A lawful and peaceful revolution.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Some history and a description of the environment our lawful and peaceful revolution will take place in America.

Since the very first framing document in 1776, the right to alter or abolish government destructive to rights has been a primary intent of the framers. The later 1787 constitution codified it as Article V. Both define our right to a lawful and peaceful revolution.

Thomas Jefferson envisioned such a revolution every generation. By the early 1800's, it's fairly visible in his writing that he is wondering why there hasn't been one and wants to see one.

A couple of factors seem to be controlling. One, there was a constant influx of immigrants that were not familiar with the options of protecting rights and freedoms. Two, the printed word seems to have pandered to the sensations a great deal. Ostensibly for profits, but also, basically diverting American focus from protecting rights and freedoms to social sensations or greed and fantasy. Easily an agenda of the elite.

It turns out a factor of human psychology tied to physiology could very easily be to blame, even exploited. Because of left and right hemisphere control over perceptional capacity and potentials, what is spoken and heard always uses cognitive capacity whereas writing or reading, might be done without as much cognitive capacity.

A factor relating to the control over newspapers plagued Lincoln. They would mostly not print his speeches. He spoke a great deal, but only those hearing knew what he had said, and for the most part were very impressed. Very few of his campaign speeches were published even in part. One that was was in his home state, Illinois stand out. From that 1859 speech we learn he was an avid supporter of an Article V convention with the impressive passage, "the people are the rightful masters of the congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the constitution but to overthrow the men that would pervert the constitution".

Clearly, Lincoln could only be working for an Article V convention to try and avert civil war. But, the elements that wanted war controlled the printing presses, so his thoughts on preserving the union peacefully were not written. What was written were the words inflaming anger and resentment towards the south.* Coupling that with the many speeches against the south created a desire for war amongst many people of the north despite the fact that the north was all
but impoverished.

Herein we have an opening for an old enemy of rights and freedoms. The descendants of king john and the barons who signed the Magna Carta. The main financiers of the union army. Some say the Rothschild money was primary.

At any rate, there was a very quiet takeover and abandonment of the 1787 constitution that occurred with the act of 1871. And that, in advanced form, is what we are confronting today in our federal government.

That infiltration of course, always has and does, oppose Article V, our right to a lawful and peaceful revolution.

At this point the issue of covert manipulation infiltrating American activism on the internet and elsewhere should be mentioned. Some of it originates from the UK or other commonwealth countries.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

Other sources could be from the US.

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

Basically their agenda is to prevent Americans from understanding and unifying around any strategy that could politically upset their current control or lead to any unity whatsoever opposing their agendas. Simply keeping Americans focused on the wrong things is plenty to block understanding which is the key to unity. Partisan politics is certainly a mainstay of preventing this revolution and always has been.

The observant and objective member here has certainly noticed this.

So within this, consider members here that refuse to agree or accept that the purpose of free speech is to enable unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish, could easily be covert agents or very much influenced by them. Particularly if involved with attacks against the concept. Others who have not agreed with that purpose of free speech could easily be simply influenced by the infiltration and be acting within what have become normal and natural social fears. This is what cognitive infiltration hopes for and depends upon. So by no means am I implying everyone here is a cognitive infiltrator. I am saying there are quite a few agents and most everyone has been influenced to varying degrees by the false agreement exhibited between the infiltrators regarding the purpose of free speech as well as other political issues.

The legal and constitutional mechanisms of our lawful and peaceful revolution.

This is actually an exceedingly simple plan. It's based on natural law, which is by definition almost a no-brainer. Our instincts provide the prime criteria for acceptance.

You may have read me posting about "the purpose of free speech". I focus on that because many Americans know the key words of the Declaration of Independence (DOI) well enough from memory to confirm what I assert. Notice, no one is arguing with me. There is good reason for that because Americans do know enough of the DOI by heart to simply use the logic and reason I put forth to prove my point when I describe the purpose of free speech. The infiltration exposes itself with unreasonable opposition to the purpose of free speech with each failure to be accountable and reasonable. They can never be either, it is a lose-lose for them.

The odds philosophically are heavily in our favor as free people under our constitution or law because the constitution or the documents which framed its intent include the biologically correct philosophies of natural law. Our social, phylogenetic instincts in action reacting and relating to one another under stress in pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (notice the order there) guide us towards survival.

The point is that if free speech does not have the purpose of enabling the unity adequate to empower the peoples action of "alter or abolish", what does?
No one has ever answered that question reasonably. The people win! By default the purpose of free speech under law is PROVEN by default, everyday one of those deniers (agents) fails to produce a description of what creates unity if free speech does not have that purpose.

Free speech is in essence the second constitutional right or intent we can actively engage to defend the constitution. It is in support of the first right we can engage; the right to alter or abolish; because free speech can create an understanding, which is the backbone of unity.

Two other aspects, basic rights empowering true representative government are secured in preparation for the full fledged Article V convention. Fair and just elections and fair campaigning. This addresses any election fraud, the potentials for electronic manipulation as well as the citizens united decision. For a time, campaign finance will likely leave the realm of "freedom of expression" because economic power has failed to show it can avoid placing greed over the principles of the republic. Someday, if the powerful learn, they will again be allowed to contribute to our betterment by using developed discretion parallel to constitutional intent for $ to politicians, if they learn constitutional intent and act to serve it properly, constitutionally. Exhibiting an INTENT to unify, as in "united states".

That convention will occur in social conditions far different than we now know. Because of the manifestation of free speech through mass media our adaptation to needed change will be underway. The stern restrictive dominance of fearfully obedient consumership will evaporate leaving openness to difficult truths with their logical implication of reasoned, logical, acceptable sacrifices.

In that, human creative nature will begin to find the intellectual and emotional rewards of living lives focused on continuity for future generations rather than condemned consumption for comfort and false security.

All in all, there are basically three amendments to the constitution to be considered as preparatory amendment for the purpose of making the nation of people more constitutional so they may properly define constitutional intent. Until that capacity to define intent is determined, no further amendment of any kind should take place, unless numerous states already have applications in on similar, proposed amendments.

After the preparatory amendment and the end of the abridging of free speech, there will be an era of truth telling. This will rock our sheltered world, which is no less than a form of "designer reality". The purpose of free speech will be creating truly deep unity where nearly none had existed before.

Part of that will be some new web forums that enable informed opinion quickly in an environment where covert agents can get no traction. From that, and their polling features, will come developed awareness and capacity to define or articulate constitutional intent. Those places on the internet will bear the proof of American peoples capacity to be "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts to be witnessed by the people themselves.

But none of that describes the transition from partisan controlled politics inside of a media shell of misleading division to something with the dynamics needed to form state legislatures into leadership tools of and for the people. Or, State legislatures capable of unifying in control over the federal government via the amendments to the federal constitution 3/4 of them can make by ratification. This is not a re-write of the constitution. This is a very carefully considered set of adjustments that expose, remove an old infiltration while preventing any new ones.

The states created the federal government and by amendment can alter parts of it and abolish others. But still, the people must define constitutional intent to shape states to lead to a republic by and for the people.

Accordingly there is a needed transition period of great contention in 3/4 of the states. It is a time where a minority, who is exceedingly vocal and sure of itself, asserts itself with regard to the purpose of free speech with other constitutional intent, to the states imposing upon them legal, constitutional tests lawfully over all state officials. For the corrupt it is a challenge, for the sincere American leader it is an invitation and honor.

There will be a parallel to the official test, which will be made upon media to either get publicity or expose the media entity as working against the constitution and the people.

The exposures will often occur in courts, or also expose courts. Very quickly, when these challenges become legal questions in courts, corrupt courts will refuse to hear the cases whereupon the challenge will move to another court which will honor constitutional intent with lawful recognition from true legal authority under the constitution.
In this way, media will be initially and lawfully be controlled because under the doctrine of purpose, which free speech must have for the constitution and republic under it to stand, government, and it's courts have a duty to enable American unity upon prime constitutional intent and preserve freedom of the press.

In this way states will be assembled one by one into representing the peoples burning need for unity in their task of defeating the infiltration and conversion of the federal government from something resembling less and less, one nation under God, into a nation respecting its natural, human purposes to survive and adapt perpetually.

And this is how it shall be, if we are to be free.

ON EDIT: This is a step by step breakdown with the sequence of testing state officials for adequate constitutionality.

An enquiry by petition to state officials-Do you accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights?

A) Test officials and candidates for acceptance of the root purpose of free speech being to assure information vital to unity needed to alter or abolish is shared and understood.

B)Test officials and candidates for acceptance of root purpose of free speech as prime constitutional intent used to create unity to conduct Article V with constitutional intent as the prime right for the purpose of protecting unalienable rights.

C) As an official of government, can you accept that EVERY American can understand and accept A)?

D) Are you aware that in 1911, 2/3 of the states applied for a convention and congress violated the law, their oath and the constitution by failing to convene delegates?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg
http://my.firedoglake.com/danielmarks/2013/04/30/congress-needs-to-comply-with-state-demands-for-article-v-constitutional-convention/
Can you accept that such a fact justifies that all delegates be elected in the states by the people of those states?

Because of that letter, the house finally adopts rule to count states applications for Article V.
http://www.examiner.com/article/u-s-house-finally-adopts-rule-to-count-article-v-convention-applications

E) Can you understand and accept that any state legislator that cannot accept A), can be impeached in this constitutional emergency as being unfit for office?

F)Can you understand and accept that A) B) C) D) & E) are legal process and that IF citizens act with D) as justification, and E) to complete the legal process, they WILL be "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" BECAUSE their states, as led by the people, then will agree that proper preparation for Article V consists of;

1) Amend Article V to assure the right to "alter or abolish" is enforceable under law by including preparatory amendment as a requirement.

2) End the abridging of free speech.

3) Securing the vote.

4) Campaign finance reform.

G) Americans need to agree that Officials of states and federal government must accept that such preparation by amendment is completely constitutional and can only enable democratic assertion of the principles of the republic, and, once complete; WHEREUPON all amendment should cease until America can be certain it is competent to Article V by testing itself to assure it knows and can define constitutional intent

[Ronin Truth]

'Periodic revolution, “at least once every 20 years,” was “a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” ' -- Thomas Jefferson 3rd US President (1801-1809)

[Peace&Freedom]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state. As many have pointed out, despite the many libertarian concepts and checks and balances put into the Constitution, there were enough holes in it for crafty advocates of central power to circumvent it over time, into the total state fiasco we have now.

[Ronin Truth]

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson

[Christopher A. Brown]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state. As many have pointed out, despite the many libertarian concepts and checks and balances put into the Constitution, there were enough holes in it for crafty advocates of central power to circumvent it over time, into the total state fiasco we have now.

The one thing left out which changes the picture of the federal governments role or behavior that you paint is the fact of the post civil war infiltration. The act of 1871 marks a point, where people not controlled by American values, were in control of America.

There was a massive manipulation which produced a war. The war traumatized the nation dynamically. During that the infiltration occurred and since that time, almost all of the circumventing you describe has taken place.

Using prime constitutional intent will undermine their premise of authority and provide substantial legal advantage.

[heavenlyboy34]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state. As many have pointed out, despite the many libertarian concepts and checks and balances put into the Constitution, there were enough holes in it for crafty advocates of central power to circumvent it over time, into the total state fiasco we have now.
Throw in undeniable rights in micro-secession and nullification, and I'm down for it, bro.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Throw in undeniable rights in micro-secession and nullification, and I'm down for it, bro.

Through repeated Article V conventions, each shrinking the federal gov, this could happen.

The empire act will have to be ended first however. It is a disaster waiting to happen and beyond that it's mentality could never be sustainable.

[Christopher A. Brown]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state. As many have pointed out, despite the many libertarian concepts and checks and balances put into the Constitution, there were enough holes in it for crafty advocates of central power to circumvent it over time, into the total state fiasco we have now.


Throw in undeniable rights in micro-secession and nullification, and I'm down for it, bro.

Me too. However, I would point out that the uniformity of laws from state to state we know now could really suffer and could make some things a pain in the ass. Consider, if corporations lost their individual rights, individuals would be empowered in business. But that would happen without the existing power of corporations to jump through unrestrained hoops put up arbitrarily by states.

Organizations like ALEC, on behalf of corporations, have been making things even more streamlined for doing business across states without concern for the peoples long term interests like those of the environment. With the Article of Confederation, that would properly disappear but the people would be hard pressed to replace them with something more thoughtful to their long term needs enabling their business.

The circumvention of "checks and balances" mentioned by Peace&Freedom were not so much advanced by craftiness as they were by the hidden usurpation of the act of 1871. Admitted, the craftiness was empowered dynamically, but still took 150 years and dozens of minor usurpations only possible by the compromises that followed within 40 years of the act of 1871.

It seems that comprehensiveness, exposure and inherent protection from such usurpation in the future, built into the constitution with very careful amendment, could mimic the inherent safety for rights and freedom the Articles of Confederation represented. This along with the repeated shrinking mentioned in my last reply could effect the minimal anarchy which I feel the framers intended and would provide incentive for the people to develop more and more independence.

[Christopher A. Brown]

I'm wondering if any of the sincere Americans here have seen this thread and are catching on.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471836-WTC-really-had-concrete-core-(split-thread)/page3

[Carlybee]

Curious...are you an American, Christopher?

[Christopher A. Brown]

Curious...are you an American, Christopher?
Santa Barbara is in California, yes.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Throw in undeniable rights in micro-secession and nullification, and I'm down for it, bro.

Excellent, but apparently there is no support for the constitution, justice and the end of LE murders of citizens outraged at the lack of justice and constitutional government by the forum.

My efforts to create constructive direction in the forum regarding the Baltimore riots prompted the mods to split the thread, and dump it into no-mans-land in the forum to get rid of the functional aspects developing.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?473730-Constitutional-Intent-Baltimore-thread-split

And not one poster has come to this thread in all my efforts to bring attention to an actual plan for Americans to defend the constitution and restore constitutional government.

Basically this indicates the forum does not serve the restoration of constitutional government, justice and freedom and that a large percentage of members are indeed agents which have complained about my posting in the thread about Baltimore. They have done that because they are paid to keep mundane, useless aspects of the riots dominant in the thread and displace any functional discussion which is designed to prevent the violence and destruction or organize Americans into a lawful unified body which can conduct a lawful and peaceful revolution.

[fisharmor]

Christopher A. Brown, you are by far the most prolific anti-liberty poster I've seen on this site in quite some time.

[Ronin Truth]

Isn't attempting to overthrow the government, by definition a criminal offense?

[Deborah K]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state. As many have pointed out, despite the many libertarian concepts and checks and balances put into the Constitution, there were enough holes in it for crafty advocates of central power to circumvent it over time, into the total state fiasco we have now.

If tptb didn't, won't, and will not adhere to the Constitution, why would anyone believe they'll adhere to the AofC?

[Deborah K]

Excellent, but apparently there is no support for the constitution, justice and the end of LE murders of citizens outraged at the lack of justice and constitutional government by the forum.

My efforts to create constructive direction in the forum regarding the Baltimore riots prompted the mods to split the thread, and dump it into no-mans-land in the forum to get rid of the functional aspects developing.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?473730-Constitutional-Intent-Baltimore-thread-split

And not one poster has come to this thread in all my efforts to bring attention to an actual plan for Americans to defend the constitution and restore constitutional government.

Basically this indicates the forum does not serve the restoration of constitutional government, justice and freedom and that a large percentage of members are indeed agents which have complained about my posting in the thread about Baltimore. They have done that because they are paid to keep mundane, useless aspects of the riots dominant in the thread and displace any functional discussion which is designed to prevent the violence and destruction or organize Americans into a lawful unified body which can conduct a lawful and peaceful revolution.

In a nutshell, can you please explain how you have a lawful revolt against the government?

[Ronin Truth]

A lawful and peaceful revolution.

Got any more :cool: oxymorons?

[Christopher A. Brown]

In a nutshell, can you please explain how you have a lawful revolt against the government?

The united states constitution Article V provides for proposing amendments to what IS the operating parameters of the federal government. States are to also abide by this.

Article V has one huge limit on amendments, they MUST have constitutional intent.

Only the people can define constitutional intent through their agreement.

By agreeing upon a definition of what prime constitutional intent is, we become "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts". The strategy of legal process defined in the beginning of this thread can be used by the people to purify state governments which are the only entities that have authority under Article V when 3/4 are ratifying.

When 5,000 Americans in complete agreement upon definition of prime constitutional intent impose the legal process described upon state governments. ALL officials of government, including the cops are going to assimilate the natural law meaning and functions of the defined prime constitutional intent.

Most of the good cops "providing security" for the state legislators etc, will want to drop the badge, keep the gun, and join the protestors demanding constitutional officials. Some may.

Others may join in legal action similar to the soldiers inquiry.

http://algoxy.com/ows/soldiersinquiry.html

If the mislead anarchists and others involved with OWS are wise, they will work to make media accountable to provide complete coverage of the movement.

At that point the rest of America begins to get educated and join in.

At this point the infiltrators will begin to jump ship. States will soon conducting conventions focusing upon preparatory amendment creating a constitutional enough nation to actually define constitutional intent by a majority.

At a point where 3/4 of the states have ratified the proposed preparatory amendment, the abridging of the purpose of free speech will end. Shortly thereafter extreme controversy will hit prime time national television, and the MSM will be helpless to stop it IF thy want to maintain their state held corporate status as broadcasters.

I have conceptualized software for a new type of forum called "Poll to Post" that will greatly enhance and speed this process.

http://algoxy.com/poly/poll_to_post.html

[Christopher A. Brown]

Christopher A. Brown, you are by far the most prolific anti-liberty poster I've seen on this site in quite some time.

How about proving how I am anti-liberty with some quotes, links etc.

[Christopher A. Brown]

In a nutshell, can you please explain how you have a lawful revolt against the government?

Sorry, I thought I had posted this step by step, state by state strategy which details a lawful peaceful revolution using constitutional intent.

An enquiry by petition to state officials-Do you accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights?

A) Test officials and candidates for acceptance of the root purpose of free speech being to assure information vital to unity needed to alter or abolish is shared and understood.

B)Test officials and candidates for acceptance of root purpose of free speech as prime constitutional intent used to create unity to conduct Article V with constitutional intent as the prime right for the purpose of protecting unalienable rights.

C) As an official of government, can you accept that EVERY American can understand and accept A)?

D) Are you aware that in 1911, 2/3 of the states applied for a convention and congress violated the law, their oath and the constitution by failing to convene delegates?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg
http://my.firedoglake.com/danielmarks/2013/04/30/congress-needs-to-comply-with-state-demands-for-article-v-constitutional-convention/
Can you accept that such a fact justifies that all delegates be elected in the states by the people of those states?

Because of that letter, the house finally adopts rule to count states applications for Article V.
http://www.examiner.com/article/u-s-house-finally-adopts-rule-to-count-article-v-convention-applications

E) Can you understand and accept that any state legislator that cannot accept A), can be impeached in this constitutional emergency as being unfit for office?

F)Can you understand and accept that A) B) C) D) & E) are legal process and that IF citizens act with D) as justification, and E) to complete the legal process, they WILL be "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" BECAUSE their states, as led by the people, then will agree that proper preparation for Article V consists of;

1) Amend Article V to assure the right to "alter or abolish" is enforceable under law by including preparatory amendment as a requirement.

2) End the abridging of free speech.

3) Securing the vote.

4) Campaign finance reform.

G) Americans need to agree that Officials of states and federal government must accept that such preparation by amendment is completely constitutional and can only enable democratic assertion of the principles of the republic, and, once complete; WHEREUPON all amendment should cease until America can be certain it is competent to Article V by testing itself to assure it knows and can define constitutional intent

[Christopher A. Brown]

Got any more :cool: oxymorons?

Prove that the notion of a peaceful revolution is an oxymoron.

Prove that the intent of Article V is other than a lawful and peaceful revolution.

Generally you are not accountable with any proof of you assertions. So I'm not expecting any now. With that, you are by default, promoting violent revolution or NO revolution. Despicable and shameful.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Isn't attempting to overthrow the government, by definition a criminal offense?

Through Article V, with the states acting under the control of the people, a lawful effective revolution can take place.

They key to this is the realization that Lincoln in 1859 said, "the people are the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" because the people are t sonly ones that can DEFINE constitutional intent. The courts and congress can only interpret it.

Article V is the democratic control over the republic.

The people only need to agree upon definition of PRIME constitutional intent. This is actually fairly easy, but, very much out-of-the-box of politics that Americans have learned. Which shows how government has been protecting its unconstitutional status by not teaching the truth of the structure of the republic and how it protests itself.

