Here is my blog.

It is focused on Montana, guns, prepping, treehuggery and other things like that... but I do throw pro-White things in there.

http://www.fatguyinmontana.com/

I'm in the process of losing my weight, but I will probably keep the "brand name" even after... just because it is kinda catchy.

Colorado is making some strange moves these days...

Governor Hickenlooper About To Give Secret Service Power To Arrest Colorado Sheriffs (http://k99.com/governor-hickenlooper-about-to-give-secret-service-power-to-arrest-colorado-sheriffs/)
Tags:

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

There is a term for what is being talked about yet I can’t think of it. Rumor has it though that the Federal government is laying the groundwork to let the Secret Service start arresting Sheriff’s for not enforcing new gun control laws, starting with Colorado.

By the sounds of it, Colorado is being targeted with an attempt to set up loopholes that will allow the U.S. Secret Service to arrest and remove an elected sheriff for refusing to enforce the law, or anyone breaking the law. This means ALL Secret Service including uniformed division officers, physical security technicians, specialists, and other ‘special officers’.

In short they want to,
»

Permalink (http://k99.com/governor-hickenlooper-about-to-give-secret-service-power-to-arrest-colorado-sheriffs/)

Colorado is making some strange moves these days...

Governor Hickenlooper About To Give Secret Service Power To Arrest Colorado Sheriffs (http://k99.com/governor-hickenlooper-about-to-give-secret-service-power-to-arrest-colorado-sheriffs/)
Tags:

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

There is a term for what is being talked about yet I can’t think of it. Rumor has it though that the Federal government is laying the groundwork to let the Secret Service start arresting Sheriff’s for not enforcing new gun control laws, starting with Colorado.

By the sounds of it, Colorado is being targeted with an attempt to set up loopholes that will allow the U.S. Secret Service to arrest and remove an elected sheriff for refusing to enforce the law, or anyone breaking the law. This means ALL Secret Service including uniformed division officers, physical security technicians, specialists, and other ‘special officers’.

In short they want to,
»

Permalink (http://k99.com/governor-hickenlooper-about-to-give-secret-service-power-to-arrest-colorado-sheriffs/)

i'm calling bullshit on this one. the ss doesn't have jurisdiction. if this was true, it would probably say the u.s. marshal's or f.b.i.

govenor hickenlooper?

Could be, sometimes it takes a lot more digging to find out the truth on the internet...I read this about several states though,
that the Feds want to use the Secret Service to deal with Sheriffs.

Governor John Hickenlooper - Contact the Governor
www.colorado.gov › Home › Contact
Contact the Governor. Mail John W Hickenlooper, Governor 136 State Capitol ...

Here is my blog.

It is focused on Montana, guns, prepping, treehuggery and other things like that... but I do throw pro-White things in there.

http://www.fatguyinmontana.com/

I'm in the process of losing my weight, but I will probably keep the "brand name" even after... just because it is kinda catchy.

Nice looking page.

Rooting for you on the weight loss goal.

Nice looking page.

Rooting for you on the weight loss goal.

Thank you. I lost quite a bit last summer.. but got sick over the winter and regained it. Already lost what I regained in preparation for losing more over the summer.

My goal is to videotape my hikes and put them on youtube.

Thank you. I lost quite a bit last summer.. but got sick over the winter and regained it. Already lost what I regained in preparation for losing more over the summer.

My goal is to videotape my hikes and put them on youtube.

Great stuff Kelly, I am looking forward to following your journey. I've had a real health challenge this year myself and am in the process of living a more health conscious life.
Translation: I am getting older and can't get away with what I used to, lol ;)

Great stuff Kelly, I am looking forward to following your journey. I've had a real health challenge this year myself and am in the process of living a more health conscious life.
Translation: I am getting older and can't get away with what I used to, lol ;)

I hope you are feeling better. I'm glad to see another person trying to live more health conscious. I know I wish I did it sooner.

My goal is to videotape my hikes and put them on youtube.

Yeah, that's going to be the next YouTube hit...a morbidly obese clown bumbling around on a half mile "hike" down the sidewalk until he has a stroke and decides that he'd better occupy his usual three seats on the city bus instead. :lulz:

Yeah, that's going to be the next YouTube hit...a morbidly obese clown bumbling around on a half mile "hike" down the sidewalk until he has a stroke and decides that he'd better occupy his usual three seats on the city bus instead.

Ahh.. the tears of the jealous! It's like a fine wine! QQ Moar!

Ahh.. the tears of the jealous! It's like a fine wine! QQ Moar!

A fine wine? I think you're probably more accustomed to Slurpees with a side of extra large popcorn.

A fine wine? I think you're probably more accustomed to Slurpees with a side of extra large popcorn.

More tears, w00t!! :D

More tears, w00t!! :D

I'll tell you what, Smelley...I'll stop making fat jokes about you if you start a thread on Stormcunt asking for my latest account to be unbanned. I mean, if you think that fascists are so good at debating, you should have no problem with this, right? :)

I'll tell you what, Smelley...I'll stop making fat jokes about you if you start a thread on Stormcunt asking for my latest account to be unbanned. I mean, if you think that fascists are so good at debating, you should have no problem with this, right? :)

Hah! See, you proved that crying is all you live for. "Waaaaahhh, pwease unband muh account!"

Besides, I don't care if you "make fat jokes', you fucking 'tard... I named my blog Fat Guy In Montana... so why would I care if some moronic injun jokes about it?

Even the injuns down on the Flathead Res would think you are a retard. They actually care about the land.. while you are just fucking whiny.

Hah! See, you proved that crying is all you live for. "Waaaaahhh, pwease unband muh account!"

Why, are you scared?

Why have an OV section at all if opposing viewpoints are censored and their accounts banned? *shrug*

Why, are you scared?

Why have an OV section at all if opposing viewpoints are censored and their accounts banned? *shrug*

Look at how you post. Of course you would be banned... you are a jackass.

In fact, I have no idea why you are asking me to get you reinstated... I am only a facilitator... not a mod. But even if I were, the way you talk to people is enough for me to say no.

Look at how you post. Of course you would be banned... you are a jackass.

In fact, I have no idea why you are asking me to get you reinstated... I am only a facilitator... not a mod. But even if I were, the way you talk to people is enough for me to say no.

This forum has no rules that govern civility, more or less. People choose to insult me, and I choose to respond in kind. Since there are rules against abusive language on SF, I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem.

I was banned for posting the same picture of me with the pistol that I posted here, though there are many threads full of pictures of personally owned guns on the forum.

This forum has no rules that govern civility, more or less. People choose to insult me, and I choose to respond in kind. Since there are rules against abusive language on SF, I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem.

I was banned for posting the same picture of me with the pistol that I posted here, though there are many threads full of pictures of personally owned guns on the forum.

I'm sure there were other reason. I don't have access to user notes though.

Here is my blog.

It is focused on Montana, guns, prepping, treehuggery and other things like that... but I do throw pro-White things in there.

http://www.fatguyinmontana.com/

I'm in the process of losing my weight, but I will probably keep the "brand name" even after... just because it is kinda catchy.

Liking it, Brother. Congrats on the blog. *bookmarked*

http://www.strangehistory.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/champagne-toast.jpg

I followed your cross country trek to the NW through SF posts and still admire you for it. ;)

I'm sure there were other reason. I don't have access to user notes though.

http://imageshack.us/a/img202/4449/sfphoto.png

Stormfront is more about discussion of things and issues, than debate. More listening than talking. Not sure your skin would stay on your body in such circumstances, N.M.....

With a bit of behavior modification therapy, I think you'd make a fine SF member, Mr. Valdez. I'll be happy to put in a good word for you at the office.

Stormfront is more about discussion of things and issues, than debate. More listening than talking. Not sure your skin would stay on your body in such circumstances, N.M.....

I'm not interested in the fascist-only sections of the forum; I want to post in the OV section and decimate the fascists who haughtily believe that no antis can debate them.

With a bit of behavior modification therapy, I think you'd make a fine SF member, Mr. Valdez. I'll be happy to put in a good word for you at the office.

Kelley AKA Mjodr is a member in good standing. I'm not sure the same can be said for you.

...

Obviously that was the last issue for that mod. But that isn't to say you don't have user notes a mile long. You may annoy me, but you are not my most hated jackass around...

That said.. I don't have the pull to get you reinstated even if I wanted to. Sorry, I know it may seem that way... but I don't. I've tried to get people reinstated before... never happens.

I'm not interested in the fascist-only sections of the forum; I want to post in the OV section and decimate the fascists who haughtily believe that no antis can debate them.

Kelley AKA Mjodr is a member in good standing. I'm not sure the same can be said for you.

Not doing too bad, N.M...considering I lost 20,000+ posts and 5,000+ rep points a few years back.

Mini Statistics

Join Date
06-08-2011
Total Posts
4,512
Blog Entries
0
1014 point(s) total

Still, SF isn't about 'descimating' others, it's about discussing things, way more than debating and trying to prove others wrong. Until you si compende that amigo, you'd not last long.

Liking it, Brother. Congrats on the blog. *bookmarked*


I followed your cross country trek to the NW through SF posts and still admire you for it. ;)

Thank you. :) No alcohol though.. I am back on my diet.. so alcohol is a no no. I even used the last of my mead to make a yummy honey sauce (I also used Gaede Swastika-brand Cracked Pepper Honey in it) for baked chicken.

Obviously that was the last issue for that mod. But that isn't to say you don't have user notes a mile long. You may annoy me, but you are not my most hated jackass around...

Nope. No prior "infractions" or temp bans or anything at all preceding the permanent ban without any kind of warning. The mods will cling to the flimsiest of excuses to ban anti-fascists that are debating a little too effectively.

That said.. I don't have the pull to get you reinstated even if I wanted to. Sorry, I know it may seem that way... but I don't. I've tried to get people reinstated before... never happens.

Maybe not, but you could post a thread in the "Questions about this Board" forum asking why the ban was imposed, and what sort of so-called "opposing views" section bans those with opposing views. With you, Armstrong, and the other person I'm asking to post a thread all posting, that may put some pressure, especially on Jack Boot.

Still, SF isn't about 'descimating' others, it's about discussing things, way more than debating and trying to prove others wrong. Until you si compende that amigo, you'd not last long.

You don't seem to understand the purpose of the Opposing Viewpoints forum.

Its "For all our opponents who want to argue with White Nationalists."

With you, Armstrong, and the other person I'm asking to post a thread all posting, that may put some pressure, especially on Jack Boot.

Another thing you might want to understand is Boot doesn't do well with 'pressure'. It's kinda like this:

David Bowie - Under Pressure (MSG) - YouTube

Nope. No prior "infractions" or temp bans or anything at all preceding the permanent ban without any kind of warning. The mods will cling to the flimsiest of excuses to ban anti-fascists that are debating a little too effectively.

Maybe not, but you could post a thread in the "Questions about this Board" forum asking why the ban was imposed, and what sort of so-called "opposing views" section bans those with opposing views. With you, Armstrong, and the other person I'm asking to post a thread all posting, that may put some pressure, especially on Jack Boot.

You wouldn't get notified of usernotes... such as if a senior mod wrote "This guy gets one chance, if he screws up... ban him." You'd never know.

But of course antis don't always get a warning. There were several I was on friendly terms that have been banned over the years. There are also those I am on friendly terms with that are still there, and send me a rep point every once in a while... like Darksider and Benjamin_Noob.

I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to you.. so I can't say what the full reason you were banned for.

But I can tell you Jack Boot would never be under pressure to reinstate anyone. SF is not a democracy. The best you can do is send an email and ask.

that may put some pressure, especially on Jack Boot.

Are you serious???

LMFAO!

:rofl

If it means you would spend less time heer, I will call Lycia, Kayden, and Boot tomorrow and beg them to take you back. Hell, I'll buy you a Sustaining Membership!

:rofl

If it means you would spend less time heer, I will call Lycia, Kayden, and Boot tomorrow and beg them to take you back. Hell, I'll send them money!

