Category Archives: Debates

Debates, no mater where they originated.

Anti corporate: not anti capitalist

Recently the MSM went digging for quotes from original organizers who apparently wished to claim to be organizers but don’t want to identify themselves. These fools wanted to claim the Occupy Melbourne was an anti capitalist movement. When did I see it advertised as that? Never.

Just more bullshit from Marxists and their cronies trying to claim ownership but in a tangential way now that the name Occupy Melbourne is too hot to handle.

Occupy Melbourne was never Anti Capitalist

So to clear up the created confusion by a poorly researched initial two paragraphs we give you this:


So there you have it corporatism is a form of socialism, hence all the bank bailouts, another reason we went to occupy. So in reality occupy was an anti socialist protest that got infiltrated and sandbagged by socialists of various stripes.

1377186290240There were of course some rather lame claims of  this being a site for conspiracy theorists ( what a Nixon term ) so we leave you with the  god father of 20th century conspiracy JFK.  JFK decided it was time to start minting silver coins again through EO 11110 and then he was killed in broad daylight. Co-incidence? We’ll let you decide, we just wanted to make you aware of that.

We generally don’t promise or offer solutions, we just raise issues. Only you can decide and demand the world you want to live in.


Government paid troll caught in the act?

Hi JS, we have decided to not approve your comment as it is misleading and contained numerous errors.
Firstly we are not a socialist group, if you wish to review our thoughts on socialism please click the following link.

You can use the search feature on the left to find our previous articles by keyword search. This media outlet has been the official media site of Occupy Melbourne since March 9 2013. The ‘.org’, twitter and facebook groups were hijacked and refused to respond to the wishes of the occupiers. We decided to remain anonymous to keep our ego’s out of the way of the message.

If as a lawyer working for the government, you are going to post general disparaging comments against activist groups from your Facebook account from work when you are ‘working’ for the government, I really need to ask: Are you skiving off from doing your job or is this your actual job?

I mean seriously are you a paid troll? Because it really looks like it.

Or this this just massive cognitive dissonance?

If you know how to look through the media mayhem we produce you’ll realize we do some serious investigative journalism, that’s why when we talked about Mega Mosques in Melbourne the mainstream media listened.

Don’t ask how we know, but we have proof.
We suggest you reread you copy of 1984.

Should we expose the name of the suspected paid troll? We’ll do a poll from the comments to this article.

Robert Fulton is not ‘Anonymous’

Who goes to a protest advertised as the Million Mask March and doesn’t take any kind of mask or face covering, and they tries to hijack the march to blockade some tram tracks, and then attacks the organizers?

Apparently Robert Fulton does.

This is then followed by pages of mindless bleating on Facebook, and appealing to fellow retards to join in the ePenis jerk-fest.

The whole point of having masks is to prevent the individual ego from subverting the common goal of the group. Its not about you, its about us.

>Robert Fulton

> confirmed as retard

apologies to all other unconnected Robert Fultons.

Just for reference; Anonymous has always had a presence at Occupy, largely in the background. We saw Guy Fawkes masks at City Square on Day 1, Anons have worked behind the scenes for a long time.

You Can Check Out But You Can Never Leave

This is how some of us feel about the Occupy Movement. Courtesy of Statler and Waldorf, famous muppet critics:

Statler: “This show is awful!”

Waldorf: “Terrible!”

Statler: “Disgusting!”

Waldorf: “See you next week?”

Statler: “Of course.”


Occupy freedOM is an inside job !

The youtube clip “Occupy is an inside job” by Sanuel Williams (see a few posts down) , inspired me to write this response.The clip is a crtical re-assessment of the Occupy movement which appears to have been widely infiltrated by government forces and while I believe this to be true I also believe that there is a way forward if we re-interpret Occupy not so much as a political movement but as a birthplace of a new consciousness. The birth may have been messy and painful but that doesn’t mean something good cannot grow out of it, but only if we manage to get rid of long-held false beliefs and red herrings.(I won’t say what those are as they differ from person to person)


The Occupy movement was certainly hi-jacked by agent provocateurs and silly greenies and socialists, it was also centrally “planned” inasmuch that it had a common origin , Occupy Wall Street, which in turn was created by Adbusters who used the Spanish occupations as a model. The model was flawed, which is why the same problems arose everywhere. The model was flawed because it presumed that all protesters are essentially good and come with the highest motivations for the common good too, while in the end they operate with the same egocentric low consciousness as the people they are fighting. However, i doubt it was planned by the governments, as they probably would have preferred not to have the hassle in the first place. or maybe the gov knows that people are essentially full of shit, so all they have to do is send in a few agents and watch the whole thing blow up.