Following the act of 1871 this is very much a logical usurpation of constitutional intent that would be expected by the infiltrators that divided the country with war.

To argue with this is to go along with and support the infiltration.

[wizardwatson]

Hi, Chris. Let's talk.

Are you a mason? Do you have an opinion on the masons? You seem like you might. I'm always looking for clues and what not.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Hi, Chris. Let's talk.

Are you a mason? Do you have an opinion on the masons? You seem like you might. I'm always looking for clues and what not.

I am not a Mason. I do understand them very well on a level they do not use. They do basically respect it though. That understanding comes through the Indigenous American people that investigated them and their occultisms extensively.

We have some very good and knowledgable men who Are Masons. Then we have some with an unconscious agenda that are taking advantage of the power which is historically held by the Order. They are exploiting the oaths of secrecy, confidentiality and brotherhood to destroy something the best Masons regard VERY highly. Something they created with the advice and guidance of the Indigenous Americans. Specifically the Six Nations Iroquois and more specifically the Seneca. The Constitution and efforts leading to it which go back to the Magna Carta.

Of the loyalists some were Masons also. This caused a mixing or confusion of intents within the Order. That is resolving, with the understanding of the people.

[Anti Federalist]

A) Test officials and candidates for acceptance of the root purpose of free speech being to assure information vital to unity needed to alter or abolish is shared and understood.

And what happens if (when) they fail this test?

[Christopher A. Brown]

And what happens if (when) they fail this test?

If incumbent officials fail the test in this constitutional emergency they are impeached.

Candidates who fail get no votes.

[TheTexan]

That's kind of a long post, but is the general gist of it, that it would be done through the mechanism of voting on it?

If so, count me in!

[Anti Federalist]

If incumbent officials fail the test in this constitutional emergency they are impeached.

Candidates who fail get no votes.

Impeached?

Impeached by their fellow officials who also failed the test?

Candidates who are felons get votes.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Impeached?

Impeached by their fellow officials who also failed the test?

Candidates who are felons get votes.

I think that officials in general are smarter than you, so will be disinclined to destroy their careers by failing to recognize obvious constitutional intent.

Your disregard for the power of constitutional Intent is only equaled by your unaccountability.

In the system You understand they get votes. In the system you do not understand they do not get votes. Return to top.

[Anti Federalist]

I think that officials in general are smarter than you, so will be disinclined to destroy their careers by failing to recognize obvious constitutional intent.

Your disregard for the power of constitutional Intent is only equaled by your unaccountability.

In the system You understand they get votes. In the system you do not understand they do not get votes. Return to top.

The whole system is filled with "officials" who enhance their careers by disregarding the constitution.

You fail to understand simple human nature.

People vote for people that give them stuff.

They care not a fuck all about much else.

So, after all this, you got nothing.

You are attempting to secure justice and liberty using the same system that is dedicated to taking it away.

Futility meeting hopelessness, head on.

And you call the people that could secure liberty, dupes, and actors.

You know what I think?

I think you are the infiltrating agent, sent to confuse the issue and undermine what will work.

[Ronin Truth]

This year's revolution has been delayed pending the arrival of the permission from the government.

[tod evans]

Impeached?

Impeached by their fellow officials who also failed the test?

Candidates who are felons get votes.

Being a "felon" today doesn't carry the stigma it once did unless one is seeking government employment...

In fact I tend to be leary of anyone who hasn't been arrested for drugs, guns, tax evasion or some other victimless crime...

Problem is murders, rapists and child molesters are lumped in with the former group...

Then again all of the felonious behavior I listed is performed under the color of law by governments officials and dubbed heroic...

No wonder I'm confused......:o

[Ronin Truth]

Being a "felon" today doesn't carry the stigma it once did unless one is seeking government employment...

In fact I tend to be leary of anyone who hasn't been arrested for drugs, guns, tax evasion or some other victimless crime...

Problem is murders, rapists and child molesters are lumped in with the former group...

Then again all of the felonious behavior I listed is performed under the color of law by governments officials and dubbed heroic...

No wonder I'm confused......:o Perhaps this will help.

"The State's criminality is nothing new and nothing to be wondered at. It began when the first predatory group of men clustered together and formed the State, and it will continue as long as the State exists in the world, because the State is fundamentally an anti-social institution, fundamentally criminal." ~ Albert Jay Nock

[Christopher A. Brown]

The whole system is filled with "officials" who enhance their careers by disregarding the constitution.

You fail to understand simple human nature.

People vote for people that give them stuff.

They care not a fuck all about much else.

So, after all this, you got nothing.

Are you trying to provide an example for readers of the kind of thinking the "officials" who enhance their careers by disregarding the constitution." want people to use?

Cognitive distortions of all or nothing thinking, over generalizing and minimizing are not law, they are not even rational.

I'm asking people to understand law. Natural law which the framing documents exemplify for us and have been revered for centuries as corrupt officials work to degrade their influence over our government and society.

Your post starts off with the classic cognitive infiltrators technique.


You are attempting to secure justice and liberty using the same system that is dedicated to taking it away.

Wait a minute, you just said it was "officials" who enhance their careers by disregarding the constitution." Now it is a system of law too? Are you saying the doctrine or structure of the constitution is also doing this taking?

I'm saying there are "officials" who enhance their careers by disregarding the constitution." and they are IGNORING the constitution and enriching their own class by exploiting their positions with secrecy and corruption.

I'm saying that when the people understand the intent of the constitution, and unify around it, redefining it, using their numbers as a majority, the people take control.


Futility meeting hopelessness, head on.

And you call the people that could secure liberty, dupes, and actors.

Their act did not stop Fergusen or Baltimore. Operation jade helm proceeds un impeded. Americans are shot and killed by LE all over America on a daily basis and no one expects justice to be found because of unconstitutional government in control of what should be constitutional.

I advocate the people impose the tyranny of the masses upon all government with constitutional unity purging all that is not constitutional and supporting that which is.


You know what I think?

I think you are the infiltrating agent, sent to confuse the issue and undermine what will work.

Of course the infiltrating agent would try and promote that, but what you present as having worked did not. It was only a standoff in a remote desert location publicized by countless people who espouse potentially violent confrontation with corrupt government that has been arming police departments with military equipment and weapons for years.

And you have counter parts here you work with, osan, Phil4who, auh20, ronin or whatever there nameless faceless usernames are. They all reject the purpose of free speech as enabling a lawful and peaceful revolution or refuse to agree upon prime constitutional intent.

They bounce useless posts around discussing racism, 2nd AMD issues, corruption and sensation without ever working to actually stop the problem.

I'm here alone, with my real name, using reason and an appreciation for natural law and some scraps of real history to try and create common ground upon constitutional intent which can be used to control government.

[Christopher A. Brown]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state.

Do the articles of confederation have equivilant of "alter or abolish" in them?

[TheTexan]

This year's revolution has been delayed pending the arrival of the permission from the government.

Maybe next year

[Christopher A. Brown]

This year's revolution has been delayed pending the arrival of the permission from the government.


Maybe next year

The government cannot deny us the revolution which is defined in Article V. It is only our failure to unify adequately to use Article V that denies us our revolution.

Ronin is one of the first deniers in failure. I remember Ronin from October2011 forum. Same shit then.

A socialist with no plan, the only action is working against the founding documents and its plan that probably 200 million people believe in, but do not understand adequately to use. Ronin blocks that expanded understanding unreasonably, unaccountably, failing to see the simple, natural law purpose of freedom of speech that enables our unity simply by the recognition of its purpose.

Mind you, that is unity of 200 million people, ONCE it starts.

They will realize immediately that the purpose is abridged, and know it time to start the revolution, TOGETHER, or without the political establishment that enriches itself from its dysfunctional activities.

[wizardwatson]

I understand, I'm actually of the same mind. But you know the opposition is on IRC etc. trying to out maneuver. But you are right, if we got the high ground, it don't matter, and we do,

I have a thread to discuss it, rather than hijack this one. Same thing I've been posting about a lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution).

It's the only real thing going besides partisan investment, which is more than I can stomach at this point. The way I see it, partisanship is leading us into real trouble and the lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution) will eventually be the only real thing left. However, things might be designed so that's it's too late by that time.

The first and most vital thing is the agreement upon the founders intent. You phrased that very well. You agree that was their intent, but not sure whether you side with them or not.

If you don't want to use my thread, for that, maybe start one on that subject.

Your threads fine.

Wanted to say, I was actually impressed by your mechanic. I first pegged you as an irrational actor. After understanding your litmus test it makes sense. It's very clever, actually. And you did it in the ideal place and it worked.

If you'll notice in my signature the red pill 'X' link is my 9/11 thread. I only posted it recently because I was only ready to broadcast on that subject recently. On the surface it's just me endorsing Jonathan Cahn, but that's no small thing.

So if you want to talk on the weird end of the spectrum, I'd say we could do it there.

If you want to talk about practical solutions I guess we can talk here.

Time is short in either case.

Is there any specific ideas you have about how you'd like to structure our communication?

[Christopher A. Brown]

I would say that since we both have common interests in the same areas, we do it in both places.

Here is where the solution is engaged and there is where justified motivation to commit to specific solution is created.

Do you understand the basic process and strategy proposed in this thread to amend the infiltrated federal government out of business after purifying the states of unconstitutional legislators?

If not, ask here, I'll answer here. If you do understand that legal
Process and strategy, then it's a matter of engaging the first step. No small step.

It is the biggest of all. Finding a way to involve more and more Americans in a very simple agreement upon the framers prime intents for us to defend and enforce our rights, laws etc, so that those like ourselves who understand the uses of the mechanisms can get started finding others that also do, and can organize activists who fully understand the intents, how to share them and how to use them lawfully to remove unconstitutional
Legislators.

The motivational/justificationsl side in its most extreme can take place in your thread. I happen to be one of the only people around that has intimate knowledge of the structure of the Twin Towers,

Seems it might be best to delineate where it's all going, then work on why, just because most activism these days is all about WHY, with no good idea of how or where to go with it.

Something tells me you've read the legal process and understand the straightforwardness of it fairly well. Is that correct?

[wizardwatson]

I would say that since we both have common interests in the same areas, we do it in both places.

Here is where the solution is engaged and there is where justified motivation to commit to specific solution is created.

