The Shotgun Blog
« Campus Conservative conspire to be conservative | Main | An Ontario flag made in China is still an Ontario flag »
Thursday, March 19, 2009
I claim this right for myself
I do not grant you intellectual authority over me. Nor do I seek intellectual dominion over you. As such, I hold my right of conscience and the right to express my thoughts through language and other means as my right to take, not yours to grant me.
My words are mine to have, not yours to give.
If your position on this matter is in conflict with these basic demands, to respect these basic rights I claim for myself, then I will deem you to be my enemy.
I will fight you.
First I will fight you with words, I will fight you through public appeal, I will fight in courts of law, I will fight you politically, and failing all this, if necessary, I will fight you with violence.
You will not silence me.
Do not bother with diplomacy: I am not amenable to being negotiated with on these rights.
I seek only for the right to express myself. I do not require you to listen. I claim no dominion over you.
But if you, or others who represent you, seek to use force to silence me, then I promise you this: you will hear my voice. It will be a thunderous and uncompromising thunder. I will take this right for myself, by whatever means necessary.
I prefer that we can be respectful of each other. That we may, through our mutual respect for this right, live peacefully together in both agreement and disagreement.
Thank you.
Posted by Mike Brock on March 19, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
This confirms beyond all doubt that Brock is a fucking anarchist pyscho.
Posted by: MikeBrockIsAnAsshole | 2009-03-19 6:08:06 PM
It’s official: Brock has gone off the deep end.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-19 6:14:33 PM
No one seeks to silence you, Mike. It would be awfully hard to mock your arguments if you weren't allowed to make any.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-03-19 6:26:45 PM
No one seeks to silence you, Mike.
I think plenty of people seek to silence me (I use 'me' in the abstract sense), such as some religious fundamentalists around the world.
If I lived in a country like North Korea, I don't think much of my libertarian rhetoric would go tolerated, etc.
This was meant to be interpreted in the abstract, to make a point.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-19 6:30:19 PM
Mike,
Good stuff. Is there anything in particular you're responding to?
(Ending a sentence with a preposition makes me sad.)
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 6:40:26 PM
Good stuff. Is there anything in particular you're responding to?
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 6:40:26 PM
That's easy. It's the Illuminati, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, World Trade Organization, Independent Task Force on North America, FDA, and Club of Rome conspiracy to silence Brock.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-19 6:49:23 PM
Terrance,
Mainly watching what's going on across Europe and getting really angry about it.
Europeans are taking a usurping of their basic rights sitting down.
Makes me sad.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-19 6:55:44 PM
Stig,
The Illuminati really burns me up, too. Especially their plan to ignite Jupiter!
http://www.cuttingedge.org/NEWS/n1331.cfm
That entire website is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever found on the Internet.
I hope it is satire.
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 7:02:59 PM
Mike, point well made. We don't know each other, and even if we did, might think little of each other. Hopefully not. But the point is, that we can hate each other yet still defend freedom.
Posted by: TM | 2009-03-19 7:38:53 PM
That entire website is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever found on the Internet.
I hope it is satire.
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 7:02:59 PM
If you read it backwards and it keeps saying; Mike Brock is the Antichrist, Mike Brock is the Antichrist, Mike Brock is the Antichrist.......
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-19 7:42:36 PM
Hah, Stig.
I converted each character to ASCII, then added a bunch of numbers I got from the Book of Revelation, then converted back to characters again.
It definitely says something about you, but I can't repeat it here or the Illuminati will come and get me.
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 7:50:46 PM
It definitely says something about you, but I can't repeat it here or the Illuminati will come and get me.
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 7:50:46 PM
Or the Trilateral Commission. Bwahahahahaha
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-19 7:55:20 PM
The Trilateral Commission is just a psy-ops, Operation Northwoods-style disinformation campaign, distracting us from the real menace...
The Bilateral Commission.
And don't get me started on the Multilateral Commission
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 8:10:22 PM
The Trilateral Commission is just a psy-ops, ...............
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2009-03-19 8:10:22 PM
Bwahahahahaha. Did you know that Jim Balsillie, the RIM guy is a member of the The Trilateral Commission? Do you have a Blackberry, do you have it on all the time? They know where you are :-)
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-19 8:21:43 PM
Sure hope the HRC does'nt read this. It's against everything they believe in.
Posted by: peterj | 2009-03-19 9:07:23 PM
We'd like to negotiate rights to preprint this essay as the text of a greeting card with a single red rose as the front graphic. We believe it will sell well in Europe because they like flowers
Posted by: 419 | 2009-03-19 9:31:59 PM
It's not quite John Galt's speech, but it is shorter. :-)
A worthy sentiment. Nice work.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-03-19 9:35:33 PM
This was meant to be interpreted in the abstract, to make a point. - Then your point was obtusely made.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-03-19 9:41:04 PM
I hope the HRC does read it. Maybe they'll stroke out and we'll be rid of them.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-03-20 12:20:02 AM
I think plenty of people seek to silence me (I use 'me' in the abstract sense), such as some religious fundamentalists around the world.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-19 6:30:19 PM
Lets bring Brock's belief home to Canada. Is there more religious fundamentalism here than there was 40 years ago? Without question, largely due to large scale immigration. Yet Brock believes in open, unrestrained immigration. So the result he complains about was largely caused by him. Yet another example of libertarianism as an abstract theory that falls apart when confronted with the real world. Shangri-La doesn't exist.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-20 3:34:28 AM
Nice one, Stig, here's another: Mike, do you support the government's actions to fight domestic violence? The state has no place in trivial disputes involving two parties who have pledged to live together through good times and bad, IMHO. If an assault occurs, treat it like any other assault, I say.
Currently, there are all kinds of insane regulations in domestic matters: if a woman calls 911 during an argument, even if there is no violence, the police *have* to charge the man, have to take him from the home, even if it is his home. As a libertarian, and a young man who is engaged/married/in a relationship, what are your thoughts on that? Why have you never blogged about this? Seems rather pertinent.
You'll recall the case of Toronto city councillor Rob Ford, who called the cops when his wife started going batshit crazy on him and assaulting him...he got charged and had to leave the home. Does that sound very libertarian to you? It doesn't to me.
How come libertarians are always going on about monetary policy in the UK and Ron Paul but ignore enormous violations of liberty right here at home? Is it because you are too politically correct to address hot button issues like domestic violence? I think so, and you'll forgive me for thinking you to be a cherry picking clown.
Nice tough talk, Mike, and I see a 911 call in your future that will set you straight boy.
Posted by: Libertarians are gay | 2009-03-20 7:26:32 AM
I guess what I find most amusing about this, is that Christians in this country are always mocking queers, feminists, Muslims, etc. for being offended for various reasons. Christian social conservatives are quick to trumpet free speech up until some atheist shows up and buys and ad, and then they draw a line.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-02-23 12:19:50 PM
What I find amusing is that Christians seem to be the root of all evil as far as Brock is concerned. When are we going to see an article, or maybe another manifesto from Brock on the evils of sharia law, which continues to be pushed by muslims in Ontario. Or is Brock politically correct and Christians are open season but muslims not?
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-20 7:43:41 AM
Well, maybe the next time Mike Brock shows up on Mike Coren's show he'll remove his penis from between his legs and tell devout Christian Coren what he really thinks of Christians. Should be a good show.
You seem to be restricting your war on Christians to libertarian blogs that non-libertarians don't even read, Brock. Doesn't seem very brave to me. And as Stig noted, those 500,000 people arriving in Canada every year, almost none of them are atheists, nearly every one of them more religious than you are to some degree. And yet you ignore this in lieu of fighting "white" Christians. No wiggle room there: Pick one of atheism or immigration.
Why are you on the Blogging Tories blogroll anyway? It's for people who support the Conservative party, and conservatives, and you are neither. You are far, far from conservative and I don't want people like you associated with my movement. You talk about principle; how about you stop presenting yourself as a Conservative and a conservative? The Star recently quoted you as a Conservative blogger. That is completely false, except "butthead libertarian" blogger might not have fit the Star's narrative. Fuck you, Mike. Fuck you.
Posted by: Libertarians are gay | 2009-03-20 8:27:27 AM
The Western Stupid had another lunatic blogger not long ago. What was his name? Adam something?
Anyway, looks like another Llibertarian has shown his true colours as a creepy social misfit.
You llibertarians just love shooting yourself in the arse!
HAHAHAHAHA!
This site is such a riot!
Posted by: epsilon | 2009-03-20 8:51:27 AM
I find the real riot is reading these idiotic comments. People who ridicule other people's opinions but never present any of their own.
Financial and economic illiteracy is no excuse for arrogance. Disagreeing with someone's opinion is no excuse for stupid and irrational name-calling.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-03-20 9:02:55 AM
who needs an excuse ?
Posted by: 419 | 2009-03-20 10:36:09 AM
Charles,
So you are protesting the fact that I am ridiculing the numbskull who wrote this stupid article claiming that there is no place for ridicule.
And now you are ridiculing me by calling me a financial and social illiterate!
HAHAHAHA!
More Llibertarian double standards methinks.
I will ridicule and insult anyone I want. Especially clowns like you. The fact that you protest this means you only like the "nice bits" of free speech and are not willing to tolerate those aspects of free speech that offend you.
Go crawl back into your hole you politically correct little worm.
Posted by: epsilon | 2009-03-20 11:13:31 AM
"When are we going to see an article, or maybe another manifesto from Brock on the evils of sharia law, which continues to be pushed by muslims in Ontario. Or is Brock politically correct and Christians are open season but muslims not?'
Stig: I've criticized fundamentalist Islam plenty: http://noncogent.blogspot.com/2008/01/when-you-cant-fix-yourself-fix-everyone.html
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 11:50:18 AM
also, it was me who was the one who crashed the Ryerson-Macleans event and secretly recorded it, much to the chagrin of the presenters.
It was I that gave the blogosphere a good first-hand account of the sock puppets.
In fact, I've criticized fundamentalist Islam right on Michael Coren's show. And Mr. Coren actually told me I was being unfair in my criticism. That show was over a year ago.
Stig, you're an idiot.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 11:59:23 AM
Why are you on the Blogging Tories blogroll anyway? It's for people who support the Conservative party, and conservatives, and you are neither.
First of all, this is not true. The Blogging Tories is not a Conservative Party blog roll. It is, to use Stephen Taylor's description: part of the movement. For the BT, that movement includes libertarians. Even libertarians who are critical of the CPC.
Second of all, you underestimate just how many fiscal conservatives completely agree with me on my criticism, and won't be voting CPC next round; they'll probably just stay home.
I even ran into some social conservatives who can't stand the fiscal direction of this government.
I've received 10 emails of a support my criticisms (from conservatives) for every 1 ad hominem attack from someone like yourself.
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 12:09:39 PM
---advertisement ------
the ideal gift- celebrate societal meltdown and save the earth, show people who matter that you care !
colourful rant cards- 12 limited edition hasty notes for hasty decisions, made by hasty people with cruelty free recycled paper envelopes. ..and r a bonus for all you socially over-aware radical shoppers : hackers can tap your email account and the police can bug your phone- but it takes a proper federal search warrent to open your mail.. tendernss, taste _and security
12 cards...( several with roses ) ... $ 49.95
>> add to cart
>> restart iris scan
Posted by: 419 | 2009-03-20 12:16:25 PM
Stig: I've criticized fundamentalist Islam plenty: http://noncogent.blogspot.com/2008/01/when-you-cant-fix-yourself-fix-everyone.html
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 11:50:18 AM
What this rather weak, waffling criticism resembles is the standard repackaged checklist that Brock feels obliged to tick off, 9/11, Bali, Madrid, London, etc., while reminding readers that muslims "start from an unfair place, and that public perception is against them." Though I'm hardly surprised coming as it does from a open immigration multiculturalist.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-20 12:27:42 PM
Epp
Posted by: Charles | 2009-03-20 1:00:32 PM
Epsilon,
You are free to insult anyone you want and I am free to call you on it. I wouldn't have it any other way.
What I find amusing is gratuitous insults when absolutely no point is made. Is does not reflect well upon you. You calling me a clown and a worm proves my point. I wonder, would you have the courage to call me those things to my face? ... methinks not.
