Compiled and edited by Frederick Mann
Copyright © 2001, 2002 Build Freedom Holdings ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOTE: This report is based mainly on a discussion between "libertarian lawyer CB" and myself on the LA-Agora List during May, 2001. To "set the stage," I include some earlier messages.
For privacy reasons, I use only the initials of all parties (except myself) participating or mentioned in the discussions.
Generally, I don't engage in ad hominen attacks and name-calling, however, in the case of CB I decided to "take off the gloves."
*****Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 08:16:11 -0500 From: JD Subject: CB is an Idiot To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU CB, you are an utter and complete fool. <snip> JD*****
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 05:58:32 -0700 From: CB Subject: Asshole Award of the Year To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU Based on his response to SW's recent "from the heart" post, I nominate SK as asshole of the year. DJ may have been an irritant and advanced considerable fallacious arguments, along with a number of good points, but he doesn't hold a candle to SK. What a moron. CB*****
[Note: The following two messages are the "from the heart" post and SK's response to it.]
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 15:10:48 -0600 From: SW Subject: Re: DJ and LA-Agora To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU TH, I am unsure of why you "wouldn't like to lose (me)." Frankly, I don't believe I have added anything to your list but I appreciate your reluctance. It somehow makes me feel needed. However, I am going to ask to be removed and for posterity I will make the following comments, as to my reasons why: 1. DJ, BTW, has asked me not to leave on his account. Shows the man has a humanity about him, irrespective of his philosophy. As to DJ, I found his posts to be entertaining because they weren't the normal blah, blah, blah and I learned stuff from him. Since he did ask to be removed, I guess that there was nothing improper about it; however, it was you who brought it up. But my real reasons for leaving now having had time to think it over have nothing to do with DJ or whoever he is. 2. I really don't care about Canada. From my observations, you guys are in worse shape than we are. Socialism seems to be ingrained in your character. That is not the case here in the States. Socialism here is relatively new. 3. I have misspent a lot of my time on the pursuit of Freedom. It has brought me to the brink of bankruptcy. And it took this debate for me to realize how misspent my time has been. Philosophy and politics are really a rich man's game and that is why, probably, DJ engages in it. I ran for Illinois Attorney General as an LP [Libertarian Party] member in 1978, having adopted the libertarian philosophy sometime in 1976. It is all explained in my Book, which nobody is interested in publishing. (Funny thing is at the end of the book I was doing well but it has been all downhill since then.) Had I adopted the FBI's stratagem in the coverup of the murder of FH in Chicago, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that I would be on easy street now, perhaps, enjoying my mistress on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Most likely I would be a Federal Judge not having to worry about my future as I do now. But the murder scared me and I became a libertarian and my law practice became dedicated to Freedom. 4. I do feel like the individual DJ mentioned in his last post, stating as follows: I most certainly don't wish to be a "freedom activist". I wouldn't give a dime to help anyone get any (likely imaginary) freedom. Only some Fools are ever activists (but then all activists are mindless, witless, brainless [meaning unintelligent], shallow, shallow-minded, shallow-headed, superficial, frivolous, bird-brained, featherbrained, crackbrained, rattlebrained, scatterbrained, harebrained, light-minded goofs). 5. My libertarian beliefs have never gotten 1 penny in my pocket. The Institute for Justice, which appears to be the only effective libertarian group, has $2mil. funding. I tried to get such an attack group together for over 20 years with no success nor support. Not only that but as a lawyer (those who are hated by the libertarian establishment) I constantly had to point out to libertarians that our founders were almost all lawyers. Moreover, it has made me a constant target for those in power, particularly Judges. I lucked out insofar as their attempts to take my law license failed. But they have caused me to fail the California and Nevada Bar Exams and, therefore, have sequestered me in this the poorest county in Michigan. As a result of my failure to recognize the reality of my situation (caused to a great deal by taking the distracted time to read the numerous ideological postings I get), I have not taken care of business. The reality of the situation is that those in power will remain in power. Power will be fractionalized, however. Means more millionaires -- less poor and welfare. There will be no revolution. Economics will be everything and interest in politics will wane, as it has been doing for some time now. Nothing libertarians say will make one bit of difference. I would counsel anybody doing the freedom game to first make a million. True power does come from money. It only took me 58 years to realize that. At first I thought if I got power, then the money would come. No way. 6. So I am getting out of it. I have gotten into a terrible debt trap. I own a building in the downtown of this city that has been on the market for sale for over two years and, although it would temporarily save me, there appears no great hope for selling it because of the Walmart effect that has taken over this town's downtown. I wish you all well. I will also be closing my website soon -- even though I don't pay anything for it. I think the owners of the site are using it as an advertisement of their website development company in San Francisco. The fact that it has libertarian in it means that I will continue to be pegged as a threat. Prodigy has me top-listed as the number 1 tax protestor lawyer, although I no longer do that work. I don't want to be a threat anymore nor do I want to end up a pauper like Thomas Paine. Man starts a revolution and ends up the way he did. And I am not saying that I am an equal of Thomas Paine. But I have to now take care of business. It hasn't helped much to have a wife afflicted with schizo affective disorder nor having to take care of an 87 year old mother whose candle is dimming slowly, but I am not blaming my situation on that. I think it is because I have been on this freedom quest that is more responsible for it and that is why I am getting out. SW*****
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 04:24:17 -0800 From: SK Subject: Re: 'Dick Jones' and LA-Agora To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU SW wrote: ><snip> > 1. DJ, BTW, has asked me not to leave on his account. Shows the man > has a humanity about him, irrespective of his philosophy. <snip> Get real. "DJ" (with his deliberately smutty choice of pseudonym) was playing you. That was his whole point. > 2. I really don't care about Canada. <snip> Screw you, Yankee scum. By the way, the only Canadians on this list are me (who has largely resided south of the 49th Parallel -- oh, that's right, you don't even know what that means, do you?) and KW. It's a BRITISH list with a majority of Yanks. And Socialism (under the Progressive name) was first imposed in the U.S. during World War I and then globally imposed by the U.S.-U.K. Imperium as a prophylactic against Communism. Canadians, and even more so, Brits and Europeans, have a lot more experience combatting social-statism -- and are now showing signs of success -- which the American sheep are NOT. > 3. I have mispent a lot of my time on the pursuit of Freedom. It has brought > me to the brink of bankruptcy. <snip>. But the murder scared me and I > became a libertarian and my law practice became dedicated to Freedom. And if that was your goal, why coming nosing around those of us who want to make sure your Class ceases to exist, now and forever? > 4. I do feel like the individual Dick Jones mentioned in his last post, > stating, as follows: > > I most certainly don't wish to be a "freedom activist". I wouldn't give a > dime to help anyone get any (likely imaginary) freedom. Only some > Fools are ever activists <snip> Looking in the mirror, again? I see you have well absorbed the brainwashing of the Power Elite. > 5. My libertarian beliefs have never gotten 1 penny in my pocket. <sip> So would I. But since when is Freedom fighting a way of making money or gaining power? The goal is to abolish power and free the market so the oppressed can make a living. Glad to hear no reward came to a grovelling, whimpering sycophant like you; makes me think there is Justice, if not a God. > 6. So I am getting out of it. I have gotten into a terrible debt trap. <snip> > I think it is because I have been on this freedom quest that is more > responsible for it and that is why I am getting out. And Good Riddance. To think I actually thought about wasting my time helping you out ... SK*****
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:44:45 -0700 From: Freespeak (Frederick Mann) Subject: Bicameral Stage 2 (was Re: Asshole Award of the Year) To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU Gentlemen, One of the characteristics of what I call "bicameral stage 2" is that people make each other wrong or worse, exemplified by the ad hominem attack. When so made wrong or attacked, it's difficult to not also descend into BS2. Check out Wake Up America! - Chapter Five. From my own experience, having indulged in considerable BS2 behavior, I can tell you that it can be pretty destructive! Frederick Mann*****
