We're Taking Back Our Government, and This Is What We Have To Say

reply to post by Kitilani

‎"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

Simple enough for you?

reply to post by Janky Red

....I say as a free man, you should have more option and regard for your status amongst these creations of the state....

WOW, for once I agree with you.

Bill Bullard. of R-CALF in testimony before Congress Concentration in Agriculture and an Examination of the JBS/Swift ... gives a very good explanation of what you are talking of plus a lot of illustrations.

JBS Wants Feedlots to Waive Rights - Nebraska Farmer (journal): "Contracts eliminate rights under Packers and Stockyards Act." gives another look at the situation.

Essentially new FDA regs (1996 HACCP) put many of the small slaughter houses out of business, now the only game in town is one of the big boys, there are four left. North Carolina just found out exactly how bad this type of situation is a couple of days ago.

Chicken plant closings deal blow to 2 N.C. cities

Townsend plans to close all the company's facilities by October and lay off more than 1,000 workers in Siler City and Mocksville.

The move, which will also terminate contracts with about 200 chicken farmers in four counties,....

Those farmers borrowed large sums of money to build chicken houses with the expectation that their contracts with Townsend would allow them to pay off the debt over years.

In May, Omtron boasted that by maintaining all of its contracts with farmers it was injecting more than $35 million into the state's economy.

"These farmers probably still owe anywhere from $250,000 to $400,000," said Dan Campeau, a poultry agent with the N.C. Cooperative Extension Service....

The U.S. poultry industry is struggling. The cost of corn, the main ingredient in chicken feed, has doubled over the last year, while chicken prices have remained weak...

Corn prices are expected to go even higher given the drought conditions the Midwest and the federal government's subsidizing of farmers to grow corn for ethanol.

Pilgrim's Pride, the world's second-largest chicken producer, reported a $128 million loss for the second quarter Friday and said it would close a plant in Dallas.....
.

"If we have another year or two like this it's going to drive everybody out of business and most of our business is probably going to go south to Mexico or South America," he said.

I live in the area and all the independents who handled chickens and rabbits were shutdown. So it looks like Al Gore was telling the truth all those years ago. I heard it first in the N.C. Cooperative Extension Service office from an irate agent they were trying to calm down. I should stop by and ask them what they think of good old Al's warning now.

..This comes from the Ag Journal, Billings, Montana: "At a recent ceremony at the White House, Vice President and presidential candidate Al Gore let slip what many have long believed was his real intention as regards to U.S. agriculture.

"While presenting a national award to a Colorado FFA member, Gore asked the student what his/her life plans were. Upon hearing that the FFA member wanted to continue on in production agriculture, Gore reportedly replied that the young person should develop other plans because our production agriculture is being shifted out of the U.S. to the Third World." mi-cherries.com...

Originally posted by NuroSlam
reply to post by Janky Red

 

I have said before, corporations would not wield the power they have if it wasn't for the violence of the state to back it.

this makes no sense to me, please explain in specific terms what you mean. Do you mean
common law or a court system?

In fact, a corporation is a fictitious government created entity to shield the individual from liability.

Yup we agree on this, I stated the same thing, no contention here

So please tell me where in that statement do I show support for corporatism?

Its no a statement, it is an entire attitude, or maybe lack of attitude. You claim that corporations will be rendered
impotent if they are left to be free to do what ever they want. Explain the LOGIC in that assertion you keep making? You are saying things and expecting me to except your abstraction without any valid attempts to explain how your steps will dampen the race to corprotacracy in the slightest. Really, honestly, it sounds like you
are preaching a religion or common fairy tale to explain this miracle you proclaim is being restricted. Meanwhile Man had been embroiled in the same basic struggles since the dawn of mankind and you ignore the fact that
your idea does absolutely nothing to address the root of corporations power beyond their charter, nothing.

Are you proposing to end all limited liability endeavors?

