PDA

View Full Version : Teen Dead After Alabama Police ‘Cut’ Throat to Retrieve Drugs




unknown
05-08-2014, 04:40 AM
Teen Dead After Alabama Police ‘Cut’ Throat Open to Retrieve Drugs (http://appalachianareanews.com/teen-dead-after-alabama-police-cut-throat-open-to-retrieve-drugs/).


In an effort to retrieve the alleged bag, the lawsuit says police had to shove a sharp object into the teenagers throat. Lawyers for the Smiths say drugs were never found in his throat or stomach.

And then theres the story linked on the same page, Witness: Kentucky Cop Jumped On Hood of Car, Shot, Killed Teen Girl Through Windshield – Dashcam Footage Released (http://appalachianareanews.com/witness-kentucky-cop-jumped-hood-car-shot-killed-teen-girl-windshield/).


Pendleton also said Brockman shot first, striking Ramsey thus causing her to speed up. “That was dead body weight on the gas pedal after she was shot.”

And in both cases, they "denied any wrong doing".

I'm at a loss for not only words but even how to feel about these daily incidents.

Am I being overly dramatic in thinking that the police represent the greatest threat to our safety?

Czolgosz
05-08-2014, 04:44 AM
lol, dumb livestock.

mrsat_98
05-08-2014, 04:57 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochin_v._California

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shocks_the_conscience

Dude, I was trying to eat.

Occam's Banana
05-08-2014, 05:20 AM
Teen Dead After Alabama Police ‘Cut’ Throat Open to Retrieve Drugs (http://appalachianareanews.com/teen-dead-after-alabama-police-cut-throat-open-to-retrieve-drugs/).

Not intentionally malevolent.

See also: http://blog.al.com/breaking/2014/04/city_of_huntsville_denies_wron.html. From which:

"It's very unfortunate that he died," City Attonrey Peter Joffrion said. "But I have full confidence the police officers responding on the scene, handled this matter appropriately."

Nancy Smith's son did this to himself.

mrsat_98
05-08-2014, 05:28 AM
http://ftpcontent4.worldnow.com/waff/hpd-wrongful-death-suit.pdf complaint

DamianTV
05-08-2014, 05:34 AM
Vid:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MlR6uydgeIo

Henry Rogue
05-08-2014, 06:06 AM
Teen Dead After Alabama Police ‘Cut’ Throat Open to Retrieve Drugs (http://appalachianareanews.com/teen-dead-after-alabama-police-cut-throat-open-to-retrieve-drugs/).



And then theres the story linked on the same page, Witness: Kentucky Cop Jumped On Hood of Car, Shot, Killed Teen Girl Through Windshield – Dashcam Footage Released (http://appalachianareanews.com/witness-kentucky-cop-jumped-hood-car-shot-killed-teen-girl-windshield/).



And in both cases, they "denied any wrong doing".

I'm at a loss for not only words but even how to feel about these daily incidents.

Am I being over dramatic in thinking that the police represent the greatest threat to our safety?
I don't think so. What are you most likely to come in contact with, terrorists, organized crime or cops? I know this sounds like a trick question, as the three choices seem synonymous.

Anti Federalist
05-08-2014, 06:09 AM
Wow, I'm pretty jaded about cops and their daily outrages, but even this is over the top, for me.

LOL and it's still not time yet...

Butcher us in the street?...yup, OK with us. Thank you Police.

On my way to pen a SWLOD.

Occam's Banana
05-08-2014, 06:20 AM
Wow, I'm pretty jaded about cops and their daily outrages, but even this is over the top, for me.

LOL and it's still not time yet...

Butcher us in the street?...yup, OK with us. Thank you Police.

*sigh* Just how messed up are we, anyway?

Don't answer that. I'm not sure I really wanna know.

(And some people seriously wonder how Hitler "got away with it" ...)


On my way to pen a SWLOD.

To maximize the impact of your SWLOD, be sure to use the word "outraged" a lot ... ;)

tod evans
05-08-2014, 06:25 AM
But, but........The little bastard had drugs on his person....

And...............He tried to flee from the heroes!

He should be glad he only got murdered! There are many,...........many mundanes who must undergo more than one orifice being probed before they're beaten and imprisoned........

PaulConventionWV
05-08-2014, 06:29 AM
Teen Dead After Alabama Police ‘Cut’ Throat Open to Retrieve Drugs (http://appalachianareanews.com/teen-dead-after-alabama-police-cut-throat-open-to-retrieve-drugs/).



And then theres the story linked on the same page, Witness: Kentucky Cop Jumped On Hood of Car, Shot, Killed Teen Girl Through Windshield – Dashcam Footage Released (http://appalachianareanews.com/witness-kentucky-cop-jumped-hood-car-shot-killed-teen-girl-windshield/).



And in both cases, they "denied any wrong doing".

I'm at a loss for not only words but even how to feel about these daily incidents.

Am I being over dramatic in thinking that the police represent the greatest threat to our safety?

Not at all. It drives me insane every time I hear about it. Especially that first one. Cutting someone's throat just to get drugs? I can't even fathom....

I give up.

Root
05-08-2014, 07:03 AM
Sick. Disgusting. Omg, this is a living horror.

Just another day in 'Murkia :mad:

RJB
05-08-2014, 07:05 AM
WTF!!! I can't wait to hear the departments report that the cops were following policy by performing medical surgery!

I can only imagine the look on the EMT's face on the scene when Officer No-Neck explained to him how he... Screw it. I can't finish the post. This is so messed up on so many levels.

fisharmor
05-08-2014, 07:17 AM
On my way to pen a SWLOD.
To whom?
We ought to be blowing up the comments sections of the sites that report this stuff. Like this:


Wow, it still surprises me to see how many people get that there's a problem, and yet still don't understand that the only thing - the ONLY thing which has changed since the very first cops walked a beat, is that we have alternative media informing us it's going on.
Find a bunch of old black guys and ask them whether any of this is new.
This is their job: this is what they do, and what they have always done. If any of you want to start talking solutions, there's only one that will make any difference at all: complete abolition of the constabulary.
Any good which you think they do is a carefully crafted fairy tale designed specifically to make you look the other way when stuff like this happens. We not only don't need them, we'd be much better off without them.

The cops ran out of fucks to give about what we think about this stuff somewhere around AD1751.
Preach the message to those who will listen.

Snew
05-08-2014, 07:22 AM
Thank you for keeping us safe, officer!!

KCIndy
05-08-2014, 07:49 AM
From the article:


The Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences has ruled the cause of death undetermined, not because the death is suspect, but instead because any number of multiple police inflicted injuries or a combination of them could be the culprit(s).

Every time I think the limit has been reached... every time I think it just couldn't get any worse... :( :(

Words absolutely fail me.


There's only one thing - just one - that really surprises me about all these police abuse cases. I would have imagined that somewhere among all the hundreds of egregious abuses perpetrated by the arrogant, over-testosteroned, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals of the cop shops across the country, there would have been one case where the sadists abused the wrong victim, and....

.... well, 'nuff said, except to add that if the kid in that story had been someone in my family, I would have been devoting myself and 100% of my time to my brand new hobby....


When is it going to stop? When will a significant portion of the population stand up as one and say "ENOUGH!" and put an end to this?:mad::mad:

jkr
05-08-2014, 08:00 AM
DEMONS!

tod evans
05-08-2014, 08:13 AM
When is it going to stop? When will a significant portion of the population stand up as one and say "ENOUGH!" and put an end to this?:mad::mad:

One at a time is the only way.

Knowledge is the key.

Kop home addresses must be made available, citizens must actually want this shit to end.

Thor
05-08-2014, 08:35 AM
Add to the list.

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 08:58 AM
On my way to pen a SWLOD.

Why not do something effective like organize with citizens in preparation for Article V by cleansing states of unconstitutional amendment, then ending the abridging of free speech, securing the vote and reforming campaign finance?

Here is a step by step description of HOW we can do this.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444637-Georgia-House-approves-Article-V-convention&p=5433668&viewfull=1#post5433668

All that is needed is for sincere Americans to be educated into how to break away from manipulated, ineffective partisan politics.

Do you have a reason for not helping? Please tell us dear Antifed:-)

tod evans
05-08-2014, 09:07 AM
Mumble, mumble, mumble

WTF are you talking about?

I even skimmed the disjointed post you referenced and wasn't able to glean anything remotely effective..

If you actually believe you know of a way to end this type of police behavior pare it down to one or two sentences that a layman can grasp.

Then if you're able to gather support try elaborating...

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 09:33 AM
When is it going to stop? When will a significant portion of the population stand up as one and say "ENOUGH!" and put an end to this?:mad::mad:

It will stop after enough Americans realize that Article V is the only way out, leave partisan politics and begin dedicated discussion on cleansing states of unconstitutional officials then proceeding to preparatory amendment with Article V.

Preparation for a general convention addressing the many diverse issues follows the unabridging of free speech, securing the vote and reforming campaign finance.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444637-Georgia-House-approves-Article-V-convention&p=5433668&viewfull=1#post5433668

There is not a single reason to continue participating in the controlled dusfunctional farce of party politics UNLESS you are working for the NWO.

They hate this strategy:-)

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 09:39 AM
WTF are you talking about?

I even skimmed the disjointed post you referenced

What part do you not understand about using our natural law awareness of constitutional intent to remove state legislators from office that are unfit?

Then continuing after replacing them with citizens that accept our prime constitutional rights, into conventions in 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution AND,

1. End the abridging of free speech

2. Secure the vote

3. Campaign finance reform

Sure, this is out of the box the elites have made for us, and perhaps the problem is you cannot think outside of it.

tod evans
05-08-2014, 09:54 AM
What part do you not understand about using our natural law awareness of constitutional intent to remove state legislators from office that are unfit?

Then continuing after replacing them with citizens that accept our prime constitutional rights, into conventions in 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution AND,

1. End the abridging of free speech

2. Secure the vote

3. Campaign finance reform

Sure, this is out of the box the elites have made for us, and perhaps the problem is you cannot think outside of it.

Keep trying........Is English your second language?

Throwing arbitrary concepts out may make sense to you but it leaves me confused..

This thread is about a kid the cops killed, do you have some insight into how to actually stop this type of blatant abuse or are you just spouting off?

Origanalist
05-08-2014, 09:57 AM
To whom?
We ought to be blowing up the comments sections of the sites that report this stuff. Like this:



The cops ran out of fucks to give about what we think about this stuff somewhere around AD1751.
Preach the message to those who will listen.[/FONT][/COLOR]

I put my two cents in.

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 10:01 AM
If you actually believe you know of a way to end this type of police behavior pare it down to one or two sentences that a layman can grasp.


Tod, there are two problems.

The first is official structures so corrupted they created the cops you refer to. They of course allow the cops to do what they do in complete violation of the law, the constitution and their oaths.

The only way for the people to deal with those corrupt officials is with the ultimate authority of Article V as "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts".

Because free speech is abridged gathering support is not easy. We will have to use word of mouth until media with constitutional integrity catches on. There might be some.

Cognitive infiltration supported by unconstitutional corporate interests as well as officials misusing public funds are another barrier. You have seen me challenge that.

Grassroots, word of mouth will work, but it is not easy like we are used to.

The second part is the cops themselves. Believe me, when thousands of Americans deliver petitions seeking acceptance of obvious constitutional intent from state legislators, and any who fail to accept it are impeached, THEN the bad cops will behave OR the new judges we elect in this constitutional emergency will imprison them for such acts as we have seen.

tod evans
05-08-2014, 10:06 AM
Tod, there are two problems.

The first is official structures so corrupted they created the cops you refer to. They of course allow the cops to do what they do in complete violation of the law, the constitution and their oaths.

The only way for the people to deal with those corrupt officials is with the ultimate authority of Article V as "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts".

Because free speech is abridged gathering support is not easy. We will have to use word of mouth until media with constitutional integrity catches on. There might be some.

Cognitive infiltration supported by unconstitutional corporate interests as well as officials misusing public funds are another barrier. You have seen me challenge that.

Grassroots, word of mouth will work, but it is not easy like we are used to.

The second part is the cops themselves. Believe me, when thousands of Americans deliver petitions seeking acceptance of obvious constitutional intent from state legislators, and any who fail to accept it are impeached, THEN the bad cops will behave OR the new judges we elect in this constitutional emergency will imprison them for such acts as we have seen.

So in essence you're advocating for more voting and educating...

I'm one of "those" people who firmly believe talking and voting have gotten us to this point and more of the same will only result in more of the same...

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 10:12 AM
Keep trying........Is English your second language?

Throwing arbitrary concepts out

Are you trying to say you cannot cognit constitutional intent?

