Also Named Bort 🇨🇦 @terryenglish@librem.one

@terryenglish @TheMadPirate @cyber-hellscape @GBCDude @Grandtheftautism @thebitchisback

Oh boy here we go with the somalia

New Misskey logo

@twitter lobsters in a bucket, people hate seeing prepared people because they know they're unprepared.

#DRM on medical equipment has always been a threat to human health and lives, as well as a violation of our rights, and now DRM on ventilators may actually cost lives: https://u.fsf.org/30n

@terryenglish
Old meme is old.

tucgv152lie41 (1).jpg

@terryenglish @GBCDude @cyber-hellscape @Grandtheftautism @TheMadPirate @thebitchisback @Oblivia @11112011 you think you are innocent, motherfucker?

@Nobody @0xc00000e9 @11112011 @Epsiloco @JapaneseLewdsFan @MKdiamond @Oblivia @Prodigal @RehnSturm256 @Terry @chuculate @comfy @cowanon @fluffy @gravity @histoire @jasonl8446 @proxeus @sjw @terryenglish @thebitchisback Man, if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

You should look up some of the claims in that document. Things like "Executive Order 12803" are pretty easy. ( https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12803 ) It doesn't say anything resembling what that image says it does, that "There is no United States!" The entirety of that EO is that, if a state sells off any of its assets, and those assets were built or acquired using federal funds, it has to return the federal funds.

The last point is also kind of absurd. "You don't own any land because the deed calls you a tenant!" is the type of thing that you could only believe if you were not familiar with the difference between the colloquial definition of a word and the legal definition. The "tenant" *is* the owner, that's what the word means here. That's actually the original meaning, per https://www.etymonline.com/word/tenant :

> early 14c., "person who holds lands by title or by lease," from Anglo-French tenaunt (late 13c.), Old French tenant "possessor; feudal tenant" (12c.), noun use of present participle of tenir "to hold," from Latin tenere "hold, keep, grasp,"

The first claim, citing Diversified Metal Products v. IRS, is also complete lunacy. The IMF isn't mentioned anywhere in that case, and what actually happened was that the judge said that the IRS could not be sued, because it was part of the government: you have to sue the government, you can't sue individual agencies.

> The Internal Revenue Service, and not the United States, was originally named as defendant in this action. However, the United States is correct that the Internal Revenue Service has no capacity to sue or be sued. Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512, 514 (1952). Therefore, the United States is properly substituted for the Internal Revenue Service in this action.

I am certainly not a fan of the government. I sure as hell do not like the IRS, I do not like taxation, any of that. There's still no reason to be that gullible. I looked up three things and all three were complete lies.

Remember my suggestion that you look this stuff up before posting it? You are posting lies. And these lies are for what? Is the government going to vanish in a puff of logic if you can prove it doesn't exist?

@MKdiamond @0xc00000e9 @11112011 @Epsiloco @JapaneseLewdsFan @Nobody @Oblivia @Prodigal @RehnSturm256 @Terry @chuculate @comfy @cowanon @fluffy @gravity @histoire @jasonl8446 @proxeus @sjw @terryenglish @thebitchisback I didn't play it, but anarchy and bedlam sound like fun.

@p @0xc00000e9 @11112011 @Epsiloco @JapaneseLewdsFan @Nobody @Oblivia @Prodigal @RehnSturm256 @Terry @chuculate @comfy @cowanon @fluffy @gravity @histoire @jasonl8446 @proxeus @sjw @terryenglish @thebitchisback see you in Hell, baby!! (hell on earth)
Hell 5.jpg

@MKdiamond @p @0xc00000e9 @11112011 @Epsiloco @JapaneseLewdsFan @Nobody @Prodigal @RehnSturm256 @Terry @chuculate @comfy @cowanon @fluffy @gravity @histoire @jasonl8446 @proxeus @sjw @terryenglish @thebitchisback
DEXATI20200115205218.png