Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 14^th, 2024 at 12:06pm:


Your error: national constitutions are  established to institute rule of law - of necessity to avoid chaos among self-interested citizens (which we all are).

National constitutions are NOT promulgated  "voluntarily" by any or each individual of a nation, they are agreed to by chosen delegates on behalf of the citizens, in order to establish rule of law and (hopefully) serve the nation's (collective) well-being.

You CANNOT "resign" from rule of law established  under the sovereignty of the Oz nation.

Quote:


"At least"?  But you (and I) DON'T agree with the absurd concept of separate 1st nations'sovereignty within the Oz nation's sovereignty which establishes rule of law in Oz. 

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 15^th, 2024 at 12:34pm:
 


Two errors, the 2nd arising from the first:

1.  American Indians and Oz blacks were FORCED to accept the sovereignty imposed on them by the invaders.

2. Oz blacks DO receive  "welfare benefits"  from the Oz government.


Quote:


More GIGO: indeed, travellers to other countries aren't entitled to benefits from those countries; as opposed to those who claim 'sovereignty by citizenship' aka 'sovereign citizens' - who imagine they aren't subject to the sovereignty of the nation whose passport they hold -  are deluding themselves. 

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 17^th, 2024 at 8:13pm:


Brilliant video, clever acting and all.

"Sovereign citizens - living in an alternate reality...."

Do Sovereign Citizens Dream Of Artificial Votes?

Just keep in mind that the rejection of an unfair or unjust law is not an exercise in sovereign citizenship.... such an extreme can only be reached by entering into a civil war and literally enforcing the 'right' to go one's own way... we all know of laws that we refuse to abide by.... some silly law about treading on the toes of some snake if we climb our own national park mountain are not laws that are legally binding - they are silly laws - non-existent other than in the phantom realms of someone's mind... same as trannyism and Aboriginalism (Black Supremacism) ... "I feel therefore it must be or I'll prosecute you" is not a basis for a valid government..... and expecially it can never be the basis for the imposition of legalised violence on any individual or group...... (FCS keep up on 'lawfare', dorks - surely you can think for yourselves 5% of the time - I haven't got all day to hold your hands every step of the way....)

“Some failed herpetological experiment is no basis on which to form a valid argument to develop a multi-layered government by changing the Constitution!  True government comes from a mandate of the masses, willingly given and fully informed! We're a semi-autonomous, quasi-anarchic egalitarian assemblage of rules-bound free individuals who vote every three years on our elected representatives, who then sit down and natter out the best way forward, and if we disagree with them we can write to them or vote them out next time around, or even refuse to abide by their dictates under the guiding principle that 'an unjust law – (or decision or policy for that matter) – is no law - (or decision or policy for that matter) - at all'!  We don't need no Voices in our heads telling us what to do!!”

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 19^th, 2024 at 6:34am:


You mean a law which advantages a particular (minority) group at the expense of others, requiring a majority in an election to overturn the "unjust"  law.   

Quote:


A civil war to walk on Ayres Rock is a bit extreme; a political party to achieve it might be a better way to go if you are passionate enough about it.

But indeed apparently  Trudeau is preparing for the possibility of a civil war in his Southern neighbour after Nov 5th....

Quote:


I've exposed the error in that proposition  before; people ("the masses") have different opinions, and the 'experts' (supposedly fully informed)  are divided, so you won't necessarily be able to rely on an appeal to "the people" to get your way.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 19^th, 2024 at 4:15pm:


Could you? And how does that refute the points I made in #99, to which you imagined you were replying?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 20^th, 2024 at 1:30pm:


I'm well aware your intellectual (sic) blindness renders you incapable of addressing the issue of " the people" ...each of whom has his own opinion, and therefore the concept of the 'sovereign citizen' is absurd since  sovereignty can only reside in government and rule of law.   Even King John recognised that when he was forced to sign the Magna Carta back in the day. 

Do try to keep up (access your brain).   

thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 20^th, 2024 at 3:49pm:


You are confused as usual - by yourself - I say people as sovereign - in that sense each individual is sovereign .... it has nothing to do with THIS 'sovereign citizen' thing at all..... it just says that in our form of democracy the people SHOULD properly hold the power - must I refer you once more to Gilbert and Sullivan?

Even back then smart people realised the reality of power and the chicanery of politics -and how the real power in the land, rather than residing with the voting public - actually resides with those who determine who they get to vote for.... pals on the inside...

... make connections..... get elected to some tiny seat by 100 votes ..... next thing you know you are appointed First Lord Of The Admiralty without ever having set foot on a ship... we get that here with 'magistrates' and 'judges' and such as well as politicians and now top rank APPOINTED 'public servants', who are mates of parties in reality and do as they are told and want to do anyway.... same agenda.....

That's how we got Robodebt ....  that's how we get all this Aboriginal activism trouble endless ..... that's how we get all the division and poor law-making and poor court decisions over and over ... that's how we get neo-Feudalism, the belief in the divine right of elected government to do as it pleases, creeping into elected politics.... that's how we get the belief in 'judges' etc that rather than being servants of the law with obligations, they simply have absolute power (and we all know where that leads) ... and that leads us to the situation where people with the ear of government can go about creating trouble after trouble out of thin air and just keep pushing the envelopes/the boundaries, like the children they are in reality ........

I'm not the only one who sees these things clearly.... but we tend to forgive the autistic like you.... we're a kind lot, we Realists.