bathroom"
And whoever finds fugitives in the bathroom, anyway???I like the courageous bit just before that: "I hid in the bathroom"
Superb! The arch-nobber Piers Corbyn has slogans like "do not consent, do not comply" on the inside of his jacket, like an anti-vax flasher.I do not consent, I do not comply. They dragged me out of the shower and handcuffed me.
I do not consent, I do not comply. They dragged me out of the shower and handcuffed me.
Superb! The arch-nobber Piers Corbyn has slogans like "do not consent, do not comply" on the inside of his jacket, like an anti-vax flasher.
I love the idea that these sovereign freemen genuinely seem to believe that by uttering these phrases, the forces of the State will back off and apologise politely in the face of these powerful magical incantations.
They strike me as people who have never had any interactions with the police that were less than polite and amicable...
This is absolutely true isn't it, there's a very strange volunteer martyrdom about the whole thing, wouldn't surprise me if John Eyers is already being held as some latter-day Jesus in some very odd circles.
Kabbes Point is valid. We all need told now and then. And yeah if you’re up at the small hours winding yourself up about Tories. Probably time to re-evaluate your use of media and the Internet. Just for your own sake.Similar things could be said for a lot of postings on this forum, but for some reason I don't see anyone telling anyone else not to make posts bashing the Tories.
This is Singapore they're very unforgiving whatever you do.The defendant's "lawyer" :
and the defendant:
Interesting though - does indeed act insanely which isn't a good idea in a court of law - they're very unforgiving.
It started in Canada and has spread to the US and Australia too.In the UK where this sovereign freemen nonsense seems most prevalent (is it a thing in other countries?) I wonder what proportion of magistrates and judges have encountered this ‘defence’? Can imagine a magistrate at the start of a long day being faced with this bollocks sighing to her / himself and muttering “Oh Christ another FOTL dickhead, here we f***ing go again”
I think I remember reading that there have been 1k or so cases with not a single one being successful.In the UK where this sovereign freemen nonsense seems most prevalent (is it a thing in other countries?) I wonder what proportion of magistrates and judges have encountered this ‘defence’? Can imagine a magistrate at the start of a long day being faced with this bollocks sighing to her / himself and muttering “Oh Christ another FOTL dickhead, here we f***ing go again”
In America they are considered a threat to cops. As they can have guns .
I knew someone who lost their house due to the fotl, they were vulnerable and some massive dick latched onto them claiming to be a lawyer, advised them into financial meltdown then fucked off when they were repossessed
In America they are considered a threat to cops. As they can have guns .
I mean, this is just off the top of my head, but I'm guessing maybe "lower income countries are more likely to have recent memories of diseases being eliminated by successful vaccine programs"? Like, I feel that maybe stuff like the big anti-tuberculosis, polio, and smallpox campaigns are not so much a part of recent memory in Europe but might be more recent outside it? I think?Sorry a bit disconnected with what you're discussing but I am really curious, who has got an answer for how come higher income countries are more likely to be 'sceptical' about vaccine safety & efficiency?
It's children's cartoon narrative baddy vs goody stuff. In this case natural vs, eh, unnatural.There's an over-abundance of hippy-dippy nature-worshipping horseshit in a lot of developed Western countries. I reckon that it's easier to think "natural=good" and "artificial=evil" when you don't have to worry about the weather destroying your harvest.
Yep i think that is probably playing a part.
Trust in scientists, in general, and doctors & nurses particularly, seems to be the most reliable indicator they've identified, for people feeling that vaccines are safe. which trust is lower in richer countries possibly because we take access to healthcare more for granted and are more critical of services provided (?)
OR is it just access to youtube
As far as I know it was the latter that did the damage but undoubtably the former was happening to some extent as the guy was clearly parasitic.Fucksake.
Out of curiosity did the FOTLer type directly defraud them or was it more just pushing these stupid ideas on them?
THIS. We have more-or-less eliminated diseases like polio so we don't see relatives, friends, colleagues, neighbours etc who have been damaged by these illnesses, and (unlike 100 years ago) we don't know of family members who died from these diseases (e.g. one of my late Mum's brothers died of Spanish flu aged 8).I mean, this is just off the top of my head, but I'm guessing maybe "lower income countries are more likely to have recent memories of diseases being eliminated by successful vaccine programs"? Like, I feel that maybe stuff like the big anti-tuberculosis, polio, and smallpox campaigns are not so much a part of recent memory in Europe but might be more recent outside it? I think?
You'd think that would be some sort of deterrent to someone who decides to mount a defence based on this gibberish: "Does it work? Has anyone ever got a not guilty using this argument?" "Er no man, but they were successful morally / on the astral level"I think I remember reading that there have been 1k or so cases with not a single one being successful.
It's a fairly typical feature of conspiracy theory/loonery that there is no feedback from the output back to the input. So, when their preferred strategy doesn't work, there will always be some external factor that they can fold into their theory to account for the fact that it didn't work. What is inconceivable is that the theory has somehow failed in practice.You'd think that would be some sort of deterrent to someone who decides to mount a defence based on this gibberish: "Does it work? Has anyone ever got a not guilty using this argument?" "Er no man, but they were successful morally / on the astral level"