Tuesday, June 15, 2004

George Washington Award for Honesty

The George Washington Award for Honesty goes to Zack Bass. When the shit hits the fan, yall can't say Zack lied. I would like to thank Zack for his continued honesty. Others in the FTP/FSP would like to deceive people as they try to take over. Zack has said all along he would not stand for this. Now some in the FTP/FSP would like to distance themselves from Zack for damage control reasons. Who is next? They knew who Zack was, and what he was doing all along. They encouraged it. That was Zack's activism. Porcupines are activists. They can't put the blame on Zack. In the end Zack and FSP have the same goals, they just disagree on the path to get there. At least Zack is honest.

65 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/11/NorthPinellas/Teen_charged_with_def.shtml

Like I said... the Lyndon Larouche of the Free State Project.

Libertarians don't instigate force OR _fraud_ against other people Jay.

You aren't a libertarian.
You are a scumbag.

11:49 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So now, RingDing-boy is claiming on yahoo groups that he has hired a lawyer to sue Jason for libel.

With what money Jay? You live at home with your parents - you seem to have no means of employment - (aside from Ebay scams)

So how are you going to sue Jason - and for WHAT? Merely reporting your MULTIPLE charges of fraud?

Lemme Guess....It's all some big conspiracy against you? You didn't actually SCAM those people out of thousands of dollars? Just like the pornography on Zacks/Larrys computer was ALL just a BIG conspiracy....

*snicker*

12:34 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am hoping that was Jay's "young and dumb" past, and did not look into it very deeply. Jay is still young, and can hopfully learn from his mistakes(I don't mean become a better criminal). Jay has not been targeted by us.

12:47 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jay....

You got caught once and then, when the courts were leniant with you and you didn't get a record... you turned around and DID IT AGAIN - as an ADULT.

There is NO 'Youth and inexperience' excuse on this.

Youth and Experience might let you slide the first time... but you just kept on doing it EVEN AFTER YOU WERE CAUGHT the first time.

Thats pathological.

There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with you.

If you were truly remorseful for your actions you would be working HARD to pay back the people that you ripped off - BOTH TIMES - and not engaged in righteous indignation about being exposed for your crimes.

"Goodman was able to make contact with 24 of the victims, and their claims added up to about $2,000. He charged Denonville with grand theft. He said Denonville went into a diversion program for juveniles and ended up without a conviction on his record."

http://web2.wsvn.com/news/articles/local/C17875/

1:01 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Young and dumb" last till about 30 years old.

1:14 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a 9 year old who knows better than to steal from people.

There is no excuse for this behaviour.

It's just plain WRONG, BAD, UNETHICAL

And what's worse is - he is running around the internet right now trying to cause a stink because people are now very aware of his criminal behaviour or will be, which he admits he pled guilty to - but insists that because the courts were leniant with him by not forcing him to have a criminal conviction entering adulthood that somehow this makes his crimes morally acceptable.

It's ridiculous.

1:23 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just read the news about the fire in Grafton - and would like to donate a few dollars to help the family out that lost their home.

Is there a way to send them some money through your website?

Thanks
A concerned libertarian

8:57 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WOW. Zack Bass has been removed from the FSP forum. He is no longer holds the "most posts" record. http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=;action=stats. JasonpSorens is the new #1 poster. I guess they are trying to 'clean up'.

11:34 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is a little late to try to clean up now! Maybe JasonPSorens can write a new essay?

11:51 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why is there such hostility to Jason Sorens over this? Is Jason saying obnoxious things about the town people?
No.. he is not.

From what I can gather, Jason Sorens is going out of his way now to not just "expel" these FTP jerks from the FSP and has vowed to personally protest these people if they do show up in NH.

What more do you want from the FSP to make this better?

We can't physically stop these people from moving to NH if they have their heart set on it. But we will join you in trying to stop the obnoxious ones from disrupting your life by whatever means are at our disposal.

You tell us - what do you want?
I mean - there are lots of people moving to NH every day that have nothing to do with the FSP... is it ONLY FSP that you have a problem with even if they are merely trying to enjoy some of the same freedoms that you enjoy by living in the "Live Free or Die" State?

12:57 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Philosophically, I have no problem with people who want to start "free town" projects and put together a local majority of migrators. It's a free country, and a free movement; do what you like!" -JasonPSorens

1:14 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That quote is only a few weeks old.

Why has the FSP waited untill the day before the big meeting to start this cleaning? Because it did not show up in print untill last Sunday?

You did not want to listen to me a month ago, why do you want to hear the same things again now? Because the press is looking?

1:19 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jason has been aware of the Grafton situation for months. Why did he decide to change his tune yesterday?

1:23 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Why is there such hostility to Jason Sorens over this?"

What hostility? Please provide some quotes.

1:25 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes - he wrote that awhile ago.
His most recent posts on the FSP discussion board and on some of the yahoo groups are quite different.
It is absolutley true that the FTP cabal are free to move to the State and there is really nothing that the FSP can do to stop them. However, there is common ground between the "save grafton" people and those FSP who are not in agreement with the behaviour of Zack/Larry, Jay and company.

So I guess I'd like to ask the question again:
You are unhappy with the Free Town Project. Many FSP are unhappy with the Free Town Project. What can the FSP do differently in the future so as to demonstrate their good faith? From the looks of things - I doubt many FSP are going to move to Grafton at all now. Partly due to Zack/Larry's behaviour - partly due to the obvious dislike expressed by the "Save Grafton" people. So what else would you like?

1:25 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know why this situation with Grafton got as awful as it did. As for myself: The first I heard about the FTP was months ago - and our family was interested in moving to a place where other libertarians were going to be. This was actually not due to political considerations - but due to the fact that we wanted to be closer to people with whom we share common values.
But I didn't see much happening with the project until - as you correctly state, the news started reporting on it.

I then started downloading the yahoo groups where this was going on and just quietly observed with I guess you could call fascinated horror. We then phoned John B, on an unrelated matter - and Roz told us about this creep. She was very dismayed about it all.

I then read Mary Queen of Scotts articles on the FSP discussion board and admit that I was amazed at how blase people were about the stuff she was reporting.
I didn't know what to say about it at the time. I was disgusted by people defending the pervert Larry - but was not aware of the other criminal activity of his little clique.

The Libertarian movement has been plagued by things like this in the past, and as such people are cautious to jump to conclusions or make a quick snap judgement about things until they are 100% sure that things are not on the up and up. This is part of how the libertarian movement avoids factionalism and infighting that would tear it apart and destroy the hard work of activists.

So yes - I was amazed at how long it took people to get a clue about Larry/Zack and Jay.... And I am guilty as charged for taking my time before jumping into the fray. But from the moment we heard about the "Save Grafton" website - my husband and I both wanted to join as "Friends of Save Grafton" - on the principle that one should not impose one's values upon unwilling people.

So - anyways: That whole process took me about 6 weeks of watching, observing and cautiously weighing what was going on before acting.
But - I am convinced that the people of Grafton have every right to be upset with the Zack Bass Bunch. I support you. I don't know what else I can do at this point to make that clear.
Sorry for not reacting sooner.

And you are right - I didn't pay that much attention to it - until it hit the press because it didn't seem that serious. But after it hit the press I paid very close attention. That's why I'm here now.

I can't speak for Jason S - or for the FSP. I can only say that I was lazy in not being more vigilint about my association with the FSP when there was such creepy behaviour going on.

Sorry.

1:40 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would like FSP and JasonPSorens to admit what they are about: taking over a state, town by town. I don't think he would have started a movement if all he wanted to do was move to NH and enjoy the freedoms we enjoy in NH. Anyone can move to NH. Many people do. Many do not move in with a group and plan to "take over" the local government. I don't see what FSP and JasonPSorens can say to convince us here in NH that their ultimate goal is to just move here to be our new friendly neighbors. I guess the only way to prove it is to do it. But it seems like JasonPSorens wanted to have some of "his" people aka members of FSP aka members of FTP aka members of NHLA to move in to NH ahead of him and set up his Libertopia essay dream.I know many libertarains are decent good people. I am not talking about them. They would just move here if they wanted to,not start a movement of liberty lovers aka militant big L libertarians.

1:58 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I know many libertarains are decent good people. I am not talking about them. They would just move here if they wanted to,not start a movement of liberty lovers aka militant big L libertarians."

That's fair enough. I just want to know if you object to the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire? I mean - if instead of the FSP, the Libertarian Party of NH had simply issued a "Move to NH" kind of campaign would that have been seen as threatening?

I've been reading about a project similar to the FSP by a bunch of Christians hoping to move a bunch of people to an area so they can be together, live Christian lives and preserve their values.

Is is just libertarians that you are worried about en-masse immigration to the State? Or would it be any group of like-minded people? What if a bunch of Amish people decided to uproot from PN and move to NH would that be a problem?

2:22 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well..Would these Christians have a plan on yahoo about how they are moving to Grafton to take it over? Would these Amish people start a movement to take over the Grafton local government? Would either one of these groups even try to do that secretly? Who knows how I would feel about a different group migrating to NH and/or Grafton,NH. I am concerned about RL aka real life. In Real Life a group of libertarians called the FSP chose NH as their "free state" and members from the FTP chose Grafton as their "free town". Now members of the FSP are saying they don't want to be associated with the FTP. uh-oh! Members of the FTP are or were members of the FSP. The FSP can pretend they have nothing to do with the FTP,but we all know the truth.

2:37 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the truth is that the FSP just wants to try and shake the bad publicity that has been created for them by the FTP. if you notice, this campaign of dissociation didn't start until the newspaper articles showed up. now Sorens and Phillps are crapping their pants and trying to hide the FSP's true goals of taking over the state. the FTP just got a bit out of their control, that's all.

anyone who believes that the true goals of the FSP is just to "promote liberty" better wake up and smell the roses. don't let them try and convince you otherwise. hopefully this will be addressed fully in tomorrows meeting. the FSP must be held in the same disreguard as the FTP if we dont want their kind invading our town.

2:52 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good for you.

Do not allow ANYONE to force their way of life on you.

Those who come to New Hampshire to "change" the state through government means SHOULD be stopped. Only those who come to be left alone, literally refugees of the loss of liberty in other states, have any legitimate reason to stay.

I'm a member of the FSP and relatively new to New Hampshire, but I believe it is very hypocritical for anyone to utilize the force of government (i.e. legislation, lobbying, politics, etc.) to make change when they believe the force of government is immoral in the first place. That type of person only really wants one thing in life: power over others.

I came to New Hampshire to be left alone, not to change others, and especially not to use the most immoral force on earth, the government, to change others.

4:05 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Somebody said

"anyone who believes that the true goals of the FSP is just to "promote lliberty" better wake up and smell the roses."

I believe that what people signed up for was just that.
I don't see the Free State Project as some sort of conspiracy. I think it is an interesting plan to try and achieve more liberty and freedom than most people are currently enjoying in the US.

"don't let them try and convince you otherwise."

Well - I'll tell you what. That's why I signed up. I didn't sign up to "take over" or anything like that. I'm opposed to such action. Freedom requires "live and let live". Which would mean that even if I disagree with the values that some may have about government and taxes - it is not right for me to force ANYBODY to go along with my views by any means.

"hopefully this will be addressed fully in tomorrows meeting. the FSP must be held in the same disreguard as the FTP if we dont want their kind invading our town."

Ok - so basically, your position is that you want to smear all 5000+ freedom oriented people who have signed up for the free state project, because you don't like "our kind".

What kind of people is "your kind" of people?

I'd really like to know. This is extremely informative to hear from NH people themselves about exactly who they want in their state. I was led to believe that NH was a very freedom-oriented culture. If this is not true - It would be best to find out now, before making the move.

Thanks for your responses.
I appreciate the time you are taking to let us know how you feel about all this.

4:56 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The big meeting was today. I don't feel like I heard any answers...I heard alot of the same thing....We want to be your neighbor....and it's not just Grafton...kinda like the Borg... resistance is futile...assimalate....or millfoil....or, your way of life will be made to service us. As a NH resident, I don't appreciate being targeted by a group that hides their true agenda... I'm sure that many of these people are nice as individuals, but we are a group of individuals, not a group with what appears to be
a hidden agenda.
I heard Alaska is available.......

5:02 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agreed. The meeting was pretty frustrating. The folks from both the FSP and the FTP made every attempt to avoid saying what is really going on - that this is a big political experiment, and we just happen to be the guinea pigs. Not a good feeling.

6:29 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Legally, can we as a town, change regulations, or enact any law(s), that would limit growth. By this I mean, limit the amount of land subdivision, or the number of new residences created? I don't think we can tell any individual that they can or can't live here, provided that places to live are for sales and available. But, to me, the thought of an individual within their group buying large amounts of land to subdivide it off to others within the FTP/FTS to flood us with 200-300 new residents, would be what would cause us the most damage. Can we control have fast we want to grow? Also, I would like to know if we can keep land owners, who really live in Florida, or some other state, from voting if they have not taken up permanent residence here. This would limit their political impact on us as well.

6:48 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The short answer is yes. We can decide things like minimum lot size, which would limit the number of lots that can be made by subdividing a larger plot. Some NH town have gone so far as to limit the number of new residences that can be built in a calendar year.

Also, there are state laws relating to the sale of subdivided lands and condominiums which the FTP folks will have to abide by. For instance, subdivisions resulting in more than 15 lots have to be registered with the Attorney General's office before any lots can be offered for sale. That makes it hard for them to be done secretly.

There are also state law requirements relating to treatment of wetlands. This is one reason why planning boards are important, and possibly one reason why the FTP folks are so opposed to them.

In short, the FTP people will have to abide by the ordinances of the town and the laws of the state. Their plan only works if the rest of the town sits by and lets them take over.

8:02 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You might want to look at some of the articles on the internet by columnist Elizabeth Nickson about the impact of those kinds of regulation upon lands and zoning.

Her article about what happened to Salt Spring Island - which was published in Harpers Magazine last year is quite illustrative. I think it was called "Saltspring Island - Where the Bees Suck"

I think that by all means, with your property you are free to not sell it to people whom you don't want to sell it to. However, dictating to others what they can do with their own land is basically the same as telling them that you should be able to control their property more than them. That's communism/socialism.

So let me ask the question again - is that the kind of people that are "your kind" of people? Is communism more attractive to Graftonites than libertarianism?

Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts and feelings on the matter.

9:59 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, in your world any land use regulation, no matter how reasonable, is automatically to be called communism? That's not only flat-out ridiculous, it indicates that there's no room for discussion of these issues in your mind. It is an attempt to stop the conversation by throwing out an emotionally loaded word rather than discussing the merits of the idea. Come on back when you can discuss these things rationally.

6:19 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And you only prove mine - you don't want a dialogue, you appear to simply want to bully the people of this town. Sorry, but if you and your friends want to come here, you're going to have to deal with us on a rational level. If you can't persuade us that your positions are beneficial for all, you will get nowhere. That's how traditional New England democracy works.

9:07 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok - let's try a reasoned discussion on the issue of zoning.

What is your definition of ownership? Do you believe in private property rights? How do you define "ownership of property".

Do you believe that an individuals ownership of their property is properly subjected to the "consent" of a comittee of other people?

9:51 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good, let's do that. I think, however, that if you want to talk about zoning, starting with a discussion of property rights might be a bit indirect. Let's forget zoning for a bit and concentrate on the idea of property rights. In this post, I hope to establish that property rights are not absolute, and see how you respond. I'll start with a definition of property rights so you know what I'm referring to:

"Property rights" means a group of rights that determine what we can do with property. First, we can claim to own it. That means we have the exclusive right to possess and use the property. "Exclusive" means we can exclude others from the use or possession of it. We also have the right to sell it, rent it, divide it, grant it in a will,and give it away. This is why property is often referred to as "alienable, divisible, and descendable." There are other rights that may or may not attach to property when we obtain it, but I think it's not necessary to go into them at this point.

However, these rights are not absolute. That's because if they are, then economic and social power can be aggregated by the aggregation of property. If one guy own all the land, then he gets to call himself anything he wants. Historically, these people called themselves "king."

In more modern times, we have limited the rights of people to use their property to disadvantage others. Most simply, we usually don't allow others to let the costs for their use of their land spill over onto others. Think large hog farms, cattle feed lots, and cement factories, all of which can be devastating to abutting property owners.

The spillover effect is usually referred to as a "nuisance," and an aggrieved abutter can go to court, which can order the offending property owner to internalize the costs of his actions by making him pay for the clean-up.

This is an example of how the property rights of one person can be limited, but in this example, the primary problem is that the one person's right to use his property is infringing on the right of the abutter to use and enjoy his. So, this is no more than a clash of property rights, with the court deciding how to apportion those rights. Society also has developed the means and rules for limiting property rights when people use those rights to infringe on other important rights.

I'll stop for now, as I think that's a good starting point. I'll check back later to read your thoughts. Thanks for the opportunity and the offer to discuss this.

10:58 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for your response: Here's a few things to think about:

"However, these rights are not absolute. That's because if they are, then economic and social power can be aggregated by the aggregation of property. If one guy own all the land, then he gets to call himself anything he wants. Historically, these people called themselves "king."

Your statement that property rights aren't absolute is an assertion. The follow-up statement does not obviously or naturally completely follow from that statement.

So let's just start at that - to begin with.
What are rights? And by that I mean - an actual definition of rights, not just a listing of various legal permissions.

The Declaration of Independence stated the following

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

Do you agree with this sentiment?

11:20 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A small correction - my statement that property rights are not absolute is not a bare assertion, it is a statement which I later support with my brief illustration on how property rights are limited by the notion of nuisance. Is it your position that my illustration does not show one mechanism by which property rights are limited? If so, why?

As to the quote from the Declaration, yes, I do agree with it. However, as you point out, it is a "sentiment."