You and Angel should use a circumventor and SLOWLY build a new account....nothing controversial, but the more the merrier. Fly light, and gentle, if ya can.

you and angel should use a circumventor and slowly build a new account....nothing controversial, but the more the merrier. Fly light, and gentle, if ya can.
Stormfront isn't that bad. Yes it's a fucktardary but what isn't.

You and Angel should use a circumventor and SLOWLY build a new account....nothing controversial, but the more the merrier.

Fuck Stormfront.

We were given "the boot", and we didn't let the door hit our asses on the way out.

I have no desire to be there. Hell, I let my "troll" account there die off, and SM expire. Just don't give two shits about that place anymore. What was funny was all the reps that I got from people that actually hate and despise the "real" me while I trolled it for a few months. I trolled as a "love everybody, accept everybody, big tent" persona - and was widely accepted. :rofl

Now think back to our conversation the past few days, and ask yourself if the real me should be there or not.

No thank you.

You don't seem to understand the purpose of the Opposing Viewpoints forum.

Its "For all our opponents who want to argue with White Nationalists."


I've noticed that myself, and think it's poorly worded everytime I see it. Perhaps 'Discuss issues with White Nationalists' would be better.



Fuck Stormfront.

We were given "the boot", and we didn't let the door hit our asses on the way out.

I have no desire to be there. Hell, I let my "troll" account there die off, and SM expire. Just don't give two shits about that place anymore. What was funny was all the reps that I got from people that actually hate and despise the "real" me while I trolled it for a few months. I trolled as a "love everybody, accept everybody, big tent" persona - and was widely accepted. :rofl

Now think back to our conversation the past few days, and ask yourself if the real me should be there or not.

No thank you.

Framed in those parameters, perhaps not then. Just a thought. My thinking is the more message boards we can put a particular message on, the better. The more communications channels we have, the better.

I don't usually discuss the same issues on all the forums I'm on, but I have the potential to reach more numbers with more forum memberships.

And I do enjoy some of the people there. So why not. Different forums have different feels to them. Different forums for different moods.

Different forums for different moods.

I have one mood. Pissed off.

Being principled, exclusive as opposed to inclusive, doesn't fly on SF. After all, Lord Tinsdale (aka MoJoe the wagon burner Lifetime Member) is exactly the type of "WN" that Don Black is looking for.

No-fucking-thank-you.

I have one mood. Pissed off.

Being principled, exclusive as opposed to inclusive, doesn't fly on SF. After all, Lord Tinsdale (aka MoJoe the wagon burner Lifetime Member) is exactly the type of "WN" that Don Black is looking for.

No-fucking-thank-you.

So that's who the Indian is...I didn't realize that. Thanks!!

Damn man, that's like only having one song on the jukebox.....Pissed off I can get, but I don't live there. Has it made things better for you and your family?

You wouldn't get notified of usernotes... such as if a senior mod wrote "This guy gets one chance, if he screws up... ban him." You'd never know.

That just reinforces my point. Actual violations of the rules generally are cause for infractions or temp bans on most discussion forums.

But of course antis don't always get a warning.

Of course not. There's interest in eliminating capable opponents from the "OV forum" as rapidly as possible.

I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to you.. so I can't say what the full reason you were banned for.

I just screenshotted it for you. There was no other reason.

But I can tell you Jack Boot would never be under pressure to reinstate anyone. SF is not a democracy. The best you can do is send an email and ask.

They would simply ignore an email, obviously. A thread clearly showing the hypocrisy of the ban cannot be ignored. I already posted one myself, but of course it was not approved, which is why I need an established member with an unmoderated account to post it.

Are you serious???

LMFAO!

Jack Boot has let me post in the open forums completely unmoderated before. I laid waste to my opponents and logged in the next morning to find my account disabled.

Jack Boot has let me post in the open forums completely unmoderated before. I laid waste to my opponents and logged in the next morning to find my account disabled.

I am unsure of your point.
Did he let you post in the open forums because he was pressured into it?

So that's who the Indian is...I didn't realize that. Thanks!!

Damn man, that's like only having one song on the jukebox.....Pissed off I can get, but I don't live there. Has it made things better for you and your family?

Actually, yes it has. Directed anger/indignation is a healthy thing. Directed.

We have educated our children (age appropriate lessons) on the way of the multi-culti world we live in. We are preparing them for the bias of the world in which we exist. The older ones are Jew-wise, while the younger ones are understanding the symptoms of jewish infestation only.

Anger is a powerful emotion, and when used and focused, is a formidable thing that will last for generations.

If only more would educate their children in such, we wouldn't have the white miscegenation problems we face today. Not brainwashing, not teaching blind hatred, actual understanding of the problems they face on a daily basis, and the root causes of such.

Too many parents have failed in educating their children.

I am unsure of your point.
Did he let you post in the open forums because he was pressured into it?

Yes, pressured by me. I pointed out the hypocrisy of fascists trying to disparage my ethnic group as unintelligent while being afraid to let me debate them without restriction.

That sounds more like an 'appeal to reason' than pressure.

Yes, pressured by me. I pointed out the hypocrisy of fascists trying to disparage my ethnic group as unintelligent while being afraid to let me debate them without restriction.

Alright, Valdez. I will respond to you on this one.

For the record, I don't consider all beaners "unintelligent". Hell, I don't even consider them unintelligent in general. That is not my issue with beaners, and never has been.

In fact, I actually respect the work ethic (as a whole) your people have (traditionally) as well as family values (traditionally). I will say that the younger generations of beaners are shitheads, but no more so than the younger generation of whites, niggers, or chinks.

Multi-culturalism is bad for ALL the races, as it erases racial identity and heritage. Unfortunately, the younger generations have bought into the lie to the detriment of all.

Fuck jews, and their lies.

I just wish that you would admit it, for in there, we could actually find common ground.

Alright, Valdez. I will respond to you on this one.

Stupid hillbilly, no one is talking to you, least of all me, after your attempts to act as a government informant. *shrug*

Oh well, not everyone is principled. Oh well.

