WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

812

If they close your bank account, or gofuckme, or confiscate your money, so you can't afford competent legal aid, or the cost of exercising your basic rights?

Like they did to atilis gym and dozens of others?

That right there was cause, by itself for armed organizations to march on the officials and banks who ordered it.

Violation of due process demanding immediate remedy: Denying competent legal council through interfering with someones income, assets, or livelihood.

Because this is the sort of thing that biases a case in a huge way. It is the sort of thing that leads to irreparable harm to the outcome of a court case, and peoples rights. It's what leads to gargantuanly-one sided plea deals and peoples lives ruined. It calls for immediate response because political and court outcomes, even years later, often don't remedy these cases at all. And worse, political appeals and grievances are often not answered swiftly enough to do anything. They're ignorned. And if the law and representatives and tech and banking refuse to change this, if they refuse to rectify what is so clearly a redline for action, a mortally serious violation of the law, tantamount to threatening someones life, AND if there isn't gravely serious consequences for officials and companies that engage in it as a practice willfully or "accidentally", it absolutely should come down to organized and armed protest outside their workplaces and anywhere else that is lawful.

Will that sort of response happen and be normalized?

No, probably not.

Should it?

yes, without any doubt or reservations.

The standard absolutely SHOULD be: Interfere with someones due process, their ability to hire legal council, and good luck to ya as hundreds of armed protesters descend on your tech company, surround your bank, encroach on your official's or executives home, or encircle your court house and jail.

The standard should be in my opinion: Obey the law, at all levels, obey peoples rights, DO not FUCK with their ability to afford an attorney, or their bank accounts, OR absolutely 100% face armed protest.

There should be no more disarming, no more tolerance for pro-leftwing police pushing peaceful protesters, armed or unarmed, into crowds of pro-regime violent leftwing mobs or the use of paid undercover federal agitators and professional violent "activists". There should be no more tolerance for this fuckery, nonsense, and criminality.

None.

These are 100% cause for armed protests, if only because these are the only deterants to provocateurs, "informants protecting the public" like the FBI did when they encouraged, and armed, a muslim terrorist to bomb a public event in texas. Armed protests are the only way to assure armed officials, who aren't obeying the law, don't murder protesters like they did on the steps of the capitol during the J6 protest. Armed protests are the only way to assure that bolshevik pro-democrat police unions don't "stand down" for rioters showing up to your protest to assault and murder you like they did to Jessica Doty Whitaker and her unborn child. Armed protests are the only way to assure they don't assault you without provocation, either through riot squads, or rioters they enable, that they don't confiscate your property and force you ("kettling") into a position where you have to walk through the middle of a mob of "counter protesters" working with leftwing universities and police.

If the 'law' has an issue with this, peaceful armed protest, and the guys on the ground in uniform or undercover want to make an issue out of it, tell them:

you came to make sure they don't stand down for terrorists who plow vehicles through your protest while you're exercising your first and second amendment rights. Tell them you're armed to make sure they don't think obeying orders is more important than obeying fucking law.

This is what the standard should be.

Remain peaceful but show up armed, in numbers. Do not disarm. Do not cooperate. Exercise your rights fully, within the law. Do not point your rifles at officials, or make threats. Just show up armed to protest, and protect yourself and others.

the public will not be pushed around anymore by criminals released on never-ending bail, mobs of worthless do-nothing socialists, and terrorist bureaucrats in uniform who use these very labels on us to justify their lawlessness nonsense.

Know your place banks, big business executives, and public employees. No your god damn place public servants . Do not interfere with peoples free exercise of their rights. Do not interfere with their right to legal counsel, and their private affairs such as their banks accounts.

Obey the fucking law, or enjoy armed protest at the front door of your workplace and everywhere else you go .

↓ expand content
If they close your bank account, or gofuckme, or confiscate your money, so you can't afford competent legal aid, or the cost of exercising your basic rights? Like they did to atilis gym and dozens of others? That right there was cause, **by itself** for armed organizations to march on the officials and banks who ordered it. Violation of due process demanding **immediate** remedy: Denying competent legal council through interfering with someones income, assets, or livelihood. Because this is the sort of thing that biases a case in a huge way. It is the sort of thing that leads to irreparable harm to the outcome of a court case, and peoples rights. It's what leads to gargantuanly-one sided plea deals and peoples lives ruined. It calls for immediate response because political and court outcomes, even years later, often don't remedy these cases at all. And worse, political appeals and grievances are often not answered swiftly enough to do anything. They're ignorned. And if the law and representatives and tech and banking refuse to change this, if they refuse to rectify what is so clearly a redline for action, a **mortally serious** violation of the law, tantamount to threatening someones life, AND if there isn't **gravely serious consequences** for officials and companies that engage in it as a practice willfully or "accidentally", it absolutely should come down to organized and armed protest outside their workplaces and anywhere else that is lawful. Will that sort of response happen and be normalized? No, probably not. Should it? yes, without any doubt or reservations. The standard absolutely SHOULD be: Interfere with someones due process, their ability to hire legal council, and good luck to ya as hundreds of armed protesters descend on your tech company, surround your bank, encroach on your official's or executives home, or encircle your court house and jail. The standard should be in my opinion: Obey the law, at all levels, obey peoples rights, DO not FUCK with their ability to afford an attorney, or their bank accounts, OR absolutely 100% face *armed* protest. There should be no more disarming, no more tolerance for pro-leftwing police pushing peaceful protesters, armed or unarmed, into crowds of pro-regime violent leftwing mobs or the use of paid undercover federal agitators and professional violent "activists". There should be no more tolerance for this fuckery, nonsense, and criminality. None. These are 100% cause for armed protests, if only because these are the only deterants to provocateurs, "informants protecting the public" like the FBI did when they encouraged, and armed, a muslim terrorist to bomb a public event in texas. Armed protests are the only way to assure armed officials, who aren't obeying the law, don't murder protesters like they did on the steps of the capitol during the J6 protest. Armed protests are the only way to assure that bolshevik pro-democrat police unions don't "stand down" for rioters showing up to your protest to assault and murder you like they did to Jessica Doty Whitaker and her unborn child. Armed protests are the only way to assure they don't assault you without provocation, either through riot squads, or rioters they enable, that they don't confiscate your property and force you ("kettling") into a position where you have to walk through the middle of a mob of "counter protesters" working with leftwing universities and police. If the 'law' has an issue with this, peaceful armed protest, and the guys on the ground in uniform or undercover want to make an issue out of it, tell them: you came to make sure they don't stand down for terrorists who plow vehicles through your protest while you're exercising your first and second amendment rights. Tell them you're armed to make sure they don't think obeying orders is more important than obeying fucking law. This is what the standard *should* be. Remain peaceful but show up armed, in numbers. Do not disarm. Do not cooperate. Exercise your rights fully, within the law. Do not point your rifles at officials, or make threats. Just show up armed to protest, and protect yourself and others. the public will not be pushed around anymore by criminals released on never-ending bail, mobs of worthless do-nothing socialists, and terrorist bureaucrats in uniform who use these very labels on *us* to justify their lawlessness nonsense. Know your place banks, big business executives, and public employees. No your god damn place *public servants*. Do not interfere with peoples free exercise of their rights. Do not interfere with their right to legal counsel, and their private affairs such as their banks accounts. Obey the fucking law, or **enjoy armed protest at the front door of your workplace and everywhere else you go**.

(post is archived)