If you disagree with my definition, or better yet, enumeration of certain property rights, would you be willing to post your definition of property rights? Then we would have something more to discuss.

11:28 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cheers and Applause to the person elaborating on the zoning and property issue that was posted earlier....
As I reflected upon yesterday's meeting, it occurred to me that NOT ONE person was ever given a straight forward answer...I checked out the FSP website, and, yes, it state that they do not endorse this and that...The members will belong to OTHER groups that will endorse those things.... (glad I have wading boots..) The impression I got from reading from the website is that FSP is just going to get them here..what they do from there is their own business.
the people of Grafton AND New Hampshire are getting screwed..and we're not even getting kissed.... How sad!

12:55 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"A small correction - my statement that property rights are not absolute is not a bare assertion, it is a statement which I later support with my brief illustration on how property rights are limited by the notion of nuisance. Is it your position that my illustration does not show one mechanism by which property rights are limited? If so, why?"

I agree that property rights do NOT include a right to pollute other people's property or infringe upon other people's property rights.

So we have common ground there.

I mean don't you find it ridiculous that a doctrine of law even exists with the idea of "acceptable levels of pollution" - Only GOVERNMENT could come up with some crazy shit like that, or put a cap on the amount of money that people can sue for - when individuals have been harmed by toxic and harmful pollutants.

So that is a free-market solution for you - for the problems of people who would abuse others, and instigate force against others by pollution of their property and inflicting harm upon others. There should properly be a tort system that recognizes that polluting other people's property - or water, or air is a harm and if people engage in such activities they should be held criminally if not legally/tort wise responsible.

I am totally with you on the issue of individuals rights to not be assaulted by people pollution. We just have different remedies for the problem. Your solution hands off the powers concerning this to government - which is often co-opted by BIG BUSINESS to allow them to get away with goddamn bloody murder! That's not right!

In my view - the crime of polluting people with toxins and harmful substances would be considered more than a tort - and lobbyist for BIG BUSINESS (who are often existing and profting from CORPORATE WELFARE) wouldnt be able to run to their friends in BIG GOVERNMENT to cover-up and mitigate on their behalf.

Now - back to the issue of property rights.
I think we need to have a proper definition of rights.
Rights are always negative. By that I mean - a proper right, never imposes a positive obligation upon other people.

"Rights" to "health care" or Housing, Or Jobs, Or what have you - smuggle in a positive obligation upon other people.

So before we talk about property rights - can we agree about the difference between a "right" and a "legal permission"

One is unalienable - the other is granted by, made possible by, or forced by governmental decree or regulation.

Is that fair enough?

Thanks again for your thoughts on this.
I really do believe that people who are opposed to the libertarian ideas probably have a lot more in common with libertarians than they know.

In that sense - this is the only positive thing to come out of this whole sordid mess. Beyond the nasty rhetoric of some assholes in the FTP - it's giving people a chance to community with each other about things that we both feel are important.

Thats more common ground that we have. In the very least - whether one is for the FTP or opposed to it - Whether people are for Zoning laws or opposed to them - in the very least, we both care about these issues at least enough to discuss them right?

Thanks again

8:18 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your thoughtful analysis. I am a bit surprised, however, that you make a reference to what you assume to be my solution to problems relating to pollution, since I have not mentioned my position on that topic. I merely used the pollution examples as an illustration of one party externalizing the costs of his or her use of property, and the remedies available to the harmed abutters. We can discuss my feelings on pollution laws later, if you wish, but for now I'd like to stick to the property rights issue. I hope you don't take offense to this comment.

I'm intrigued the difference you identify between rights and legal permissions. Can you elaborate on that? I think you're saying that rights come from a different source than a legal permission, and I'd like to see how you make the distinction. Is a legal permission ever attached to a right? Could you include an explanation of why you think a right is unalienable?

Sorry for being so inquisitive, but I think this is really interesting.

8:59 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

-----------
Anonymous said...
Legally, can we as a town, change regulations, or enact any law(s), that would limit growth. By this I mean, limit the amount of land subdivision, or the number of new residences created? I don't think we can tell any individual that they can or can't live here, provided that places to live are for sales and available. But, to me, the thought of an individual within their group buying large amounts of land to subdivide it off to others within the FTP/FTS to flood us with 200-300 new residents, would be what would cause us the most damage. Can we control have fast we want to grow? Also, I would like to know if we can keep land owners, who really live in Florida, or some other state, from voting if they have not taken up permanent residence here. This would limit their political impact on us as well.

3:48 PM

------------

This discussion of the power of zoning has nothing to do with settling issues of rightful liberty now does it? THIS is why libertarians oppose so-called "zoning"; for it's political socioeconomic abuses.

And how would flooding Grafton with 200-300 new residents cause you damage? Will they build concentration camps next to their "compounds" to enslave and torture the "old-timers?" Maybe they will wallpaper "downtown" Grafton with pages from Screw Magazine? 200-300 libertarians isn't enough to win in a 3-way local election race let alone a 2-way race, a fact which is irrelevant anyways considering the "Free Town Project" is nothing more than a few internet personalities with more time and server resources on their hands than they know what to do with.

Zack Bass aka Larry Pendarvis is a single-issue political theorist hack who doesn't know the first thing about building a community and doesn't represent the core participants in the FSP that want to join in voluntary and productive free-trader relationships with current residents.

Rather than using the term "take over" how about we use "take back"? Even if I was not born in NH, surely you would agree that I have every right to "take back" my rights, freedoms and liberty no matter where I was born or currently choose to live? The above quote is quite telling, really, as is the general response by anti-fsp/ftp activist, activists that obviously self-select inclusion into the "statist pig" collective Zack rants about (with much more colorful Deadwoodesqe terminology I should add). What are you people afraid of? Why would you need to engage in ad hominem attacks against FSP participants collectively by focusing on an individual that has largly been shunned by the FSP community, for more than a year now I might add. If you want to criticise the FSP or self-describe "libertarians" you need to educate yourself on the Philosophy of Liberty and then make an honest attempt at debate, not this "he's a pervert! he uses naughty language!" crap that seems to be the limit of your complaints.

Are you afraid of a few dozen (if that) moving to Grafton to take advantage of it's now-rare property freedoms? Will you hold it against us if we think being prohibited from building low-cost, non-standard, high-density, mixed-use developments like cohousing or arcologies and populate them with our family, friends and fellow like minded persons? Or do you think we should be prohibited from building basement apartments and backyard flats for low-income people, running a small business out of our homes or living upstairs from an existing business, or even telecommuting from a home office because it's not an "approved use". How do these prohibitions of zoning and planning have to do with protecting the common rightful liberties of all? Nothing, that's what. They are merely the tools of oppression used by the ruling political class to impoverish the working class and enslave them into perpetual socioeconomic dependancy. But I'm sure you would rather cut off your nose to spite your face by instituting zoning. How about a nice tax raise as well come next november?

Ever wonder why the cost of housing is so high? Or why the cost of living is so high? Or why wages are so low? Certainly not because the free market has been allowed to work it's magic. No, I blame those petty xenophobic busybody mafioso control freaks that will use any amount of violence to satisfy their envy, and then use taxpayer money to put a happy face sticker on it. It's up to you if you wish to self-select inclusion into that pitiful collective.


- Mark

1:14 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One more thing...

-----

"You ARE an agent provocateur."

- Joe Swyers, Leadville, Colorado city councilman (joe aka solitar) on FSP forum addressing "Zack Bass" circa early 2003

---------

- Mark

1:33 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I really really wonder if Larry cut some sort of deal with Federal Government types to infiltrate and agitate. Maybe that's why at this point there has been no new trial ordered for his child-porn charges.

He and his little peanut gallery of provacaters are now going out of their way to create more in-fighting within the FSP.

For instance if you read Charlie Proulx's statements about what Keith said, after Keith had apologized - it would appear that both Keith and Charlie are on civil terms with each other again. Yet Larry has gone out of his way to repeat the statements that Keith made to try and stir things up again.

I agree with the other poster who commented on JAYs website. It was either done with ridiculous immaturity or was designed to discredit the efforts of the FSP or those who may in any way be associated with it. (Officially or not)

I also find it interesting that some of the "Save Grafton" people have now latched onto Larry and Jay as being "more honest" than the FSP leadership. It would appear that perhaps those who are making such statements are really NOT upset with the behaviour of Larry and Jay and various other FTP types. That's just their excuse to get people riled up.

What will happen to the cause of "saving NH" from the FSP - (not saving Grafton from the FTP) if Larry and Jay dissapear or crawl back under their rocks?

Larry and Jay provide the anti-FSP with ammunition on a daily basis to keep NH/Grafton people feeling afraid, wary and upset.

In fact - it's quite a nice arrangement that you guys have worked out.

I am not speaking to those residents of Grafton who quite properly have varried and justified misgivings about the FTP carrying out their plot to "take over". I'd be upset and worried about Larry and Co moving to my hometown too.

No, I am speaking to people who see Larry and Jay as just an excellent means to garner sympathy and support for anti-FSP sentiment.

Heaven help ya, if Larry and Jay just go away.
Far better to continue feeding the trolls?

Wouldn't this blog be more _honest_ if it's stated purpose was "Save NH" instead of Save Grafton?

7:46 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's really funny is Thanks to this blog, and the efforts of various people, I think that the ONLY (formerly)FSP people actually moving to Grafton are going to be Larry and Jay and their 4 friends.

So you are going to get exactly what you want by encouraging them.

They will think that you admire them and welcome them - and they will come.

That's really cool. Great for Grafton!

8:40 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rebecca,

I can understand your concerns. If a bunch of people were plotting to take over MY town and force their values upon the residents there via coercive voting practices, I would be up in arms too.

My family has been involved in Libertarian activism for over 20 years. One of the core beliefs of tenets of libertarianism is that imposing one's values upon other with the use of force or fraud is absolutely 100% wrong.

Some people (in libertarian circles) don't object to voting on certain issues because they don't view their vote as an instigation of force or as their consent to the use of the instigation of force. They view voting as a mechanism of self-defence. I don't agree with them.

I think a better approach for the FTP would have been to take out ads in the local paper and announce their interest in moving, hold "open to all" public meetings and such to gage the reaction of these communities. Just like when people with big development plans have to inform various city governments and residents of their plans. This should have been done as a curtesy and measure of politeness, peacefulness and simply being a good neighbor. IMHO not doing this was stupid and arrogant. I think it's because very few of these people have lived in a community as small as Grafton is - and have NO idea just how tight-knit such communities are.

My home community numbers 2000. I believe that if the FTP had done what they have done with Grafton to my community, you better believe my family and neighbors would be manning the baricades at this point.

The FTP crowd obviously didn't go out of their way to reach out to the entire population of Grafton. And you are 100% correct in your statement that apparently this little cabal just acted like they arrogantly could do whatever they wanted, consequences be damned. It is 100% accurare to say that there is no moral or legal obligation upon the FTP or similar projects to consult with the people/residents about their plans. However - common sense of small-town life would have told them that they should have reached out and informed Grafton people about their efforts.

They obviously don't know what it's like to see Grandchildren of One faction in a small town still arguing 40 years after the fact, about what the Grandchildren of another faction said or did. I've seen such smalltown politics play out about all sorts of matters. These people obviously don't GET that in a small town, you don't get to just wipe out your email address and name and move onto a new group of people once you have offended people in a community. When you engage in rude and obnoxious behaviour, in a small town - your family hears about it, your friends hear about it, and even your kids can end up duking it out in the playgrounds with the families of those people whom you have offended. Thats part of why small towns are so great. Everybody knows everybody. There is an inclusion and sense of community that many people have never in their life experienced. Of course, it's not cool that everybody knows everybody else's business, but that's just a trade-off that one makes when you move to small town. For instance, in my hometown, I can't walk down the street chewing bubblegum without 3 people asking me a week later what flavour it was. In small towns people are often more polite, friendly and careful with their behaviour because by sheer economics of human interaction there are tangible and real consequences for NOT being a good neighbor.

I think you are 100% correct that it's fairly obvious that the "Save Grafton" people have demonstrated that the FTP and FSP have failed to demonstrate that they understand even how to BE good neighbors despite their intentions.

I believe the reason the FSP is not as culpable at this point is that the FSP is a different entity than the FTP. The FSP hadn't planned on what the consequences of large numbers of people moving into a small community would be. That was not their goal. 20,000 people is a drop in the bucket to the rest of NH's population - whereas, 200 people (as claimed by one of the FTP) is a HUGE voting block to the population of Grafton.

I think it's funny that the FTP yahoo group has now been shut down by the FTP crew. They didn't like being "infiltrated", "attacked" and having a whole bunch of new people join THEIR internet community - so they shut the doors.

It's an interesting little hypocricy on their parts don't you think?

In any event, based on the reaction by the town, I think it's safe to say that there are not many FSP at this point who even want to come to Grafton. The ones who still do - well, all I can say is good luck to them.

Winters and conditions strike me as particularly harsh in your neck of the woods. And I don't think these Floridians are going to last under such conditions, especially if they haven't got ANY friendly neighbors to help them through any rough patches they might endure. That's another aspect to living in a small town which none of them have a clue about. There isn't a whole lot of resources out there to assist people if they make poor decisions, or run into trouble and since they have pissed off most of the people, they will probably have difficulty finding people to help them out if, for instance their car breaks down, they are snowed in, or even if they need a jump-start.

It will probably also be pretty damn lonely. They haven't got a clue. It's one thing to have to adjust to a small town, just in and of itself. It's quite another to have to adjust to living in a small town when nobody in that town wants anything to do with you anymore.

These FTP creeps can't even handle the heat of an email flame war. I wonder how well they will psychologically deal with people actively crossing the street to avoid them and being treated in a hostile fashion.

So, mission accomplished Rebecca.
I doubt they last the first winter as well.

4:37 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow - All of 8 FTP people on the new Yahoo Group that Larry and Jay have set up.

I thought all the freewheeling publicity you guys were creating was going to bring new recruits to your FTP project in droves.

So what, you are down to 8 now?

heh.

7:57 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How many on the list are not Tim Condon, Bob Hull, Zack/Larry, You and Mike Lorrey, Shawn and Linda or Bruce?

10:08 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is no need for me to join the new list.

I only wanted the info off the old list. You know, the planning, plotting and scheming. I got what I wanted long before the list was shut down. The part that sucks is that I can no longer link to message #s to back up the claim. Why is FSP trying to hide the truth?

I'm sure Jay and Zack will tell the truth if asked, and provide copies of the email, if they have it. I mean, Amanda Phillips, Tim Condon, Mike Lorrey, and John Babiarz did blame everything on Zack. They were attacking Zack like he was their worst enemy. And FSP had only dropped Zack as a member the day before. It seemed like FSP/FTP had made a plan to place all blame on Zack. ...you can't go by the freetownproject website, that is Zack's, he is a nut, we don't like him, he won't give up the web site...

10:35 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Woo Hoo 4 people have now been converted to the FTP.

Only 191 more to go!

Good luck when you can syphon of exposure from the FSP anymore.

You'll be reduced to maybe just bringing in 175 mail order brides to shore up your numbers huh?

11:10 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW, has anybody else noticed that Larry sorta looks liek L Ron Hubbard?

11:11 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Holy Shit! That is probably the idea.

Sell package deals of asian ladies in shipping containers on 5 acres of swamp land! What will that go for?

They can use the yet to be sold asian ladies as part of the voting block.

12:07 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Believe it or not Jay, most people don't have to purchase partners.

It's true.

2:42 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course if you weigh 375 pounds (according to your mug shots on the Florida Offenders website) and are a bum who still lives at home with his mommy and daddy, the appeal of paying prostitutes for sex and mailorder brides makes a lot of sense I suppose, right Jay?

4:32 PM

 
Blogger Save Grafton said...

Can we stop the personal attacks?

Who cares if Jay is overweight? I don't want to hear about Zack's past. It does not matter, he is not the issue. I don't want to lose focus.

Lets get this out of the way Jay.
Jay, did you reimburse all the people you ebay scammed?
I assume you did as part of the deal, but don't really know. You should clear that up. I saw some one else claim you did, but I would like to hear it from you. Especially if the FSP is going to try to slam you with your 'criminal past'. If you made restitution, what more could the FSP expect?

5:55 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why did you steal money from people Jay?

And more importantly, after you were caught the first time, why did you keep doing it?

I'd really like to know how you rationalized this process in your mind.

What was the justification that you gave to yourself of scamming people out of their hard earned money?

And even after you were caught - how did you then convince yourself that you should do it again and again?

As to the issue of why people keep bringing it up: While it's true that people make mistakes... most people learn from them and don't do the same things over and over again.

You clearly didn't learn from your mistakes and your indignation about being treated poorly now, seems to indicate that the ONLY thing you regret is that you got caught. Not that you robbed people of their money.

Whats even more disturbing is considering the product that you were using to scam people out of their money. Wasn't it gold coins?

Ya know: Many libertarians are in the market for gold and bullion since they distrust fiat currency. Considering your libertarian leanings, you must have been aware of this. Did you actively target libertarians in your scam?

1:36 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that is really funny, now the democrats in Grafton are going to use the fear they generated off of Zack/Jay to institute more governmnet regulation over 'their' town and ALL of their neighbors. Don't fall for it Graftonites! Zack is a hermit and besides running a business out of his house or painting it purple, he ain't gonna affect you and yours in the least (NOTE: if anyone, not only Zack orany 'libertarian', violates the basic rights of others then each and EVERY libertarian will cry out for justice through the courts). All libertarians are really about is choices: in schooling, in control of your rightful property, in all personnal regards - as long as that choice does not harm other folks rights or persons or property (NOTE: 'property values' are NOT a right and float freely on the market, or at least 'should').