Are you saying that the proposal to use constitutional law is arbitrary?

Be specific, be accountable.

Constitutional intent is the purpose of free speech. That information vital to survival be shared and understood.

Can you accept that?

There is no direct way to stop the cops from doing what they are doing. Trying such is exactly what the NWO wants.

UNITY is needed, THEN Americans can stop it.

Are you against creating unity to stop the killing?

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 10:21 AM
So in essence you're advocating for more voting and educating...

I'm one of "those" people who firmly believe talking and voting have gotten us to this point and more of the same will only result in more of the same...

Talking and voting on the subjects the elite want have gotten us here, yes.

Can you talk about voting on what will get us out of this situation?

So far you have not.

Be specific be accountable.

moostraks
05-08-2014, 10:21 AM
Sounds like the government pulled a cya move:
"The autopsy goes on to say:

'Because of the circumstances of this event, it is difficult to discern if the decedent died from a drug overdose or an asphyxia event exacerbated by either the occlusion of the airway by the foreign object, a possible vascular occlusion associated with the neck restraint, or from a combination of all the events that transpired during this incident.'"

So they are going with the he did this to himself defense. :mad: If anyone of us had been in a similar situation we would be charged but instead we get this explanation, ""It's very unfortunate that he died," City Attonrey Peter Joffrion said. "But I have full confidence the police officers responding on the scene, handled this matter appropriately."http://blog.al.com/breaking/2014/04/city_of_huntsville_denies_wron.html

Found this gem, "The report could not rule out a drug overdose. But since Smith’s blood samples were discarded, and never tested, it is impossible to determine whether he had drugs in his system at the time of his arrest."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/07/lawsuit-cops-violent-drug-sting-resulted-in-teens-death/#ixzz318pH6ZE5

How convenient for them that the blood samples were discarded. :mad: :mad: :mad:

I know for a fact northern Alabama is corrupt as hell. There is no way you could get me to enter the state of Alabama again. Bunch of thugs, crooks, and liars run the systems there.

tod evans
05-08-2014, 10:25 AM
Can you talk about voting on what will get us out of this situation?


I do NOT believe that any amount of talking or voting is going to end the type of abuse exhibited in this thread.

Got it?

Philhelm
05-08-2014, 10:35 AM
This is bad even for the jack-booted, demonic swine. What makes stories such as this even worse is that we will joke about paid vacation and such, but will be 99% right on target. I guess we are at moustache-swirling, cartoon villany.

Ender
05-08-2014, 11:20 AM
Are you trying to say you cannot cognit constitutional intent?

Are you saying that the proposal to use constitutional law is arbitrary?

Be specific, be accountable.

Constitutional intent is the purpose of free speech. That information vital to survival be shared and understood.

Can you accept that?

There is no direct way to stop the cops from doing what they are doing. Trying such is exactly what the NWO wants.

UNITY is needed, THEN Americans can stop it.

Are you against creating unity to stop the killing?

Dude-

"Constitutional intent: was the creation of a strong central government. It succeeded.

Unity is indeed needed but it is going to take a whole different kind of education of a people who do not know they are uneducated. The hardest job in the world is to help the ignorant who have no clue they are ignorant.

PaulConventionWV
05-08-2014, 11:36 AM
Are you trying to say you cannot cognit constitutional intent?

Are you saying that the proposal to use constitutional law is arbitrary?

Be specific, be accountable.

Constitutional intent is the purpose of free speech. That information vital to survival be shared and understood.

Can you accept that?

There is no direct way to stop the cops from doing what they are doing. Trying such is exactly what the NWO wants.

UNITY is needed, THEN Americans can stop it.

Are you against creating unity to stop the killing?

I don't know. Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

I am pretty much fed up with voting and talking. Every time I hear someone say this now, it's the same old spiel and people just ignore it. You're not going to change anything that way.

PaulConventionWV
05-08-2014, 11:38 AM
Sounds like the government pulled a cya move:
"The autopsy goes on to say:

'Because of the circumstances of this event, it is difficult to discern if the decedent died from a drug overdose or an asphyxia event exacerbated by either the occlusion of the airway by the foreign object, a possible vascular occlusion associated with the neck restraint, or from a combination of all the events that transpired during this incident.'"

So they are going with the he did this to himself defense. :mad: If anyone of us had been in a similar situation we would be charged but instead we get this explanation, ""It's very unfortunate that he died," City Attonrey Peter Joffrion said. "But I have full confidence the police officers responding on the scene, handled this matter appropriately."http://blog.al.com/breaking/2014/04/city_of_huntsville_denies_wron.html

Found this gem, "The report could not rule out a drug overdose. But since Smith’s blood samples were discarded, and never tested, it is impossible to determine whether he had drugs in his system at the time of his arrest."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/07/lawsuit-cops-violent-drug-sting-resulted-in-teens-death/#ixzz318pH6ZE5

How convenient for them that the blood samples were discarded. :mad: :mad: :mad:

I know for a fact northern Alabama is corrupt as hell. There is no way you could get me to enter the state of Alabama again. Bunch of thugs, crooks, and liars run the systems there.

We only stabbed him in the neck to get the drugs! We didn't know it would kill him... honest!

Anti Federalist
05-08-2014, 06:56 PM
What part do you not understand about using our natural law awareness of constitutional intent to remove state legislators from office that are unfit?

Then continuing after replacing them with citizens that accept our prime constitutional rights, into conventions in 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution AND,

1. End the abridging of free speech

2. Secure the vote

3. Campaign finance reform

Sure, this is out of the box the elites have made for us, and perhaps the problem is you cannot think outside of it.

We have enough free speech to speak out about these outrages.

People want them, they vote for them time and time again.

Anti Federalist
05-08-2014, 07:03 PM
Talking and voting on the subjects the elite want have gotten us here, yes.

Can you talk about voting on what will get us out of this situation?

So far you have not.

Be specific be accountable.

We are a minority.

We have always been a minority.

People, throughout history, have shown time and time again, that they do not want freedom.

They want three things:

To be Fed.

To be Entertained.

And to exercise some Petty Power over their fellow man.

So, being a minority, how do you get your freedom?

Well, not through voting and plebiscites and talking.

Being a minority, you will be outvoted, consistently, and thoroughly, over and over again.

You get your freedom by taking it.

You repeat this scene, 100 times a day, until the system collapses of its own illegitimacy.

http://benswann.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P-BLM.jpg

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 10:43 PM
I do NOT believe that any amount of talking or voting is going to end the type of abuse exhibited in this thread.

Got it?

Yes, you are indirectly advocating violence.

That is a BIG fail for Americans in these conditions because they do not have the reserves to fight a government teamed with corporations that took the wealth Americans had.

Meanwhile you are NOT being accountable to specific matters in discussion. You are evading issues which are not beliefs, they are facts of law, ultimately. If Americans are to unify in defense of the 1787 constitution.


Are you trying to say you cannot cognit constitutional intent?

Are you saying that the proposal to use constitutional law is arbitrary?

Be specific, be accountable.

Constitutional intent is the purpose of free speech. That information vital to survival be shared and understood.

Can you accept that?


You have not responded to a question a child could answer properly.

You have indirectly stated that a proposal to use constitutional law is arbitrary.

Can you be accountable? Do you have any desire to do so?

Or do you ONLY advocate that Americans solve their problem with government by violence and do so with no accountability to the consequences under these conditions?

Origanalist
05-08-2014, 10:47 PM
You're a bad, bad person tod.

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 10:55 PM
You're a bad, bad person tod.

Do you, Origanalist, accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to assure that information vital to survival is shared and understood?

Origanalist
05-08-2014, 10:58 PM
Do you, Origanalist, accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to assure that information vital to survival is shared and understood?

If I do will I be saved?

CPUd
05-08-2014, 11:01 PM
http://i.imgur.com/RVym7.png

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 11:07 PM
We are a minority.

We have always been a minority.

People, throughout history, have shown time and time again, that they do not want freedom.

They want three things:

To be Fed.

To be Entertained.

And to exercise some Petty Power over their fellow man.

So, being a minority, how do you get your freedom?

Well, not through voting and plebiscites and talking.

Being a minority, you will be outvoted, consistently, and thoroughly, over and over again.

You get your freedom by taking it.

You repeat this scene, 100 times a day, until the system collapses of its own illegitimacy.

http://benswann.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P-BLM.jpg

Cognitive distortions, generalizations. The entire post is intended to be a mental filter tha minimizes the foresight and courage that created the 1787 constitution.

If what you write is true, that constitution would not exist.

One thing is sure. A forum user that does not overtly accept that free speech has the purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood cannot be trusted to comment constitutionally in any discussion about the constitution.

Origanalist
05-08-2014, 11:13 PM
http://i.imgur.com/RVym7.png

http://cdn.buzznet.com/assets/users8/lea/default/cute-superman-squirrel--large-msg-1122473584-2.jpg

Ender
05-08-2014, 11:17 PM
Yes, you are indirectly advocating violence.

That is a BIG fail for Americans in these conditions because they do not have the reserves to fight a government teamed with corporations that took the wealth Americans had.

Meanwhile you are NOT being accountable to specific matters in discussion. You are evading issues which are not beliefs, they are facts of law, ultimately. If Americans are to unify in defense of the 1787 constitution.



You have not responded to a question a child could answer properly.

You have indirectly stated that a proposal to use constitutional law is arbitrary.

Can you be accountable? Do you have any desire to do so?

Or do you ONLY advocate that Americans solve their problem with government by violence and do so with no accountability to the consequences under these conditions?


Pot/Kettle :rolleyes:

YOU have not responded to this:


Dude-

"Constitutional intent: was the creation of a strong central government. It succeeded.

Unity is indeed needed but it is going to take a whole different kind of education of a people who do not know they are uneducated. The hardest job in the world is to help the ignorant who have no clue they are ignorant.

Anti Federalist
05-08-2014, 11:17 PM
Cognitive distortions, generalizations. The entire post is intended to be a mental filter tha minimizes the foresight and courage that created the 1787 constitution.

If what you write is true, that constitution would not exist.

One thing is sure. A forum user that does not overtly accept that free speech has the purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood cannot be trusted to comment constitutionally in any discussion about the constitution.

You want my comment on the constitution?

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.” - Lysander Spooner

I am an Anti Federalist, Chris.

Anti Federalists were opposed to the 1787 constitution, because they feared that it was too broadly written and would result in an out of control central government.

They were right.

And while a good starting point at this juncture, I do not think the solution lies there.

Outside of the Bill of Rights, of course.

Which is only there because of the Anti Federalists.

Ender
05-08-2014, 11:19 PM
You want my comment on the constitution?

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.” - Lysander Spooner

I am an Anti Federalist, Chris.

Anti Federalists were opposed to the 1787 constitution, because they feared it it was too broadly written and would result in an out of control central government.

They were right.

And while a good starting point at this point, I do not think the solution lies there.

Outside of the Bill of Rights, of course.

Which is only there because of the Anti Federalists.

Exactly.

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 11:24 PM
If I do will I be saved?

You will be contributing to the salvation of the 1787 constitution and perhaps the millions of lives that depend on its principles withstanding its usurpation.

Your posting has made it clear, you do not care about any of it.

GunnyFreedom
05-08-2014, 11:30 PM
You will be contributing to the salvation of the 1787 constitution and perhaps the millions of lives that depend on its principles withstanding its usurpation.

Your posting has made it clear, you do not care about any of it.

You would say the same thing about James Madison and Thomas Jefferson because they would fail to worship you, personally. You really do need professional help. And that's as sincere as I can get.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
05-08-2014, 11:37 PM
Yes, you are indirectly advocating violence.



Forget indirect advocacy. For throat slashers, dog killers, Hitler, and that guy on silence of the lambs--yeah, violence is the only thing some understand.

Christopher A. Brown
05-08-2014, 11:41 PM
Anti Federalists were opposed to the 1787 constitution, because they feared it it was too broadly written and would result in an out of control central government.

They were right.

No, you misrepresent what I asked for and, no, they were not right.

We have not been under the 1787 constitution since the end if the civil war. It was secretly abandoned as the English financing of the union took over the government.

You work for their interests not the states because they would want people to believe the 1787 constitution failed. It did not, the infiltration of government succeeded and the people failed to understand what had happened.

You try to take advantage of that . . . again.

ON EDIT:
You misrepresent what I ask for which is in relation to constitutional intent. You evade that issue.
You do not stand for states rights because the states, relating to natural law ALSO must accept that freedom of speech has the ultimate purpose of assuring that information vital to survival is shared and understood.

GunnyFreedom
05-08-2014, 11:45 PM
The US has not followed the Constitution since 1803, 60 years before the Civil War.

GunnyFreedom
05-08-2014, 11:48 PM
And your endless verbatim repetitive rant has exactly nothing to do this child getting his throat violently ripped open.

Anti Federalist
05-08-2014, 11:57 PM
No, you misrepresent what I asked for and, no, they were not right.

Yes, they were.

Multiple passages in the Anti Federalist papers make it clear that their primary objection to the 1787 constitution was the consolidation of power in the new central government and that the government would end up squashing people's rights.

Right.

heavenlyboy34
05-09-2014, 12:00 AM
Cognitive distortions, generalizations. The entire post is intended to be a mental filter tha minimizes the foresight and courage that created the 1787 constitution.

If what you write is true, that constitution would not exist.

One thing is sure. A forum user that does not overtly accept that free speech has the purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood cannot be trusted to comment constitutionally in any discussion about the constitution.
False. Boobus was duped by the Constitutionalists back then, as he is duped by the likes of our Big Brother and the various State Ministries.

heavenlyboy34
05-09-2014, 12:01 AM
Yes, they were.

Multiple passages in the Anti Federalist papers make it clear that their primary objection to the 1787 was the consolidation of power in the new central government and that the government would end up squashing people's rights.

Right.
Yes, this.^^ The Anti-Federalist papers were/are eerily prophetic. +rep

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 12:01 AM
And your endless verbatim repetitive rant has exactly nothing to do this child getting his throat violently ripped open.

What happened to the young person was unconstitutional. I defend their, our right under the 1787 constitution.
In 1803 there was a court case, Hamilton and Marbury, it had bearing on constitutionality generally but it had little effect on the republic operating under the 1797 constitution.

Which is why the civil war was needed to divide the nation and covertly abandon the old republic and the constitution over it.

GunnyFreedom
05-09-2014, 12:03 AM
What happened to this child was against the Magna Carta. You don't even need the Constitution for this one, although it was also clearly a violation of his constitutionally-recognized God-given right to due process.

kcchiefs6465
05-09-2014, 12:05 AM
The US has not followed the Constitution since 1803, 60 years before the Civil War.
1803?

1798.

ETA: Why CB posted "1797 Constitution"... lmao/smgdh

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 12:16 AM
Yes, they were.

Multiple passages in the Anti Federalist papers make it clear that their primary objection to the 1787 constitution was the consolidation of power in the new central government and that the government would end up squashing people's rights.

Right.

Perhaps the consolidation made it easier to take over, but it was STILL taken over following the civil war.

Constitutional intent is natural law and even states recognize it, but you don't.

heavenlyboy34
05-09-2014, 12:20 AM
1803?

1798.

ETA: Why CB posted "1797 Constitution"... lmao/smgdh
This^^

heavenlyboy34
05-09-2014, 12:21 AM
Perhaps the consolidation made it easier to take over, but it was STILL taken over following the civil war.

Constitutional intent is natural law and even states recognize it, but you don't.
Constitutionalism is not rooted in Natural Law. You're thinking of the Declaration of Independence.

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 12:21 AM
What happened to this child was against the Magna Carta. You don't even need the Constitution for this one, although it was also clearly a violation of his constitutionally-recognized God-given right to due process.

Agreed, and the MC had more accountability than we have today.

However, IF the 1787 constitution had not been covertly abandoned after the civil war, we would have more accountability from the elite and authority than under the MC.

The civil war was the loser signatories to the MC returning, albeit secretly, to attempt to regain what they had lost in 1215.

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 12:34 AM
Constitutionalism is not rooted in Natural Law. You're thinking of the Declaration of Independence.

Article V is codification of "alter or abolish" from the DOI. There was intense competition for inclusion in all three founding docs which fragmented the statements of natural law that were trying to be integrated into a new expression to be termed "constitutional intent".

That competition was the losers of the war which the Magna Carta marked the end of as a peace treaty, returning to try and regain some of the tyranny lost. That war is another missing piece of history.

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 12:49 AM
1803?

1798.

ETA: Why CB posted "1797 Constitution"... lmao/smgdh

I'm posting on a phone 95% of the time. When the the coginfils attack, I can't edit all the typos out.

Spikender
05-09-2014, 12:51 AM
Cut throats, blast teenagers, shoot dogs, get bitches.

#thugcoplyfe

God bless these motherfuckers.

GunnyFreedom
05-09-2014, 12:51 AM
Article V is codification of "alter or abolish" from the DOI. There was intense competition for inclusion in all three founding docs which fragmented the statements of natural law that were trying to be integrated into a new expression to be termed "constitutional intent".

That competition was the losers of the war which the Magna Carta marked the end of as a peace treaty, returning to try and regain some of the tyranny lost. That war is another missing piece of history.

Just a word of friendly advice, if you actually discussed issues like you are doing here instead of just telling everybody what they think (which, by the way, is incorrect 9 times out of 10), then you would likely find about a hundredfold better reception to your efforts. False accusations piss people off, and repeated false accusations will make people intentionally drive you mad, even if they have to play Devil's Advocate to do it. It's human nature.

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 12:56 AM
Perhaps the consolidation made it easier to take over, but it was STILL taken over following the civil war.

Constitutional intent is natural law and even states recognize it, but you don't.

Intent is one thing.

What it is in practice is another thing.

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 12:58 AM
Dude-

"Constitutional intent: was the creation of a strong central government. It succeeded.

Unity is indeed needed but it is going to take a whole different kind of education of a people who do not know they are uneducated. The hardest job in the world is to help the ignorant who have no clue they are ignorant.

constitutional intent was a way to integrate natural law into a compact. The Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy inspired it.

Even the ignorant can accept that freedom of speech ultimately exists because it assures information vital
To survival is shared and understood.

Even the ignorant can accept that human society have a natural law right to "alter or abolish" abusive government.

Now, the deeply corrupted of today's society are beyond ignorant, but they are a glorified minority.

Educating anyone with a false group of people pretending to care but always working to distract, confuse and deceive, while secretly colluding is VERY difficult, but it IS getting done here.

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 01:00 AM
Intent is one thing.

What it is in practice is another thing.

Stop complaining, you did it to yourself.

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 01:03 AM
Just a word of friendly advice, if you actually discussed issues like you are doing here instead of just telling everybody what they think (which, by the way, is incorrect 9 times out of 10), then you would likely find about a hundredfold better reception to your efforts. False accusations piss people off, and repeated false accusations will make people intentionally drive you mad, even if they have to play Devil's Advocate to do it. It's human nature.

Yes, this.

We are not "coginfils".

We are real people, many of us known to one another personally.

Spikender
05-09-2014, 01:06 AM
Christopher you should write for Al Sharpton so that his "teleprompter mishaps" can be a weekly series.

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 01:08 AM
Stop complaining, you did it to yourself.

During the period of debate over the ratification of the Constitution, numerous independent local speeches and articles were published all across the country. Initially, many of the articles in opposition were written under pseudonyms, such as "Brutus," "Centinel," and "Federal Farmer." Eventually, famous revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry came out publicly against the Constitution. They argued that the strong national government proposed by the Federalists was a threat to the rights of individuals and that the President would become a king.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalism

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 01:13 AM
Just a word of friendly advice, if you actually discussed issues like you are doing here instead of just telling everybody what they think (which, by the way, is incorrect 9 times out of 10), then you would likely find about a hundredfold better reception to your efforts. False accusations piss people off, and repeated false accusations will make people intentionally drive you mad, even if they have to play Devil's Advocate to do it. It's human nature.

You are perhaps a bit naive and inexperienced at detecting cognitive infiltration.

http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

It's real and its been going on since 1998, quite heavy in certain areas. Your belief structures make it easy for it to remain invisible to you.

Also, they've been at it so long as a covert group they've actually been able to successfully model some quite dysfunctional social memes in the language they employ. Doing this covertly the groups fool lots of people into thinking what they want them to think.

They've got this forum so bamboozled that not one sincere American here has what it takes to overtly accept that free speech has the natural law purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood. Basically they have everyone operating in a contrived, non functional social convention that satisfies a basic need to feel one is doing something meaningful to counter animalistic behaviors of authority.

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 01:16 AM
There you go again.


You are perhaps a bit naive and inexperienced at detecting cognitive infiltration.

http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

It's real and its been going on since 1998, quite heavy in certain areas. Your belief structures make it easy for it to remain invisible to you.

Also, they've been at it so long as a covert group they've actually been able to successfully model some quite dysfunctional social memes in the language they employ. Doing this covertly the groups fool lots of people into thinking what they want them to think.

They've got this forum so bamboozled that not one sincere American here has what it takes to overtly accept that free speech has the natural law purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood. Basically they have everyone operating in a contrived, non functional social convention that satisfies a basic need to feel one is doing something meaningful to counter animalistic behaviors of authority.

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 01:21 AM
During the period of debate over the ratification of the Constitution, numerous independent local speeches and articles were published all across the country. Initially, many of the articles in opposition were written under pseudonyms, such as "Brutus," "Centinel," and "Federal Farmer." Eventually, famous revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry came out publicly against the Constitution. They argued that the strong national government proposed by the Federalists was a threat to the rights of individuals and that the President would become a king.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalism

Wiki is rarely accurate in such matters . They have an anti American agenda.

The infiltrators of the government following the civil war, similar to that behind wiki, also the loser signatories of the Magna Carta, have made the president into a king.

The antifederalists were not predicting they were dictating the plan IF the people weakened or became confused in there resolve or understandings of constitutional intent.

Constant manipulation via media confused and mislead the American people so they could not effectively resist the plan.

GunnyFreedom
05-09-2014, 01:24 AM
Well. You all saw that I really did try.

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 01:27 AM
Wiki is rarely accurate in such matters . They have an anti American agenda.

The infiltrators of the government following the civil war, similar to that behind wiki, also the loser signatories of the Magna Carta, have made the president into a king.

The antifederalists were not predicting they were dictating the plan IF the people weakened or became confused in there resolve or understandings of constitutional intent.

Constant manipulation via media confused and mislead the American people so they could not effectively resist the plan.

Brother, you need to go read the Anti Federalist papers and then get back to me.

You won't find me jumping on your plan because I, like the original Anti Federalists, find the current constitution fatally flawed, for precisely the same reasons that they did in 1787.

I, quite frankly, think the best thing that could possibly happen at this point is to have the whole mess collapse under its own weight and blow away, like the USSR did in 1991.

That said:

In spite of the diversity that characterized the Antifederalist opposition, they did share a core view of American politics. They believed that the greatest threat to the future of the United States lay in the government's potential to become corrupt and seize more and more power until its tyrannical rule completely dominated the people. Having just succeeded in rejecting what they saw as the tyranny of British power, such threats were seen as a very real part of political life.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/16b.asp

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 01:29 AM
Well. You all saw that I really did try.

I think we both did...

"You must spread some reputation around..."

tod evans
05-09-2014, 02:24 AM
Yes, you are indirectly advocating violence. Mumble, insult, and try to redirect..


Apparently I wasn't clear enough?

I do not believe that more talking or voting is going to stop governments abuses of the citizenry.

It is very apparent that in your naivety you believe you can somehow use "The Law" and their courts to bring "them" to heal...

So instead of answering your silly questions that attempt to lead a person down a dead end path I will pose one for you;

In the face of outright tyranny, upon observing your leaders abuse your countrymen, why pray-tell do you continue to advocate for more of the same behavior that brought this country to this point?

Will you be one of the people who chant and kneel in submission as the government runs roughshod over your children and your neighbors?

Do you honestly believe that governments employees will not climb right over your ideals and good thoughts in order to secure themselves more status?

These same people who have bastardized the constitution and now fail to recognize the most basic human rights will not give one whit as they crawl over your submissive body in an attempt to secure more trinkets for themselves.

You have a choice.........Continue to plead your cause to the same people who abuse your countrymen or don't..

Occam's Banana
05-09-2014, 02:25 AM
During the period of debate over the ratification of the Constitution, numerous independent local speeches and articles were published all across the country. Initially, many of the articles in opposition were written under pseudonyms, such as "Brutus," "Centinel," and "Federal Farmer." Eventually, famous revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry came out publicly against the Constitution. They argued that the strong national government proposed by the Federalists was a threat to the rights of individuals and that the President would become a king.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalism

Wiki is rarely accurate in such matters . They have an anti American agenda.

In spite of the diversity that characterized the Antifederalist opposition, they did share a core view of American politics. They believed that the greatest threat to the future of the United States lay in the government's potential to become corrupt and seize more and more power until its tyrannical rule completely dominated the people. Having just succeeded in rejecting what they saw as the tyranny of British power, such threats were seen as a very real part of political life.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/16b.asp

Wiki ushistory.org is rarely accurate in such matters . They have an anti American agenda.

:p (at AF)

while 0 < 1;
print "free speech has the natural law purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood";

endwhile;

Mani
05-09-2014, 02:28 AM
Similar information. But just to re-emphasize...


The kid was being chased by plain clothed people who did not announce themselves as police officers.....

When he was caught he was thrown to the ground and had his ribs shattered, on top of that he was pepper sprayed. When the cop sat on him, he couldn't breathe. It sounds like he passed out while the cop suffocated him while putting on the cuffs. Must have been a really horrific last 2 minutes of his life.

I'm wondering if the cops cracking his ribs then putting their crushing weight on him already knew they killed him, and just shoved the object down his throat to muck things up a bit.

You know...if you broke someone's ribs and crushed them to death just for running away...Maybe you could get in trouble for that...But if he ACCIDENTALLY and UNFORTUNATELY dies while you are trying to get some evidence that stuck in his throat...well then it was just an accident..and the kid "did this to himself..."

That's my initial guess....They knew they crushed the life out of him and needed an "accident" while searching for evidence...Well they found their drugs after all right? Amazing that his blood samples are gone, but the drugs on his person have been carefully kept as evidence. WTF. Oops sorry, we can't go get his blood samples....we don't have any...BUT LOOK AT THE DRUGS WE FOUND ON HIM!!!

War on Drugs victory! Keep up the good work heroes! (that was hard to type :()

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/07/lawsuit-cops-violent-drug-sting-resulted-in-teens-death/

Occam's Banana
05-09-2014, 02:53 AM
Similar information. But just to re-emphasize...

The kid was being chased by plain clothed people who did not announce themselves as police officers.....

When he was caught he was thrown to the ground and had his ribs shattered, on top of that he was pepper sprayed. When the cop sat on him, he couldn't breathe. It sounds like he passed out while the cop suffocated him while putting on the cuffs. Must have been a really horrific last 2 minutes of his life.

I'm wondering if the cops cracking his ribs then putting their crushing weight on him already knew they killed him, and just shoved the object down his throat to muck things up a bit.

You know...if you broke someone's ribs and crushed them to death just for running away...Maybe you could get in trouble for that...But if he ACCIDENTALLY and UNFORTUNATELY dies while you are trying to get some evidence that stuck in his throat...well then it was just an accident..and the kid "did this to himself..."

That's my initial guess....They knew they crushed the life out of him and needed an "accident" while searching for evidence...Well they found their drugs after all right? Amazing that his blood samples are gone, but the drugs on his person have been carefully kept as evidence. WTF. Oops sorry, we can't go get his blood samples....we don't have any...BUT LOOK AT THE DRUGS WE FOUND ON HIM!!!

War on Drugs victory! Keep up the good work heroes! (that was hard to type :()

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/07/lawsuit-cops-violent-drug-sting-resulted-in-teens-death/

The Appalachian Area News and Daily Caller stories (both dated May 7th) make it sound like he died on the scene.

But according to another story (linked to from the AAN story), he did not.

FTA (April 10th): http://blog.al.com/breaking/2014/04/city_of_huntsville_denies_wron.html

The teen died after five days in the hospital and has been dead for nine months, [...]

Origanalist
05-09-2014, 08:30 AM
Similar information. But just to re-emphasize...


The kid was being chased by plain clothed people who did not announce themselves as police officers.....

When he was caught he was thrown to the ground and had his ribs shattered, on top of that he was pepper sprayed. When the cop sat on him, he couldn't breathe. It sounds like he passed out while the cop suffocated him while putting on the cuffs. Must have been a really horrific last 2 minutes of his life.

I'm wondering if the cops cracking his ribs then putting their crushing weight on him already knew they killed him, and just shoved the object down his throat to muck things up a bit.

You know...if you broke someone's ribs and crushed them to death just for running away...Maybe you could get in trouble for that...But if he ACCIDENTALLY and UNFORTUNATELY dies while you are trying to get some evidence that stuck in his throat...well then it was just an accident..and the kid "did this to himself..."

That's my initial guess....They knew they crushed the life out of him and needed an "accident" while searching for evidence...Well they found their drugs after all right? Amazing that his blood samples are gone, but the drugs on his person have been carefully kept as evidence. WTF. Oops sorry, we can't go get his blood samples....we don't have any...BUT LOOK AT THE DRUGS WE FOUND ON HIM!!!

War on Drugs victory! Keep up the good work heroes! (that was hard to type :()

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/07/lawsuit-cops-violent-drug-sting-resulted-in-teens-death/

I'm under the impression no drugs were found, am I wrong?

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 09:45 AM
You won't find me jumping on your plan because I, like the original Anti Federalists, find the current constitution fatally flawed, for precisely the same reasons that they did in 1787.


All you are saying is that the Antifeds in 1787 knew of the plan to take down the republic and that consolidating power, in one way, made greater vulnerability to takeover of the whole.

You leave out the fact that there were alternative plans and they allowed for quicker takeover. By the same means, but one state at a time.

What you've not said is the natural law rights that states would, or are implied they would have created. Just like you have no plan to defend natural law rights, you omit that the Antifeds were going to provide them.

What you advocate is exactly what the NWO is doing. Economic collapse. Russia was easier because it does not have the strength of the constitution underlying its history.

When you failed to accept the purpose of free speech your intentions are revealed. Not everyone who fails to accept such has those intentions, but the door is left open for them, which is the goal of cognitive distortion in cultivating a social fear of openly aligning with such constitutional intent.

The fact remains that this plan will work.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444637-Georgia-House-approves-Article-V-convention&p=5433668&viewfull=1#post5433668

And that you are against it working. Not because you have an alternate method to assure rights are respected, but because you work for the NWO.

And, the fact that not one poster has accepted the purpose of free speech leaves it open as to WHO you are working with, and WHO is simply deceived by you and those you are working with.

The fact remains you have no plan to see rights respected and do not respect or accept the purpose of free speech, a prime right with or without a constitution.

jkob
05-09-2014, 10:12 AM
these pigs are out of control, i hope one day they get whats coming to them

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 10:42 AM
:p (at AF)

while 0 < 1;
print "free speech has the natural law purpose of assuring information vital to survival is shared and understood";

endwhile;

Exactly what are you trying to state?

ON EDIT: Never mind, I get it.

Yes, :p (at AF)

Omission, evasion and selectivity do not suffice in this kind of discussion. AF can't do anything else. No coginfil can, when held to the rail.

Anti Federalist
05-09-2014, 10:55 AM
And that you are against it working. Not because you have an alternate method to assure rights are respected, but because you work for the NWO.

*sigh*

I do not work for the New World Order.

I receive no compensation from either Soros or Koch.


And, the fact that not one poster has accepted the purpose of free speech leaves it open as to WHO you are working with, and WHO is simply deceived by you and those you are working with.

*sigh*

I am "working" with nobody, other than those political candidates and efforts that I have publicly supported over the years here.

Feel free to use your right to free speech to convince those that I have "deceived".


The fact remains you have no plan to see rights respected and do not respect or accept the purpose of free speech, a prime right with or without a constitution.

Your constitution would not have those right enumerated, had it not been for people that thought just like me, in 1787.

Would it make you any happier if I agreed that the purpose of free speech, among other things, is to unify people in opposition to tyrannical government?

I mean, that is what you're after here, isn't it?

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 11:03 AM
Apparently I wasn't clear enough?

I do not believe that more talking or voting is going to stop governments abuses of the citizenry.

You have a choice.........Continue to plead your cause to the same people who abuse your countrymen or don't..

Yes, you made it clear. Belief cannot be supported with facts and you have not addressed the facts of this.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444637-Georgia-House-approves-Article-V-convention&p=5433668&viewfull=1#post5433668

No one has. It is absolutely viable and feasible as a plan for a lawful and peaceful revolution that will STOP the abuses of LE long before the convention begins.

As soon as one states citizens assemble with petitions requesting that legislators declare their acceptance of constitutional intent, and follows through with proper demands for impeachment in this constitutional emergency, we will see a purge of unconstitutional officials in all areas of states government.

Judges will be second in line. The bad ones will recuse themselves making it obvious where the next petitions are to be directed.

Americans need to understand how simple unity upon constitutional principles makes them "the masters of the congress and the courts".

tod evans
05-09-2014, 11:06 AM
Yes, you made it clear. Belief cannot be supported with facts and you have not addressed the facts of this.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444637-Georgia-House-approves-Article-V-convention&p=5433668&viewfull=1#post5433668

No one has. It is absolutely viable and feasible as a plan for a lawful and peaceful revolution that will STOP the abuses of LE long before the convention begins.

As soon as one states citizens assemble with petitions requesting that legislators declare their acceptance of constitutional intent, and follows through with proper demands for impeachment in this constitutional emergency, we will see a purge of unconstitutional officials in all areas of states government.

Judges will be second in line. The bad ones will recuse themselves making it obvious where the next petitions are to be directed.

Americans need to understand how simple unity upon constitutional principles makes them "the masters of the congress and the courts".

Let's see if I understand you correctly...

You're advocating that masses of people who eschew physical force band together and attempt to impose their beliefs on the most heavily fortified government in the world?

Yes or No?


[edit]

If you have it in you to answer the yes/no question.......

The post you quoted asks another couple of questions in a similar vein....

Somehow you seem to have glossed over them when you quoted me..:rolleyes:

Christopher A. Brown
05-09-2014, 11:28 AM
*sigh*

I do not work for the New World Order.

I receive no compensation from either Soros or Koch.



*sigh*

I am "working" with nobody, other than those political candidates and efforts that I have publicly supported over the years here.

Feel free to use your right to free speech to convince those that I have "deceived".



Your constitution would not have those right enumerated, had it not been for people that thought just like me, in 1787.

Would it make you any happier if I agreed that the purpose of free speech, among other things, is to unify people in opposition to tyrannical government?

I mean, that is what you're after here, isn't it?

That is part of it, but there are other applications just as worthy.

Here is a point I will concede. The consolidation of authority does make control o er all of us a bigger target and if infiltrated a more complete takeover.

At an Article V convention, an amendment could be made to limit federal authority, similar to the 10th, but more specific to the issues the anti federalists were standing with in opposition to the constitution. I view such a position as more anarchical and can show that beliefs rather than knowledge of human need motivates such an agenda.

In 1787 the principals of the republic protected all Americans from the tyranny of beliefs and enabled a dialogue of coherent, comprehensive adaptation empowered by sharing and understanding information vital to survival.

I personally think that eventually, after the ending of the abridging of free speech, we will become a society acutely focused on the longest term needs of humanity. At that point, something like dissolution of the constitution may be advantageous to our continued adaptations. However, that may need to be conditional depending on the test of the world.

An Article V convention is the proper place to propose such a thing. And if it is done with the specifics above included, it could create an amendment that allows for contingent developments that are very good for all of us.

tod evans
05-10-2014, 04:07 AM
I personally think that eventually, after the ending of the abridging of free speech, Blah, blah, blah

I asked you quite clearly how exactly you intend to achieve this particular goal right here;


Let's see if I understand you correctly...

You're advocating that masses of people who eschew physical force band together and attempt to impose their beliefs on the most heavily fortified government in the world?

Yes or No?


[edit]

If you have it in you to answer the yes/no question.......

The post you quoted asks another couple of questions in a similar vein....

Somehow you seem to have glossed over them when you quoted me..:rolleyes:

Is there a reason you're avoiding simple discourse?

It seems as though your entire philosophy of achieving freedom hinges on the idea of rallying hoards of people to make peaceful demands of armed opposition....

Why not break it down into baby steps so you yourself may explore its feasibility?

RJB
05-10-2014, 06:21 AM
I asked you quite clearly how exactly you intend to achieve this particular goal right here;



Is there a reason you're avoiding simple discourse?



I think his reply would have been the same if you responded in Mongolian about how scary short people in clown suits are.

Spikender
05-10-2014, 06:23 AM
Christopher's plot to derail every topic with his rants about the Constitution and information being vital to survival carries on without a hitch.

Meanwhile, another teen dies and another officer gets a pat on the back. Booyah.

tod evans
05-10-2014, 06:23 AM
I think his reply would have been the same if you responded in Mongolian about how scary short people in clown suits are.

Hence the query earlier as to English being his primary language..:o

LibForestPaul
05-10-2014, 07:32 AM
One at a time is the only way.

Knowledge is the key.

Kop home addresses must be made available, citizens must actually want this shit to end.

Don't forget the chief and others. Putting down a Pavlovian dog does not do much. Need the owner with the leash to know his responsibilities.