When Samuel William is saying that there isn’t a truly free market and that’s what’s causing our problems, it’s is oversimplifying things a bit. Partly our problems are due to banks and companies becoming more un-regulated over the last 40 years, the whole neo=con agenda was deregulation. Although i agree that the wrong kind of restrictions are also problematic.

Ultimately what I have found is that whether it’s capitalism, socialism, environmentalism, feminism and kind of -ism will lead to problems if the wrong people with the wrong agenda are behind it and because if left unchecked they will all lead to extremes which will end up hurting someone. Any -ism has failure built in because language and semantics are not going to solve anything, the only solutions are spiritual, that is people need to come from a higher consciousness, which means not coming from an attitude of selfishness and greed and valuing an excess of material goods more highly than interactions between humans and our interconnection with the planet we all share.

The Free Shop is a little microcosm of proof that we have more than we need and curiously the more we share the more we have. This flies in the face of socialism and environmentalism which operate on the idea of limited resources, and it flies in the face of capitalism too, as the shopkeepers do not operate in order to create profit (while at the same time creating abundance for themselves and others out of seemingly thin air). And strangely, if there is no profit agenda, women’s work, which is largely unpaid or underpaid in society, because it’s based on the idea of sharing and caring, is valued just as highly and so there are no feminism agendas in the Free Shop either. Any “competition” between Freeshopkeepers to provide better goods also ultimately benefits everyone. The Free Shop is a model of what could be.Of course in the real world you get people with lower consciousness taking stuff from the Free Shop and selling it for a profit on Ebay ! But why should people buy it from Ebay if they can get it for free at the Free Shop? So in the end it’s self-regulating. And if the government wants to ever prevent people from sharing with each other, I would like to see them try!There aren’t enough agents in the world to watch every human interaction and nobody can take away your thoughts (although admittedly Facebook is trying).


It’s hard to imagine a world without money at this stage, but it’s not impossible, as all our money is fake anyway and it’s our un-evolved consciousness which is preventing us from taking the next step. Instead, we blame each other, or some evil forces (Doyle ,Obama, Monsatan) that are supposedly pulling the strings, when the real enemy, our egocentric ,territorial reptile consciousness, is still inside each and every one of us. In that respect I fully agree: Occupy is an inside job.

Fresh off the Press

Never let it be said that we do not allow our critics to bring their views to the table. Unfortunately almost all of them can’t even work out the simple task of how to use WordPress, so this is an example fresh from the FB jungle.

“Anoun E Moose: i have been through the site and i agree that it offers opinions (many of which are of embarrassingly poor linguistic construction and heaped with libelous assertions) but what it doesn’t offer is a process of critical thinking into the issues it raises or any form of solution based analysis. personally, i wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole because every time i read an article from there i have to go take a shower. admittedly some of the meme’s are somewhat comical but as a credible activist resource out of a rating of 0 to 10 i would rank it as a -1.”

Now, I find this rather interesting, because I share his views somewhat, but my target would be a different one :It’s exactly how I feel about Facebook, which is essentially a sewer of badly worded ad hoc opinions mixed in with often unfounded personal attacks, dressed up with cat memes. Sockpuppet accounts aplenty and misinformation central. Also a government spying tool on those who dare use their real name. After reading Facebook sometimes, I don’t need a shower, I need a blood transfusion and a memory reset.

What some people fail to understand, is that this website often uses controversy and hyperbole mixed with humour to get people thinking, while at the same time adhering to what we believe at the very least approximates the truth. A bit like an like an online “Chaser”, we take the piss but we do not publish lies.

