Re: Wringing-the-Neck of Empty Ritual.

But John, you're the one who has written a socialist constitution.

On 04/18/2011 08:31 PM, NoEinstein wrote:

Jonathan:  Mainly he's done that by attacking the capitalist system that made this country great; and by supposing that government should control everything (with him in charge).  The fact that you even ask that question confirms my initial gut reaction that you are a socialist-communist, like 95% of Democrats are.  The remaining 5% are just stupid.  You're in both of those groups.  — J. A. Armistead — Patriot 

On Apr 18, 3:03 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote: 

John,  That you own stock in a company that routinely downgrades websites based on "link relevance" over "content relevance" says much about your credibility regarding the understanding of what freedom of expression means.  That you believe Obama "has caused more economic and social harm to the USA than any other person who ever lived, including Hitler" seems ludicrous. Just how has he (as an individual) been able to pull off this tremendous task?  On 04/17/2011 09:05 AM, NoEinstein wrote:        

Dear Mark:  I own Google stock.  It's an American multinational Corporation that's headquartered in Mountain View, California.  Google World shows the new complex quite well.  In many ways you are very naive.  Your obvious desire to protect Barack Obama's neck from the noose is tantamount to looking-the-other-way to those who commit TREASON every day of their existence.  Would you put on moderation someone who proposes that Libyan President Kadafi should be killed? Do you suppose it is Google's obligation to protect those who kill their citizens?  Hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans have committed suicide because of the bad economy and the lack of jobs resulting from Obama's socialist-capitalist policies.  He has caused more economic and social harm to the USA than any other person who ever lived, including Hitler. 

Treason is a recognized capital offense.  Those in our government and in our law enforcement who don't press to have that bastard arrested, tried and hanged are themselves in violation of the Constitution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.  Keith suggested that you, Jonathan and MJ are anxious to read my next "missive".  He's viewed you all in a favorable light, before.  As for me, I suspect you are so screwed-up in the head that you are both for and against having a better government.  That means you have schizophrenia.  Get some couch- time, Mark.  You need it!  ï¿½  J. A. Armistead �  Patriot On Apr 16, 10:28 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE<markmka...@gmail.com>  wrote: 

Einstein, 

Again, you mistake me for someone that is liable under the present, or your future, US Constitution. The message you received is the standard message sent to all new or moderated members, get used to it. It originates from outside the US and is also not liable under US law. Isn't the internet grand when the originating country has the responsibility for what is or is not allowed under their law(s). 

On Apr 16, 7:11 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>  wrote: 

Dear Keith:  I sensed that there was a common thread of "reasoning" in those you name. My last missive, as you say, was explaining why Jews are causing a lot of problems and expense while seeming to be such nice people.  Israel should become a training place for successful capitalism.  Only the latter can start to heal the deep wounds Muslims feel. Today, when I posted: "Can The Donald 'Fix' the Thin Ice that the USA is skating on?"  There was a message (Mark's responsibility?) saying that moderators must approve what I say.  Of course that in UNCONSTITUTIONAL by both the present Constitution, and by my New Constitution, which requires that Mark be fired from his job.  If you butterfly conservatives are starting to understand what I'm saying, then you should like to know that about 85% of my New Constitution has now  been copied and pasted for interested citizens to read.  The last 15% relates to problems with government which I have batted heads with, first hand.  Once people begin showing appreciation for the 85% of my non-Stalinesk document, the remainder will become available. But NOT on this forum.  The full document will be presented as part of a book containing my many essays and detailed rational for why this country needs a New Constitution Now.  You guys can help speed things along by talking-up my document on the NET.  ï¿½ John A. Armistead � Patriot On Apr 16, 4:17 pm, Keith In K�ln<keithinta...@gmail.com>  wrote: 

Hey John! I am atwitter with excitement and anticipation!  Jonathan,  Mark  and MJ are already chomping at the bit to sling complimentary praise and one of them maybe even will write a haiku in your honor!  Sugarshack Literal Truth might even have an orgasm in anticipation of reading your next missive! On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 4:21 AM, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote: 

Stay tuned, People!  Tomorrow I will write you another essay explaining why the "ritual" of most of our political-governmental processes are either unconstitutional, wasteful of economic resources, or otherwise stupid.  ï¿½  John A. Armistead �  Patriot On Apr 14, 10:44 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>  wrote: 

Like me, the readers must be busy with spring buying and fix-up.  The present discussions will affect the fortunes and the liberty (happiness) of your grandchildren.  There won't be any more fortunes and little liberty if the US economy goes down-the-tubes.  By adapting my New Constitution, the survival of the USA will be assured!  ï¿½ John A. Armistead �  Patriot Those interested are invited to read my book: "The Shortest Distance; Harmony Through Prosperity" (Amazon and B.&  N.).  I'm thrilled that the word 'prosperity' is being mentioned more and more as a cure for our ailing economy (Capitalism over socialism).  That book explains the 'build-up' to my writing the New Constitution.  Simple things can turn this country around!  And none of them involving conducting... business-as-usual in Washington!  Trust me, Folks!  I know what I am doing.  99.5% of those in Washington are clueless! On Apr 11, 2:36 am, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>  wrote: 

Mark:  If you could, and would, read my document with an open mind, there is nothing injurious to ordinary citizens.  Stalin didn't give a damn about ordinary citizens (or soldiers).  He killed them by the millions.  Are you saying that my New Constitution will harm ordinary citizens?  Ha, ha, HA!  Then you can't read, for sure!  ï¿½ J. A. A. � On Apr 10, 7:25 pm, Mark<markmka...@gmail.com>  wrote: 

I prefer to call it what it is.... Stalinesque. On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Jonathan Ashley< jonathanashle...@lavabit.com>  wrote: 

  John, So you are trying to eliminate celebrities who have an opinion that 

differs 

from yours. How fascist of you! On 04/10/2011 01:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote: No, Jonathan!  Celebrities in the media and in entertainment simply can't voice their opinions or political preferences in any MEDIUM. The man-on-the-street doesn't get hours a week to talk about how 

great 

Barack Obama is, the way Oprah Winfrey did.  Barbara Walters, a celebrity, made no bones about the fact she supported Barack Obama. What in our "Constitution" gives high-paid celebrities the right to have more influence on the outcome of elections than the man on the street?  As soon as Jay Leno or David Letterman make one joke about 

a 

candidate for public office, they will immediately be fired or 

their 

network closed.  Politics is NOT about entertainment, nor is it a 

game 

with 24-7 play-by-play coverage with commentary and prove-nothing polls.  Those who would like our government to be run the way the People say, rather than the way those who publicly endorse a 

candidate 

say, should rally behind my New Constitution�a document for the people!  ï¿½  J. A. A. �    On Apr 9, 1:01 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> 

<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> 

wrote:   John, You have once again shown that you have no interest in freedom, but instead want to dictate what others can and cannot do. That you believe celebrities should have less right to voice their opinions smacks of fascism. Or am I misinterpreting what you mean 

when 

you state, "Entertainment celebrities, like media celebrities, have 

a 

'following' which would be cesseptable (sic) to vote like the celebrities vote. The (sic) means celebrities would have more 

influence 

at the poles (sic) than the man-on-the-street (sic).  Of course, 

that 

shift of power runs counter to principles of fair play and 

democracy." 

Please explain to the world what "principles of fair play" means 

and why 

someone who is a celebrity will not be allowed to "play" in your 

world. 

And, John, you'd better do it fast. I think your time on this forum 

is 

about up. On 04/08/2011 09:07 PM, NoEinstein wrote:   Jonathan:  Entertainment celebrities, like media celebrities, have 

a 

"following" which would be cesseptable to vote like the celebrities vote.  The means celebrities would have more influence at the poles than the man-on-the-street.  Of course, that shift of power runs counter to principles of fair play and democracy.  The 1st 

Amendment 

says: "... the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or other medium".  Having a pro-democracy press means that no one like Mark 

is 

allowed to push socialism nor communism. His threatening me because 

I 

correctly peg him as anti-America, would shut down Google, if 

Google 

didn't FIRE Mark, post haste!  ï¿½ J. A. 

 ..  read more » 

--

Freedom Is Always Illegal.

Learn How To Protect Your Identity And Prevent Identity Theft