You ask when have I had a say in contracts that I have signed? As I said, I have had ultimate say in that if I don't agree I can walk away, but I see where you are going with that, so I will tell you that I had a say in the terms and conditions of my divorce and the custody of my child. I have also negotiated the terms and conditions of previous employment, from pay to benefits and bonuses. Now to address the T&C of ATS. Granted, I have no say in that other then my yes/no, however, considering a group of people have worked to create this forum, at their expense, ask nothing but civility and basic common sense, it seems to be a fair trade. If you have such a big problem with it, why are you here?

Firefox is made available to you under the terms of the Mozilla Public License. This means you may use, copy and distribute Firefox to others. You are also welcome to modify the source code of Firefox as you want to meet your needs. The Mozilla Public License also gives you the right to distribute your modified versions.

As you see, I choose my browser based upon what I believe my rights should be as a user. It is my property, whether I have paid for it or not, and I may do with it what I wish.

Same with my OS

Debian, the producers of the Debian GNU/Linux system, have created the Debian Social Contract. The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) part of the contract, initially designed as a set of commitments that we agree to abide by, has been adopted by the free software community as the basis of the Open Source Definition.

www.debian.org...

The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for software and other kinds of works.

The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free software for all its users. We, the Free Software Foundation, use the GNU General Public License for most of our software; it applies also to any other work released this way by its authors. You can apply it to your programs, too.

When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, and that you know you can do these things.

www.gnu.org...

All of those are attached to contracts created by corporations, which are actionable by law. You have had to acquiesce in all three cases, you had 0% input in the terms of the contracts associated with all the above. There
is not even an option for you to negotiate a position is there??? My point is show you that, that predicament is at the core of corporatism. In 1776 'til the late 1800's people existed in a world where there was and equal legal footing on a daily basis. The corporate structure and process has changed the entire face of the world, the nature of agreement and choice. For example, you cannot buy and use ANY cell phone in the world without engaging into a pre dictated contracted, by and for the corporation. Can you choose not to buy a cell phone? sure, but then, you have just let the market dictate to you, because you have no real choice of the terms, no option but terms or no cell phone. It this circumstance that is at the root of corporatism.

Lets do an experiment to see if you have very little choice in the corporate contract monopoly here-

I want you to negotiate a term of your contract here on ATS to prove that the root of corporatism is not systemic

I want you to log out

Then come back here and respond without agree to the terms and conditions (contract)

If you are not pro corporate, maybe you can share what is wrong about corporations and their position in America?

reply to post by crimvelvet


Thanks, great testimony, I am working on it now...

Wow, Bill recognizes nuance, a shock to my system

I will get back

Originally posted by Lono1
reply to post by Kitilani

 

‎"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

Simple enough for you?

Do you not know what the word "proof" means?
I asked for proof. Had I asked for simplification, this would have made sense.

Originally posted by Evanzsayz
reply to post by Kitilani

 

Who said anything about christians? TROLL ALERT

edit on 5-8-2011 by Evanzsayz because: (no reason given)

The Right Wing nuts.
The Teabaggers.
The Republicans.
Many of the posters jumping onto the OP's ship.

Originally posted by Romekje
Angry Christian Extremists?

Where in this thread or in the OP did anyone mention Christians (let alone angry extremist ones?)

Or are you just trying to put "homegrown terrorism" into people's heads?

Oh?

There are no Christian Extremists in this psuedo "take back our government cuz we are teabaggers" movement?

You sure about that?

Originally posted by NuroSlam
Actually what I'm advocating is de-regulation by government.

Yeah you said that and then went on to contradict it in your explanation.

There are free market solutions to everything government does. Take product safety testing. There is a non governmental organisation that's sole business is dependent on its reputation. That is Underwriters Laboratories, and while you can find products that have not been approved by UL, you would be foolish to buy them. Compare that to say government auto safety laws, there is nothing safe with an airbag blowing up in your face.

I will ask you this question again then.

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by NuroSlam

 

Let's take a look inside your corporate utopia for a moment.

President Ron Paul removes all those evil regulations on companies such as the ones preventing lead based paint in toys for toddlers and infants.

You find out your 9 year old child suffers severe mental disabilities most likely due to exposure to lead.

