The Tender For Law

Volume 6

Jun 29, 2014 1:12 AM

Ceit Butler

Ceit

FOR THE LOVE OF TELEVISION...

I'd like to say a few words regarding a disturbing trend. I first noticed this not long after Dean Clifford's arrest, with instances recurring at an alarming rate. The recent Robert Menard video-fiasco, and the ensuing comment skirmish on YouTube, was the latest example of this. I am referring to the apologist Free-Dumb attitude of �It's not HIS fault that things didn't work out for you, YOU made the choice to give him money so the blame lies with you�. You will find this argument mirrored by practically ALL of the Dean Clifford crowd, as well as repeated by most any other Free-Dumb Guru's staunch defenders.

Let's translate this into some examples that everyone can understand!

If you walked into Best Buy (for non-Canadians, insert your country's equivalent here!), and purchased the new 85� Samsung HD Smart television (A steal on Amazon, at only $39,997.99! http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN85S9-85-Inch-Ultra-120Hz/dp/B00CMEN95U ), when you arrived home and set it up, you would expect it to work. If said television did NOT work, would you sit there and think to yourself �Well golly, there goes go forty some-odd grand! But it's my own fault for trusting that Best Buy (or local equivalent) wouldn't sell me a defective product in the first place.�? Hell no! You would cart that puppy straight back in and demand a refund or replacement! You would expect that the source from which you purchased this thing, would not only KNOW that the product works, but would GUARANTEE it just in case some unforeseen, manufacturer's defect happened to rear its ugly head!

Still not clear? Let's try another example. If you contracted with someone to have your house painted/lawn cut/pool cleaned/home renovated/etc and paid them in advance, would you blame yourself if they didn't carry out the task for which they had been paid? HELL no! You would insist on either your money back, or the completion of the SERVICE FOR WHICH YOU PAID.

So, the question is, why do you people expect higher standards from your television and/or other material purchases or personal services, than you do for your freedom? Because really, that's what is at stake in these legal matters. A simple search on Google will turn up countless examples of �Freeman failures�. There are even enough of them that RationalWiki has a direct link ( http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land )! The consequences of these failures are usually exorbitant fines, and/or jail time. A little more serious than a scummy pool, and unruly yard. :p

If someone is selling a service, you should expect to get what you paid for. You SHOULD expect accuracy! If I advertised myself as being a contractor, and told you that I think I have this whole building-thing figured out... Would you pay me to build your dream home? Hell, would you pay me to build your DOG'S dream home?! HELL NO! If I was a Math teachers and taught children that 2 + 2 = 5, would it be your kids fault when they flunk out at the end of the year? HELL FUCKING NO! It would be MINE, for teaching them INACCURATELY. So why, WHY are you so eager and willing to lower your standards of expectation when it's your LIFE on the line?

I CAN'T be the only one that finds this insane (aside from present company currently in this room), that would just be too depressing for words. Dean Clifford, Robert Menard, Santos Bonacci, Karl Lentz, to name a few... NONE of them have ANY business selling a service that they CANNOT GUARANTEE. This SHOULD be COMMON FUCKING SENSE!!!!! They are profiting off of people's ignorance and desperation, and gambling with your freedom and your lives in return.

Investigating on your own, accessing FREE information and formulating your own plan of attack; a resulting failure then WOULD be your fault because YOU made each and every one of those choices YOURSELF. If, on the other hand, you have PAID someone for their services, the ONUS is on them to come through with what they have promised. To provide ACCURATE information!

This should not be complicated, I should NOT have to point this out. Wake up, people. Pull your heads out of your asses and start USING that brain! This is the main difference between The Tender For Law, and basically every other group that is teaching law. Scott Duncan DOESN'T charge money, and he encourages CRITICAL THOUGHT. If any of the rest of you lot was capable of employing such a thing, we WOULDN'T need to be having this conversation right now, critical thinking easily reveals these logic gaps.

Okay, I'm finished ranting now. Those of you who have not already reinserted your heads into your rectums, may proceed to do so now. I'm really not expecting any less...

Read Comments

Ceit Butler

Shit, Pete, you just failed the Surety Test! Was Pete Daoust mentioned in this article? No, so why would you assume the "you", applied to YOU? Come on, man, this is first year stuff. I was waiting for someone to step into it, but didn't expect it to be "you" :p

Stuart Stone

I'm still trying to work out why peanut + butter isn't the same as peanut butter :/ ....maybe if I take 'a' peanut and 'a' butter (I'm not sure that's even possible)...then it might become a peanut butter, or possibly even a a peanut butter...BUT when I have this a and/or a a peanut butter, then I'll know the rules don't apply to me and I'll have FREEDUMB!!! and/or a free room at the fortress of remand ;-)

Ceit Butler

And don't forget the best part, your whole "tender for law theory" is merely fear-mongering to cause the good people of the world to lose faith in the "almighty dollar", while driving up the value of aforementioned "hoarded stockpile of Bitcoins"! :p

David Johansen

menard got a 40 thousand dollar tv? i'm in the wrong business... did it come with a warrantee?

dont lie to me, he got that out of a white van from some cifford guy! for 29995 with a fake reciept. and a feel good story! LOL

David Johansen

oh, you guys dont know about the white van scam. some guy tries selling you walmart crap claiming it is high end expensive goods, at a gas station, claiming it was overstock he cant return or some other story. out of a white van, so he looks like a legitimate delivery driver.

Tara Duncan

David Johansen. Delete your own comments for being "off subject"? Have you read anything that has been written today? If you use the word "the" in a sentence you're probably closer to being on subject than most of the participants. Don't delete anything :D

Ceit Butler

""You can bake the best cake ever, but if you frost it with your own shit, no body will eat it. They will say get that shitty cake away from me. Scott frosts his cake with so much ego, and ridicule, and derision, that he is obviously not tying to teach anyone anything." RM"

See? The cake really IS a lie this time. :D

David Johansen

did dean, or robert ever give any one a receipt?

one can not 'blame' a deception on the deceived. that would be a misdirection on the part of he who commits the fraud, error, and/or omission, whether intentional or not.

David Johansen

yes, thanx Max, it's the practicing. cant say enough about rehearsal Pete, your shocking me. loosing free dumb, hurts. because i just keep getting more pissed off AND realizing how dumb people wish to remain that way without accepting that what they do causes me harm. or they are enjoying the harm they perpetuate upon the ignorant.

David Johansen

How would one call any one in a court out for lying and/or comitting fraud?

YYou LLie YYou BAStard, go on, tell da WHOLE trruuTTh.

If it is NOT a SECURITY, then what in YOUR opinion, on and for the record, what exactly is it then for now?