>
On Feb 26, 12:32 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
wrote:
> John,
>
> In almost all of your posts over the past few days, you have resorted to
> name calling - "the last resort of the desperate."
>
> That you cannot tell the difference between an individualist,
> anti-conformist, voluntaryist who wants little or no government and a
> socialist-communist who relies upon government to suck the lifeblood out
> of everyone likely says volumes about YOUR New Constitution.
>
> On 2/26/2011 3:59 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jonathan, since you have not said one thing positive about my efforts,
> > that identifies you as a socialist-communist. Bug-off, loser! � J.
> > A. A. �
> > On Feb 25, 11:55 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> > wrote:
> >> It appears to me you are about self-glorification, not patriotism.
>
> >> On 2/25/2011 7:49 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> >>> Dear Socialist-Communist: There is three or four times more MEAT in
> >>> the 40% of my New Constitution, regularly printed in the thread, than
> >>> in the entire original Constitution! In the RUDEST way, you've
> >>> attacked me for not showing you the 60%, when you haven't cared enough
> >>> to even look back for the meaty 40%! Make your own post, traitor.
> >>> I'm about saving the USA. I have a �pointed wooden stake� for the
> >>> heart of anyone who stands in my way! � J. A. A. � Patriot
> >>> On Feb 23, 11:21 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> John,
> >>>> I was under the impression when I joined this political "discussion"
> >>>> group that folks subscribed to the group to discuss political issues.
> >>>> Your failure to post YOUR New Constitution when at least four people
> >>>> (including myself) have expressed a sincere interest in reading it shows
> >>>> you are not interested in having it enacted. Either that or you are
> >>>> afraid of the feedback you will receive.
> >>>> I seem to recall your concern with publishing it was it isn't
> >>>> copyrighted. Would a true "patriot" (as you continually label yourself)
> >>>> be more concerned with the direction in which his country is headed or
> >>>> HIS copyright protection? As it stands now, YOUR New Constitution will
> >>>> likely die when you do because no one else will ever have a chance to
> >>>> read it.
> >>>> Your claim that I am "likely socialist-communist" shows you have never
> >>>> read anything I have posted to this group. If you had you would know
> >>>> that I come real close to believing that the government that governs
> >>>> best is no government at all. A completely voluntary society could not
> >>>> possibly be any worse than the socialist police state we now live in.
> >>>> Your comment, "You are not wanted here, nor anywhere else in the USA!"
> >>>> only confirms my suspicion that you are a wanna-be dictator. If you were
> >>>> a moderator for this group, I would likely have been banned long ago
> >>>> because I dared to comment on YOUR posts.
> >>>> On 2/23/2011 6:33 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> Dear Jonathan: Get this and get this good: Your "pushy" attitude on
> >>>>> MY post about MY New Constitution pegs you as a likely socialist-
> >>>>> communist. You are not wanted here, nor anywhere else in the USA! �
> >>>>> John A. Armistead � Patriot
> >>>>> On Feb 23, 2:56 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> How does John expect to implement his New Constitution if no one is ever
> >>>>>> allowed to read it? He sounds like a wanna-be dictator in the making.
> >>>>>> On 2/23/2011 11:45 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote:
> >>>>>>> That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has
> >>>>>>> scarcely been commented on. I am NOT wishing to have your nor anyone
> >>>>>>> else's feedback on what I have written! Most would love to see the
> >>>>>>> entire document so that they can make grandiose criticisms about this
> >>>>>>> or that. From my personal life, I have had head-to-head run-ins with
> >>>>>>> our corrupt state, local, and federal governments that allow me to
> >>>>>>> speak from personal experience that few if any other person could
> >>>>>>> have
> >>>>>>> had. That is why my New Constitution will immediately fire or kick
> >>>>>>> out of office any public official or employee, including the
> >>>>>>> President
> >>>>>>> himself, who does not respond appropriately for a logical request of
> >>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>> single law-abiding citizen for the redress of a grievance. To wit:
> >>>>>>> Substitute "Obamacare" and thats what the DEMS slammed down your
> >>>>>>> throats.
> >>>>>>> On Feb 22, 11:07 am, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Dear Keith: Thanks for your rational-toned reply. My New
> >>>>>>>> Constitution will indeed be copyrighted. But only those parts of it
> >>>>>>>> not copied and adapted from the original, public-domain document.
> >>>>>>>> This isn't being done for making money from the sale of copies, but to
> >>>>>>>> be sure no crazies print 'modified copies' that would, maliciously,
> >>>>>>>> make me look bad�as part of a socialist/communist plot to side-track
> >>>>>>>> my efforts.
> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure you nor others realize that my document has, for fourteen
> >>>>>>>> years, withstood the test of correcting the daily crises highlighted
> >>>>>>>> in the news, and the regular injustices coming from our courts. What
> >>>>>>>> is included is at least ten times broader in scope than the original
> >>>>>>>> constitution. Realize that I have had the advantage (over the
> >>>>>>>> Founding Fathers) of seeing what has and what hasn't worked with our
> >>>>>>>> Constitution.
> >>>>>>>> That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has
> >>>>>>>> scarcely been commented on. I am NOT wishing to have your nor anyone
> >>>>>>>> else's feedback on what I have written! Most would love to see the
> >>>>>>>> entire document so that they can make grandiose criticisms about this
> >>>>>>>> or that. From my personal life, I have had head-to-head run-ins with
> >>>>>>>> our corrupt state, local, and federal governments that allow me to
> >>>>>>>> speak from personal experience that few if any other person could have
> >>>>>>>> had. That is why my New Constitution will immediately fire or kick
> >>>>>>>> out of office any public official or employee, including the President
> >>>>>>>> himself, who does not respond appropriately for a logical request of a
> >>>>>>>> single law-abiding citizen for the redress of a grievance. To wit:
> >>>>>>>> "1st Amendment: No law shall be made regarding the establishment of
> >>>>>>>> peaceable religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, but
> >>>>>>>> government, its campaigns, processes, slogans, and disbursements shall
> >>>>>>>> be secular. No law nor private or civil action shall abridge: the
> >>>>>>>> freedom of speech; the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or
> >>>>>>>> other medium; the right of People to peaceably assemble; *** and the
> >>>>>>>> right of any Citizen or group to petition government or any of its
> >>>>>>>> branches or departments for redress of grievances. Citizens so
> >>>>>>>> petitioning government shall receive appropriate, relevant, timely,
> >>>>>>>> comprehensive, helpful and just responses from proper authorities who
> >>>>>>>> have thoroughly read, understood, and addressed each salient aspect of
> >>>>>>>> the grievances or requests for directions or clarifications. Failure
> >>>>>>>> to so respond to a rightful petition for redress of a grievance shall,
> >>>>>>>> on a single provable instance, terminate the apt one�s employment,
> >>>>>>>> especially those in management or public office�including judges and
> >>>>>>>> justices�who ignore, frustrate or give the run-around to any competent
> >>>>>>>> Citizen who has been diligent in having a grievance properly
> >>>>>>>> addressed, or in having his or her civil rights fully upheld. No
> >>>>>>>> judge or justice shall presume that by performing the above required
> >>>>>>>> duties, that they in any way might be compromising their objectivity
> >>>>>>>> or fairness in court; justice be not �blind�, but well informed.
> >>>>>>>> Freedom of the press or other medium mandates that there be reasonable
> >>>>>>>> truthfulness in reporting. Wanton distortion of the truth, or
> >>>>>>>> deliberate omission of the truth�except in cases of obvious fiction or
> >>>>>>>> satire�is prohibited. Stating or implying that a particular news
> >>>>>>>> medium has a collective voice (we) or position on any issue is
> >>>>>>>> prohibited, as for example via: anonymous editorials; regularly
> >>>>>>>> occurring accompanying comments; commentary programs financed by, or
> >>>>>>>> ideologically screened by, the same news medium; editorials named as
> >>>>>>>> being authored by management; editorial comments by others that are in
> >>>>>>>> any way ideologically censored, omitted or screened; or by comments
> >>>>>>>> occurring at specific times or designated locations that most would
> >>>>>>>> come to associate with the management of such medium, even if such are
> >>>>>>>> innocuous. No medium shall be a forum for promoting the ideology of
> >>>>>>>> its management or owners, nor shall they employ anyone who uses such
> >>>>>>>> job to hawk their personal political preferences�at risk of loss of
> >>>>>>>> license or closure of the business. Flagrantly editing news to
> >>>>>>>> promote the ideology of management is a felony. No medium shall
> >>>>>>>> analyze, assess, summarize, or make subjective judgments about any
> >>>>>>>> pending election or referendum. Nor shall they invite others outside
> >>>>>>>> of the media to do so. But factual, thorough coverage of the
> >>>>>>>> candidates or referenda issues�on an as occurs basis�is allowed,
> >>>>>>>> provided there are no comments, nor actions, as above, and provided
> >>>>>>>> the same unbiased coverage is given to all of the candidates or to all
> >>>>>>>> of the referenda issues. It shall be a 10 year felony to repress
> >>>>>>>> truthful news reporting in any medium by threatening legal action. No
> >>>>>>>> medium can be sued for libel for presenting material authored by
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment