Topless Charge Dropped!

September 3, 2009 by Ian
Filed under: Issues, National, News, Personal Freedom, Police, Update, Video

Rivera Word just came in through Porc 411 that Cassidy Nicosia’s “Indecent Exposure” charge has been dropped by KPD’s prosecutor, Eli Rivera. Does this mean the KPD is liable for false arrest, kidnapping, or official oppression? I don’t know, but I forgive them for what they’ve done and would encourage them to leave peaceful people alone in the future. Thankfully, now Cassidy doesn’t need to be concerned about being deemed a “sex offender” for acting as free as her male counterparts.

Some liberty ladies had scheduled another topless event in advance of Cassidy’s arraignment, so will that event occur or be rescheduled? I’ll let you know.

Also, here was the Ridley Report’s coverage of the topless outreach event arrest, which did not get pulled from Youtube as our original footage did:

charley hardman

Whose life?

explain to me what material difference ron paul made in your interactions with others. kept you from shooting a river-crossing mexican? you were probably like most neocon pussies, doing little or no direct initiated violence. i highly doubt that ron paul transformed you from someone fucking people over to someone not. the external change, in other words, was probably immaterial. not even a blip. and you're among the best of the paulists.

I can’t really raise my children in that environment of abject hostility toward all authority based everything.

you can begin by correcting your language, however. authority? c'mon.

Little people I made are counting on me to feed them and keep them out of the hands of the state.

naming perhaps the biggest impediment to the increase of liberty in this world: fear for children. frankly, i don't see how anyone with young kids can move toward liberty strenuously unless the kids are written off as "collateral damage". do not mistake this for approval of that situation. however, the state prevails largely on the fear of parents.

Do you have children, Charley? Do you live the true voluntarist life with them?

i have no young children. only kid is nearly 20 and not dependent on my "freedom". however, had i been a voluntarist during her childhood it would've been impossible to resist as i have since.

full rejection of the whole societal bent is oppressive to one’s own happiness, which seems to me contrary to the point of existing.

i refer to valerie in V for Vendetta for that one. i cannot be happy associating with criminals.

I do disobey where I can, but am unable to live as a free man because I am not a free man.

it isn't like i'm not being raped by "sales tax" and the like, despite major life changes to minimize that shit. it's all curves.

How would this route of action educate the masses about liberty?

false implied premise, in at least two ways. first, i disfavor the term "educate" in this regard, because it's essentially de-brainwashing — a far more difficult problem. after that, who made one man liable for correcting masses? you're lucky if you correct even one criminal toward voluntarism. the beauty of voluntarism, of course, is that it may be practiced without the cooperation of anyone else. doing that even alone is huge. ron paul will die having failed on that one, by miles.

How would it get people excited about liberty?

more false premises. generally, you cannot "get" people excited about liberty. if you think ron paul's getting people excited about liberty, wake up.

What is exciting or alluring about constant harassment by ‘authorities’? How do we make it the kind of thing ‘everybody’s doing’?

dude, we will leave this world physical slaves. you haven't figured that out yet? the only freedom in our lives is mental, and that takes decades for one above-average person to get together under a favorable setting. the notion of mass binary liberty conversion is ludicrous. a bunch of drone fucks shouting "ron paul" needs to be refuted? almost funny. that douche sold his soul to the devil decades ago, and multiple times on the "campaign trail". what a dummkopf pussy, and millions bought it. IMO ron paul's net influence is more destructive of liberty than schlobama's.
Lpviper

'explain to me what material difference ron paul made in your interactions with others.'

From his own words/deeds? Not much.

BUT:

He opened the gateway into the whole world of media that I enjoy and learn from, like this website, FTL, Gard Goldsmith, etc. From that I changed my perspective on people from one of groups to one of individuals. I have been generally more tolerant of people, I have learned to respect the non aggressive choices of others, and I have erased considerations of appearance (among other superficialities[is that a word?]) from my judgements of and interactions with my fellow humans.

'you can begin by correcting your language, however. authority?'

Corrected, with the caveat that authority is real when tyrants are enforcing it upon others. It is a struggle to teach children voluntarist principles without it spilling into everything. The government thinks my kids have 'Oppositional Defiant Disorder' when in truth all they have is me for a father. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.

'generally, you cannot “get” people excited about liberty.'

Generally I cannot 'get' a hard-on in ice water either. But when the prize is so great, I think I'll try anyway.

'IMO ron paul’s net influence is more destructive of liberty than schlobama’s.'

By what explanation do you hold that the man who is currently enacting the monopoly's tyrannies upon is is less destructive of liberty than the one man on the inside of the gang who is preaching (some) free market principles and attempting to restrain the beast?
Lpviper

In my mind I am already beginning to form the answer of that last question. Is it 'He's encouraging people to use government as the answer to the government problem, thereby justifying and extending the existence of government, which is bad on principle'?