So imagine, Mr. Hull manages to sell off some acreage to fellow libs, and they bring their families, and these families absolutely refuse to join the school system (have you 'lost' anything yet?), and they form a private cooperative homeschooling network perhaps jointly purchasing an acre and building a 'schoolhouse' on it. After some time of testing and refining, they finally have some sort of working 'school' which educates children in reading, writing, math, perhaps civics, ethics, the constitution, history - and they totally ignore all the socialist propoganda and teaching methods which drum out creativeness and individuality from children... then it happens, they decide its ready for primetime and open the doors to ANY others that might wish to garner the same type of education for their own children...

So now, the 'locals' have a choice... is this so awful? Is this what you are afraid of? If you don't subscribe to the 'education' taught at this school... don't go! And golly gee, you won't have to help pay for it! NO impact upon you and yours... interesting how libertarianism allows for a variety of different and far ranging views, without force...

'Taking Over a Town' my ass! It is simply an expedient phrase used by use to convey the allowing of freedom to exist within a community... libs will gleefully allow you to do as you wish, teach your children socialism, tax each other to death, pass regulations on yourselves to restrict housing or property rights... go ahead, have fun - just leave us out of it! Why do you insist on using government to force others that have their own ideas of how to do things with their own property and children?

Now THAT is plain scarey - sure, be wary of EVERYONE until they prove their integrity to you - dissallow Zack from your property and businesses... this is a GOOD thing! We totally encourage you to use your own property as you see fit! And if anyone does something illegal - string 'em up!!! But until that point, stay out of other peoples business and lives and property!

Michael
PS: posted anonymously because I couldn't remember my dang password

5:00 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Michael- I BEG you and your friends to stay away from the homeschooling movement. Of course all your families that you move here should homeschool if they want. But I don't think you know a lot about the homeschooling movement. They will NOT want to be attatched with the FTP or FSP. People who homeschool do it for the love of their children,wanting the best for them the educationally and socially. It is a BIG movement that has worked a long time at making sure that homeshcooling is legal and accepted. I feel you will all taint that! Man,were you in the same yahoo group as Zack and Tim? Cus they were discussing "shocktown" and all that entails,not homey quiet homeschooling families fleeing from being harassed.

7:52 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not Zack that is the problem. The FTP is the problem. Please stop focusing on Zack.

8:15 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it worse if Jay targeted libs?
Would it have been ok if they were dems?

Jay paid people back. Lots of crooks don't. What more do you want?


Michael, should I start posting your quotes?

8:17 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

more responses from Michael(ME):

****Hey Michael- I BEG you and your friends to stay away from the homeschooling movement.
I am involved in a variety of groups, not just the 'Free Town' one - the educational aspects of my activism has no 'zacks' or any others who you might consider detremental to the homeschooling crowd. I will provide email references and links to sites if you are interested in seeing what 'positive' things are being done.

Of course all your families that you move here should homeschool if they want. But I don't think you know a lot about the homeschooling movement.
I would never discourage anyone from homeschooling, I do have some specific ideas about other alternatives though - neighborhood schools where parents may get together to hire teachers for specific subjects they might feel they are at a disadvantage to teach, etc. You are correct in that my total knowledge of homeschooling is quite inadequate currently, this is why I defer to others who are active and possess alot more knowledge in this area - don't worry, I will not parade myself around as some sort of 'homeschool' poster boy! LOL


****They will NOT want to be attatched with the FTP or FSP.
ME: there would never be a 'connection' - totally separate goals etc


****People who homeschool do it for the love of their children,wanting the best for them the educationally and socially. It is a BIG movement that has worked a long time at making sure that homeshcooling is legal and accepted.
EXACTLY! I totally support the right of parents to homeschool with as little or NO interference from the state - to this extent I would provide my vote in their cause, perhaps help print up pamphlets and literature, perhaps help print up educational materials and such at deep discounts in an effort to make homeschooling even more available to lower income families. I would not be trotting out 'donkeysex shows' (ridiculous term that) or do anything which would stain or strain the 'movement' of homeschooling. I believe it to be the bedrock of liberty and in need of promotion and protection is all.


****I feel you will all taint that! Man,were you in the same yahoo group as Zack and Tim? Cus they were discussing "shocktown" and all that entails,not homey quiet homeschooling families fleeing from being harassed.
ME: as I stated elsewhere, those discussions and terms were used in very specific ways with specific targets in the audience. In fact, I probably posted a few 'wierdo' remarks myself (I say wierdo because when taken out of context or looked at by someone who does not understand libertarianism and the necessity that some libs feel of putting others through a 'purity' test - these terms were mostly used to that effect and not meant towards Grafton residents or even anyone outside of the 'group')

****Michael, should I start posting your quotes?
Who are you and what quotes? If you feel inclined to do so, fine - I don't have anything to hide - though I might be hard-pressed to explain some things in terms that non-libs would understand, but go ahead, hang out my dirty laundry... I am human, with all the frailties and bad habits that entails... I also have some positive, hopefully endearing aspects as well...

michael

10:32 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michael, how much did you pledge to FTLD?

What is FTLD?

11:04 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mike, lots of people homeschool in Grafton.

11:06 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

more more more...

****Anonymous said...
Michael, how much did you pledge to FTLD?

ME: nothing

****What is FTLD?

ME: Free Town Land Development Company (though not even incorporated, its actually a funny story to go through the gyrations this inept appearing group has done - at one point I believe the treasurer refused to open a bank account on principle and thus all monies were kept in a coffee can or the like - LOL! I have a bit more sense than to through money into someone else's "can" - LOL)

****Anonymous said...
Mike, lots of people homeschool in Grafton.
That is VERY encouraging! This suggests to me that people are 'do it yourselfers' and not willing or desiring to run to government to fix things they can do for themselves either individually or in groups.... Grafton is alot more like us libs than either of us realize..


BTW: all those posting Anonymously, could you use some sort of a name (doesn't have to be yours) just so I can keep various folks straight... thanks so much!

michael

1:21 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>Grafton is alot more like us libs than either of us realize..

No, it is more lib than YOU realize. I live in Grafton. Have you ever even visited? Yet, you seem to know what is best for us, but don't even know us or what we do. That is the issue.

