Jason1
Well-Known Member
well I guess they better get the cross out then.
Dentons might need a gofund me page however, to get the money for the wood, lol
Kitko is suing John Adams
- Thread starter AgOx
- Start date
- Status
well I guess they better get the cross out then.
Dentons might need a gofund me page however, to get the money for the wood, lol
WTF?This is ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT! How can the price of silver remain flat after news of a $US 6 TRILLION BUDGET was leaked to the New York Times? This MUST be the SMOKING GUN for anyone who doubts that the price of silver is SYSTEMICALLY MANIPULATED!
https://twitter.com/adamseconomics/status/1397920983898488836
Alloy
Active Member
I hadn't heard of John Adams before, or this As Good As Gold firm. I'm in Arizona though, not Oz. But I'm surprised by the malice and lack of empathy on this thread.
First, I probably wouldn't like his content and opinions, if the other posts are accurate. I'm not a physicalist barbarian who can't understand abstract processes, how commodities futures trading works, the next generation of currencies, or how things can have value even though they're not shiny and heavy. Nor do I imagine that powerful cabals care deeply about my somewhat niche hobbies, or that they even think about a specific minor metal on a regular basis, much less engage in huge conspiracies around that minor metal.
But none of that intersects with the weird malice and false claims people are making here.
1. He doesn't need the money.
Very unlikely to be true. Hardly any individual has enough money to defend themselves in a defamation lawsuit. The status quo legal system in Western countries is essentially inaccessible to anyone who isn't rich, where "rich" means something like USD $100,000 to $1,000,000 in spare cash. This probably implies being at least a millionaire, but realistically a couple of million dollars in net worth, where you can liquidate enough of that to pay for lawyers. A lawsuit will bankrupt something like 95% of the population.
Kitco isn't a significant company by normal standards, compared to the technology sector or Fortune 500, but they're plenty big enough to fund lawsuits against individuals. It's not anywhere near a fair fight.
2. He should "put his money where his mouth is".
What money? See Point 1.
I'm also confused by the general claim that a person who is being sued for defamation should "put his money where his mouth is". I'm not even sure what that means, but it sounds like it's saying that if you ever say something that makes you the target of a multimillion dollar corporation, you should pay for your own legal defense as a matter of honor or something.
That doesn't make any sense. First, it's not actually possible to pay for one's defense in most cases, for most humans. We can't demand that people do things that are not possible.
Second, what is it about being sued for defamation that would require someone to not seek help? What's different about it? What if the lawsuit is unjust because the statements made are in fact true? Does that not matter? Why not?
3. It's a scam, he isn't being sued, his increasing the target amount of funding makes it a scam, etc.
These all appear to be arbitrary assertions without evidence. I'm not sure what's going on with people making these bizarre claims out of the blue. They can't possibly know that these things are true, so why are they saying them? It was incredibly strange to read people making such statements, behaving so shabbily. People shouldn't say things like that unless they know what they're talking about.
First, I probably wouldn't like his content and opinions, if the other posts are accurate. I'm not a physicalist barbarian who can't understand abstract processes, how commodities futures trading works, the next generation of currencies, or how things can have value even though they're not shiny and heavy. Nor do I imagine that powerful cabals care deeply about my somewhat niche hobbies, or that they even think about a specific minor metal on a regular basis, much less engage in huge conspiracies around that minor metal.
But none of that intersects with the weird malice and false claims people are making here.
1. He doesn't need the money.
Very unlikely to be true. Hardly any individual has enough money to defend themselves in a defamation lawsuit. The status quo legal system in Western countries is essentially inaccessible to anyone who isn't rich, where "rich" means something like USD $100,000 to $1,000,000 in spare cash. This probably implies being at least a millionaire, but realistically a couple of million dollars in net worth, where you can liquidate enough of that to pay for lawyers. A lawsuit will bankrupt something like 95% of the population.
Kitco isn't a significant company by normal standards, compared to the technology sector or Fortune 500, but they're plenty big enough to fund lawsuits against individuals. It's not anywhere near a fair fight.
2. He should "put his money where his mouth is".
What money? See Point 1.
I'm also confused by the general claim that a person who is being sued for defamation should "put his money where his mouth is". I'm not even sure what that means, but it sounds like it's saying that if you ever say something that makes you the target of a multimillion dollar corporation, you should pay for your own legal defense as a matter of honor or something.
That doesn't make any sense. First, it's not actually possible to pay for one's defense in most cases, for most humans. We can't demand that people do things that are not possible.
Second, what is it about being sued for defamation that would require someone to not seek help? What's different about it? What if the lawsuit is unjust because the statements made are in fact true? Does that not matter? Why not?
3. It's a scam, he isn't being sued, his increasing the target amount of funding makes it a scam, etc.
These all appear to be arbitrary assertions without evidence. I'm not sure what's going on with people making these bizarre claims out of the blue. They can't possibly know that these things are true, so why are they saying them? It was incredibly strange to read people making such statements, behaving so shabbily. People shouldn't say things like that unless they know what they're talking about.
IfUdonotholditUdonotownit
Active Member
A quote attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto says: “If you don’t believe it or don’t get it, I don’t have the time to try to convince you, sorry.”
The answer to your post is an exceedingly long one, but I will try to make this as brief as possible.
Q1: Do all men possess the same capacity to get to the truth of a given matter, or to rapidly see through the artifice of a fraudster?
A1: The simple answer is no. What is unfolding now regarding the true origins of the Wuhan virus is just the latest example of this. [Fact] A large proportion of people "knew" with 15 minutes of hearing about Covid19 that it almost certainly originated from the Wuhan laboratory. Meanwhile, the worldwide media (broadcasting to billions) has attempted their utmost to paint this as a falsehood, and snuff out all such claims. Only belatedly and begrudgingly, are they slowly coming around. Oh, what a bitter pill to swallow
Apparently – according to Facebook – there are some "new facts." Uhmm, no there aren’t actually.
Q2: How would you act if you observed someone misleading your younger brother, who might not possess the same capacity to discern truth as yourself? Would you just stand back, and tell yourself, "Well I don’t have all the facts myself, so I better do nothing until I do possess them", or would you go in and fight on behalf of your brother?
A2: You will find people who will do both. Many will do nothing, and many will act.
Q3: So what is it that he has done that has so riled up so many people, here, on Reddit, YouTube, and countless other forums?
A3: Basically – using a "megaphone" to cast a series of serious aspersions on precious metals institutions around the world. As for Kitco, I think we don’t really care much about them (here in Australia) and what vicarious concern there is – is because they are under the same attack which is being directed at the Perth Mint – the beloved precious metals institution of Australia. And by inference, these aspersions are extended to the leadership team; i.e. they are either too stupid to know what they are doing, or (alternatively) they do know – but are corrupt. We are informed that it is a "scandal", a "scam", and countless other criminal terms, and we are told of "horror stories."
Here is one YouTube amongst many, with the title saying, "John Adams unleashed on corruption at Perth Mint | Wall Street Silver."
At 16:56 - 17:01, he says, "Every step they've done, they've exposed themselves for the frauds that they are."
This is one hell of a thing to say. But this is the siren song that keeps coming out of that damn megaphone.
Some of us very strongly believe that this (i.e. the current silver manufacturing crunch) is not a scandal, it is not a scam, and that the leadership team at the Perth Mint are not "frauds." And we haven’t got time to write hundred page presentations explaining (to the lowest common denominator) why these claims are false. But we will type in little, disparaging snippets of words into this forum, dismissive, spiked with black humour – but of a type really only appreciable by others able to easily see through the clouds of deception.
Our position: You will eventually find that that these claims will fade away (but only for a season), and the Perth Mint will come through with flying colours – in spite of all the gutter-mud that has been flung at them. Most people (if they are even willing to examine their previously held, mistaken views) will say that it is just "pure luck and a wild guess" that many of us were able to see through all the clouds of bullshit and realize that it never had any real substance, and that the Perth Mint would sail through the storm and emerge in one piece. Like Facebook, they might talk about "new facts."
And after the storms have subsided, we will not say to anyone that, "We told you so." And we are sorry [not?] about the fact that while the storm persisted, we are not able to shut up, and just restrain ourselves – similar to in Q2 – there were many who did not come to their brother’s aid. And in so doing, we got a bit dusted up, and ended up looking a bit shabby ourselves – it is true.
Sorry, but our position was not arrived at as a result of "dumb luck", and at this point, I refer you again to what Satoshi Nakamoto says.
PS: And as for the money aspect of your argument/post... if you are going to be using a megaphone to be denouncing (to a global audience) institutions and their leadership teams as "frauds", then don't be bitching about the money.
The answer to your post is an exceedingly long one, but I will try to make this as brief as possible.
Q1: Do all men possess the same capacity to get to the truth of a given matter, or to rapidly see through the artifice of a fraudster?
A1: The simple answer is no. What is unfolding now regarding the true origins of the Wuhan virus is just the latest example of this. [Fact] A large proportion of people "knew" with 15 minutes of hearing about Covid19 that it almost certainly originated from the Wuhan laboratory. Meanwhile, the worldwide media (broadcasting to billions) has attempted their utmost to paint this as a falsehood, and snuff out all such claims. Only belatedly and begrudgingly, are they slowly coming around. Oh, what a bitter pill to swallow
Apparently – according to Facebook – there are some "new facts." Uhmm, no there aren’t actually.Q2: How would you act if you observed someone misleading your younger brother, who might not possess the same capacity to discern truth as yourself? Would you just stand back, and tell yourself, "Well I don’t have all the facts myself, so I better do nothing until I do possess them", or would you go in and fight on behalf of your brother?
A2: You will find people who will do both. Many will do nothing, and many will act.
Q3: So what is it that he has done that has so riled up so many people, here, on Reddit, YouTube, and countless other forums?
A3: Basically – using a "megaphone" to cast a series of serious aspersions on precious metals institutions around the world. As for Kitco, I think we don’t really care much about them (here in Australia) and what vicarious concern there is – is because they are under the same attack which is being directed at the Perth Mint – the beloved precious metals institution of Australia. And by inference, these aspersions are extended to the leadership team; i.e. they are either too stupid to know what they are doing, or (alternatively) they do know – but are corrupt. We are informed that it is a "scandal", a "scam", and countless other criminal terms, and we are told of "horror stories."
Here is one YouTube amongst many, with the title saying, "John Adams unleashed on corruption at Perth Mint | Wall Street Silver."
At 16:56 - 17:01, he says, "Every step they've done, they've exposed themselves for the frauds that they are."
This is one hell of a thing to say. But this is the siren song that keeps coming out of that damn megaphone.
Some of us very strongly believe that this (i.e. the current silver manufacturing crunch) is not a scandal, it is not a scam, and that the leadership team at the Perth Mint are not "frauds." And we haven’t got time to write hundred page presentations explaining (to the lowest common denominator) why these claims are false. But we will type in little, disparaging snippets of words into this forum, dismissive, spiked with black humour – but of a type really only appreciable by others able to easily see through the clouds of deception.
Our position: You will eventually find that that these claims will fade away (but only for a season), and the Perth Mint will come through with flying colours – in spite of all the gutter-mud that has been flung at them. Most people (if they are even willing to examine their previously held, mistaken views) will say that it is just "pure luck and a wild guess" that many of us were able to see through all the clouds of bullshit and realize that it never had any real substance, and that the Perth Mint would sail through the storm and emerge in one piece. Like Facebook, they might talk about "new facts."
And after the storms have subsided, we will not say to anyone that, "We told you so." And we are sorry [not?] about the fact that while the storm persisted, we are not able to shut up, and just restrain ourselves – similar to in Q2 – there were many who did not come to their brother’s aid. And in so doing, we got a bit dusted up, and ended up looking a bit shabby ourselves – it is true.
Sorry, but our position was not arrived at as a result of "dumb luck", and at this point, I refer you again to what Satoshi Nakamoto says.
PS: And as for the money aspect of your argument/post... if you are going to be using a megaphone to be denouncing (to a global audience) institutions and their leadership teams as "frauds", then don't be bitching about the money.
Last edited:
I'm not sure where to begin with this, but the last time I began laying out the evidence,
1. I was almost banned
2. I made a couple of other member cry
3. The entire thread was removed.
I'll leave it there
IfUdonotholditUdonotownit
Active Member
PS: You forgot to mention the (best) part which involved a lightsaber fight between a Jedi and a Sith-lord.
Jason1
Well-Known Member
1.He has made claims he hasnt backed up with any substantive evidence.
2. they are unable under Australian Law to sue John Adams for defamation because he is an individual and they are a corporation with more than 10 employees, not only that an over seas company with out jurisdictions todo so, Kitco do not meet the requirement to sue JA in Australia, under defamation act 2005. He is protected under Australian Law. the laws are designed to protect Aus citizens from corps bullying the small guy
A corporation has no cause of action for defamation of an individual in relation to the publication of defamatory matter about the corporation unless it was an excluded corporation at the time of the publication.
(An excluded corporation is a corporation that employs fewer than 10 persons and the corporation is not a public body)
so I say again, If they cant actually sue him, why does he need the money?
and How does that not ring alarm bells with you?
Last edited:
Last edited:
IfUdonotholditUdonotownit
Active Member
PS: I have also had to correct Point 1, for (remember that) you were Obi-wan kenobi, and you died on the Battlestar. [There is a video here somewhere on this forum, showing your death]
IfUdonotholditUdonotownit
Active Member
Geez... BackYardPirate is getting a real workout in the ring this morning.
Jason1
Well-Known Member
good old fashion internet pile on,
Led by the Libertarian which is Ironic lol
I’m sorry you have some personal problem with me.If you re-read my post you would clearly see that I was not “piling” on @BackYardPirate at all but giving a friendly reminder to him and others here the reason why the thread was deleted.
Now pull your head in.
Jason1
Well-Known Member
not personal problems mate. I just found it interesting the thread was deleted because of the personal details not the offending post it self deleted.
Would have been interesting to hear what the Bloke had to say as his evidence against JA and the legitimacy of his gofundme campaign, if he had anything substantial as he claimed? I dont know but would have been interesting to find out, rather than have the thread completely censored over one offending post.
Last edited:
Then there was no need to claim I was leading a “pile on” on @BackYardPirate.
The thread was deleted because personal information about an individual was posted online. Members were reminded by both myself and by fellow long-time forum member to tread cautiously in the thread, however that advice was ignored.
I didn’t delete the thread but I support the decision to do so. And I haven’t got a problem with members politely asking for my moderating decisions though I don’t speak in that regard for the owner.
Jason1
Well-Known Member
you had a poke, and it was clear the direction that poke was going togo.
its shame that thread was deleted as it was interesting, a couple of guys didnt like the thread, so what? they have the ability to skip over it not read it.
The post with the personal details could have been removed, instead of every one being punished for it
Thread re-opened as long as we all play nicely.
And just reiterating that posts/threads are moderated in the interest of the Forum and its owners not in the interests of individual members.
If you’re not happy with the moderation on this forum then by all means start your own online forum. It’s a free world after all, but there’s boundaries.
And just reiterating that posts/threads are moderated in the interest of the Forum and its owners not in the interests of individual members.
If you’re not happy with the moderation on this forum then by all means start your own online forum. It’s a free world after all, but there’s boundaries.
IfUdonotholditUdonotownit
Active Member
Actually, a part of me was relieved that the thread was locked. I think this issue (JA) has kind of been thrashed to death. I for one, would be happy to see this thread locked down again.
Jason1
Well-Known Member
FFS! Do I have to spell it out for you?
If you keep going down the path you seem so intent upon ie slagging off moderating decisions or posts I make when I give advice to others then it’s a path you’re not likely to return from ie you will be told you are taking a holiday from this forum or you will get banned from this forum. It’s as simple as that.
I thought my advice to you previously was plainly obvious.
Last edited:
- Status