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 07:48:57 -0700 From: CB Subject: Frederick Mann To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU NS, what you have to understand about Frederick is that he has put considerable effort and time into the attempt to become a cult figure. For several years he would march around town with rather imposing body guard sorts, and the debating "technique" you identify above has always been SOP for him. For a while he was offering to sell a secret knowledge packet for a ridiculous price, which packet contained such obscure and otherwise unavailable mystery writings as Bastiat's The Law. Frederick should, however, be listened to when he writes about gibberish, since he well knows that subject. He has been one of the various promoters of the "commercial lien" fraud and of the "IRS is illegal and can safely be ignored" stupidity. Recently he has expressed a great attachment to the term "memes" -- since it is such a paradigmatic gibberish term that can always be used when you really don't have an argument. Indeed, he likes psycho-babble in general, since it really doesn't require much in the way of rationality or logic. Of course, when anyone asks him to clarify what he is saying, he just retorts that the questioner is a tool of the state, or is attempting to confuse people [from seeing the light of Frederick] or is otherwise despicable slime. Just keep these points in mind when you attempt to have a discussion with Frederick and you won't be disappointed. CB*****
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 14:11:21 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: CB's "Facts" (Re: Frederick Mann) To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU At 07:48 AM 05/04/2001 -0700, CB wrote: >NS, what you have to understand about Frederick is that he >has put considerable effort and time into the attempt to become >a cult figure. For several years he would march around town >with rather imposing body guard sorts... I've never had nor employed any "bodyguard." CB, can you provide any evidence for your allegation? >For a while he was offering to sell a secret knowledge packet >for a ridiculous price, which packet contained such obscure and >otherwise unavailable mystery writings as Bastiat's The Law. CB, can you provide a sample or any evidence that I've ever sold any "secret knowledge packet for a ridiculous price" that "included Bastiat's The Law?" From 1993 to 1996 I did sell freedom information, to several thousand people. My policy was always to give full refunds to any dissatisfied customers. Fewer than 1% asked for refunds, indicating that more than 99% thought the information was worth what they paid for it. All my freedom information is available FREE to anyone who wants to read or download it. >He has been one of the various promoters of th > "commercial lien" fraud... Commercial liens are valid financial instruments. In particular, I recommended the use of a legitimate lien filed by a legitimate entity for legitimate reasons to protect property. CB, can you produce anyone who has gotten into trouble applying my lien information? >and of the "IRS is illegal >and can safely be ignored" stupidity. CB, can you find anywhere in my materials where it says the "IRS can be safely ignored." CB, can you produce anyone who has gotten into trouble applying my IRS information? What I have said is that since I moved to this part of the world in 1988, I've received maybe a dozen threatening letters from various terrocrat agencies. (Terrocrat = coercive government agent or terrorist bureaucrat.) The nature of some of these letters, including one from the "State Attorney General's Office," was such that they could be safely ignored. In all other cases, it took just one letter from me to the threatening party to persuade them to leave me alone. >...Of course, when anyone asks him to clarify what >he is saying, he just retorts that the questioner is a >tool of the state... CB works or worked as an "attorney," an "officer of a government court," i.e., a government agent. CB, can you produce anyone else I've accused of being a government agent? >...or is attempting to confuse people [from seeing >the light of Frederick] or is otherwise despicable slime. CB, can you produce any evidence that I've ever called anyone "despicable slime?" I think CB's veracity is a credit to his "profession." Frederick Mann*****
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 06:27:55 -0700 From: CB Subject: Re: Frederick Mann To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU >I've never had nor employed any "bodyguard." CB, >can you provide any evidence for your allegation? Ah, the typical deny it all technique. Not very convincing Frederick. >CB, can you provide a sample or any evidence that >I've ever sold any "secret knowledge packet for a ridiculous >price" that "included Bastiat's The Law?" > > From 1993 to 1996 I did sell freedom information, to >several thousand people. My policy was always to >give full refunds to any dissatisfied customers. Fewer >than 1% asked for refunds, indicating that more than >99% thought the information was worth what they >paid for it. Or that they were too ignorant to know that what you were selling was either crap or widely available at a significantly lower price. >All my freedom information is available FREE to anyone >who wants to read or download it. Including the books and pamphlets that use to be included at inflated prices? Great. Send me a hundred copies. >Commercial liens are valid financial instruments. In >particular, I recommended the use of a legitimate >lien filed by a legitimate entity for legitimate reasons >to protect property. > >CB, can you produce anyone who has gotten >into trouble applying my lien information? Well, try this: ["Bernie's Story" - copy of original article which is no longer online] Particularly note the affidavit from his almost attorney that comments on the misinformation on which this poor sap took the actions that got him into trouble.
>CB, can you find anywhere in my materials where >it says the "IRS can be safely ignored." > >CB, can you produce anyone who has gotten into >trouble applying my IRS information? Oh, no, Frederick, there is no one who has ever got in any trouble by applying any of your revelations [see above]. Frankly, I think that your sort is a wart on the ass of humanity, and apparently a dishonest wart who continues to deny his cons when caught. >What I have said is that since I moved to this part >of the world in 1988, I've received maybe a dozen >threatening letters from various terrocrat agencies. >(Terrocrat = coercive government agent or terrorist >bureaucrat.) The nature of some of these letters, >including one from the "Arizona Districy Attorney's >Office," was such that they could be safely ignored. >In all other cases, it took just one letter from me to >the threatening party to persuade them to leave me >alone. What was in the letter, Frederick? Will you sell us the contents of this secret for $ 100? >CB works or worked as an "attorney," an "officer >of a government court," i.e. a government agent. >CB, can you produce anyone else I've accused >of being a government agent? Frederick, I'm not going to play this little game with you. We both know what you are, and we both know that you're, once again, doing your best to deflect attention from what you are and from your campaign of preying on the ignorant folk of the libertarian movement. Anyone watching your behavior can readily determined the identity of the real government agent. >CB, can you produce any evidence that I've ever called >anyone "despicable slime?" > >I think CB's veracity is a credit to his "profession." Well, Frederick should know about veracity [or the lack thereof]. CB*****
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 08:21:55 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: Government Agent CB To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU >Ah, the typical deny it all technique. Not very convincing Frederick. Where's your evidence CB? You pluck absurdly false accusations out of thin air, then provide no evidence to substantiate your lies. >Or that they were too ignorant to know that what you >were selling was either crap or widely available at >a significantly lower price. Government agent CB, the fact is that you never bought the materials, and had little or no idea what was in them. You're a government agent, which I notice you haven't denied, attacking someone who has a 100% success record in helping people extricate themselves from the government system you're part of, and which you support through your work and the taxes you pay. >Including the books and pamphlets that use to be included >at inflated prices? Great. Send me a hundred copies. Government agent CB, you can download 100 copies or more at any time, including the "books and pamphlets." Again, you've provided no evidence for your "inflated prices" crap. Just another lie sucked out of thin air by a freedom-hating government agent. >Well, try this: ["Bernie's Story"] >Particularly note the affidavit from his almost attorney that >comments on the misinformation on which this poor sap >took the actions that got him into trouble.
Government agent CB, this poor idiot didn't buy and apply my materials and you know it. If you have any evidence that he bought and applied my materials, provide it. Quote from above URL: Back in 1991 a man by the name of John Ross asked me to go in business with him to sell urethane roofing products to other roofing companies. Against better judgment, I agreed. Ross then said he wanted me to put new roofs on the warehouse roof located on Dodge Blvd. just North of Fort Lowell Rd. I told Mr. Ross that I could only do residential roofing since I had opted not to get a commercial license (despite the fact that I am the oldest urethane foam roofing company in Pima County and had previously been licensed to do residential, commercial or industrial under the one license -- the State of Arizona decided they could make more revenue if they now required a separate license for residential and commercial). Ross informed me that he was a retired lawyer and that there was no need for any license at all, since these were "our buildings". It seems that Bernie Oliver got in trouble by following the advice of "retired lawyer" John Ross -- a colleague of yours, CB? >Oh, no, Frederick, there is no one who has ever >got in any trouble by applying any of your revelations >[see above]. Frankly, I think that your sort is a >wart on the ass of humanity, and apparently a >dishonest wart who continues to deny his cons >when caught. Government agent CB, you've provided no evidence that anyone applying my materials has gotten into trouble. It's because you cannot provide any evidence that you resort to silly insults. Government agent CB, the information on how to deal with threatening letters from your government colleagues is available FREE of charge to anyone who wants to read or download it. >Frederick, I'm not going to play this little game with you. >We both know what you are, and we both know that you're, >once again, doing your best to deflect attention from what >you are and from your campaign of preying on the ignorant >folk of the libertarian movement. Anyone watching your >behavior can readily determined the identity of the real >government agent. His name is CB. An "attorney" (twister of words), who is in a "profession" which habitually preys on the ignorant? How much do you charge your "clients," CB? $150 an hour? $250 an hour? $10 plus for every phone call? $15 every time your secretary makes a photocopy? Again, government agent CB has provided no evidence for his false accusations, because he has nothing but lies. Frederick Mann*****
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 07:57:31 -0700 From: CB Subject: Frederick Lies On To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU >Where's your evidence CB? You pluck absurdly false >accusations out of thin air, then provide no evidence to >substantiate your lies. Well, Frederick, I personally saw you at one of the local libertarian supper clubs - the one that used to be run by DD -- accompanied by two quite large gentlemen with bulges under their coats. When I mentioned this to other people in the group, they informed me that they'd seen you at other groups with the same company. Now do I have a p.i. report with other numerous collaborating instances? Do I have a copy of your contract with these gentlemen? No, I wouldn't waste my money on a p.i. where you are concerned, and I certainly wouldn't want give you grounds to file a stalking charge against me. But I'm curious, Frederick, you keep demanding evidence? Just what sort of "evidence," short of the above p.i. report, would you accept as sufficient to fess up? >Government agent CB, the fact is that you never >bought the materials, and had little or no idea what >was in them. You're a government agent, which I >notice you haven't denied, attacking someone who >has a 100% success record in helping people >extricate themselves from the government system >you're part of, and which you support through your >work and the taxes you pay. Lying con man Frederick, you had a list of the contents of the packets you offered on the Internet. Why is it that people like you always think that they can cover one disreputable con by another lie or that people will automatically buy into your attack on those who expose you? Is it just that you have such contempt for everyone else that you think they are stupid? As I said before, not very convincing. >Government agent CB, you can download 100 copies >or more at any time, including the "books and pamphlets." >Again, you've provided no evidence for your "inflated prices" >crap. Just another lie sucked out of thin air by a freedom-hating >government agent. Well, Frederick, as I asked above, just what sort of evidence would you like? Do you want me to send to this list a copy of your previous webpage. In fact, I may have copied it as a file, but since it has been several years, it may take awhile to dig it out. So why not just fess up now, Frederick? >Government agent CB, this poor idiot didn't buy and apply >my materials and you know it. If you have any evidence >that he bought and applied my materials, provide it. Again, the demand for more and more evidence. Come on, Frederick, con man tell us all just what would satisfy this demand. You want me to post your list of customers so you can sue me for violation of privacy and for infringement of your proprietary trade secrets? Would that do it.;-) >It seems that Bernie Oliver got in trouble by following the advice >of "retired lawyer" John Ross -- a colleague of yours, CB? Didn't read the affidavit of his attorney, did you Frederick? Or is it that you assume that others will be too lazy or too stupid to do so, and will therefore believe your latest distortion? >Government agent CB, you've provided no evidence >that anyone applying my materials has gotten into >trouble. It's because you cannot provide any evidence >that you resort to silly insults. > >Government agent CB, the information on how to >deal with threatening letters from your government >colleagues is available FREE of charge to anyone >who wants to read or download it. Ooooo, goody. Could you give us the URL so that everyone can see the sort of stuff you put out? And about the books in your freedom packet? Where are my 100 copies? >His name is CB. An "attorney" (twister of words), who is in >a "profession" which habitually preys on the ignorant? How >much do you charge your "clients," CB? $150 an hour? >$250 an hour? $10 plus for every phone call? $15 every time >your secretary makes a photocopy? $250/hr, and I'm well worth it. >Again, government agent CB has provided no evidence >for his false accusations, because he has nothing but lies. Frederick is an expert on lies. CB*****
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 10:51:46 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: Government Agent CB Produces No Evidence To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU I Note that CB as an "attorney" (twister of words) is an "Officer of a Government Court.") Hence my claim that he is a government agent. (I also presume that he supports HIS government by paying taxes.) >Well, Frederick, I personally saw you at one of the >local libertarian supper clubs - the one that used >to be run by DD - accompanied by two quite >large gentlemen with bulges under their coats. Government Agent CB, I presume that you know something about the "rules of evidence." The fact that I was accompanied by about 8-10 people, some of whom were well built, does not constitute evidence that I had hired bodyguards. >When I mentioned this to other people in the group, >they informed me that they'd seen you at other groups >with the same company. Come on Government Agent CB, you know that this does not constitute evidence. In fact, It's most likely a fabrication on your part. The DD meeting was the only group I attended accompanied by the above people. >Now do I have a p.i. report with other numerous >collaborating instances? Do I have a copy of your >contract with these gentlemen? No, I wouldn't waste >my money on a p.i. where you are concerned, and I >certainly wouldn't want give you grounds to file a >stalking charge against me. But I'm curious, Frederick, >you keep demanding evidence. Just what sort of >"evidence," short of the above p.i. report, would you >accept as sufficient to fess up? Corroborating statements from your "other people in the group," together with their names and contact information, so at least their existence can be verified. Their statements should include how they determined that "people accompanying me" were bodyguards Name the people who were supposedly my "bodyguards." Government Agent CB, you know that you have still provided no evidence for your silly and false claim. >Lying con man Frederick, you had a list of the contents >of the packets you offered on the internet. Why is it that >people like you always think that they can cover one >disreputable con by another lie or that people will >automatically buy into your attack on those who expose >you? Is it just that you have such contempt for everyone >else that you think they are stupid? As I said before, not >very convincing. Government Agent CB, you still have not produced any evidence that anyone who used my materials as a guide to extricate himself from YOUR government system got into trouble as a result. That's why you resort to silly insults which you don't and can't substantiate. >Well, Frederick, as I asked above, just what sort of evidence >would you like? Do you want me to send to this list a copy >of your previous webpage. In fact, I may have copied it as >a file, but since it has been several years, it may take >awhile to dig it out. So why not just fess up now, Frederick? Government Agent CB, as an "attorney" you should know that if you make a claim it's up to you to provide the evidence to support it. You've provided no evidence and you know it. >Again, the demand for more and more evidence. Come on, >Frederick, con man tell us all just what would satisfy this >demand. You want me to post your list of customers so you >can sue me for violation of privacy and for infringement of >your proprietary trade secrets? Would that do it.;-) Government Agent CB, you revert to silly insults because you can't provide any evidence. >Didn't read the affidavit of his attorney, did you Frederick? >Or is it that you assume that others will be too lazy or too >stupid to do so, and will therefore believe your latest distortion? Government Agent CB, it looks like you're too lazy or stupid to read the Affidavit (of one "David T. Hardy"), which provides no evidence of any connection with me. Of course to a "brilliant attorney" with your intellect, the direct quote from the URL ["Bernie's Story"] you provided -- "Ross informed me that he was a retired lawyer and that there was no need for any license at all, since these were "our buildings"." is my "latest distortion." Come on, Government Agent CB, is this the best you can do?
>Ooooo, goody. Could you give us the URL so that everyone >can see the sort of stuff you put out? And about the >books in your freedom packet? Where are my 100 copies? The URL is here. You can download as many copies as you like of any of the information. I particularly draw your attention to THE WORST PROFESSIONAL SCREWMASTERS. >$250/hr, and I'm well worth it. Based on the "quality" of your "legal opinions" I've seen during our interaction, some might suspect you're a shyster to be avoided like the plague. Though I can conceive that in your professional capacity you're more competent than on this list. What's the difference between a catfish and a lawyer? One is a garbage-eating bottom-dweller and the other is a fish. For some great lawyer jokes, see THE WORST PROFESSIONAL SCREWMASTERS. Frederick Mann*****
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 15:20:56 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: Shyster CB Moves His Lips To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU "The lawyer has learned how to flatter his master in word and indulge him in deed; but his soul is small and unrighteous... from the first he has practiced deception and retaliation, and has become stunted and warped. And so he has passed out of youth into manhood, having no soundness in him... " - Plato, 321 B.C. How do you know when a lawyer lies? His lips move. What does a lawyer do after he dies? He lies still. At 01:01 PM 05/08/2001 -0700, VC wrote: > >Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks CB is an agent - >although they may both be agents - faux fights between two >agents seem to have been the fashion from what I've seen >lately, and I know of people who got in trouble filing liens... >Slander of title is nasty. If these two even exist at all... >Anybody have any real evidence? My lien information -- which was published in 1995 and is probably horribly out of date -- can be found here. It warns emphatically against filing bogus liens. It includes several examples of people who got in trouble because they filed fraudulent liens. "Felony slander of title" is covered in Chapter 5. Have a look at 'Fiscal Freedom' and then tell me whose side you think I'm on. >I thought CB was always the one who threatened to sue >for defamation if evidence wasn't produced to suit his >exacting demands? Now he seems unable even to >come up with a ballpark figure for Frederick's inflated >prices. CB is probably still too stupid to look at my website and see that all the information is free and has been for years. His "inflated prices" crap is pure imagination. >Bulges under coats, isn't that what the cops always use to >"get" someone in stop and frisk? Sort of like the "I smelled >marijuana" or "I smelled alcohol" routine - who's to say? >Can't CB get affidavits from his fellow witnesses? >Although now it doesn't sound so much like the witnesses >saw the bulges, as that they saw F. with similar company, >meaning what, the same two guys? Looks like CB has a fertile imagination! >Now a 98% drop in IRS seizures/86% drop in "levies" - that you >can verify by going to my site <http://www.getawarrant.com> and >clicking on the Syracuse U figures. But that still probably won't be >enough evidence for CB to admit I was correct about the tax >seizure warrant requirement. So check out my briefs, folks! Red >Hen Resources gets more results than all the free market tanks >put together. They may let Ron Paul and others get a move going >to repeal the tax before it gets embarrassing and enough people >figure out they don't have to pay because the government won't >even swear you owe - it can't getawarrant.*** I had a quick look at your site and am impressed. Frederick Mann*****
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:05:25 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: CB: Stupidest Shyster in the World? To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU Shyster CB claims I have or had a bodyguard. His "evidence" is that he saw two people with bulging muscles with me and that someone else also said they had seen these two people with me. Shyster CB is so stupid he seems not to know about rules of evidence. Shyster CB accused me of selling material at "inflated prices." But he's too stupid to say what these prices are. He's also too stupid to look at my website and see that all my information is available free and has been for years. Shyster CB is so stupid he accused me of selling information that includes Bastiat's 'The Law,' but he's too stupid to provide a sample of such material or any evidence that I've sold such material. Shyster CB is so stupid he accused me of having "been one of the various promoters of the "commercial lien" fraud, but he's too stupid to even look at my information on liens before rendering "judgment." Shyster CB is so stupid he presents as "evidence" that someone got into trouble applying my materials, the case of Bernie Oliver. But he's too stupid to read the Oliver story and notice that it includes no reference to me or my material. (Oliver has a reference to "an Elizabeth Broderick seminar." Shyster CB seems so stupid that he doesn't know the difference between me and Elizabeth Broderick.)
