Tuck Fheman : Decentralized Blockchain Technology & Doom Updates

Genius Gardening Hacks

@cable78

“Gardening hacks” you mean agriculture?

Any of you who have followed the deep state disinformation campaign over the last year, please watch this video.  This is Ken Dilanian attempting to forcefully corroborate the false CNN “wikileaks/trump email bombshell” for MSNBC.

Watch this CIA asset lie through his teeth with bobblehead media encouraging and reinforcing numerous false narratives as if they were common knowledge.  

Seeing this made me nauseous.  

There’s no cover anymore, no pretense of being legitimate, they just count on the gullibility of the majority of the audience.    

@wrecknician

Capitalism himself in the background of the Equifax hearing

Ending years of speculation about how much Palm Beach billionaire Jeffrey Epstein paid young women who claimed he used them as sex toys, court documents filed last week show he shelled out $5.5 million to settle lawsuits with three of more than two dozen teens who sued him.

Responding to requests from Epstein’s attorneys in a complex lawsuit that was spawned by the sex scandal, attorney Bradley Edwards said the politically-connected 64-year-old convicted sex offender paid more than $1 million to each of the three women Edwards represented.

Identified in court papers only by their initials or pseudonyms because of the nature of the allegations and their youthful ages, L.M. was paid $1 million, E.W. $2 million and Jane Doe $2.5 million, Edwards said of the settlements he negotiated with Epstein to end the lawsuits.

Jack Goldberger, one of Epstein’s criminal defense attorneys, on Tuesday declined comment on the revelations, citing confidentiality agreements that were part of the settlements. For the same reason, he declined to say whether Epstein paid similar amounts to settle roughly two dozen lawsuits filed by other young women against Epstein, claiming he paid them for sex when some were as young as 14 years old.

Murderers.

Please click the link and read the whole article. There’s too much there for me to just copy and paste.

The reason you pay for permits is because local governments are trying to make sure that the food you eat won’t make you incredibly sick and that the food they’re selling you is what they claim it is. They aren’t stealing from you.

They are stealing from you. They don’t rightfully own the property which they’re seizing, and they’re taking it by force, which means that it literally can’t be anything other than theft.

They aren’t seizing anything from you. They are charging you a fee, a really small one by the way, to provide a service that ensures the safety of everyone who consumes your products. You’re free to not pay the fee, but you won’t be allowed to operate on their property.

They are seizing from you, because you do not have the choice to opt out of their “service” or the respective “fees”. It’s a system of coercion, no different from a mafia gang and their “protection fees”.

You said, “You’re free to not pay the fee, but you won’t be allowed to operate on their property.“ Well there’s just one issue with that, they don’t rightfully own any property, because they’re a gang of thieves writ large. The government hasn’t taken any measure to acquire a legitimate private property claim to anything, least of all the territories it controls.

Our status quo is the equivalent of a tyrant breaking our legs, and then pretending to be our savior for monopolizing on the provision of wheelchairs to us.

The idea that there is a service being provided in the form of assuring the safety of the food, or that the product is advertised truthfully is also preposterous.

Government does absolutely minimal health inspections at the retail level, so any enforcement action where health codes are concerned are going to be on a “per complaint” basis.

As in, somebody still has to get incredibly ill, identify the source and report it before any action is taken, and even then, they have to make their own separate suit if they want any sort of reparations for their illness.

The government only uses the complainant as justification for continued aggression against the business owner, it doesn’t provide comfort and support to the injured party at all

It provides no service except to itself.

I’m always curious how someone like @alotteofchar makes their living or how the breadwinner in their family does.  I have a theory about people who advocate so strongly for government interference in our lives. 

edit:

and there it is:

Want to use this post to point out the mechanic of self-interested government deluding itself into necessity and the population into serfdom.

These people vote and they’re politically active.

As cities and states across the nation succumb to outrageous public debts owed the public sector keep this post in mind.

What pill is @alotteofchar’s?

Why is she untaggable?

Here’s another quick test: when you eat from a mobile vendor, do you even consider that they have a permit? no? chances are you are judging the quality of their food before you make a purchase based on how appealing it looks to you. perhaps through community promotion as well. what about the man in the picture? does his food look appetizing to you? would you buy from him if you were unsure if he had a permit? if yes than a permit is irrelevant. if no, then why do you buy from food trucks and other street vendors? logically, you will be equally unsure if they have a permit. what’s the difference to you if it isn’t to enforce your bias towards a police state?