10:02 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah! maybe THAT is the 'real' problem - this perception that the libs who might move to Grafton are doing so with the 'we are coming to SAVE Grafton' - there are a few you feel that way, but that is only their opinion obviously. This 'saving' is totally subjective: if Grafton was populated by mostly socialist or communist peoples, then they certainly would not look to our desire to enhance private property rights or reducing government interference into all citizens lives - in fact, we would be considered Evil and totally antithetical to their desires. As far as our 'limited' research determined, Grafton was NOT such a place: mostly populate by 'rugged individualists' and people who have little desire for government nannying. This is one of the reasons that Grafton was chosen - other towns might experience too much 'culture shock' if the government were even minorly dismantled as those towns can only see survival through their local government-one one the stats we looked at was percentage of welfare recipients including government provided jobs as an indicator of this tendency to be infatuated or not with government. Were we wrong in believing that Grafton was/is populated by responsible, self-dependent, individuals?

I could safely say that most of those in the FTP are less interested in 'saving' Grafton, but rather, are more interested in providing for themselves and others common defense against the intrusions of government - each and every citizen (old and new) would decide for themselves the level of intrusion as opposed to deciding for others.

I think we got off to a bad start, but I think that the increased communications between the current and possible future town residents is a benefit to all involved - do you agree?

The 'next step' will be to actually meet those folks who are intending to move, instead of the leadership of the FSP who in know way represent us in this micro-migration. Amanda is a nice person, but she cannot speak on the integrity, intentions, honesty, and values of folks she knows nothing about.

michael

11:47 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>Amanda is a nice person, but she cannot speak on the integrity, intentions, honesty, and values of folks she knows nothing about.
----------------

That is exactly what she does. So, do you understand why I don't believe her?

12:11 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, I haven't visited Grafton OR New Hampshire - it sure looks lovely and I bet the winters are a bit worse than those I experienced in Colorado.

Yet, you seem to know what is best for us, but don't even know us or what we do. That is the issue.Absolutely Not! I do not wish to tell you how to life your life AT ALL! I trust that YOU are the best judge for that particular position. The same for me - I am the best judge for making decisions in my life.

The only changes 'we' or 'I' would bring is to reduce the involvement of government in EVERYONES lives. I would be fighting in YOUR corner if you desired to paint your house a color you determined to be attractive yet the local government decided against it (I realized that Grafton does not currently have these type of regulations, but I would be fighting the future incursion of them).

If you are of the mind that it is 'OK' to tell other folks (and use the force of government to back up your claim) how to live their lives, then , yes, we will be at odds AND I would totally agree with you in your assessment that you absolutely do not want more libertarians in your local area...

How do you think that we will negatively influence your life in particular?

michael

12:55 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amanda is a nice person, but she cannot speak on the integrity, intentions, honesty, and values of folks she knows nothing about.----------------

That is exactly what she does. So, do you understand why I don't believe her?
I wouldn't either. Ths FSP seems to be a bit paranoid about its perception in public, understandable, BUT, I simply will not portray myself in a fraudulent manner. I AM a libertarian. This means a variety of things, but it follows that:
I believe that it is morally wrong for one person to use force or fraud against another. This does not change if you happen to be a member of a group of people, no matter the size of your group. You also cannot 'give' the power to use force in instances that you yourself did not have the moral right to do so.

Now, what follows from that 'principle' is:
(1) It is morally wrong to punish or use force against people depending upon what the inject or ingest into their own bodies. (I support the repealing of drug laws)
(2) It is morally wrong to punish or use force against either of two consenting adults engaged in a voluntary trade (I support the Right of all people to sell their talents and bodies for labor, sex, or what-have you)
(3) It is morally wrong to use force or punish others in the use of their own private property. (I am against all zoning laws and restrictions)
(4) It is morally wrong AND economically detremental for the government to interfere in any voluntary trade 'on the market' (I am against all government involvement in how people choose to run & operate their business, buy or sell their own labor, etc)

Amanda does not speak for me or for my actions or the actions of those in the FTP. Her purpose at the meeting the other day was to distance herself and the FSP from us (the FTP) because she believed we were a potential liability to her goals. so be it.

Trust or don't trust Amanda - up to you. But if you have questions regarding me, someone who desires to possibly move into your town - then ask me. If you have questions about the FSP, then ask her (them). I am an FSP member BUT, my specific actions regarding Grafton have NOTHING to do with the FSP - the FSP got me interested in New Hampshire and I formulated my own interest in Grafton.

michael

1:16 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Grafton shitbags. THE PLAN IS TO TAKE YOU OVER BY FORCE! Don't get confused. I'm an FSP member and we talk about it all the time. We also formulate stories to spoon-feed this blog and twist your little hillbilly minds into our way of thinking. Haha, you are puppets.

You haven't had an original complaint or issue, that has not been planted by an FSP representative since the first week of inception. The funny thing is, I can tell you this now, and still be in control of you by the end of the day. The lights are a little dim in Grafton, and they will soon go out!

There is no plan to move to Grafton. Do you understand that shitbags?? Understand, when I say "shitbags" I'm talking about everyone in NH, not just Grafton. The plan is to TAKE OVER, migration is not necessary, who the fuck would live in Grafton on purpose anyway? BTW, NH wasn't chosen because it is the most " free state" it was chosen because the people who occupy it are generally the most ignorant residents that occupy any state and they are as defenseless as school girls when it comes to politics. You are completly predictable with every action you take. This blog is all you can do to defend yourselves against the impending take over?? That is why Grafton was chosen. Do you think the same response would be offered out west??? Not a chance, they would have skinned us alive for throwing Zack at them, but you people are great, you take it right in the ass and ask for more. Zack was great wasn't he?? I don't think anyone could have done it better. You responded with the usual predictability, just like what was planned. Haha, boy, it was beautiful!

Grafton will be TAKEN OVER! don't you worry about that. The snare has already been tripped by your very own top official. It's all over but the publicity for the next endeavor. This will go down in history as one of the most profound political coups in America's history, and ya'll git to be a part of it, so, look alive! Everyone is watching.

8:20 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home