Do you understand the basic process and strategy proposed in this thread to amend the infiltrated federal government out of business after purifying the states of unconstitutional legislators?

If not, ask here, I'll answer here. If you do understand that legal Process and strategy, then it's a matter of engaging the first step. No small step.

It is the biggest of all. Finding a way to involve more and more Americans in a very simple agreement upon the framers prime intents for us to defend and enforce our rights, laws etc, so that those like ourselves who understand the uses of the mechanisms can get started finding others that also do, and can organize activists who fully understand the intents, how to share them and how to use them lawfully to remove unconstitutional Legislators.

The motivational/justificationsl side in its most extreme can take place in your thread.

I happen to be one of the only people around that has intimate knowledge of the structure of the Twin Towers,

Seems it might be best to delineate where it's all going, then work on why, just because most activism these days is all about WHY, with no good idea of how or where to go with it.

Something tells me you've read the legal process and understand the straightforwardness of it fairly well. Is that correct?

Well, it is now for the most part. I wasn't really paying attention to you before. I've created a map to follow you. I will stay in these threads if I communicate. Obviously this one will be primary but I may go back to some old ones from when we talked before.

[1] http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution

[2] http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478542-WizardWatson-s-Magnificent-9-11-Truth-Thread-Tale-of-the-Spooky-Shemitah

[3] http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471836-WTC-really-had-concrete-core-(split-thread)

[4] http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?473730-Constitutional-Intent-Baltimore-thread-split

After looking over your post content in light of new information and actually comprehending, you do appear to have been a consistent activist. I've simply been in a different place for quite some time so wasn't actively seeking interaction on that level. If you want to bore yourself, you can see what I've been doing last couple days on these two threads:

[5] http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478636-Recommending-removal-of-RPF-reputation-system-to-minimize-cyber-bullying

[6] http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478559-Split-derail-about-immigration

Gotta, say you were pretty prophetic in the OP about "changing" things when you look at [5].

Now the reason I didn't see you is because, as I said, I wasn't seeking interaction on this level, haven't in a while. I've been in pretty much full throttle mystical mode. It's my dominant side really, at least lately. Now as you correctly pointed out, the other thread is mystical in nature.

As you've indicated that isn't your focus and you think in general people are overstimulated on that side. Now naturally, my instinct is that you yourself are lacking in that area based on your post there. But this is simply from my perspective. But you didn't join my club, I joined yours. So while I might reply there, don't feel pressured to indulge me simply to reciprocate. I want to help you with your thing first. Better to focus on the primary objective as much as possible given the limited time and resources. Then if you develop interest on that side, we'll play it by ear.

Of course reality is one, and even our attempts to focus don't remove all elements. For instance, look at the timing.

In post #12 of this thread where you get all whiney, "not one person has come here", you linked to thread [4]. That is our main thread where we talked. The last 20 posts, 61-80 are just me and you talking. And for the record, you stopped talking. You gave up on me. But in your defense, I was a little carefree at that time. Had too many other things going on in my life to get serious on RPF.

The whole context was carefree but the subject was mystical.

Now a little over 48 hours ago is when I answered your questions in the affirmative. That just so happened to be the same exact time I was composing thread [5]. See the timing. Now, no need to comment on that, it's really common sense to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, but it's quite prophetic indeed to me that the same time I pass your test is when I make the most significant move since I've been on RPF that is directly related to the reason you need the test in the first place!

Now I may comment on 9/11 in [3] but I want to make a point I made long ago when 9/11 truth was infecting this forum.

My point was it doesn't affect strategy. I said this over and over and over again on here. It doesn't matter if it was inside job, or terrorists, or God himself for that matter with respect to the strategy of the liberty movement. No one would agree, or for that matter acknowledge. Something tells me you might.

I mention this because it relates to social network dynamics in general. Ultimately these operatives aren't "unique" or special. They are death-eaters. They mimic death. That is the essence of the state. It loves death. Which is why you can't resist evil with dark tactics and must stay in the light. Because since the dark networks mimic the weak and the sick, to strike them in the dark would be to risk hitting an innocent.

This violates the principles of the Tao, the Way, and the Lord Christ.

So ultimately, really, the sick and the pretending to be sick, are both sick, the latter is just SEVERELY sick, and to be pitied. The difference is the former has been cursed and will be shown mercy, and the latter has been blessed and will be judged.

I say all this, not to bring our future discussion into this realm really, but to point out that I'm well aware of the dynamics of sociopathic actors in group systems so I'd prefer if we simply focus on the strategies most useful for achieving your goals.

Plus, the vampires that do exist in this ecosystem are already proud enough, no benefit in acknowledging them and making it worse.

So let's cut to the chase as they say. I won't bore you with my life story. If you have specific questions just ask.

....

So, some questions to get started:

1. Do you have the draft of the proposed preparatory amendment that is required? Basically, would like to understand this process in detail. It sounds like you've thought it out, to you have a rough draft of the actual amendment(s) proposing?

2. In post #18 you say you need 5000 Americans. Is that per state? How many do you have so far? You say the first step is to find "more and more" Americans. Is this implying you have some? Guess I'm wondering where you are in the overall plan.

3. So do you think you'll be banned here as you mentioned you were when others accepted your litmus test? Maybe you will. If the Lord gives them that power. Of course you could get banned just for being an annoying poster like some others. LOL. Anyway, guess I'm also wondering what happens to these other people who have accepted your proposal? When I originally reached out to you in post #23 you were cryptic but nothing I could unlock. You claim a "we" in #24. Is your entire network still operating in the dark? Currently we are operating in the light. Granted, 2 isn't a lot. But this is the Well of Souls. A sacred place by my estimation. I'm wondering what your real support is, and if their are others, are they on this site? If they aren't why not? We could use some real supporters here.

Anyway, it seems to me if you are alone just say so. If you aren't then what is the reason you are the only one on this site?

So those are my questions. You also seem sincere. But then again, so did many others on here in the old days, and things change. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt though.

Let me know how I can help you.

P.S. 2nd link in sectin D of OP is dead. See, I'm helping already. :)

[Ronin Truth]

REVOLT FOR PERMISSION!

[wizardwatson]

REVOLT FOR PERMISSION!

Who are the rebels? The ones trying to restore order or the ones creating disorder?

The Founders didn't rebel from order, they established it. They were called rebels because tyrants corrupt the language.

A lot of people think you need a bible to fight evil. True, in the early stages.

In the final stages you just need a dictionary.

[Ronin Truth]

Who are the rebels? The ones trying to restore order or the ones creating disorder?

The Founders didn't rebel from order, they established it. They were called rebels because tyrants corrupt the language.

A lot of people think you need a bible to fight evil. True, in the early stages.

In the final stages you just need a dictionary.


"Chaos is found in greatest abundance wherever order is being sought. Chaos always defeats order because it is better organized." -- Terry Pratchett

[wizardwatson]

"Chaos is found in greatest abundance wherever order is being sought. Chaos always defeats order because it is better organized." -- Terry Pratchett

Don't be such a negative Nelly.

Of course chaos is found more where order is sought. Why would you be seeking order if you already had it?

But the second statement is just "titty baby" talk (a term I picked up yesterday when daring to question the benign nature of the reputation system in a forum addicted to it).

How can chaos be better organized? If chaos is better organized then it is order and the order was chaos.

Sounds like Terry needs a dictionary too. Even writers need dictionaries. Things are getting really bad.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't apply to the order vs. chaos structure of universe.

Only titty babies think like that.

[Ronin Truth]

Don't be such a negative Nelly.

Of course chaos is found more where order is sought. Why would you be seeking order if you already had it?

But the second statement is just "titty baby" talk (a term I picked up yesterday when daring to question the benign nature of the reputation system in a forum addicted to it).

How can chaos be better organized? If chaos is better organized then it is order and the order was chaos.

Sounds like Terry needs a dictionary too. Even writers need dictionaries. Things are getting really bad.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't apply to the order vs. chaos structure of universe.

Only titty babies think like that.

You see chaos as negative.

I do not, it just is.

Entropy wins.

Cheer up!

[wizardwatson]

You see chaos as negative.

I do not, it just is.

Entropy wins.

Cheer up!

Who says I want to be like you?

You cheer up!

[Ronin Truth]

Who says I want to be like you?

So who asked you?

Only in your wildest dreams.

You cheer up!

I'm cheery, you're bipolar. :p :(

//

[wizardwatson]

I'm cheery, you're bipolar.

Don't be a bully.

I've been asymptomatic for quite a while.

I don't go around calling everyone grassroots activists do I?

[Ronin Truth]

Don't be a bully.

I've been asymptomatic for quite a while.

I don't go around calling everyone grassroots activists do I?

Ahem. ???????

You seem to be currently having an episode of something or another.

Burr under your blanket?

[wizardwatson]

Ahem. ???????

You seem to be currently having an episode of something or another.

Burr under your blanket?

On a liberty forum where few people have a have even an intermediate understanding of the topic they claim to represent, somehow everyone is a doctor.

The confusion people have surrounding me is merely a byproduct of encountering a superior mind. And what's more, a godly mind.

An aura that makes a Nazi's face melt.

Haven't you seen Indiana Jones?

[Ronin Truth]

On a liberty forum where few people have a have even an intermediate understanding of the topic they claim to represent, somehow everyone is a doctor.

Or perhaps it was just your earlier health confessional post signature. ;)

The confusion people have surrounding me is merely a byproduct of encountering a superior mind. And what's more, a godly mind.

I share that one with you, but perhaps not the godly part. :D

An aura that makes a Nazi's face melt.

That wasn't an aura, that was an Ark. :eek:

Haven't you seen Indiana Jones?

Sure, all of them. Some more than twice.



Hang in there. The singularity approaches. :cool:

[wizardwatson]

Hang in there. The singularity approaches. :cool:

My signatures are usually where satire meets deniability.

We all have godly potential. If we didn't, we wouldn't be aware of its absence.

You're thinking of Noah. Indiana Jones is the movie with Hans Solo.

[Christopher A. Brown]

So, some questions to get started:

1. Do you have the draft of the proposed preparatory amendment that is required? Basically, would like to understand this process in detail. It sounds like you've thought it out, to you have a rough draft of the actual amendment(s) proposing?

There are 3 basics amendments needed to prepare the people for proper participation in Article V. They deal with opening up the peoples information systems for the peoples purposes.

Basically all informations systems are the peoples first. Without this, dark organizations of control contrary to survival and evolution can prolificate within them and people cannot counter the darkness. Even those living in the dark suffer eventually from that. They might not care, but people do.

The 3 amendments first end the abridging of the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech, then secure the vote and reform campaign finance.

Since revision of the 1st amendment us viewed with such great contention, I've written a draft of where I think it should go. The others might best be effected in ways I do not well know of within our systems so I haven't bothered to draft amendments there. Others who know those systems far better will produce the best results.

REV. Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Congress shall see that nothing abridges the freedom of speech and the primary methods or systems of it shall not be abridged and be first accessible for the purpose of the unity of the people in order to alter or abolish government destructive to their unalienable rights, or with its possible greater meaning through understanding one another in; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Congress shall see that nothing abridges freedom of the press in its service to the unity of the people; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances or defense of this constitution.

There is also proposed legislation for states created to become compliant. It uses state power over corporate licensure in states to compel broadcast networks to produce qualifying informations.

To qualify, a subject or information must be NOT widely available in its nature, or be so unknown that most people cannot come up with search terms. It also must be something that cannot be promoted within the average persons economic means on a scale justifying its relationship to common interests of defending vital rights.

A petition to a state legislator with a yet to be determined number of signatures which is then carried to a state Supreme Court for the production of a court order to the largest television broadcast corporation to produce a 1/2 hour or 2 hour production at current audience production standards. That is to be broadcast nationally on their network to prime time audiences for a yet to be determined number of times and repetitive schedule OR contingent upon testing of public awareness and understanding of the subject matter.


2. In post #18 you say you need 5000 Americans. Is that per state? How many do you have so far? You say the first step is to find "more and more" Americans. Is this implying you have some? Guess I'm wondering where you are in the overall plan.

We enter into the mystical again, IF there is a collective unconscious. Is support the prime intents of the constitution, of Americans conscious AND unconscious the question? If so, the latter will be hard to measure. Your notes on the timing of your composition of post #5 and agreeing with the prime constitutional intent I've set forth is as good a measure of the latter as anything.

We now find again an area of mysticism and conspiracy.

A book titled "The Hundredth Monkey" is missing from our planet. The original was published in 1962 by 23 Japanese biologists with no marketing or publicity. It was replaced by a book of the same name in 1974 written by Ken Keyes. The original was only published in 2 printings of a total of 20k copies. The replacement was published in the millions and heavily publicized. Today people only know of the replacement, not if the original which was SCIENCE documenting dream state communication between primates on a remote South Pacific island.

The replacement marginalized the phenomena by associating it with a politically charged issue relating to nuclear weapons while completely leaving out the science,

I'm sure you will agree that a conspiracy doing such a thing is of the darkest possible intentions.

There is at least one copy left on the planet and I read it. Where it went, I don't know. I read it in 1988 and did not know its full
Importance until 1998. By then the person that compelled me (yes, compelled) to read it had forgotten they ever had it. Memory, it turns out, consistently plays a major role in our evolution. It is basically controlled from the unconscious mind and in the 3rd .pdf of those posted in your 9/11 thread you will find a concept I've developed and graphically positioned called the "resolute barrier" which I believe can or mostly controls our ability to remember things.

The basics I've come to understand from the reading of the original "hundredth monkey" which I returned a few days after to read a second time, realizing how profound the research was are as follows after integrating a number if other aspects into one, whole concept.

There are 2 states. Of consciousness for living things. both are collective AND individual. Mammals have a significantly greater individual existence as groups of different genera.

Humans collective conscious comprises waking state communications of ALL types. Human collective unconscious communications have 2 types. One is individual telepathic emission which may reach many perceivers, not all necessarily need to be present, and the other is dream state communication which may be global or universal depending on the importance of it to life in the universe, to God.

The original book was obviously removed to prevent humanity from being aware of dream state influences upon conscious waking state performance. The design was to influence humanity without it conscious awareness and essentially de evolve its conscious performance and make it more controlled centering material power within specific groups of people for their purposes.

I noticed your timetable of 2 millennia in the Rabbis writings, corresponding to the influence of Christ as well as Jewish events in the later 1960's that may correspond.

There are at least 2 significant scientists that read the original book and incorporate its information in speculative advancement of the potentials. One is Rupert Sheldrake and the other I shall find the name of an edit it in to this paragraph with some specifics after I re find the info.

Accordingly, I have no idea of how many supporters of the 2 prime constitutional intents there are. I have to assume, that naturally, unconsciously, because those intents are developed human social natural law, that a large percentage of the planets human beings are supporters.

The sacred task is to make that support conscious and active socially.

I could not even venture a hues as to how many conscious supporters there are. I would speculate there are very many. Most however are very likely wrestling with their resolute barrier and fears created by the same dark forces using dream state manipulation over time, as well as conscious collective manipulation, misinformation, misleading, corruptive influences etc., that removed the original book.

The prime dream state directive programmed into populations is, Thou shalt not be causal to change." That unconscious directive is socially reinforced in a myriad of different ways with unconscious conditioning of social fears.


3. So do you think you'll be banned here as you mentioned you were when others accepted your litmus test? Maybe you will. If the Lord gives them that power. Of course you could get banned just for being an annoying poster like some others. LOL. Anyway, guess I'm also wondering what happens to these other people who have accepted your proposal?

I shall be truthful here. You are unique and the first to accept it with the full cognition you exhibit.


I thank God, and you!

Your cognitive capacities and spiritually positive focus are exceptional so I anticipate some very interesting correlations in the mystical realm related to 9/11 and your interpretations of the a Rabbis writings.


When I originally reached out to you in post #23 you were cryptic but nothing I could unlock. You claim a "we" in #24. Is your entire network still operating in the dark? Currently we are operating in the light. Granted, 2 isn't a lot. But this is the Well of Souls. A sacred place by my estimation. I'm wondering what your real support is, and if their are others, are they on this site? If they aren't why not? We could use some real supporters here.

Anyway, it seems to me if you are alone just say so. If you aren't then what is the reason you are the only one on this site?

So those are my questions. You also seem sincere. But then again, so did many others on here in the old days, and things change. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt though.

Let me know how I can help you.

I do believe that there is an unconscious barrier to the support which exists unconsciously here and elsewhere. Since we are both cognitively addressing the constitutions intent as well as what support for it may exist, how it may exist, I can only surmise the barrier is breaking down.

Unconscious social fears assimilated at childhood control us all, with UNDERSTANDING all fears can be properly dealt with.

Your post #5 and the issue of "reputation" as well as the covert infiltrations group impositions of social fear structures invoking individual conditioning is certainly relevant to "how many" conscious supporters there are, or could be.


P.S. 2nd link in sectin D of OP is dead. See, I'm helping already. :)

Was that the salon.com link on cognitive infiltration?

[Ronin Truth]

My signatures are usually where satire meets deniability.

We all have godly potential. If we didn't, we wouldn't be aware of its absence.

You're thinking of Noah. Indiana Jones is the movie with Hans Solo.

Incorrect, the Nazis opened the Ark of the Covenant, and got melted by the spooky spirits and whatever else was in there. Watch it again. :p :)

raiders of the lost ark
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=raiders+of+the+lost+ark&gbv=2&oq=Raider&gs_l=heirloom-hp.1.1.0l10.6208063.6209750.0.6213922.6.6.0.0.0.0. 265.1046.0j4j2.6.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.6.1046.yPgXCSDp4kM

[wizardwatson]

http://i.imgur.com/48oZGqy.jpg

Dude, I was having like a crap evening. You just made my day.

I just want to officially say "SUCK IT" to all the posters over these 8 years who whined like babies when I said over and over and over that transparency is the key to effective social organization and you anonymous coward social mirror gazers whined about your non-existent "right to privacy".

...

Only thing I would point out is that you aren't asking any questions. Give me a target to hit as well. If you are the only one doing the punching neither of us will learn very efficiently.

Make them hard targets. I've been dreadfully bored for a good many years now.

The funnest targets are the ones that might hurt you. If you are brave enough for that. I think the photo shows this to be affirmative.

Because remember one thing. No matter how much your mind tells you the goal is to find out "what to do". The real goal is to find out "who you are".

For this act of courage I award you one coupon good for artistic direction in the form of a theme for a 30 second video of me saying something to the community. Maybe something pithy. A little diddy on my classical. A song for the weary heart. Et cetera. Et cetera.

...

Ron Paul Forums is safe because it is protected. But the very mechanism by which it is protected is why it is ineffective.

If an infiltrator is mimicking a participant to thwart action then we say this is bad.

But multiple power structures can exist. The ultimate failure of the state isn't that it is one but that it is many. It is a divided house.

When a house is divided some good neighbors can be protected by a good division looking like a bad division infiltrating a good division. And this is actually good. A lot of people forget this simple fact of multiple networks and double agents. And as we discussed before, it's irrelevant the real identity of the agents with respect to strategy. The important part is the strategy. It's only necessary to have a feel for the "space". It isn't necessary to know whether the good force is one good ghost, 10 good persons, or your imagination. Only the feel of the room is necessary.

But it still limits action. In fact it is limited even more. And here at RPF. It is limited TO THE MAXIMUM.

But why would the Lord limit the action of the core of Constitutional Liberty? Does evil win?

The stronger the system. The more powerful the potential. The more pure the participant must be. The sword cannot be drawn from the stone simply because you have found and recognize the sword.

There are many who admire truth but there are few who live by it. If a man thinks he can follow truth by speaking well of it, he fools himself. Truth does not bestow its blessings as a result of flattery but by engaging in it.

....

So we're stuck Chris because although the Lord has lit a candle in the temple, none worthy have said the right words. The reason this forum is like a dark prison full of violence and profane blashpemies against the truth is because the temple is deserted. It is an old cottage in a garden of cucumbers.

Your graphics only confuse me. If you need scientific understanding of the mind start with "only don't know". The Socratic position. Systematizing a concept of cognitive function is delusional. But zen teaches that unconciously concscious is really just a natural state. Me-ness and other-ness really on a basic level. Keeping "only don't know mind" prevents other-ness and me-ness from dominating irrationally. The confusion is with enlightenment. People think they only "reach" this ability through enlightenment. This is not true. Unconsciously conscious is every day. You only become more aware of it as the mind is cleansed. But the mind can get dirty and clean many times even from moment to moment. In unconcious and unconcsious states for long or short periods of time. That is why rebirth is the better understanding of true enlightenment and not models of what exists on a daily basis. Because rebirth involves cleansing of infirmity. This is what is meant by polishing ones mirror until not a speck remains. Enlightenment is not a "realization" of an enlightened state but awareness of the removal of an infirmity.

The hidden mystery of enlightenment is that rebirth of the Holy Spirit is the mechanism of the cleansing. To see one's true self is to see the state of oneself outside of the prison of sin. This is a rare thing and the end of a long journey. So rebirth is simply to see unconsciously conscious normalcy unblemished.

Hence the most relevant goal becomes the over-arching command of every man and woman from the seed of Adam.

You must be born again.

A buddhist seeks it but the Lord in his mercy commands it of us all.

Feedback:

1. I'm thinking of watching some movies that I've seen before. Do you have any recommendations?

2. You're an engineer. What is your theory why there is a daily anomaly in an odd place on this map that isn't where they should be? And don't say fracking that's too easy. This is from 7/21/15. 11:34pm. Just now.

http://i.imgur.com/UmyhzZS.png

3. If 9/11 was committed by terrorists on one level. By orchestrators on another. And by God on another...then do you think it's conceivable that your litmus test to alter or abolish was possibly engineered for another purpose than to alter or abolish.

That's all for now. I may address the last post. Got carried away after seeing your picture. I honestly forgot most of what it said now.

[wizardwatson]

Incorrect, the Nazis opened the Ark of the Covenant, and got melted by the spooky spirits and whatever else was in there. Watch it again. :p :)

raiders of the lost ark
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=raiders+of+the+lost+ark&gbv=2&oq=Raider&gs_l=heirloom-hp.1.1.0l10.6208063.6209750.0.6213922.6.6.0.0.0.0. 265.1046.0j4j2.6.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.6.1046.yPgXCSDp4kM

Oh, so I say aura and you correct me with ark, but now it's spirits, which is a lot closer to aura than ark. It was analogy. Why you gotta be an analogy Nazi? 100% likeness is not a requirement.

Don't make me melt your face.

[Ronin Truth]

Oh, so I say aura and you correct me with ark, but now it's spirits, which is a lot closer to aura than ark. It was analogy. Why you gotta be an analogy Nazi? 100% likeness is not a requirement.

Don't make me melt your face.


Because as a 40+ year, now retired, computer programmer/systems analyst, I learned very early on that accuracy and very minor details make a whole lot of difference, in the outcomes.

Say what you mean, mean what you say, and do what you say you're gonna do.

Tighten up your syntax there, Kiddo.

[Americans1st]

First of all, you must gather a critical mass of folks that are actually pro-American. Not neo-cons or "libertarians" that support open borders and the death of the nation.
The founding fathers were clear on that point-of open borders and being ruled by merchants.

[wizardwatson]

First of all, you must gather a critical mass of folks that are actually pro-American. Not neo-cons or "libertarians" that support open borders and the death of the nation.
The founding fathers were clear on that point-of open borders and being ruled by merchants.

Me and Chris are the only two people so far who even accept the premise of liberty. Do you as well? It is defined in the OP.

Your first statement is truthful, and is in line with the spirit of the OP. Your conclusions thereafter are of questionable origin.

You have arrived at a very weird time. What is the reason? Why active now but member since 2013 with only 59 posts?

[Americans1st]

Me and Chris are the only two people so far who even accept the premise of liberty. Do you as well? It is defined in the OP.

Your first statement is truthful, and is in line with the spirit of the OP. Your conclusions thereafter are of questionable origin.

You have arrived at a very weird time. What is the reason? Why active now but member since 2013 with only 59 posts?

What "conclusion" are you referring to? The reason? Are you trolling me?

[Ronin Truth]

First of all, you must gather a critical mass of folks that are actually pro-American. Not neo-cons or "libertarians" that support open borders and the death of the nation.
The founding fathers were clear on that point-of open borders and being ruled by merchants.

"Our forefathers would be firing by now."

[Christopher A. Brown]

3. If 9/11 was committed by terrorists on one level. By orchestrators on another. And by God on another...then do you think it's conceivable that your litmus test to alter or abolish was possibly engineered for another purpose than to alter or abolish.

Certainly terror was involved, but the label does not quite fit the perpetrators who used terrorists in a massive ruse.

Of course all life is subject to God, even the perpetrators. And God, is first and best known by our unconscious existence. Those that inspired the framers worked extensively with the unconscious mind for millennia before Europeans showed up on this continent. The Indigenous American people.

It was from them that the clarity came to use the words "alter or abolish", it was from them which came a beautiful philosophical doctrine that was not fully or properly expressed in the first amendment.

It was called the "Greater Meaning of Free Speech" and came from the practice of free speech tending to create unity. Free speech can create an understanding between people. From that understanding can come; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit if happiness.

The Druid in the framers genes saw the spiritual value and adopted it. This is why Franklin fearlessly went to the hellfire club and dealt with the intentionally challenging darkness there. There is no doubt in my mind he resisted all temptation and compulsion and executed shrewd moves to protect this nations peoples.

The agreements upon alter or abolish and the purpose of free speech are solidly at the root of human survival and evolution. Completely in support of freedom, which is really the only place love can grow.

Great post!

If the graphics are difficult and your memory is inconsistent after a nights immersion into the unconscious existence, limit your exposure to them for a time. Only work on the first, "S1", one year of your life.

I will later address some other interesting points of your post, when I'm not limited to posting on a phone.

[Christopher A. Brown]

"Our forefathers would be firing by now."

Uh, you have not even agreed and accepted that the framers intended for Americans to alter or abolish and that the purpose of freedom of speech is to enable the unity adequate to alter or abolish.

You actually are not appreciated as an un needed peanut gallery until you do agree with and accept those concepts as intended for us to use to protect our rights.

And please cease advocating violence and death in this thread.

[Christopher A. Brown]

First of all, you must gather a critical mass of folks that are actually pro-American. Not neo-cons or "libertarians" that support open borders and the death of the nation.
The founding fathers were clear on that point-of open borders and being ruled by merchants.

Me and Chris are the only two people so far who even accept the premise of liberty. Do you as well? It is defined in the OP.

Your first statement is truthful, and is in line with the spirit of the OP. Your conclusions thereafter are of questionable origin.

You have arrived at a very weird time. What is the reason? Why active now but member since 2013 with only 59 posts?

It's possible Watson that Americans1st is one of the lurkers I know is reading trying to gain some perspective on what Americans are up to with working on unity (as the first sentence of the post indicates) and is testing the waters with their perceptions of what constitutes current politics.

But you are correct, the agreement upon prime constitutional intent IS defined in the OP as well as the purpose of making it, serves.

[Ronin Truth]

Uh, you have not even agreed and accepted that the framers intended for Americans to alter or abolish and that the purpose of freedom of speech is to enable the unity adequate to alter or abolish.

You actually are not appreciated as an un needed peanut gallery until you do agree with and accept those concepts as one intended for us to use to protect our rights.

And please cease advocating violence and death in this thread.

And I would give a frick about what you want or think and/or your fantasy imagined thread posting criteria, WHY?

[Christopher A. Brown]

And I would give a frick about what you want or think and/or your fantasy imagined thread posting criteria, WHY?

Okay, you have again confirmed your contempt for constitutional principles.

Perhaps you can find another place to locate someone else besides yourself that is looking to engage violence and death rather than reason towards a peaceful, lawful revolution.

[Ronin Truth]

Okay, you have again confirmed your contempt for constitutional principles.

Perhaps you can find another place to locate someone else besides yourself that is looking to engage violence and death rather than reason towards a peaceful, lawful revolution.

I checked with "Oxymorons R Us", and no takers. Sorry. <Shrug!>

"Ideals are peaceful. History is violent."

[wizardwatson]

I've had to pull a post of yours from another thread, Chris. :mad:


Okay, use a pencil and paper like I did when I first started doing carburetors at 15 years of age.

When I started doing automotive carbs, the kit provided an exploded diagram. I quickly learned that resolution and small parts did not always add up to a useful diagram. Back came the pencil and paper.

These things are all tools with different purposes. Some more benevolent that others. I have an old saying, perhaps 35 years ago I started using. "If we could build batteries well as we build bombs, we would not need bombs."

If I was wizard Watson I would say, "Hey, God sent us a message by what he sends our intuitions for inspiration of our cognition. The fact that 90% of technology development in the last 50 years is mostly communication and information oriented, tells us what we need to do."

Communicate, share and learn. Thanks for posting!

I'm confused. Maybe you can alleviate my confusion.

What makes you presume to know what I would say about anything? Especially concerning the Father?

This is a clear violation of the 4th commandment:


Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Now, I know you aren't a Christian. You've only mentioned God 3 times in this thread and the primary test of a Christian is the confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Lord of Heaven and Earth. You haven't named him at all. Only the Father brings those he chooses to Christ. I do not fault you for not claiming to be a Christian or even for being an atheist for that matter. Because it is not relevant to our agreement.

If you don't want to take this thread, or me, or our agreement seriously then that is fine. Why don't you just end it? If you don't take it serious and you started it, how do you expect me or anyone else to? But I will not allow someone I rubber-stamped on this forum for the first time ever to parade me around after speaking with me hardly at all as if I've anointed him as a Christian. Because when you say that I would say God said anything, then there's only one God I'm ever talking about and anyone who knows me knows who that God is.

The two posts you made after replying to me (7 when I posted this) are so alien my unconscious shock made me imagine as if perhaps you just got sock-puppeted by some nefarious forces, dissolved in acid after starring in a Satanic snuff film, and replaced. I'm hoping that's simply a manifestation of your apparent power trip you are on thinking that you in any way speak for me.

...

Let me explain something very clearly to you. I already told you this place is sacred if only to me. I've have cried tears and literally sacrificed my family life on the altar of the ideas of this forum. But as seriously as I take this liberty business and our agreement I take the issue of faith so much more serious that liberty is but a faint cold light in the near infinite distance.

For me to declare in this medium in this place that we are together does not grant you any power. It puts you in a prison and in chains. These ghosts and goblins and vampires that lurk about in this crypt are the living dead. But I have chosen not one worthy to receive the sacred water.

Your precious "key" was not unlocked because of some greatness you possess. The sacred living water can fill any vessel.

...

Now, I'm going to "assume" for the sake of peace and reconciliation that you have taken my appearance of being "carefree" and whimsical and cryptic and playful as a sign that you would simply mimic me and we just need to be happy like a couple of butterflies. No doubt your amateur attempt to absorb my unconscious and subliminal messages made you drunk. If you can't maintain focus, don't drink so quickly.

So drunk apparently that the first thing you decide to do when I merely respectfully nod hello from my point of view, is "thank God", then go outside to have a lay down with the whores and the money changers and brag about how you've received my blessings by spouting nonsense about how me and my God would be discussing carburators. These Nazi's and blasphemers get a pass because I'm not in cahoots with them, and the I follow the commands of the Lord when in a foreign land.

You think because I said "Masons", and the "Order", and because I post alchemy symbols, that we are the same? We are not. My candy-cane rainbow bright behavior is for the sick children in the temple. Not for men I'm in agreement with. Men I'm in agreement with are to toe the line. If you think these roaches and dung beetles in here have censured and roasted you then what do you think is going to happen if you get on the bad side of the fire-breathing dragon?

The reason I know about seekers, and entered apprentices, and alchemists, and Templars, is because all those Women have let vile men do vile things, and their crimes have cracked there temple walls, and the blood they've spilled on their altars has sept into the ground water poisoning that which I drink.

If all your "agreement" is, is another form of money or reputation and you think you've bought me with it then we can end our agreement right now.

And as a memorial to this show of disrespect I will make the ending of that agreement so loud that instead of the proverbial sulfur and sweat and rat dung and snake shit that litters the floor of this holy place, I will paint the walls with the blood of a seeker who drank from the sacred fountain and "thanked God" by blaspheming him and hang his bones in the doorway to warn the next one who comes for a drink.

Metaphorically speaking of course.

...

But again. I only aim to make a point. Perhaps this is another one of your tests. Or perhaps you simply were providing me with the hard target I asked for (wishful thinking?). If that's the case then good show, though if you keep it up you'll be alone again and I'll probably just go back to sleep. I don't seek glory in the eyes of others, only in the eyes of the Lord.

If you were genuinely caught off guard by this response then you are clueless about my intent. My intent was never to alter or abolish. I thought I made it quite clear in the post directly following my entering into the agreement that I never said that was my intent but that I agreed that was the Founders intent.

The only thing that appealed to me about your agreement was its simplicity. And I'm in agreement with its simple components.

1. I agree with the questions.
2. You accept my sincerity.
3. I believe you are in the ideal place to seek wider participation.

I'm in your club means I'm part of your agreement. But you are in my domain by virtue of the fact that you are in agreement with me. We are not "moral" by nature of being in agreement with one another but only by nature of being in agreement with God. You are half-baked.

Stick to the plan. I went off running and incorporated ringing this liberty bell of yours into my daily routine. My daily routine doesn't involve violating the 4th commandment in a blatant way. An OMG, and a godammit here and there on occasion (usually never in writing either, only in speech), but not anything close to what you did up there and at the same time talking as if we were "friends" in any other sense that dictated by the agreement.

My initial estimate was that if we continued the initiated process with dialog in the primary thread at the rate we were progressing we may have shown progress you would have noticed in a few weeks. The fact that I'm going off in different directions talking about you is part of what I'm doing daily. You haven't replied quickly enough to take up all my time. This is my area, I know what I'm doing. You clearly do not. If you want to do your own thing then by all means, post away. I don't control you. But keep my name out of it outside of the context of our agreement and don't talk about God as if you understand what I mean by the name. It is dangerous for our future relationship. Mystic, not just Martial rules apply here. I'm aware you're not a mystic. If you have a question about the rules just ask. You now know one. Do not blaspheme if you intend to remain in agreement with me.

You can certainly talk "about" God. Even quoting him from the bible. I recommend the King James 1611. There is no such thing as "God would say this". I say "God did 9/11" not because God did this and not that and I'm aware of it. I know God does ALL THINGS and I only point out 9/11 for the sake of those seeking knowledge of Him. You used His name to promote an idea.

...

You aren't Chuck Norris here. You are the karate kid. Before you try to crane kick some of these golems you need to paint the fence and carry the water. I didn't become good at this by being good at this. I became good by obeying the law. Submission is the primary principle. It's a far more useful term than "agreement". In the context of the mystical the word "agreement" doesn't cut it. It implies you are a volunteer before the power of God. Submission is better because it implies that lack of it will break you, which is closer to the truth.

...

If all of these seemed to be a fist from the darkness, then you haven't even realized I operate in the blind. I see your old man face with my human eyes, but in the spiritual sense I operate from faith and principle only. We haven't gotten close to seeing one another. I acknowledged your presence only.

If you want to know where the railings are and need to hold on, stay in this primary thread to discuss the process with me and perhaps more sophisticated techniques can develop. Stick to the basic plan of getting others to agree outside of it and simply follow my lead if you get outside this thread. Anti-liberty, anti-libery, anti-free speech. Point it out, try to get people to see reason. Get them in the light. Transparency is key. That strategy got you this far don't abandon it because you found me. I'm just one person. I'm no more special than you. I'm not sure if MY INTENT will be made clear to you. My intent has not changed. Yours shouldn't either without sufficient cause because you've seen a mirage.

In post #142 in thread [3] I said I was your bitch and you were my bitch. The 'your bitch' part was a courtesy because of the limitiations of the analogy and I errored on the side of respect to you. When you mention me only mention that we are united in liberty in plain terms. An embryonic constitution (I'm assuming you see this fact, maybe I'm wrong here).

Our roles aren't the same. I'll simply say you are more impressive than anyone I've met here. Which is true. However, when you mention me now it comes with a price. You can say anything you want about me as long as you don't violate the Martial and the Mystic code bringing further censure. You understand the Martial code for the most part. I've given you a very central mystic code. But whenever you mention me, if you don't mention that I am a Christian (or professed Christian, if you wish) and that you are not a Christian in the same post and if you violate this more than two times I will end our agreement permanently. This will not apply in this thread. This is a permanent rule. I will relieve it when it is no longer true.

You are accountable to this rule whether or not you acknowledge it starting from the time of this post. If you aren't paying attention to your own thread then you aren't worth the effort.

None of your other posts are of any interest to me. In fact in this primary thread where we are supposed to be refining the process you answered question 3 before question 1.

Plus you completely missed the question. I asked you if your "litmus test was engineered for another purpose". I didn't ask you if there was another "intent" from the realm of law. I'm saying you think this thing you made was to "fix society" but what if it was simply to gather people? Or maybe just lead you here?

This is all but a sign to me that your sincerity is in question. Or at least your focus. Your blashpemy in the temple is even affecting your reading comprehension is my guess.

Not that answering 3 before 1 is necessarily a hard rule. But you didn't even comprehend the question you chose to answer out of order. The Lord is a stumbling block to those who resist him.

You are blind. We both are. The first step is accepting that. Not only are you new at it, but you've never been in a place the equivalent of the Chokey before and ALSO been blind. Be stil. Follow the rules. Hold on to the railing. Stay in the light. Stop talking to people who aren't listening. Ring the bell only. Don't convince yourself that you know anyone. Remember the Socratic principle.

If you need to be reminded of whose domain you are in, look at the opinion you had of me in thread [4] where you announced in my temple that you had "proof" that I am not a sincere American, and yet here we are in the thread where you are thanking the God of Heaven that I am the first person you ever met who is fully cognizant of your mechanism.

My intent has certainly shifted mildly over the years, sometimes drastically but not in ways noticeable to most. But that thread is on the map. And my intent certainly hasn't changed that much since April 28th, 2015. If you'd like to understand why you were confused by my communications and claimed "proof" of being a liberty denier when in fact I had was only checking your Mystic credentials in the temple then I encourage you to revisit and discover the source of your ignorance.

I think you may need to go back and read your own words here as well:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?473597-FOR-DEEPER-UNDERSTANDING&p=5928976&viewfull=1#post5928976

..and consider that maybe YOU don't understand the power of agreement between people. You didn't "succeed", you just finally got started. Thank God by getting serious.

I will pray for you and ask for your forgiveness and for mine for anything I may have done to draw you from the path.

...

3 before 1...

Seriously, do you not watch movies or something? Everybody watches movies. SMDH.

:)

[wizardwatson]

What "conclusion" are you referring to? The reason? Are you trolling me?

You're conclusion that border policy defines "true Americans". I agree the goal is to find true Americans. I have doubts about your assessment of what that is.

I'm asking the "reason" you are interested at all anymore. Your post count is low. Just wondering what all the sudden made you want to do grass roots stuff. Have a coffee or whatever.

What changed? You don't come on here often so you don't understand the rarity. And if you are a lurker, makes it even more curious, because you should understand the rarity.

[ClydeCoulter]

What "conclusion" are you referring to? The reason? Are you trolling me?

Yes.

[ClydeCoulter]

begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.



The Bill of Rights (so called) is not a list of our rights. Our rights do not come from the Constitution. The BoR only lists a few of the natural rights that governments were wont to abuse in the past, that are infamous for.
And, the 9th and 10th Amendments were meant to state in no uncertain terms that this was not a list of rights of the people.

[wizardwatson]

Yes.

I predate your existence on this forum. You are violating forum policy by calling me a troll.

I am using my real face and name (David Watson). You are some anonymous clip art mega poster with no clear agenda.

[ClydeCoulter]

I predate your existence on this forum. You are violating forum policy by calling me a troll.

I am using my real face and name (David Watson). You are some anonymous clip art mega poster with no clear agenda.


But, you don't predate my existance, you youngin' And I didn't call you a troll, but agreed that you were trolling. Something about hating the sin but not the sinner, but I'm not Christian so I'll not harp on that.

I'm using my real name, and my avatar represents my attitude, for the most part, on this forum these days. You haven't always used you pic as your avatar, I did once and didn't call you out on it. Do you also jump on the bandwagon of blaming people who do what you did yesterday but now don't, like becoming a Christian or quitting smoking or whatever?

I have a fairly extensive post history, but won't blame you for not digging since you really don't give a shit...you are on a roll...for something...

edit: And my post count comes, partially, from efforts in 2012 like this thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?370863-RPF-Web-Warriors-Current-Tasks
(http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?370863-RPF-Web-Warriors-Current-Tasks)
edit again: I miss PolicyReader too.

[ClydeCoulter]

Mr Wizard,

Why did you choose to respond to my "yes' comment instead of the following reference?