Who do you sue?

Originally posted by Janky Red
I have said before, corporations would not wield the power they have if it wasn't for the violence of the state to back it.
this makes no sense to me, please explain in specific terms what you mean.
In fact, a corporation is a fictitious government created entity to shield the individual from liability.

Yup we agree on this, I stated the same thing, no contention here

First off, the corporation would have no legal standing, since the only legality it had was from the government that no longer exists. Thus, everyone would be held personally accountable for their actions. In a free market, there is no "limited" liability. It seems you assume that I don't believe in the rule of law, in fact I very much do, but those laws are limited to my personal life, liberty and property as well as your same three rights. Corporations have no such rights, the only rights they have are those "positive" rights government gives them, thus taking away those same rights from the individual. I am free to give up my rights as I see fit, but no one has the right to take them from me. If its not consensual it is a crime. There are already free market systems to handle liability in place and have been for quit some time.

All of those are attached to contracts created by corporations, which are actionable by law. You have had to acquiesce in all three cases, you had 0% input in the terms of the contracts associated with all the above. There
is not even an option for you to negotiate a position is there???

Please tell me what position i need to negotiate? I have complete control on the software even to the point of renaming it, putting it on a CD and selling it. I see no need to negotiate when what I want is already there. In fact the GNU public license is in direct contrast to what you seem to think it is.

My point is show you that, that predicament is at the core of corporatism. In 1776 'til the late 1800's people existed in a world where there was and equal legal footing on a daily basis. The corporate structure and process has changed the entire face of the world, the nature of agreement and choice. For example, you cannot buy and use ANY cell phone in the world without engaging into a pre dictated contracted, by and for the corporation. Can you choose not to buy a cell phone? sure, but then, you have just let the market dictate to you, because you have no real choice of the terms, no option but terms or no cell phone. It this circumstance that is at the root of corporatism.

Again its a government granted monopoly. You keep putting in the problem which is government and using that to tell me the free market would never work.

Lets do an experiment to see if you have very little choice in the corporate contract monopoly here-

I want you to negotiate a term of your contract here on ATS to prove that the root of corporatism is not systemic

I want you to log out

Then come back here and respond without agree to the terms and conditions (contract)

If you are not pro corporate, maybe you can share what is wrong about corporations and their position in America?

I've already done this. Even on the odd chance that you agree that corporations are fictitious entitles created to shelter the individual from liability. You continue to preach its merits. All I can say is, If you want to place a gun to someones head to force them to think and believe what you do, then we have nothing else to discuss. You want to condone violence, by all means go right ahead. I will continue to speak out about it. I prefer to live in a voluntary consensual society with like minded freedom loving human beings.

-------------------------------
"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out… without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable." – H.L. Mencken

reply to post by Kitilani

Oh?

There are no Christian Extremists in this psuedo "take back our government cuz we are teabaggers" movement?

You sure about that?

So if the "tack back our government" crowd is Christian extremist, tea bagger republicans then I guess you are on the other side of the dividing line along with Pascal Lamy.

Of What Use is Global Governance? written by Pascal Lamy, Director, World Trade Organization (WTO) He speaks of the European Union as sort of an intermediate stage.

...the very incarnation of an international organization of integration in which Member States have agreed to relinquish sovereignty in order to strengthen the coherence and effectiveness of their actions.

...If there is one place on earth where new forms of global governance have been tested since the Second World War, it is in Europe. European integration is the most ambitious supranational governance experience ever undertaken. It is the story of interdependence desired, defined, and organized by the Member States. In no respect is the work complete—neither geographically nor in terms of depth (i.e., the powers conferred by the Member States to the E.U.), nor, obviously, in terms of identity....

Our challenge today is to establish a system of global governance that provides a better balance between leadership, effectiveness, and legitimacy on the one hand, and coherence on the other...

OK now we all understand you are one of the Global Corporatists.

Because either you want to oust K street from the US government or you do not. It has come down to the wire now and it is time to take sides, even if you have to stand with "Christian extremists" and "tea bagger republicans" otherwise you are standing with the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs and friends.