I would also encourage you to look up the meaning of free speech. It does not make me a hypocrite or against free speech to consider your behaviour to be idiotic.
Finally, your point about political correctness is absurd. Throwing around insults is not being politically incorrect. I believe Islam is a disgusting set of belief and I have no qualms pointing that out. That is being politically incorrect. Calling someone a worm is just stupid.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-03-20 1:11:55 PM
Charles,
Welcome to the world of social conservatism. Where logical analysis gives way to emotional appeal, arguments from tradition and positions grounded in blind faith!
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 1:26:23 PM
I will fight you.
First I will fight you with words, I will fight you through public appeal, I will fight in courts of law, I will fight you politically, and failing all this, if necessary, I will fight you with violence.
You will not silence me.
Posted by Mike Brock on March 19, 2009
Brock's brave words don't apply to Warren Kinsella. When Brock threatens Kinsella with legal action, Kinsella responds with " Wee Mikey was told to piss off, repeatedly, and he did. He's told anyone who will listen, all six of them, that he now won't sue. Chickenshit."
http://warrenkinsella.com/index.php?m=04&y=08&entry=entry080402-221742
Some blowhards can be quite amusing to read. Brock isn't one of them.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-20 1:53:42 PM
Question:
is Mr. Brock in the same play group as pot radical Russell Barth? Mr Barth is obsessed with threatening to sue anybody who he feels is anti marijuana, and Mr Brock is onto the same deal here -- minus the marijuana.. If anyone can answer that I can get them a deal on some wonderful greeting cards,,up to 50% off
----advertisment----
greeting cards up to 50% off
most popular message essays
most popular European rose motiffs
hurry! supplies are limited
we accept legal aid certificates
Posted by: 419 | 2009-03-20 2:12:06 PM
Stig,
Before you assume the reasons for me backing down in that case, you might actually inquire.
I was more than prepared to have a go at him. But contrary to how Warren spins it, he was the one who backed down. He silently modified the post to clarify his words.
At that point, Ezra Levant, Al MacDermid, and my wife all convinced me to just let it go. It had nothing do to with "chickening out" as Warren Kinsella in his typical, save-face way, tried to spin the whole ordeal.
He knew he was in the wrong, and he modified the offending post in question to mitigate any possible damages. So who was the real wimp?
That all being said, I don't even know why I respond to you. All of your comments here at the Western Standard are simply ad hominem attacks. You offer nothing of substance to the debate here.
I won't give you the pleasure of deleting your comments, or banning you--you'd like that too much.
By the way: what can you tell me about advanced image processing?
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 2:12:25 PM
By the way: what can you tell me about advanced image processing?
Posted by: Mike Brock | 2009-03-20 2:12:25 PM
A lot. What would you like to know?
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-03-20 2:23:50 PM
Charles, it is obvious to me you cannot handle the rough and tumble battle of debate.
If you are just going to whine and cry then go play somewhere else.
You bore me and offer nothing.
Posted by: epsilon | 2009-03-21 11:02:39 AM
If any of you do not immediately know exactly who he is speaking to and why, then you are surely too naive. As such, it is best that you remain ignorant.
If you know, then you know.
Posted by: Timothy | 2009-03-21 12:32:12 PM
Another elitist llibertarian remark courtesy of Timothy. I think you would find a better home in the Ignatieff party.
Posted by: epsilon | 2009-03-21 12:36:01 PM
What the hell's this? A lost chapter from Atlas Shrugged?
Posted by: Liberal | 2009-03-21 5:06:45 PM
Anyone with a name like "libertarians are gay" probably beats his girlfriend anyway. No wonder you don't like the police cracking down on abusive men!
Posted by: Sarah Landau | 2009-03-23 11:21:44 PM
Time for you to change the channel Mike,your getting a bit obsessive,like who is trying to take your rights away.
And all this talk of fighting,please....again who is threatening your rights(eyeball roll).
You crashed that Maclean/Ryerson thingy...wow,what commitment you possess, you really put it all on the line,lol.And I thought you were all talk.
Posted by: dirk | 2009-07-21 3:37:10 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.