*shrug*

Oh well, not everyone is principled. Oh well.

You're the least principled, snitch, trying to inform on members by reporting lies to military authorities. You're a government informant who tries to silence opponents through false reporting. You're not just a fascist, but a hypocritical fascist.

Yes, pressured by me. I pointed out the hypocrisy of fascists trying to disparage my ethnic group as unintelligent while being afraid to let me debate them without restriction.

Not once have I ever considered injuns as a whole unintelligent. Certain groups are dumb as doornails... but in general I get along with injuns. My landlord was born down on the Flathead Res... and he knows my politics. I also go down there occasionally. The road that the PLE will be adopting is on the Res.

You really do get pretty paranoid.

Yes, pressured by me. I pointed out the hypocrisy of fascists trying to disparage my ethnic group as unintelligent while being afraid to let me debate them without restriction.

You most likely presented a reasonable position, because I know damn well there is no way you could pressure Jack Boot into anything.

I consider him a friend of mine, have made no bones about it here and there are very few in that category in WNist circles.

Considering the opinions of SF on this forum, surely no one will misconstrue my statement as name dropping by any stretch of the imagination.

Not once have I ever considered injuns as a whole unintelligent.

I'm flattered.

However, your fellow fascists repeatedly emphasize the unintelligence of Mexican and Central American immigrants as well as U.S. Indians.

You're the least principled, snitch, trying to inform on members by reporting lies to military authorities. You're a government informant who tries to silence opponents through false reporting. You're not just a fascist, but a hypocritical fascist.

Sounds like a serious accusation. Do you have proof that I'm on the Government's payroll, or a snitch for the Government?

You may want to re-word or edit that, shitskin.

Sounds like a serious accusation. Do you have proof that I'm on the Government's payroll, or a snitch for the Government?

You may want to re-word or edit that, shitskin.

We have proof in your own words that you tried to snitch on me to government authorities, falsely reporting me as a racist posting on VNN Forum...government informant.

My, my, my....What an interesting conversation my husband had with a JAG officer in Hawaii today. Merry Christmas, "Valdez".

He's a prosecutor in the legal department. He cut our conversation off, as he informed me that discussing anything further, or in more detail, he would be duty bound to launch a criminal investigation for violations of Article 134 of the UCMJ.

We have proof in your own words that you tried to snitch on me to government authorities, falsely reporting me as a racist posting on VNN Forum...government informant.


Prove it.

I never used your name, your user name, your avatar, your signature block, your ethnicity, your race, or any of the specific things that you have said.

Merely inquiring if a member of the USMC posting as a full member of an officially designated "Hate" site (by the SPLC and ADL) would be against the UCMJ, Article 134, is NOT snitching *you* out in any way, shape, or form.

Get your facts straight, private. You just made a serious accusation against me, based on your own lies and/or misconception of what actually transpired.

Retract or prove that I informed the USMC of "N.M. Valdez" posting on VNNF, and was somehow compensated by the "Government" for my actions as a snitch and/or informant.

Prove it.

I never used your name, your user name, your avatar, your signature block, your ethnicity, your race, or any of the specific things that you have said.

Merely inquiring if a member of the USMC posting as a full member of an officially designated "Hate" site (by the SPLC and ADL) would be against the UCMJ, Article 134, is NOT snitching *you* out in any way, shape, or form.

Get your facts straight, private. You just made a serious accusation against me, based on your own lies and/or misconception of what actually transpired.

I'm going by what's been said in this post. Of course, if Anal Rammer is lying, feel free to let us know.

Let me explain how this works. My husband called your JAG. Captain Robinson was who he told about his nephew having these racist views.

Captain Robinson told my husband to stop, or he would be duty bound to prosecute.

You are not invisible. You have put yourself out. It's your own doing. Keep pushing. How does Leavenworth sound?

This phone call to government authorities and lie about a "nephew having these racist views" is the act of informing that I referred to.

The reference to "Leavenworth" is an insinuation that I will be incarcerated in a federal prison as a result of this snitching.

Retract or prove that I informed the USMC of "N.M. Valdez" posting on VNNF, and was somehow compensated by the "Government" for my actions as a snitch and/or informant.

Who said that an informant has to be compensated by the government to be an informant? *shrug*

I'm flattered.

However, your fellow fascists repeatedly emphasize the unintelligence of Mexican and Central American immigrants as well as U.S. Indians.

I'm libertarian, not fascist. /facepalm

I'm libertarian, not fascist. /facepalm

:rofl :rofl :rofl

Oh, wow. No, while libertarianism is European in origin, that's where the similarities with fascism end. Libertarians were originally anarchist radicals in the nineteenth century, with the word "libertarian" first recorded as being used in a political context by the French anarchist Joseph Dejacque.

You couldn't be any closer to authoritarian. And regardless of whatever kind of label you want to use, you're dodging the question of why you won't post a thread about me being unbanned.

I'm going by what's been said in this post. Of course, if Anal Rammer is lying, feel free to let us know.



This phone call to government authorities and lie about a "nephew having these racist views" is the act of informing that I referred to.

The reference to "Leavenworth" is an insinuation that I will be incarcerated in a federal prison as a result of this snitching.



Who said that an informant has to be compensated by the government to be an informant? *shrug*

And once again, I never "snitched" or "informed" about you in any way, shape, or form, and your quote proves it.

I posed a theoretical (on my part) situation to a JAG officer. The result was, "Stop talking or I will have to investigate" for violations of the UCMJ.

How is that "snitching" or "informing" the government on *you* in any way, shape, or form, shitskin?

Answer: It isn't.

You have made a completely inflammatory and untrue allegation against me, and I want you to retract it by editing your posts.

I never informed anything, merely inquired about the legality under your governing law (UCMJ) for a completely fictional member of the UCMJ, without EVER implicating you in any way, shape, or form.

In other words, I asked a question, and got an answer straight from the horses mouth. Consider it a "Wiki" answer from the subject matter experts. You don't like that answer.....fuck off, not my problem.

You have made a completely inflammatory and untrue allegation against me, and I want you to retract it by editing your posts.

Nigga, I ain't retracting shit.

If I called up the FBI and asked a "hypothetical" question about a member of VNN Forum's plot to firebomb a Jewish synagogue, I wouldn't squeal with anger and demand a retraction if someone called me a government informant.

:rofl :rofl :rofl

Oh, wow. No, while libertarianism is European in origin, that's where the similarities with fascism end. Libertarians were originally anarchist radicals in the nineteenth century, with the word "libertarian" first recorded as being used in a political context by the French anarchist Joseph Dejacque.

You couldn't be any closer to authoritarian. And regardless of whatever kind of label you want to use, you're dodging the question of why you won't post a thread about me being unbanned.

Right...I'm so authoritarian that I don't want the government to get involved in anything at all.

You do realize that that is as far from authoritarian as you can get...

You want me to try to get you reinstated at SF, then you go and say nonsensical stuff like that. /facepalm

Nigga, I ain't retracting shit.

If I called up the FBI and asked a "hypothetical" question about a member of VNN Forum's plot to firebomb a Jewish synagogue, I wouldn't squeal with anger and demand a retraction if someone called me a government informant.

I never mentioned "VNN", you user name, or ANYTHING about *you* specifically or even indirectly. Can you prove that I did?

Answer: NO

You have made an accusation that I am a Government Snitch and a Government Informant.

Prove it, or retract it.

Thus far, you haven't proved jack shit. *edit* beyond me inquiring about the legalities of a member of the USMC posting on an officially designated "hate" site (per SPLC and ADL) as a full member - and if that was against Article 134 of the UCMJ.

If anything, you should be banned from this site, because what you are doing is actually ILLEGAL and breaking the laws that you are governed by.

Right...I'm so authoritarian that I don't want the government to get involved in anything at all.

You do realize that that is as far from authoritarian as you can get...

You want me to try to get you reinstated at SF, then you go and say nonsensical stuff like that. /facepalm

Organized government isn't the only source of authoritarianism under capitalism; capitalists themselves act as independent sources of hierarchical authority.

I think the problem with asking you to advocate the reinstatement is your idea that opposing viewpoints should be casually dismissed with "facepalms" rather than debated. *shrug*

Organized government isn't the only source of authoritarianism under capitalism; capitalists themselves act as independent sources of hierarchical authority.

I think the problem with asking you to advocate the reinstatement is your idea that opposing viewpoints should be casually dismissed with "facepalms" rather than debated. *shrug*

It's a facepalm because what you are doing is not debating, but simply making retarded statements. It's pretty hard to debate a person that has no clue what they are talking about.

I vote libertarian. I am registered libertarian. It doesn't matter what you think I am. I'm libertarian.

As for capitalism... I am no more capitalist than any other artisan. So unless you are going to walk into the artisan district of Seattle or Portland and call all of the liberals fascist... you might want to get a new thought into your head.

Hel, you are more authoritarian than I am.

There are many Pro-White American 'Libertarians' on the internet, Valdez.

Linder is one of them IMO. Have you listened to his latest 3-4 interviews?

Your 'Smash the Fash' gains absolutely no yardage with us.

Nunya!

I never mentioned "VNN", you user name, or ANYTHING about *you* specifically or even indirectly. Can you prove that I did?

Answer: NO

You have made an accusation that I am a Government Snitch and a Government Informant.

Prove it, or retract it.

Thus far, you haven't proved jack shit. *edit* beyond me inquiring about the legalities of a member of the USMC posting on an officially designated "hate" site (per SPLC and ADL) as a full member - and if that was against Article 134 of the UCMJ.

If anything, you should be banned from this site, because what you are doing is actually ILLEGAL and breaking the laws that you are governed by.

Well, let's review some of your posts on this topic. You allege that I am violating the UCMJ here, and should be prosecuted for this.

LOL, no lawsuit, just a friendly reminder to a supposed marine about his obligations and limitations under Article 134 of the UCMJ. One that he completely ignores because he thinks he is smarter than the people that wrote the laws that govern him. Restrictive laws that he freely volunteered, through his supposed enlistment, to adhere to. Of course, if he actually isn't a Marine, then he really has nothing to worry about. Either way, meh, he's in violation of the UCMJ, period, and could (and should be) prosecuted for such.

You imply that I could be reported to my command if someone had my command information for this alleged violation of the UCMJ.

He's a bitch ass punk who acts all tough, but when push comes to shove, he knows he is in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. That is why he's too much of a pussy to post his command information.

You say that reporting my comments on VNN Forum to the Attorney General could result in me being dishonorably discharged.

All it would take would be a few pissed off Whites, copy, clip, paste some of your rants - even if they are out of context, and publish them in the editorial section of local newspapers - then send those newspapers off to the AG. Bye-Bye, Tonto, enjoy the Dishonorable Discharge.

You then publicize your government informant activities, which include conversations with military legal officers, while Anal Rammer insinuates that I could be incarcerated in a federal prison as a result of this snitching.

Unless you have a recording of your phone conversation, there's no way to verify its contents, but after your allegation that I am committing a crime for which I should be prosecuted, your allegation that reporting this to the government could result in my dishonorable discharge, and your description of your phone calls to government authorities regarding that topic, it's quite accurate to describe you as the government informant that you are, snitch.

You most likely presented a reasonable position, because I know damn well there is no way you could pressure Jack Boot into anything.

I consider him a friend of mine, have made no bones about it here and there are very few in that category in WNist circles.

If my position is reasonable and he's a friend of yours, why don't you ask him to unban me and grant me the same unmoderated status on the open forums?

The fascists can chat away to their hearts' content on their "white" section of the forum; I just want to post in opposing viewpoints without having to wait three days for a post to appear, if it ever does.

It's a facepalm because what you are doing is not debating, but simply making retarded statements. It's pretty hard to debate a person that has no clue what they are talking about.

You've done nothing to refute anything I've said about your pseudo-libertarianism. But that doesn't matter to me. I'm more interested in why you simply ignored my proof about the hypocrisy of my ban.

I vote libertarian. I am registered libertarian. It doesn't matter what you think I am. I'm libertarian.

The Libertarian Party might call itself "libertarian," but as with the "Democratic People's Republic" of Korea, is anything but that.

As for capitalism... I am no more capitalist than any other artisan. So unless you are going to walk into the artisan district of Seattle or Portland and call all of the liberals fascist... you might want to get a new thought into your head.

I never said that you were a capitalist. I said that government is not the only source of hierarchical authority.

There are many Pro-White American 'Libertarians' on the internet, Valdez.

Pseudo-libertarians, you mean (http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/The_Anarchist_FAQ_Editorial_Collective__An_Anarchist_FAQ__07_17_.html).

blah, blah, blah

Nowhere can you prove that I ever mentioned *you*, your username, or ANY detail about *you*. In fact, YOU have proven that I posed a theoretical discussion, about a person who is not you with a JAG officer to find out if in fact, posting on an officially designated "hate" site (by the SPLC and ADL) would be a violation under Article 134 of the UCMJ. I never mentioned VNN, your username, or any other information about you or this site, directly or indirectly, in any way shape or form.

As a service member of the USMC, you are breaking the laws that govern you by being a member and posting here. All I did was research the LAW that governs you, nothing else. As there is no information in print (such as a Wiki entry or peer reviewed study), I had to go to where I could get an answer, the USMC Judge Advocate General's office.

This is in NO way being a government "snitch" or "informant" as I did not tell on anybody, or inform the government of any specific person's actions or where those actions (specifically) are taking place.

You have made a libelous accusation against me, without factual basis, and IMO, are in violation of the rules of this forum for doing so. (not to mention, once again, breaking the LAWS that you are subject to under the UCMJ).

You accused me of being a Government Snitch and a Government Informant.

Prove it.

Who did I snitch on? Who did I inform the government on? How is asking a simple legal question being a "snitch" or an "informant"?

Answer:

It isn't.

Who did I snitch on? Who did I inform the government on? How is asking a simple legal question being a "snitch" or an "informant"?

Who can say? We don't know the details of your conversation. We just know that you were conversing with a government official after making remarks that I was breaking the law, should be prosecuted for breaking the law, and would be dishonorably discharged if I was reported to the Attorney General.

We have Anal Rammer's description of your informing and insinuation that I would be incarcerated in a federal prison.

In that context, I choose to refer to you as the government informant that you are.

If my position is reasonable I said your position must have been reasonable to have ever been granted access to the main forum.

and he's a friend of yours, why don't you ask him to unban me and grant me the same unmoderated status on the open forums?

Because I consider him a friend I don't interfere with his job, especially for someone who has implied he caves under pressure. I may ask out of curiosity but I certainly do not suggest what he needs do.
That's why we remain friends. Must be a White thing.

The fascists can chat away to their hearts' content on their "white" section of the forum; I just want to post in opposing viewpoints without having to wait three days for a post to appear, if it ever does.

We aren't all fascists.

Who can say? We don't know the details of your conversation. We just know that you were conversing with a government official after making remarks that I was breaking the law, should be prosecuted for breaking the law, and would be dishonorably discharged if I was reported to the Attorney General.

We have Anal Rammer's description of your informing and insinuation that I would be incarcerated in a federal prison.

In that context, I choose to refer to you as the government informant that you are.

So, you are making a serious allegation, without proof to support that allegation, as you admit that you don't know. What you do know, as you have quoted, is that your name was never mentioned, and in fact, the conversation was about a fictional relative of ours, and based purely on the legality of the below.

Regardless, a member of the USMC posting as a member on an officially designated "hate" site (by the SPLC and ADL) is, in fact, punishable under Article 134 of the UCMJ (which you are subject to), and that punishment can carry a sentence that includes incarceration and dishonorable discharge.

Don't blame me, or the Mrs, for merely attempting to educate you on the LAWS and penalties that you are subject to.

I don't care what you prefer or want to call me, as long as it is within the boundaries and guidelines for posting on this forum.

You have made a serious allegation towards me, calling me, specifically, a "Government Snitch" and a "Government Informant".

You have failed, thus far, to provide ANY proof to back up your allegations, and once again, IMO, are violating the rules of this forum (not to mention the LAW that governs you, Article 134 of the UCMJ).

Prove that I "snitched" on anyone or "informed the government" on anyone's actions.

Results:

You can't.

What you do know, as you have quoted, is that your name was never mentioned, and in fact, the conversation was about a fictional relative of ours, and based purely on the legality of the below.

I don't "know" that my name was never mentioned at all. I just know that you claim that, but given the context provided by your other quotes, which all directly state or imply that I'm breaking the law, should be prosecuted, could be dishonorably discharged, and that you've spoken to government officials about this, and Anal Rammer's insinuation that I could be incarcerated in a federal prison, I simply identify you for the rat that you are.

You've done nothing to refute anything I've said about your pseudo-libertarianism. But that doesn't matter to me. I'm more interested in why you simply ignored my proof about the hypocrisy of my ban.

The Libertarian Party might call itself "libertarian," but as with the "Democratic People's Republic" of Korea, is anything but that.


So you admit to not understanding what libertarianism is.

I never said that you were a capitalist. I said that government is not the only source of hierarchical authority.

/facepalm

I don't believe in any hierarchical authority, nitwit. If people leave me alone, I don't care what they do.

For example, Valdez.. if you want to bang that chicken.. more power to you. I don't care.

I said your position must have been reasonable to have ever been granted access to the main forum.

And it hasn't changed.

Because I consider him a friend I don't interfere with his job, especially for someone who has implied he caves under pressure.

Posting a thread asking a question isn't interfering with anyone's job. They can choose what they want to do. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the ban and the reason that it should be reversed.

I cannot post this myself because I don't have an unmoderated account, so I need someone who does to post it for me. If rae kiley AKA momofthree was here, I would ask her to do it.

So you admit to not understanding what libertarianism is.

I suspect that my understanding of libertarianism is far superior to your own, inasmuch as its rooted in the actual historical traditions of the term.

I don't believe in any hierarchical authority, nitwit.

The Scumfront administrative structure is a form of hierarchical authority. Since you don't believe in it, you can post a thread advocating that my ban be removed.

I suspect that my understanding of libertarianism is far superior to your own, inasmuch as its rooted in the actual historical traditions of the term.

The Scumfront administrative structure is a form of hierarchical authority. Since you don't believe in it, you can post a thread advocating that my ban be removed.

If you think libertarians aren't libertarian.. then no.. you don't. Libertarians are not all the same... just as there are different statists. Just as you can have many different kinds of moderates.

I always COULD post a thread to do so. But I WILL NOT. Simply because I DON'T CARE enough to. You also haven't given me a real reason to do so.

If you think libertarians aren't libertarian.. then no.. you don't. Libertarians are not all the same... just as there are different statists. Just as you can have many different kinds of moderates.

I think that actual libertarians, along the lines of Noam Chomsky, are real libertarians. Pseudo-libertarians, along the lines of Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul, are not.

I always COULD post a thread to do so. But I WILL NOT. Simply because I DON'T CARE enough to. You also haven't given me a real reason to do so.

A real libertarian would have a greater interest in freedom of speech and expression, I would think. Are the white supremacists in the OV section afraid of debating me without me being moderated?

I think that actual libertarians, along the lines of Noam Chomsky, are real libertarians. Pseudo-libertarians, along the lines of Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul, are not.

A real libertarian would have a greater interest in freedom of speech and expression, I would think. Are the white supremacists in the OV section afraid of debating me without me being moderated?

Again, not all libertarians are the exact same. It is not a monolithic group. that would defeat the purpose of liberty. /facepalm

While I believe in freedom of speech and expression... I have nothing to do with who gets banned... nor do I think a private website needs to allow every Floating-With-Fish, Chicken-Fucker & Poops-On-Floors to post.

Being a libertarian doesn't counteract the belief that private groups are private.

If a statist went to a libertarian meeting to spout his statist nonsense, do you think it would be allowed? no.

N.M, you are OWNED by the US Government if you're a Marine....you're there to enforce the laws of this Nation and the flag for which it stands, defending it against all enemies, both foreign an domestic. And you call someone a snitch for perhaps implying you could get in trouble for posting here?

:rofl

Again, not all libertarians are the exact same. It is not a monolithic group. that would defeat the purpose of liberty.

Not at all. However, Rothbard, Paul, and that camp are not libertarians.

While I believe in freedom of speech and expression... I have nothing to do with who gets banned... nor do I think a private website needs to allow every Floating-With-Fish, Chicken-Fucker & Poops-On-Floors to post.

Being a libertarian doesn't counteract the belief that private groups are private.

Libertarians don't believe in private property, i.e. private ownership of the means of production. A forum can be private, although it's more a matter of being disingenuous and claiming to allow the free expression of opposing viewpoints when for all intents and purposes this is not true.

If a statist went to a libertarian meeting to spout his statist nonsense, do you think it would be allowed? no.

Wouldn't it? Couldn't he be debated with, or would he simply be expelled?

When I was in, I once went to a John Birch meeting. The Captain knew I'd been to it before I got back to the ship.

And I was told to never go to such a thing again.

When I was in, I once went to a John Birch meeting. The Captain knew I'd been to it before I got back to the ship.

And I was told to never go to such a thing again.

Prohibiting someone from merely attending political meetings is in many cases illegal.

Prohibiting someone from merely attending political meetings is in many cases illegal.

No it isn't. :rofl

Libertarians don't believe in private property, i.e. private ownership of the means of production. A forum can be private, although it's more a matter of being disingenuous and claiming to allow the free expression of opposing viewpoints when for all intents and purposes this is not true.


Of course libertarians believe in private property. :rofl It is not a communistic (as in commune, not communist) philosophy.

SF doesn't claim to allow ALL opposing viewpoints. Nor does it claim to allow all freedom of expression.


Wouldn't it? Couldn't he be debated with, or would he simply be expelled?Generally if all someone is there to do is argue, it interferes with everyone that is there to discuss.

It has nothing to do with CAN he be debated... it all has to do with a private entity does not legally have to allow the debate in the first place.

Having a meeting of a group of people that exist just to plant trees is very nice... when a person shows up that wants to argue and annoy because he wants to cut all the trees down.. not so much.

Just because YOU want to argue, that doesn't mean we all want to argue with you.

Honestly, Valdez... I couldn't care less what your beliefs are... arguing with you would be a waste of time.. because I simply wouldn't care.

That's why I rarely post in OV anymore. I'm at the point now that if a retard wants to believe something stupid... let them.

Of course libertarians believe in private property. It is not a communistic (as in commune, not communist) philosophy.

Yes, it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_D%C3%A9jacque

"Joseph Déjacque (December 27, 1821, Paris – 1864, Paris) was a French early anarcho-communist poet and writer. Déjacque was the first recorded person to employ the term libertarian (French: libertaire) for himself."

This is the original and authentic form of libertarianism, libertarian socialism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

SF doesn't claim to allow ALL opposing viewpoints. Nor does it claim to allow freedom of expression.

So which opposing viewpoints are disallowed? Those that cut too close to the bone, that white supremacists cannot refute?

Generally if all someone is there to do is argue, it interferes with everyone that is there to discuss.

Then why is the tagline of the OV forum, "For all our opponents who want to argue with White Nationalists"?

Yes, it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_D%C3%A9jacque

"Joseph Déjacque (December 27, 1821, Paris – 1864, Paris) was a French early anarcho-communist poet and writer. Déjacque was the first recorded person to employ the term libertarian (French: libertaire) for himself."

This is the original and authentic form of libertarianism, libertarian socialism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism


Again, you are making me /facepalm.

Valdez... not all libertarians believe the exact same thing. It is NOT a single ideology.

And that guy called himself a libertarian, but he was anarcho-communist. He is a libertarian socialist.... just as your link states. (sometimes called social anarchism[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-Ostergaard_1991._p._21-1)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-Noam_Chomsky_2004.2C_p._739-2) or left-libertarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism)) Didn't you even pay attention to your own link?

