Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual. || World News

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

John,

I find it enlightening that you won't define what you think a "Patriot" is. I also find it disturbing that you do not deny being "an agent provocateur for the CIA."

On 03/31/2011 10:20 AM, NoEinstein wrote:

Jonathan:  Your seeking answers to items of common knowledge shows you to be motivated to destroy, not save, the USA.  The entire tone of my New Constitution—over 50% of which has been posted—is pro power to the individual citizens, and con power to those biased groups that so regularly bypass the democratic ideal of one-person-one-vote, fairly counted.  You are spinning your wheels.  I won't be answering any questions from those with a clearly negative bent.  — J. A. A. —

 

On Mar 31, 11:55 am, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:

John,  Once again you have failed to answer even a single question posed to you.  That you won't provide a definition for what you think a "Patriot" is says volumes. I am beginning to think your are an agent provocateur for the CIA.  On 03/30/2011 09:27 PM, NoEinstein wrote:

Jonathan:  From the tone of your first reply, weeks ago, I knew you were a negative person in talking about THE most positive for-the- people document ever written.  There isn't a single person in the USA with enough status as a patriot to have me explain even one sentence of my New Constitution.  I've written such to be understandable by ordinary Americans.  Too many important areas of "the law" were hidden in codes of laws, out-of-sight of the man on the street needing to know what laws say.  My New Constitution, alone, could run the country without any other law being required to be written.  When the majority of the man-on-the-street know my document, no policeman nor judge will violate their rights with impunity.  Knowledge is POWER!  That's what my New Constitution gives to the People!  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead ï¿½ Patriot

On Mar 29, 12:58 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:

John,

1) Since you claim to be a Patriot, please provide YOUR definition of that word.

2) One does not need to "transcribe" the original Constitution, one merely has to perform a "cut and paste" action - a technique you are quite familiar with - as many sources of the Constitution exist on-line.

3) I would never spend 14 years making "that document" suit my "liking" since I firmly believe "that document" is inherently the cause of our existing problems. But if I were so inclined, I am certain it would not take me 14 years - not even 14 months - and it would certainly be less convoluted than your vain attempt.

I would start with a Preamble such as this:

     With the understanding that no Person has the Right to rule over      another, the Government instituted upon the adoption of this      Constitution shall be Restricted to the powers specifically granted      herein. The sole purpose of this Government shall be the protection      of the Right to Life, Liberty, and Property for all Persons living      within the limits of the several States. The exercise of a Right not      infringing upon the Right of another is not subject to Regulation.

I would also attach a list of definitions for words of importance because people are want to change the meanings of words over time. I remember when "bad" meant "evil; opposed to good." Now half the population equates "bad" with "good."

4) YOUR "already-in-place New Constitution" is already "dead in the water."

On 03/29/2011 09:18 AM, NoEinstein wrote:

Jonathan:  Do this: Transcribe the original Constitution, and spend the next fourteen years making that document to suit your liking. Then, you can get a referendum on your constitution.  My bet is that you won't get the 60% of the votes required to change even one word of my already-in-place New Constitution.  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead ï¿½  Patriot On Mar 28, 11:56 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:

John, I read Article III of YOUR New Constitution in its entirety yesterday. It is both wordy and convoluted. Let's examine the first line of Section 8:       * Itï¿½s a felony for any person, organization, group, or special         interest ï¿½ publicly or privately ï¿½ to lobby judges or justices for         influencing their rulings; also, for any judge or justice to         accept a bribe in exchange for a judicial favor. It took you 39 words to state what can be stated more effectively in 26   words.       * The lobbying of Members of the Judicial system by any Person is         prohibited; as is the issuance of Favor by any Member of the         Judicial system. In addition to being wordy, YOUR New Constitution fails to provide remedy. One can provide such remedy by adding the following:       * Persons found guilty of Lobbying or the issuance of Favor under         Article III, Section 8, shall be imprisoned for not less than 10         Years and/or deported. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "'My country, right or wrong' is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober.'"ï¿½Gilbert Keith Chesterton ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 03/28/2011 07:55 AM, NoEinstein wrote:

Folks:  Jonathan shows his anti-America ideas with every word he utters.  There are no moderators on this group.  So, he, MJ and Mark hang-out here because my readership is high.  Those who love America are invited to attack these socialist-communists.  I have better things to be doing.  Thanks!  ï¿½ J. A. A. ï¿½ On Mar 26, 7:35 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:

John, If "naive, pesky losers" like myself failed to ask questions regarding the excrement self-proclaimed intellectuals like yourself keep spilling forth, less-discerning individuals in this group might blindly accept the bull crap you have written. It is /highly/ unlikely that you will ever get the opportunity for an up or down vote on YOUR New Constitution. I say that because the casinos I visited during my recent trip to Las Vegas had no idea YOUR New Constitution even existed. If Vegas doesn't know about it, the masses necessary for its passage surely don't. In the unlikely event you ever have the opportunity to place YOUR New Constitution before the voters, it is my belief that ambiguous provisions such as "Every two years an unbiased review panel shall apprise the Citizens of the job performance grade, as herein, of seated judges and justices" and "It is TREASON for a judge or justice to rule with disfavor on the supremacy of a fair democracy" (both from Article III, Section 1) will insure more "down" votes than "up" - even from our dumbed-down society. On 03/26/2011 03:48 PM, NoEinstein wrote:

Jonathan:  The only opinions of others that matter are the one-day, up or down votes for ratification of my New Constitution.  I don't have time to explain to a naive, pesky loser like you the sociology and the psychology of how and why people make up their minds one way or the other.  I highly recommend "The Power of Positive Thinking" to you. "Great things are never accomplished by the skeptical."  ï¿½ J. A. A. ï¿½ On Mar 25, 1:12 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:

John, You failed to address "the opinions of others are a necessary requisite for the passage of YOUR New Constitution." How do you envision YOUR New Constitution being enforced when you will never get it instituted? On 03/25/2011 09:53 AM, NoEinstein wrote:

Dear Jonathan: If I had wanted to have the opinions of others influence anything, I would have sought public office and had my insightful solutions neutered in committees and on the floor of the House and the Senate. I realized, early on, that the status quo governmental processes are so screwed-up that our country has gotten away from the "leave-me-alone to make-my-own-way" ideals of the founding fathers. Not a single person would have risked their lives to come to America if they had supposed every hard-earned dollar they make would be taxed and controlled to serve the LAZY members of society who want the right to vote, but are unwilling to support their own weight in society. It was only after the Civil War that media coverage started showing photographs of political candidates and of rallies and conventions. From that day forward, ego-maniacal career politicians became the norm. And those were treated like (unconstitutional) royalty by the mediaï¿½which is largely responsible for the long, slow decline of the US economy. My New Constitution will pin-back-the-ears of the corrupt US media, and remove all undue influences by those purporting to assess the events of the day. Once John Q. Public starts watching news COVERAGE rather than 24-7 news commentary, the USA will again be on the path to success and prosperity for the vast majority of hardworking Americans! ï¿½ John A. Armistead ï¿½ Patriot On Mar 24, 12:39 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:

John, I am fully aware that my opinions "are neither sought, considered, nor appreciated." It appears that no one's opinions are ever "sought, considered, nor appreciated" by you. Unfortunately for your ego, the opinions of others are a necessary requisite for the passage of YOUR New Constitution. Unless, of course, you plan on seceding from the Union to create a one-man nation. On 03/24/2011 09:19 AM, NoEinstein wrote:

Jonathan:  Judging from quick scans of two of your TOME '+ new posts', you lack the ability to be concise in your wording of ideas.  I don't have the time, nor the desire, to personally explain to you things that I've already explained in detail, if you would only read back into my thread.  Please quit