Originally posted by Kitilani
Let's take a look inside your corporate utopia for a moment.

President Ron Paul removes all those evil regulations on companies such as the ones preventing lead based paint in toys for toddlers and infants.

You find out your 9 year old child suffers severe mental disabilities most likely due to exposure to lead.

Who do you sue?

Sorry, never saw this question. First off its not a corporate utopia, corporations are stripped of their protections. The manufacturer of the paint of course. But again, just because government is not there to regulate doesn't mean there are no regulations when doing business. Again I point you to UL.

Originally posted by crimvelvet

Because either you want to oust K street from the US government or you do not. It has come down to the wire now and it is time to take sides, even if you have to stand with "Christian extremists" and "tea bagger republicans" otherwise you are standing with the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs and friends.

edit on 5-8-2011 by crimvelvet because: (no reason given)

How does that equation work???

I stand with neither in that I think they are butt buddies

reply to post by NuroSlam


Lol, why do you even bother? Hardcore statist can barely understand simple concepts, they will never understand something as complex as anarchism.

Originally posted by survivalstation
So you are saying when my employer offered me a choice between Blue Cross, Community Blue, Independent Health and Oxford Health Care, that I couldn't compare plans and pick what was best for me?

That is not even close to what I was saying. You show me proof that people get sick and injured only by choice and you got something. Take your straw man back.

Why does everyone need a healthcare? Only sick people go to doctors.

Tell that to the guy that just got hit by a car outside.

Historians have recently concluded a study showing that British soldiers calling the American patriots "Teabaggers" didn't work in 1776 and still isn't working in 2011.

Oh really? I would LOVE to see that time travelling story because teabags were not invented until 1908.

Oh yeah

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by NuroSlam

 

Lol, why do you even bother? Hardcore statist can barely understand simple concepts, they will never understand something as complex as anarchism.

Are you trying to call me a statist?

why don't you jump in here and I'll give your a rodgering you won't soon forget, son.

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by NuroSlam

 

Lol, why do you even bother? Hardcore statist can barely understand simple concepts, they will never understand something as complex as anarchism.

All I would like them to understand is the gun in room.

Originally posted by alpinestar
reply to post by Wetpaint72

 

I find it really hard to believe that people keep asking the op who the "we" are in this thread. Really? TPTB are brilliant. Division IS the thing that keeps us down. Right against left, black against white and so on. If you look around and think all is right with this country... then you are not "we".

I find it really hard to believe that people do not understand why there is clearly no "we." Look how everyone agrees in just this thread.

I feel some things.
I feel we do not need to blame the poor for the economy.
I feel we do not need to waste political time and power worrying about which consenting adults can marry.
I feel this is not a Christian country.
I feel that multinational corporations are a detriment to the US.

Do we all agree?
Hardly. I do not even have many friends I can hit all those points on together. So let's say we all clear out Washington. We all do agree things are bad. We all do agree things need to be fixed. So we empty the place out and...

...well then what do we do? Do we all suddenly agree on such fundamental things somehow by magic? Who do we blame for us not agreeing? Is it the TPTB fault you do not agree with me or is it their fault I do not agree with you?
It is not so simple when you give it a little thought and I do not mean just about yourself but the country we have or will have.

Originally posted by NuroSlam

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by NuroSlam

 

Lol, why do you even bother? Hardcore statist can barely understand simple concepts, they will never understand something as complex as anarchism.

All I would like them to understand is the gun in room.

All I want you to understand is the mine field abound

reply to post by Janky Red

Just saw it on cnbc.com's frontpage. S&P downgraded the US to AA+ just a little bit ago.

Ought to be an interesting weekend for pundit watching. Its becoming a sport you know....

Yeah some CEOs are actually good guys and care about people. We have to be careful to sort out the true SOBs from those who just want to make a decent living and care for their people. I have run into both types.

Originally posted by wolfwood290
We are?? Where and when did it start? How come I didn't get the memo? Or is this another 'all talk and no walk' post on a forum?

Maybe...