In addition we try our best to avoid pseudo intellectual analysis and politically correct language, which all too often make a mockery of the human experience.

Ze censor?


You can take a horse to water but you can’t make it drink

In response to Ozhouse once again making itself look foolish here: ( I feel the need to help Eddy overcome his lack of knowledge.

So it’s difficult to know where to start with a chap like Eddy, he is all over the place in several different directions.

Eddy claims that: [Israel became a sovereign nation the exact moment the US said so. Palestine is not a nation because the US hasn’t said so – despite over 100 nations recognizing their sovereignty. Those nations do not matter. The US matters. Why? Because they have the fucking bombs to back up their pretty pieces of government paper.]

Really?  The U.S. created the state of Israel?  A brief review of the Wikipedia page (not that Wikipedia is a totally solid source but good for a basic information) here: ( shows that the U.S. had little to do with the legal and technical formation of Israel as a state.

Now in previous writings here ( I showed where Eddy was  incorrect and in fact while people may think Australia is a sovereign nation, just thinking it does not make it so.

If Eddy were to do some light reading here ( he might find that the courts are just as confused (hypocritical) as he is.


Now in my opinion the best way to clear up any confusion is to ask questions.  So I devised a list of question will allow anyone who has done some research can realise the truth of the situation.

If Australia is an independent sovereign nation please tell me the date on which this transpired? (so I know which day to celebrate as independence day)

What is the provision in the constitution that allows for the creation of a citizen?

Does the Queen of Australia exist?  if it does please show me the date and ceremony of the coronation of the Queen of Australia.

Is money and asset or a liability?

When did birth certificates start being used and what is the legal purpose of such a document?

What is an Australian government bond backed by?

If you want the answers you may comment below

Now Eddy did bring up a good point:  the writers of the constitution did afford the ability of change.  In the Australian constitution section 128 allows for change given a referendum requiring: majority of electors voting approve of the change in a majority of states.

Now I think the difference is that I don’t trust the government, i don’t trust lawyers either (they can never answer my questions 😦 ) I don’t trust bankers and I don’t trust the media to get it right…  So when they act outside the constitution on a regular basis one must ask why it is allowed to happen…  I for one would prefer to settle the problems that face us with a pen and not a sword, mainly because of the cost of dry cleaning 😛

So to be crystal clear what I advocate is not for corporations to run the world, rather corporations would be in the service of their creators…  under a charter as Chomsky points out in the corporation:

I have one last question which should reveal my perspective:

Eddy do you believe in the principle of consent?

For example:

And thus if Eddy doesn’t make an effort to respond in a manner that actually builds something constructive we have to assume he fits into this category:

Good luck Eddy I would love to hear a real reply to the questions and my challenge still stands, when your ready to accept.

Where Eddy James gets it wrong…

After much deliberation I have decided that Facebook is possibly the worst place to try to convey information to those that already know everything…   Of course it’s almost impossible to show anything to people who know everything, and thus we might conclude that it’s the people that are the root of the problem not the platform alone.

Now in recent time I have been interacting with some of the more unstable people out there and have come to the conclusion that they may in fact be horribly ignorant  or possibly socialists in disguise (just to pun the transformers).  I reference my recent expose on Eddy James and here ( I showed how Eddy deliberately takes people out of context, is clearly a hypocrite and is too cowardly to take up my challenge of an open public debate about his worldview.

So please allow me to deconstruct Eddy’s misunderstanding of the world.

Eddy has an about us section here ( which states: [OzHouse believes political and economic conspiracies are the norm, not the exception.]

Eddy says Australia has to register with the U.S. S.E.C. Okay I can understand that he views something like this link ( as necessary.  although I myself and a great many other people are perplexed as to exactly why Australia is a registered corporation trading on the U.S. S.E.C. I can accept that he thinks it’s only to do business.

you can see Eddy’s explanation on the links provided on the last article or alternatively enjoy some samples here


However Eddy makes the claim that Australia is a sovereign nation…

While this may be widely accepted in the minds of many, that does not necessarily make it fact.   Quite clearly our constitution made us a dominion of the the United Kingdom, and our head of state it Queen Elizabeth.

