Blog Archives

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.

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: