On 2/28/2011 6:52 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
Folks: Jonathan, the jerk, is undeserving of a reply. —J. A. A. —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 »
No comments:
Post a Comment