If so, is there not a place for such activity in the current paradigm? Is not every bit of real freedom restored to the people going to encourage them to want more? Do we really want to villify RP for trying to make lemonade out of lemons? What is to be gained by it?
charley hardman

He opened the gateway into the whole world of media that I enjoy and learn from,

plenty of others to do that, and they don't confiscate 2008$3M for it while preaching the sanctity of "non-aggression".

the caveat that authority is real when tyrants are enforcing it upon others.

too much distortion. something wrong with "crime" or the like? i've been surprised even at this site how language is used, often subtly, to excuse the worst oppressors.

Generally I cannot ‘get’ a hard-on in ice water either. But when the prize is so great, I think I’ll try anyway.

nah, i think you misunderstood me there. too long to explain if so. not in the mood.

By what explanation do you hold that the man who is currently enacting the monopoly’s tyrannies upon is is less destructive of liberty than the one man on the inside of the gang who is preaching (some) free market principles and attempting to restrain the beast?

i read your later comment. without getting into it too much right now, simply ask which has encouraged the most real resistance to the official crime syndicate. twenty years, and ron paul won't end the confiscatory career? fuck him. obama's done more in twelve months, orienting people correctly to the role of the state. of course, RP isn't president of the fedgoon machine, but consider if he were. disaster.

i do not advocate intentional tyranny for the purpose of waking sleeping liberty instincts. however, i do advocate always treating the state as what it is and always will be: the enemy. ron paul attempts to fuck this all away, and he's done well enough at it. obama's helped straighten out that fuckup.
Lpviper

'…orienting people correctly…'

Can you elaborate a bit on that?
Pluto

The letter should be photocopies or scanned into the computer and sent to the Union Leader, WMUR, Concord Monitor and the other news media outlets so everyone can see what has been accomplished.
charley hardman

Can you elaborate a bit on that?

ron paul, while profiting from plunder (well over 2008$3,000,000, career), asserts that his version of the state is where it's at. the constitution will save you. his "restraint" will save you. while "government" (i.e., official crime syndicate) has been perverted, the precepts are sound. oh, and he founds this on non-aggression… a laughable crock of shit from a pussified indirect thief. he trains the compliant horde to have faith in his version of the state.

schlobama, on the other hand, avows no major principle beyond his natural superiority and clear parental vision for how you should be fucked for the greater good and love it. this, correctly, inspires revulsion in even some stupider aspects of the lemming masses — not necessarily because he's a power-mad psycho (which he is), but because they happen to disagree with that version of a power-mad psycho — one unleashed, of course, by perversions of their hero bush II and his predecessors. however it turns out, he encourages mass resistance to the state, whereas ron paul encourages clinging to a fantastic version of the state that never has nor never will exist. ron paul has a remedy, and that remedy is the state — the non-existent restrained state.

between those two evils, i'll take schlobama in a heartbeat. the only correct relation to the state is one of aware and total opposition, for by definition the state is tyrannical. despite near total delusion in this regard, it is never simply in need of the right masters. "good government" is a despicable lie, and — naturally — the first course in brainwashing applied to most children in the goonited states. ron paul continues it with adults as though a virtue.

BTW, to counter this wonderful development, schlobama is likely lining up to turn to the "war presidency" gimmick to save his stupid psycho ass. prepare for some manufactured disaster over our heads, à la mencken.
Lpviper

Yep

Makes me think though; if Ron were president we (US govt.) would likely not wage aggressive war.

That seems better
IceTrey

@Hardman

You're such a retard you don't even recognize sarcasm when you see it you douche.
charley hardman

Makes me think though; if Ron were president we (US govt.) would likely not wage aggressive war.

we? WTF.

as i've written in detail on my site, there's plenty of evidence that reality would be the opposite (e.g., one "terrorist" attack and the generally insane american population would wank off straight to congress, which RP repeatedly swore to obey as a blind rat, as if that's a virtue). of course, that gets straight back to the ludicrous proposition that ron paul would be president anyway. the spineless dipshit couldn't even assert himself on a goddamned debate panel advertised as free-form. when hit by his first full MSM smear (newsletter debacle), he was dishonest as a snake and instantly beaten down. ron paul is a joke even if you ignore his unprincipled position. he is best remembered by the crowds of fools shouting his name as elixir.

You’re such a retard you don’t even recognize sarcasm when you see it you douche.

since it's obvious that my reply was addressing precisely your evading sarcasm, i'll not discuss generally the waste of much written sarcasm among strangers, @sign sheep. you're talking evasion gibberish.
Tumbleweed

Charley's agenda is transparent. I see no point in engaging his sort and would hope others tune him out.
Travis

TITS OR GTFO
Tracy

Charley has no agenda.

He insists that if I imagine some good could come of supporting Ron Paul, his warts and all, I must be a sheep, easily led by a charlatan.

But Charley, he's no charlatan, he must be the ONE.

My boy, relax and realize that someone, possibly as smart as you, thinks it's no big deal supporting Ron Paul.

Keep linking to your blog. You look pathetic.
charley hardman

watching "libertarian" and "voluntarist" paulists confront hard truths about their idol is similar in proportion to the death grip conventional statists hold on their false notion of the state. paulists are statists by definition, of course, for ron paul advocates — and is — the state. it's almost silly to note the deep cultist indignation (twitches of the brainwashed) when one highlights essential ron paul details, but replies here indicate it's necessary:

- ron paul asserts that his guiding principle is non-aggression.

- he's a career plunderer, with underestimated goon career takings exceeding $3,000,000 in 2008 dollars. yet paulists croon for him to increase this personal plunder by rising to the office of fedgoon emperor. this list disregards the folly of what he'd accomplish in the position he's no right to hold — wrongly assumed by paulist fantasists to be only a possible net positive, dwarfing the discussion of $millions per individual thief.

- ron paul says nothing that hasn't been said before, better, by thousands who are not hindered with the ludicrous position of a career engaging in behavior directly violating principles for which he's supposedly supported. he is a cult figure because he violates his asserted principles. he is a cult figure to those enthralled by fedgoon celebrity and the idiocy of advocating liberty via the organization most fundamentally opposed to it. he's the rotting carcass of "founder/framer" idolatry.

these and other core details are "warts" in the same way jeff dahmer's resume indicates "he's not ideally suited to a position as head babysitter". when nailed on these "warts" (i.e., complete disintegration), supposedly non-deluded paulists assert that ron paul is useful for cheap publicity of a message his actions belie. record of accomplishment for liberty through this corruption: zip.

between the assertion of practical paulist political advancement of liberty and discussing the rightness of it, all that matters is the ideological argument, for the fedgoon machine long ago passed the point of remedy through other than self-destruction.

instead of linking more to my blog in this comment, i refer paulists to explanatory articles vigorously endorsed by ron paul's former chief of staff and now head cheerleader.
Lpviper

Did you read Dr. Paul's book, Charley? The whole thing is a rather stinging rebuke of statism. I don't really consider my self a Paul worshipper or anything but I think you are a bit overboard here. RP has been railing against the bank scam for over 30 years now, in Congress and in public, but you can't seem to get past the fact that he's getting paid to be a Congressman. This automatically makes him evil. Well I don't buy it. And to address your earlier assertion that any number of people could have guided me to the liberty movement; you are right. But they didn't. Ron Paul did. Because he's out there in public talking about freedom and personal responsibility. So really, Charley, why don't you attack somebody who is doing evil upon others right now, like that madman Obama?

What is to be gained by attacking Ron Paul? And don't give me the 'at least Obama is honest about tyranny' shit. I don't WANT to live in tyranny, I want out! I don't think your approach is helping. But if you think it is, feel free to elucidate
Rich

I hate evil bastards like Ron Paul who only agree with me on 99% of issues.

Only those who agree with me on 100% of issues, and are willing to change their minds when I do, are not evil.
charley hardman

Did you read Dr. Paul’s book, Charley? The whole thing is a rather stinging rebuke of statism.

you and most other paulists are apparently hopelessly confused regarding the definition of "statist", and it's laughable that you do the usual routine of paulist scrambling, calling him "Dr." for effect, in the same paragraph implying he isn't a statist. ron paul asserts that the state is a requirement for social interaction. << read that again. if reading again doesn't help, merely consider that he's made a career of being a state parasite. you, like lew rockwell, have a psycho double standard whereby the identical behavior criticized in others as parasitism becomes holy writ when emanating from the 2008$3M bandit of "peace".

"Dr." is an absurd coercive-guild title infused up the ass with statism. note the word "is", indicating present tense.

I don’t really consider my self a Paul worshipper or anything [...]

hold that thought.

[...] you can’t seem to get past the fact that he’s getting paid to be a Congressman.

said the paulbot who cannot accept rationally (i.e., objectively) that he's "getting paid to be a Congressman". sounds almost quaint when viewed through a socialistic Mr. Smith Goes to Washington brainwash fog, but more than a bit of a sticker when it's done by a fuck whose avowed principle is non-aggression. explain to me how that plunder's in line with the principle you espouse. name one other person on the earth, cultist, who's embraced over 2008$3M in plunder and gets such a pass.

This automatically makes him evil. Well I don’t buy it.

now back to you being a cultist. thievery is evil.