So naturally my question to Eddy is this:  On what day did Australia become an independent sovereign nation?

What I find amazing is that while he believes in political and economic conspiracies, he cannot understand what’s clearly on the books… it appears he ignores information that interferes with his perception of reality.

I will throw him some clues though because i can’t help wanting to help those less fortunate than myself…

Eddy if banks have to balance their books, and a bond is an asset to the holder and a liability to the issuer, then the Australian government bonds are a liability to treasury. yes?

Now if the books have to be balanced what is the asset that backs the liability known as an Australian government bond?

Let’s remember that nothing (least that i am aware of) of value or use comes into existence unless labour is imbued into it…

Eddy may want to look up the term Register in a law dictionary and figure out why the government is submitting to the (regis) trar of another country…

And what has has all this legal research bought us?  well looking through history, the revolutions the change, they have all been based on ideas, and frankly the glorious revolution in 1688 bought about much change and created the English bill of rights, the American revolution ultimately gave birth to the U.S. Constitution, which i will note both socialists and neo-cons alike want to destroy and have for the most part.

All in all the great question is how people should amicably communicate with each other? I think people should not take things too seriously, while maintaining an open mind to hear others is key.

The sad fact is [OzHouse believes political and economic conspiracies are the norm, not the exception.]  yet suffers from cognitive dissonance when shown documents like Australia the concealed colony which can be found here: (   It’s a great read if you haven’t read it you should…

As always I’m more than happy to operate in the open and i have nothing to hide, anytime Eddy want to have a debate about his erroneous ideas I will happily accommodate and post on youtube later, I’m all for letting the public decide.

Eddy James and

I’m sure many readers are familiar with the functions of facebook…   mainly to destroy interpersonal relationships and promote narcissism.  I recently Had a very interesting chat with a chap on FB, named Eddy James.

Eddy is somewhat twisted though, he likes to take others out of context and make ad-hominem attacks, and I have come to the conclusion that he is and out and out hypocrite

He posted an article about our conversation on FB and I responded to him, of course the Oz house website doesn’t allow people to comment below their articles, who would allow criticism?

so needless to say I posted a comment below their about us section found here:


Hi Eddy James

I response to your article here ( about the conversation below your FB post here:

and previous discussion here:

I can only say that clearly you do have an issue with taking people out of context and tarring them all with the same brush.
I can only say this to your ad-hominem attacks:
lol you make me laugh

If you actually want me to pick apart your ideology I can, but the old saying goes:
You can take a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.

My challenge to debate you about your worldview stands, I’m happy to operate in the open and not hide behind a computer screen

If you choose not to publish this comment then clearly you are a hypocrite as above you have stated: [OzHouse strongly supports freedom of speech]




Needless to say Ozhouse has chosen not to publish the comment, and thus Eddy clearly proves he is a hypocrite…

see this type of person is dangerous because they say they will do one thing, yet they do another, needless to say it’s deception and hypocrisy at it’s best.

I polished off the FB conversation with a little:

~I just tried to provide your audience with a link to the actual conversation, which i note you did not… you claim to strongly support free speech but clearly you consider yourself the benevolent dictator… lol Eddy you should come and have a beer with me sometime, i might know something you don’t


~see this is the hypocrisy of your ideology: in one hand you say your not a libertarian and yet in the other you say that you believe in private property, in one hand you say you strongly support free speech and yet in the other you censor responses to you, in one hand say your for the truth and yet you don’t post a full link or full dialogue but only your version of the truth. if you call me a libertard then I can only call you a hypocrite… but at least i’m right

Needless to say Eddy is suffering from some mental problems, mainly in the areas of IQ, Cognition and Memory.   Like the coward he is he refuses to step out from behind his computer screen, but I should expect no less from a coward.

The challenge to debate is still open, will Eddy accept?  Personally I doubt it

I hope I have cleared up any doubts about this particular matter, if Eddy decides to delete the FB post he made then I have the screen shots and they will be posted as a comment, it is far easier to click on the link and read the source material for yourself.

%d bloggers like this: