Steam installeren
inloggen
|
taal
简体中文 (Chinees, vereenvoudigd)
繁體中文 (Chinees, traditioneel)
日本語 (Japans)
한국어 (Koreaans)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgaars)
Čeština (Tsjechisch)
Dansk (Deens)
Deutsch (Duits)
English (Engels)
Español-España (Spaans - Spanje)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spaans - Latijns-Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Grieks)
Français (Frans)
Italiano (Italiaans)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Hongaars)
Norsk (Noors)
Polski (Pools)
Português (Portugees - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Braziliaans-Portugees)
Română (Roemeens)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Fins)
Svenska (Zweeds)
Türkçe (Turks)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamees)
Українська (Oekraïens)
Een vertaalprobleem melden
Regels en richtlijnen voor discussies
Dit bericht rapporteren
Multiple deed holders on a single piece of property = many lawsuits.
when you provoke them so you can beat them and also win the lawsuit they file against you. because a judge advised you to do this next time, instead of suing them.
why even bother?
Clearly they're just scamming the american people to get corporate disability.
Crazy thing was the prankster was found "not guilty".
Like the time I stopped at a gas station, brought bread, ham, cheese, and mayo so I can make my own sandwich.
self defense; psychological violence isn't recognized outside of instances of physical abuse in the us, and the aggressor is the one at fault in all physical cases.
if someone's bullying you and there's no recourse legally you sohuld probably brush up on your wetwork skills. or harass them back until they hit you, in which case you need to preare yourself to take that first hit.
and if you do lose it, cop and gun rules apply: you're legally indemnified more if they survive than if you simply kill them with that one hit.
so the laws essentially conspire to encourage violence as a solution, independent of the tools necessary to conduct it effectively, such as guns or knives or kung fu or whatever.
The lawsuit situation is an elaborate feint to convince people not to resort to violence, and to instead undermine their own position and convince themselves to let it go through getting shot down in court.
Statistically 13% of the population are given no other recourse except violence, owing to the unavoidable nature of their psychology and the nature of this system.
England is currently the biggest proponent of the 'discouragement and futility' tactic, which is in line with their global mandate to encourage violence for profit's sake. This is a matter of internally and publicly recognized fact amongst the judicial system there, but the ruling powers simply do not care. As if they wanted it like this.
conversely, harassment as a political mode is only found within the confines of their sphere of influence.
I will have to find another apprentice...
an american journalist won a major case against BP for their activities in Argentina, and they've been harssed into obscurity by English-filed suits in American courts over it.
American judges just shrugged; tons of people defend SLAP suits because they can't think of an alternative which supports the violence-mitigation aspects of the current system. And the US is inherently predicated on violence given its current economic and sociopolitical role, globally.
They could switch to agricultre and dominate, but they'd be in Russia's position then. Whole world against them economically due to their grain production capacity. Which is the root cause of England manipulating the oil economy against them, as well as the root cause of England fostering and supporting a fascist coup in Japan. So afraid were they of Japan trying to buy something with real grain assets, how dare they destroy the leveraged economy with actual goods?
Some go on to point out that Austria-Hungary's incorporation into Germany presented a similar kind of existential market threat, and that the Schleiffen Plan could not have been implemented if England had not moved to sanction coal and grain trades against them.