Political philosophies commonly described as libertarian socialist include most varieties of anarchism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism) (especially anarchist communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism), anarchist collectivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivist_anarchism), anarcho-syndicalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism),[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-20) and mutualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_%28economic_theory%29)[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-21)) as well as autonomism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomism), Communalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communalism_%28Political_Philosophy%29), participism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participism), libertarian Marxist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Marxist) philosophies such as council communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_communism) and Luxemburgism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxemburgism),[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-Graham-2005-22) and some versions of "utopian socialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopian_socialism)"[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-23) and individualist anarchism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualist_anarchism).[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-24)[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-25)[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism#cite_note-26)

I, and many others, are libertarian nationalists... as well as other kinds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-libertarianism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_conservatism


So which opposing viewpoints are disallowed?


Any. They could decide they don't like your username.

It is not a free speech zone.


Then why is the tagline of the OV forum, "For all our opponents who want to argue with White Nationalists"?

Really? You take ALL OUR that literally? I thought you were smarter than that.

That tagline does not make it mandatory that they allow you to post. It is not a promise. :rofl

These are all forms of libertarianism, Valdez...




Agorism
Anarchism




Anarchist communism
Autarchism
Christian libertarianism
Consequentialist libertarianism
Free-market anarchism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-market_anarchism)


Fusionism
Geolibertarianism




Green libertarianism
Individualist anarchism
Left-libertarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism)
Libertarian Marxism
Libertarian socialism


Minarchism
Mutualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_%28economic_theory%29)




Natural-rights libertarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-rights_libertarianism)
Paleolibertarianism
Panarchism
Right-libertarianism
Social anarchism
Voluntaryism

Libertarian socialists don't believe that any so-called form of libertarianism that supports capitalism is authentic. Similarly, most rightist pseudo-libertarians claim that libertarian socialism is inauthentic.

Really? You take ALL OUR that literally? I thought you were smarter than that.

LOL! It says "all our opponents who want to argue with white nationalists," not just "all our opponents."

That tagline does not make it mandatory that they allow you to post. It is not a promise.

This is a strawman fallacy; that's not what I said. You claimed, "if all someone is there to do is argue, it interferes with everyone that is there to discuss." Since the foundation of the OV forum is opponents arguing with white supremacists, this doesn't seem true.

Libertarian socialists don't believe that any so-called form of libertarianism that supports capitalism is authentic. Similarly, most rightist pseudo-libertarians claim that libertarian socialism is inauthentic.

You are an idiot. /facepalm

I even listed all of the kinds of libertarianism.. and you are still being a retard.

Yet you wonder why you can't post on SF. It seems facts escape you.

I even listed all of the kinds of libertarianism.. and you are still being a retard.

LOL, clearly you are the idiot if you think that listing Wikipedia articles proves a point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germany

Look, East Germany was a "Democratic Republic"! But wait...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China

Wow, China is a "People's Republic," even better. But there's more...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korea

Damn, North Korea is a "Democratic People's Republic"!

It's on Wikipedia so that means it must be true! :rofl

LOL, clearly you are the idiot if you think that listing Wikipedia articles proves a point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germany

Look, East Germany was a "Democratic Republic"! But wait...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China

Wow, China is a "People's Republic," even better. But there's more...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korea

Damn, North Korea is a "Democratic People's Republic"!

It's on Wikipedia so that means it must be true! :rofl

/facepalm

You started posting wikipedia articles first, nitwit. So if you think wikipedia aren't true, stop posting wikipedia articles. Seriously, every time you post you prove how retarded you are.

The fact is, that listing I posted are all real variations of libertarianism... wikipedia or not.

Gotta love it.

Retard posts wikipedia links to try to make his point.
I post a group of links that I got to by following the link that he posted.
Retard doesn't like being proven wrong, so he says wikipedia is not a good source.

NM Valdez... stop being a retard. :rofl

You started posting wikipedia articles first, nitwit.

LOL, you are acting retarded tonight, Smelley. Let's go through this again.

I was making a comment about you referencing the names of the articles themselves, as though what people named their ideology meant that name was etymologically or semantically accurate.

People can call China a people's republic or North Korea a democratic people's republic, but that doesn't make those countries democratic or republics. Similarly, merely referencing the names of so-called libertarian philosophies does not make those ideologies "libertarian."

LOL, you are acting retarded tonight, Smelley. Let's go through this again.

I was making a comment about you referencing the names of the articles themselves, as though what people named their ideology meant that name was etymologically or semantically accurate.

People can call China a people's republic or North Korea a democratic people's republic, but that doesn't make those countries democratic or republics. Similarly, merely referencing the names of so-called libertarian philosophies does not make those ideologies "libertarian."

It has nothing to do with the names of the articles I posted.

It has to do with those being types of libertarianism. They are known types of libertarianism... and I got them by following your libertarian wikipedia link. /facepalm

You say I'm being retarded, but you can't understand that simple concept. Why don't you click on one of the links, for example.. autarchism?

In fact, since you are stupid...

http://autarchism.org/What_is_Autarchism_.html

Autarchism means literally "self rule". Similar to anarchism, it means that each person rules themselves, and should not accept rule by others. In today's vernacular, it is quite similar to libertarianism.

See Wikipedia's definition here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarchism)

Some famous autarchists: Lysander Spooner, Robert LeFevre, H.L. Mencken, Mark Twain

I would classify any individual that tried to free themselves and others as autarchists as well, so would include famous Americans like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison as well.http://centerforselfrule.org/
http://heathenautarchist.wordpress.com/autarchism/
http://earthsociety.org/wordpress/archives/tag/autarchism

http://www.wordaz.com/autarchism.html

an american libertarian and primary theorist of autarchismNow, either get fucking smarter... or move on. You do your Marxist brethren no favors by being a total nitwit.

Valdez is a fucking hypocrite.

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=1537854#post1537854

Valdez is a fucking hypocrite.

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=1537854#post1537854

Of course he is. Looking at that group, it seems he has a few homosexual buddies also.