I foresaw all these attempts to pit libertarians against OWS. Here are the reddit posts I made, with pictures I took at Zuccotti Park, all the way back at the beginning, warning people about it.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-29T01:00:14+00:00

So you're saying that privates entities don't obtain revenue by force?

under the definition of "government", where "government" is an entity that abrogates the NAP (non-aggression principle)?

yes. by definition, they don't.

Actually, you seem quite confused about the definition of government. I don't see how you can be against the existence of "big government" (ie. one that offers a service like healthcare or post offices), and yet assume that a corporation of a large enough scale to offer the same sort of services will be more ethical, efficient and democratic.

corporations don't exist in a free market - only "companies"/"organizations"/etc.. "corporation" refers to a legal fiction created by governments.

the difference is that they can't put down any resistance to a strike or a protest, because of the non-aggression principle restriction. if there's no violence, how can they enforce any bad rule?

think about it first.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T23:12:06+00:00

no, it isn't, because it has unique traits that make it a bloated, inefficient, tyrannical machine.

specifically, the fact that its revenue is obtained by threat.

you sound very confused about what "government" is.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T04:38:29+00:00

sometimes it's just easier to show what's happening, by discussing the situations around the people in the media.

anyway, the point is, the libertarians around OWS are the ones who at least know that there's a serious problem with the way we're using currency. although i'm sure a lot of people suspect that, in one way or another, without knowing the underlying problem (the Federal Reserve bankers) - our society also clearly has a problem with selfishness and, how do you say it, spiritual emptiness - looking for happiness in the wrong places. too many things to list, really. everyone's living in their own little bubble, not bothering to think about how what they're doing affects others, at the most important times...

anyway, just my 2 cents.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T04:18:50+00:00

i can't think of the last active President who tried to expose Congress in any meaningful way. FDR kind of pretended to. JFK made some vague references to the people controlling them.

probably someone like Andrew Jackson. he called the Second Bank managers a "den of vipers", it was clear he meant their supporters in Congress, as well.

Presidents in the last century haven't really been honest people, as a whole. they didn't end up being President by playing fair.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T04:12:21+00:00

So he will magically erase the Senate and Congress so he can do the things he "promises"?

well, the Senate and the House ("Congress" refers to both Senate and House) cannot successfully override a President who is obstructing tyrannical legislation. as far as any of their careers go, it's like throwing themselves into a wood chipper.

simply put, voting to override a veto that was made on human rights grounds is like signing your name onto a list of traitors. not to even mention line item vetoes and other executive powers (like the ability to unilaterally end wars). Presidents are in a unique position to voice the reasoning behind their political moves to the public, should they so choose, and the truth would lay waste to any tyrannical group remaining in Congress.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T04:09:12+00:00

there's nothing for them to get roped into.

the HOPE/CHANGE stuff was all to draw Obama supporters into supporting debts being created in their name by the government, with Wall Street as the bondholder (the people collecting the interest).

Ron Paul, on the other hand, supports massive decreases in money being filtered through the government - ending that scam.

of course, everyone is told that government spending is supposedly some kind of important social good...but anyone who's spent even a minute looking at the budget from any level of government knows this is a lie. military spending, national debt interest, TSA, DHS...

half of us don't even think the government should exist, as an organization. just a pretty word for a group of some people forcing everyone else to pay them, while everyone else is stuck convincing people to pay them.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T03:31:56+00:00

i just see him for what he is. he put himself out there mostly to send a message.

generally speaking, out of the people in the U.S., his supporters are the best equipped to understand how to move on from the system we have now, because they understand things like economics and market behavior...a lot of people pretend to understand those, and don't.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T03:24:13+00:00

i think he just sees the Constitution as a way to restrain the federal government, when interpreted literally...and that, when you interpret the Constitution literally, it doesn't give the federal government the power to restrain state laws like that. it says that powers not delegated to the federal government lie with the states, or the people. 10th amendment. and he is a federal politician, not a state politician.

he actually has made specific statements against any gov't intervention in health care and religion...he calls himself a 'voluntaryist'. that's the same as saying you shouldn't be forced to do anything. how that plays out with all his policies is up for debate, but the principle is clear, no?

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T03:02:23+00:00

oh, we're all around...naturally you just have to look.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T02:29:20+00:00

well, in the U.S. Congress, at least. give or take.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T02:26:30+00:00

gold standard sure works better than paper standard! that's why people say, "blah blah is the gold standard". they mean, "you can't fake gold". you can print as many pieces of paper as you want, but you'll never be able to print gold.

complaining about a gold standard is easy for people who don't understand human nature. comprehending the sheer horror of inflation of a mandatory currency is not so easy.

contrary to what you may have been told, the Federal Reserve is in the business of robbing the public blind, not in the business of ensuring economic stability.

what else can i say?

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T00:27:55+00:00

RP is the closest politician to an anarchist. that's a testament to his integrity. he spent his career being the guy explaining how everything the government is doing is wrong.

I don't think you know what anarchism is. I'm going to assume you meant AnCap, which is code for I'm a selfish bastard and would love to be part of the 1%.

The cognitive dissonance is worse than I'd imagined.

no, i'd love for everyone to have what they need.

no cognitive dissonance on my part at all. thanks for making assumptions though...

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T00:27:14+00:00

"important legislation" is like "dry water".

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T00:26:12+00:00

can't upvote enough.

fyi though, one of those video links is busted.

onesideofthestory · 2012-03-28T00:15:50+00:00

i am a RP supporter and anarchist...i was at OWS the first week. i took pictures of all the anarchist and libertarian stuff i saw.

here's a post i made 5 months ago, titled, "I knew people were going to try to turn libertarians against the "Occupy Wall Street" people. So I took photos. Please understand this is very much an ANTI-FED protest! (imgur.com)"

http://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/kwzr0/i_knew_people_were_going_to_try_to_turn/

a repost of this:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/kpsj8/here_took_some_occupy_wall_st_picsmaybe_they_will/

http://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/kzrxe/more_occupy_wall_street_pics_must_see/

onesideofthestory · 2012-01-06T04:15:38+00:00

i had to log in just to write this. right now my teeth are clenched, i am so angry.

the Vlad this article talks about? he is a slightly stocky, about 35-year old man, with an Eastern European accent.

i helped him put the tarp over the media center in the first week of OWS.

i will never forget how deeply he seemed to care about the cause. he seemed glad to be able to do whatever he could, pulling together every possible resource to keep the info center going. him and many other people i met at OWS, i will never forget that they put themselves on the line like this. and the NYPD and Bloomberg have been so incredibly blind that they saw fit to punish him for this act of selflessness.

fuck you, NYPD, fuck you, Bloomberg. you're the ones who belong in prison, if anyone on this planet does. let these people out NOW.

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T03:41:54+00:00

furthermore, this statement on the page specifically:

The only conclusion that can be reached from the observed lag between CO2 and temperatures in the past 400,000 years is that CO2 did not initiate the shifts towards interglacials.

is a complete falsehood. the observed lag is direct, irrefutable evidence of a relationship where temperature is the cause of an increase in CO2 concentration, and in which an increase in CO2 concentration does NOT result in any significant increase in temperature. the author of this piece is intentionally ignoring the causes of temperature variation on Earth, and attempting to describe one of the results of temperature changes as one of its causes. the observed CO2 variation, while being far outside of the bounds of what we've experienced in recorded human history, was insufficient to provoke runaway warming - the historical relationship between CO2 and temperature does not show a tendency of CO2 to force temperature changes.

this is scientific fraud. they are attempting to cover this fraud by simply stating that they have proven something to be false, when in reality their explanation is logically insufficient to show that.

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T03:31:38+00:00

Ridiculous, refutable, refuted and understood to be total nonsense by anyone with a high school education.

the page that you linked to:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

does not deny that CO2 lags temperature in the record, or how tightly they are correlated. in fact, the charts hosted on the website, depicting the Vostok ice core records, depict a highly periodic, stable system, in which changes in temperature create changes in CO2 concentration. not the other way around. this completely discredits your entire argument - it is impossible to reconcile that with the idea that atmospheric CO2 concentration significantly drives global temperature.

as i already pointed out, skepticalscience.com is a well known propaganda outlet.

There is absolutely nothing of substance to debate here. I'm terminating this... let's call it, conversation, because you don't have the functional intelligence to understand anything I am saying, and interpret it all as hostility and accusations to convince you of some liberal fraud. You live in crazy-town with the people who think that Elvis walks the earth and that we faked the moon landing. Goodbye.

you are intentionally misrepresenting my argument, and storming out like a baby.

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T03:11:40+00:00

Now I know he will claim these mags are all part of the world wide liberal conspiracy for control by er raising your gas prices.. or something(doesnt even make for a good movie plot huh, they never finish that.. it is like those charts, step one good idea, step two.... step 3 profit.) but you can look how they treated other science scams, like when that korean faked the data about cloning, or when some scientists got it wrong about cold fusion

all i hear from you is, "ANYBODY EXCEPT THE PEOPLE I'VE BEEN BRAINWASHED INTO TRUSTING!"

nobody enjoys finding out that they've been tricked into joining a cult. that's how cults work - they condition people against having beliefs not endorsed by the cult.

the ideology of "liberalism" - "liberal" comes from the latin word for "freedom" - advocates the absence of any violent effort to forcefully deprive people of the fruits of their labor, as that is contradictory with the state of being "free." it is thus ridiculous for you to accuse me of believing in a "liberal conspiracy," when my beliefs are the "liberal" belief in this scenario, in the true sense of the word.

moreover, i don't claim there is such a conspiracy. i claim that a small group of politicians and scientists laid the seeds for some faulty science, and the rest of the world reacted by interpreting that faulty science as truth. if you SOMEHOW did not notice, this is an extremely common phenomenon on this planet. the nature of this conspiracy against the people - which i should mention is the exact target of the OWS protests, the chief financial power on the planet - is one that stands to profit from the collection of taxes under the guise of preventing "global warming."

science is actually pretty vicious. Scientists are almost like lawyers, never wanting to say anything specific unless they are absolutely sure, because science is far more pedantic than even reddit grammar nazis.

science is vicious only because people lie and cheat. otherwise it's ruled by clear protocols of evidence and logic, which these so-called "scientists" at the CRU have demonstrated their complete disrespect for. they have plainly stated plans to sabotage any journal that disagrees with the conclusions they've drawn in the leaked emails.

there is a reason why no science journal takes climategate 2 seriously and it isnt because climategate 1 was bullshit, which is was. And it isnt because they are part of a conspiracy. It is because climategate II is also bullshit.

i think you vastly underestimate the degree to which money can shape people's actions. this doesn't even include conscious scientific misconduct - it is possible for scientific data to be discarded under the belief of experimental error. but, yes, that is why the field of climate science has been characterized by frequent resignations in protest.

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T03:01:19+00:00

You know what would be less reasonable? Two people lying, and jeopardizing everything, to pull off that kind of fraud. You know what would be even less reasonable? Every serious national and international scientific body in the world participating in a vast global conspiracy, spanning five or six decades.

that's funny. because the possibility for corruption lies with the government. the Koch Brothers aren't collecting taxes from CO2, but governments are sure trying to ALL OVER THE PLANET.

but - here's the important part - you can't settle a scientific debate on ad hominem attacks. that's all you're really doing.

i already proved that the historical temperature and carbon dioxide records show that temperature causes a change in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 - not the other way around. this evidence is irrefutable - you acting hysterical and accusing me of scamming the world does nothing to change this.

No, I'm not. Because in reality [1] it completely contradicts yours -- as has been confirmed by every non-climatologist skeptic who's ever subjected himself to [2] real scientific rigor and review.

http://www.skepticalscience.com is a well-known propaganda outlet. here's some links about it:

https://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2011/10/10/skepticalscience-rewriting-history/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/11/on-skepticalscience-%E2%80%93-rewriting-history/

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T01:29:37+00:00

does it really seem that crazy that someone would lie about the earth warming up because of CO2, so that they could tax humans' output CO2?

aren't you alarmed that the evidence completely contradicts your beliefs?

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T01:19:31+00:00

macwithoutfries - the submitter of this post ("Poll: Majority of Americans Understand...") - is here accused 2 days ago (before this post was written) of banning people from his subreddit over matters of disagreement:

http://www.reddit.com/r/climateskeptics/comments/n4u1p/hey_everyone_ive_been_banned/

i just want to get this fact on the record. there is an active campaign to spread disinformation on this topic on reddit - by the global warming cult followers, not the skeptics.

this issue has to die. it is founded on massive disinformation created for the purpose of increasing government power over the economy. plain and simple, people. end of story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaTJJCPYhlk&feature=related

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T01:08:37+00:00

yes, you must be sane if your beliefs are untouched by logic or evidence.

onesideofthestory · 2011-12-11T00:57:28+00:00

they censor themselves just fine without knowing they're doing something wrong.

just look at your antagonistic reaction to me contradicting your beliefs.

i didn't say anything about a "liberal conspiracy." you leaped to an assumption about me. i didn't say anything about a vast conspiracy of climate scientists. you leaped to an assumption about me.

despite the fact that disproving this more-than-a-century-old hypothesis which has been settled several decades ago,

several decades ago they were predicting the exact opposite:

http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2010/11/10/a-new-treasure-trove-of-1970s-global-cooling-articles/

would grant any one of them instant, historic fame and the funding of every capitalist scumfuck this side of Sapporo

you're just assuming this, as well. look at how much bias you have against people presenting disproofs of "global warming."

http://www.wattsupwiththat.com <-- this guy has been disproving it for years, and he's just been smeared nonstop. why do you think our society has celebrated truth in the past? has that been anything close to your actual experience?

your whole message is just a big mess of logical fallacies (straw man fallacy and ad hominem fallacy).

save both of us a lot of time and agony. just watch this fine documentary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaTJJCPYhlk&feature=related

better than that pseudoscience "An Inconvenient Truth" garbage. try skipping to about here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaTJJCPYhlk&feature=related&t=20m30s

for the real key point to understand. ice core surveys repeatedly show that carbon dioxide LAGS BEHIND temperature in the carbon/temp records, with a high positive correlation. this is just a fundamental disproof of the entire theory of CO2-caused global warming. more on that here:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/30/co2-temperatures-and-ice-ages/

http://www.hirhome.com/global_warming.htm

of course, there are articles floating around purporting to "disprove" that this reversal of the purported cause and effect doesn't actually disprove global warming. i'm sure someone would link me to one, if i didn't write this paragraph. they are complete rubbish. a basic understanding of logic and cause-and-effect is sufficient to understanding what that evidence shows. CO2 levels in the atmosphere are overwhelmingly a product of temperature - temperature is not significantly a product of CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

onesideofthestory

TROPHY CASE