Shyster CB is so stupid that when I quote from the Oliver story that Oliver was advised by "retired attorney John Ross," he accused me of a "distortion." Shyster CB is too lazy or stupid to read the Oliver Story and find the Ross reference. Shyster CB is so stupid that he didn't read the Affidavit linked to from the Oliver story and didn't notice that the Affidavit contains no reference to me or my material. Shyster CB is so stupid that he wrote, "Didn't read the affidavit of his attorney, did you Frederick?" But Shyster CB is too stupid to notice that the author of the affidavit, David T. Hardy, was not Oliver's attorney (because of other commitments he was not able to handle Oliver's case), but a friend of the Oliver family, attempting to assist Oliver and his (clearly incompetent) public defender. Shyster CB is too stupid to provide any evidence that Oliver bought or received any of my materials. Shyster CB is so stupid that he didn't compare Oliver's actions to my material on liens and notice that Oliver didn't even remotely do what my material advises. Shyster CB is so stupid that he accused me of having "been one of the various promoters of... the "IRS is illegal and can safely be ignored" stupidity." But he's too stupid to provide any evidence in support. He's too lazy or stupid to read my website and find a reference where I claim that "the IRS can be safely ignored." (In fact, my website explicitly warns that you have to be careful, because the IRS may ruin you or even kill you.) Shyster CB is so stupid that he accused me of "when anyone asks him to clarify what he is saying, he just retorts that the questioner is a tool of the state, or is attempting to confuse people... or is otherwise despicable slime." But Shyster CB is too stupid to provide any evidence that I've accused anyone other than him of being a government agent (or tool of the state). Shyster CB is also too stupid to provide any evidence that I've ever called anyone "despicable slime." (Guess who qualifies as "despicable slime!") Shyster CB claims that he charges "$250/hr, and I'm well worth it." Judging by his "legal performance" on this list, the "well worth it" claim seems pretty stupid. I think CB has demonstrated that he's a strong favorite for the title: Stupidest Shyster in the World. However, another explanation is suggested by the following words from the above-mentioned affidavit by David T. Hardy: "Judging that few attorneys can resist the lure of ethanol at 5 P. M., I suggested that we all go to the Plaza Pub for a few drinks." (Page 3 of the affidavit.) Maybe CB is a strong favorite for the title: Most Inebriated Shyster in the World. Frederick Mann*****
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 04:56:29 -0700 From: CB Subject: Frederick Fumes On To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU Those who have been following Frederick's diatribes will note that he hasn't denied any of the basic facts about his views or activities. Nor has he ever informed us what "evidence" he would accept to fess up. [Curious, isn't it, that when Frederick makes a statement, it requires no "evidence" to back it up, but when anyone makes a statement regarding Frederick, he finds himself under the demand that he strictly adhear [sic] to the rules of evidence applied by the government courts - courts that Frederick otherwise claims to hate.] Frederick never says anything like: "You're wrong, I've never had anyone around me acting as a body guard, either for pay or voluntarily. The gentlemen you saw me with who were packing heat and who shadowed my every move were just friends." Or like "I don't suggest that commercial liens are a way of disciplining government officials. That would be stupid. The UCC governs COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS between private individuals and institutions and has nothing to do with disciplining government officials." Or "I've never sold readily available libertarian books over the Internet for inflated prices claiming that they were some sort of secret freedom knowledge." Or "I don't deny that federal prosecutors will prosecute people and get them put in jail for not paying their federal income taxes." He doesn't say those things because he knows that they are untrue. Instead, he just attacks those who point out that he has routinely acted in ridiculous ways and has and continues to distribute false information. Now I have no idea why Frederick does what he does. But I do know that he acts strangely. The very fact that he does X and then attacks anyone who points out that he does X is rather strange for an honest and forthright individual who truly believes in the merits of what he espouses and what he does. But that is O.K. Frederick, we all know that your only defense to the truth is to characterize others as "government agents" or the "Most Inebriated Shyster in the World," without, ah, "any evidence". But then, you're Frederick, you don't need evidence. CB*****
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 09:06:04 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: CB Caught in His Lies To: LA-AGORA@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU CB, I've refuted your false allegations, point by point. You've not responded specifically to even one of the points below, presumably because you can't refute anything I've said. Do you have any objection to my posting an article on BuildFreedom, based on our interaction, and with a link to <Link.omitted.to.save.CB.professional.embarrassment>, so my readers can find out more about who you are and what you do? Some might even be so impressed with the quality of your arguments that you'll get extra business! Now it's time to expose your specific lies. Your claim that I had or have bodyguards was either a lie or a false conclusion. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was merely a false conclusion. Below you say, "Frederick never says anything like: "You're wrong, I've never had anyone around me acting as a body guard, either for pay or voluntarily." That's lie #1.Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 14:11:21 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: CB's "Facts" (Re: Frederick Mann) I've never had nor employed any "bodyguard." Seeing that you can provide no specifics regarding your allegation that I've sold materials at "inflated prices," that's lie #2. I've repeatedly said that all my materials are free and anyone can download them from my website. You've accused me of selling information that includes Bastiat's 'The Law.' That's lie #3.Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 14:11:21 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: CB's "Facts" (Re: Frederick Mann) I've ever sold any "secret knowledge packet for a ridiculous price" that "included Bastiat's The Law?" I claim that nobody I know of has gotten into trouble by applying my materials. In an attempt to provide an example to the contrary, you presented the case of Bernie Oliver. That's lie #4. There's no reference to me or my materials in the Oliver case. (There is a reference to Elizabeth Broderick, who I believe gave seminars on liens.)When I quoted from the Oliver story that Oliver was advised by "retired attorney John Ross," you accused me of a "distortion." That's lie #5. Read the Oliver Story to find the Ross reference. Your "Didn't read the affidavit of his attorney, did you Frederick?" falsely implied that the author of the affidavit, David T. Hardy, was Oliver's attorney. Here I give you the benefit of the doubt. It could have been a careless mistake on your part, rather than a deliberate lie. You accused me of having "been one of the various promoters of... the "IRS is illegal and can safely be ignored" stupidity." I challenged you to show where in my materials it says that the IRS can be safely ignored. You haven't done so. That's is lie #6.Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:05:25 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: CB: Stupidest Shyster in the World? (In fact, my website explicitly warns that you have to be careful, because the IRS may ruin you or even kill you.) You accused me of "when anyone asks him to clarify what he is saying, he just retorts that the questioner is a tool of the state, or is attempting to confuse people... or is otherwise despicable slime." These are lies #7 and #8. You're the only one I've accused of being a government agent, and you have no evidence to the contrary. I've also not accused anyone but you of being despicable slime and you have no evidence to the contrary. You state, "Those who have been following Frederick's diatribes will note that he hasn't denied any of the basic facts about his views or activities." This is an attempt to confuse. If I were to deny any facts. I would be lying. So I obviously don't deny any facts. I have, however, denied all of your false accusations either explicitly or by refuting them. Your statement above is lie #9. You state. "Nor has he ever informed us what "evidence" he would accept to fess up." The first part of your statement is lie #10.Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 10:51:46 -0700 From: BigBooster (Frederick Mann) Subject: Government Agent CB Produces No Evidence Corroborating statements from your "other people in the group," together with their names and contact information, so at least their existence can be verified. Their statements should include how they determined that "people accompanying me" were bodyguards. I've also specifically indicated, "Specifically what was the inflated price?; "Show us where in my materials it says that the IRS can be safely ignored"; etc. The second part of your sentence implies that I have something to "fess up." Seeing that you've only been able to provide false accusations and silly insults, this is lie #10. You state, "...when anyone makes a statement regarding Frederick, he finds himself under the demand that he strictly adhear (sic) to the rules of evidence applied by the government courts..." I've never demanded that anyone "strictly adhere to the rules of evidence applied by the government courts." I've only indicated that CB seems ignorant of the rules of evidence. Lie #11. You state, "...[H]e just attacks those who point out that he has routinely acted in ridiculous ways and has and continues to distribute false information." Nobody that I know of (other than CB) has accused me of "routinely acted in ridiculous ways and continues to distribute false information." Lie #12. You state, "Frederick, we all know that your only defense to the truth is to characterize others as "government agents"..." This is lie #13. You're the only one I've accused of being a government agent -- for three reasons: 1. You're an "officer of a government court"; 2. You seem to go out of your way to attack, insult, and verbally abuse -- in general with outright lies or blatantly false accusations which you can't substantiate; and 3. You often seem to argue on the side that favors your government, rather than individuals seeking greater freedom. Frederick Mann*****Note: CB did not respond to the above.
Index | Parent Index | Build Freedom: ArchiveDisclaimer - Copyright - Contact
Online: buildfreedom.org | terrorcrat.com / terroristbureaucrat.com