Charley, why don’t you attack somebody who is doing evil upon others right now, like that madman Obama?

the usual FK false dilemma horse shit from the very person who in this thread inserted ron paul into the discussion with the explicit assertion, "Anyway, I stuck this in here cuz Charley loves Ron Paul he told me so."

i didn't bring him up, you fucking disingenuous retard.

I don’t think your approach is helping. But if you think it is, feel free to elucidate

a stance that might rise above snot-nosedness were ron paul's "approach" helping on net, or were the pro-liberty aspect of his actions limited to those who embrace the state for decades. you and the other cultists assert/imply this, at the very time you notify the world that things are rapidly getting worse than ever and you ignore writers/speakers far superior to your plastic jesus. lemmings.
charley hardman

I hate evil bastards like Ron Paul who only agree with me on 99% of issues.

when the only issue is the non-aggression principle (as with ron paul), your numbers are reversed and off. takes a cultist to not notice this glaring detail.

salvation via the state? yes, or no. ron paul shouts, "yes".
Lpviper

That's not what I've heard Ron say in all his addresses to Congress and to colleges and to other crowds. What I've heard him say is 'let the people decide for themselves' and 'let's try freedom for a change' and things like that. His new book doesn't propose any solutions to economic problems that don't involve reducing the government or eliminating parts of it entirely. You're painting with too broad a brush here, Charley. I get that you're mad that Ron wound his campaign up with a surplus of money. I get it. I get your whole 'bandit of peace' spiel. But what is the point? If someone like you has a baby fit every time somebody in this movement deviates from principle even a little, people are just gonna be like, well, fuck this, I can't make these people happy and still live my life, so fuck 'em. You know? I think your attitude could be a net loss for liberty just as much as Ron's 'endorsement' of statism.
charley hardman

Lpviper, here's your entrance to this thread:

Anyway, I stuck this in here cuz Charley loves Ron Paul he told me so.

nobody was talking about ron paul. when i reply as you know i'm going to (because nothing has changed), you whine, "What is to be gained by attacking Ron Paul?"

don't fucking bring him up to me if you don't want an honest discussion, asshole. you're now going to write to me, seriously, that a career statist parasite isn't espousing salvation via the state? fuck off.

Charley. I get that you’re mad that Ron wound his campaign up with a surplus of money. I get it.

making shit up, your usual fallback routine.

deviates from principle even a little

more straw man tripe. three goddamned million 2008 dollars in plunder (i link once again, since obviously you never check to see WTF i'm referring to) is not "deviates from principle even a little". you're insane. and that's before RP's premise that the state is essential.

stop talking your retard filth addressed specifically to me. you're a disingenuous jerk and cultist. me? i live and support according to the ethics of liberty i espouse — something your idol cannot assert honestly, even if isolated to his campaign rhetoric. that, snot-nosed bastard, is a material win for liberty.
Lpviper

No, sir, that is one asshole with a MONSTER chip on his shoulder. Nobody's getting off on you but you, dude.

Later

Besides I like fucking with you because you hate RP so much. "Obama's better", he says. LOL

You kill me dude
charley hardman

“Obama’s better”, he says.

straw man. shocker.
Lpviper

And BTW I went to your damn website and read your damn post. AGAIN. And it's still the same as it was the last time I read it. And what I have to say to it is, yes, Ron is taking stolen money to be a member of Congress. Every one of the Congressmen does it. Now tell me, who would you rather have in Congress, a man who preaches principle on almost every issue, or a neocon asshole who votes the party line because the boss told him to?

Again, technically you are correct, Charley. But what good are you doing with your stuck up libertine attitude toward Ron Paul?

I'm a disingenuous jerk? Maybe. Cultist? No, not so much. I'm just learning my way through this stuff bit by bit, and while I understand the wrong within what Ron Paul does, I don't see how he can advocate for liberty in the Congress if he doesn't at least make a living. He doesnt go on junkets, he doesn't take their health insurance or their pension. So basically you are philosophically bashing the man who is the best of a very very bad lot.

It must make you feel like a big big man Charley. I don't know why you even take the time to read my 'retard filth'. Obviously you would be better served by going in the bathroom and jerking it while you have a mental debate with Mises or something.

Cheers
Lpviper

And nice slapping around the one guy in the fed gang who wants 1976 dollars to be the same as 2008 dollars. That's helping.

The fight to take back money and again make it a commodity like any other in the market is the fight of our time. Publicly bashing the one 'fedgoon' who is on the right side of the issue seems like kicking yourself in the dick.

Never mind, I'm sure you barter or pay gold for everything, right? Great. Guess it's just too bad for the rest of us suckers who are still stuck on the plantation, right?