The Bill of Rights (so called) is not a list of our rights. Our rights do not come from the Constitution. The BoR only lists a few of the natural rights that governments were wont to abuse in the past, that are infamous for.
And, the 9th and 10th Amendments were meant to state in no uncertain terms that this was not a list of rights of the people.

[Christopher A. Brown]

I've had to pull a post of yours from another thread, Chris. :mad:

Seriously, do you not watch movies or something? Everybody watches movies. SMDH.

:)

Very sorry Watson. Apologies, I knew I was being presumptuous, but somehow felt you might accept the perspective.

I do not watch movies generally. I take almost nothing from Corporate Americas entertainment. It's pretty clear to me that power intends to corrupt, distract and mislead.

There are clues and evidence left for us however and those tend to be recognized by many and brought forth for the masses to ponder. That I find and use as I might best to make sense of events. However consistency and clarity of purpose needs to be easily visible. Within one instance or over many.

But the point of this thread is to show definition of potential basis for unity unmistakably related to the prime principles of the framing documents. The Greater Meaning of Free Speech woven into the revision of the 1st amendment has the potential for ending the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech. So I'm very appreciative of your asking for what preparatory amendment might look like.

Then the thread serves to show how legal process can give the people authority over their state governments setting the foundation for a lawful and peaceful revolution providing functional mechanism to utilize our unity.

[Ronin Truth]

I predate your existence on this forum. You are violating forum policy by calling me a troll.

I am using my real face and name (David Watson). You are some anonymous clip art mega poster with no clear agenda.

Ooh, ooh, I seriously just can not resist. "It's elementary, my dear Watson." Ahhhhhh.<sigh>
(I know Sherlock never actually said that, but it's widely popular.)

[wizardwatson]

Very sorry Watson. Apologies, I knew I was being presumptuous, but somehow felt you might accept the perspective.

I do not watch movies generally. I take almost nothing from Corporate Americas entertainment. It's pretty clear to me that power intends to corrupt, distract and mislead.

There are clues and evidence left for us however and those tend to be recognized by many and brought forth for the masses to ponder. That I find and use as I might best to make sense of events. However consistency and clarity of purpose needs to be easily visible. Within one instance or over many.

But the point of this thread is to show definition of potential basis for unity unmistakably related to the prime principles of the framing documents. The Greater Meaning of Free Speech woven into the revision of the 1st amendment has the potential for ending the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech. So I'm very appreciative of your asking for what preparatory amendment might look like.

Then the thread serves to show how legal process can give the people authority over their state governments setting the foundation for a lawful and peaceful revolution providing functional mechanism to utilize our unity.

Water under the troll bridge.

You know what I've changed my mind.

You do whatever you want. I don't think my agreement requires any action on my part at this point. Plus I've put years of effort into these threads I've created. Pretty sure all the answers are there. Not really fair to expect me to regurgitate and reformat, especially for someone versed in the "oral histories". By the way. Jeffrey Lebowski got a carton of milk on the day that Atta and Neo got their license renewed. That's kind of spooky.

Clearly, none of your sentences end in question marks. You're appreciative of me asking and yet you don't ask anything. Seems a bit one-sided. Plus how is the "greater" after the lesser purpose. If it was greater shouldn't it come first.

Don't answer that.

Think about it. And ask me something cool. Or give me like a toy or puzzle or something.

If you have any questions about me just ask Ronin Truth. He knows who I am. Plus he lives right next to me. I think it's those truth bombs he keeps dropping causing all the earthquakes.

I'm just over the rainbow if you need me.

Taking a nap now.

P.S. If speech is primary, why does first amendment begin with religion? Were the founders confused? You know what don't answer that. Consult the oracle or something and try not to bore me anymore.

[wizardwatson]

Christopher A. Brown, you are by far the most prolific anti-liberty poster I've seen on this site in quite some time.

Sorry, Chris. fisharmor has made 'infinity' of your ideas at scout camp.

Take your baubles and trinkets elsewhere! We have everything under control.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=On2BMf0E-uY


Isn't attempting to overthrow the government, by definition a criminal offense?

Well, it is in the Empire of Lies. Where the Truth is a Ronin.


In a nutshell, can you please explain how you have a lawful revolt against the government?

(This is the part of the story where someone who has been paying attention all these long years weeps for humanity.)

Luckily you are guided by Fenton Crackshell.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKMK3XGO27k

http://i.imgur.com/sqnCkWS.png


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jne9t8sHpUc


Got any more :cool: oxymorons?

Ooo! Me, Me, Me!

1 We Will Never Forget.

2 Saving Jesus from the Church

3 A Ron Paul Republican disagreeing with Chris.

...

You are not going to pick up the signal without tuning your tin foil hat to guerilla radio station.

Due to extreme levels of irony inherent in the corrupted program you will need to turn on the "Idiot Box" to receive this transmission.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lnr8THgL5k

[Ronin Truth]

Sorry, Chris. fisharmor has made 'infinity' of your ideas at scout camp.

Take your baubles and trinkets elsewhere! We have everything under control.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=On2BMf0E-uY



Well, it is in the Empire of Lies. Where the Truth is a Ronin.

A Samurai without a master? :confused: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ronin

Meds check! ;)



(This is the part of the story where someone who has been paying attention all these long years weeps for humanity.)

Luckily you are guided by Fenton Crackshell.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKMK3XGO27k

http://i.imgur.com/sqnCkWS.png


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jne9t8sHpUc



Ooo! Me, Me, Me!

1 We Will Never Forget.

2 Saving Jesus from the Church

3 A Ron Paul Republican disagreeing with Chris.

...

You are not going to pick up the signal without tuning your tin foil hat to guerilla radio station.

Due to extreme levels of irony inherent in the corrupted program you will need to turn on the "Idiot Box" to receive this transmission.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lnr8THgL5k//

[wizardwatson]

Ooh, ooh, I seriously just can not resist. "It's elementary, my dear Watson." Ahhhhhh.<sigh>
(I know Sherlock never actually said that, but it's widely popular.)

People have wanted to talk to me forever. Now they have the chance and all I get is an army of insufferable bores. Well, if you call a couple posts a day an army, anyway.


Thomas Augustus Watson (January 18, 1854 – December 13, 1934) was an assistant to Alexander Graham Bell, notably in the invention of the telephone in 1876. He is best known because, as the recipient of the first telephone call - although coming from just the next room - his name became the first words ever said over the phone. "Mr. Watson - Come here - I want to see you," Bell said when first using the new invention, according to Bell's laboratory notebook.[1] There is some dispute about the actual words used, as Thomas Watson, in his own voice, remembered it as "Mr. Watson - Come here - I want you," in a film made for Bell Labs in 1931 which is referenced below in "The Engines of our Ingenuity."

WATSON Surname Meaning & Origin:

Watson is a patronymic surname meaning "son of Watt." The popular Middle English given names Wat or Watt were pet forms of the name Walter, meaning "ruler of the army." From the elements wald, meaning rule, and heri, meaning army.

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCKRI2wEw7I


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eLzLdeGBV0

[wizardwatson]

"Ænema"

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see Armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will.
I sure could use a vacation from this

Bullshit three ring circus sideshow of freaks

Here in this hopeless fucking hole we call L.A.
The only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
Any fucking time. Any fucking day.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.

Fret for your figure and
Fret for your latte and
Fret for your lawsuit and
Fret for your hairpiece and
Fret for your Prozac and
Fret for your pilot and
Fret for your contract and
Fret for your car.

It's a bullshit three ring circus sideshow of freaks

Here in this hopeless fucking hole we call L.A.
The only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
Any fucking time. Any fucking day.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.

Some say a comet will fall from the sky.
Followed by meteor showers and tidal waves.
Followed by fault lines that cannot sit still.
Followed by millions of dumbfounded dip shits.

[INTERMISSION]

"I hope they're wearing their brown pants." - Deadpool

Proverbs 1:26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;

http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/deadpool-cover-front-croppe.jpg

Deadpool (Wade Winston Wilson) is a fictional antihero appearing in American comic books published by Marvel Comics. Created by writer Fabian Nicieza and artist/writer Rob Liefeld, the character first appeared in The New Mutants #98 (February 1991). Deadpool was depicted as a supervillain when he made his first appearance in The New Mutants and later in issues of X-Force, but has since evolved into the role of an antihero.

Deadpool is a disfigured and mentally unstable mercenary with the superhuman ability of an accelerated healing factor. He is known as the "Merc with a Mouth" because of his talkative nature and tendency to break the fourth wall, which is used by writers to humorous effect.

The character was portrayed by Ryan Reynolds in the 2009 film X-Men Origins: Wolverine, who will reprise the role in Deadpool, set to be released on February 12, 2016.[5][6]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO2sbzgo4wQ

[/INTERMISSSION]

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see Armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will cause
I sure could use a vacation from this

Stupid shit, silly shit, stupid shit...

One great big festering neon distraction,
I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied.

Learn to swim. [3x]

Mom's gonna fix it all soon.
Mom's comin' round to put it back the way it ought to be.

Learn to swim.

Fuck L Ron Hubbard and
Fuck all his clones.
Fuck all these gun-toting
Hip gangster wannabes.

Learn to swim.

Fuck retro anything.
Fuck your tattoos.
Fuck all you junkies and
Fuck your short memory.

Learn to swim.

Fuck smiley glad-hands
With hidden agendas.
Fuck these dysfunctional,
Insecure actresses.

Learn to swim.

Cause I'm praying for rain
And I'm praying for tidal waves
I wanna see the ground give way.
I wanna watch it all go down.
Mom, please flush it all away.
I wanna see it go right in and down.
I wanna watch it go right in.
Watch you flush it all away.

And they cried with a loud voice
saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true
dost thou not judge and avenge our
blood on them that dwell on the earth?

Time to bring it down again.
Don't just call me pessimist.
Try and read between the lines.

I can't imagine why you wouldn't
Welcome any change, my friend.

I wanna see it all come down.
Bring it down
Suck it down.
Flush it down.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCEeAn6_QJo&feature=youtu.be&t=308

[phill4paul]

"Ænema"

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see Armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will.
I sure could use a vacation from this

Bullshit three ring circus sideshow of freaks

Here in this hopeless fucking hole we call L.A.
The only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
Any fucking time. Any fucking day.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.

Fret for your figure and
Fret for your latte and
Fret for your lawsuit and
Fret for your hairpiece and
Fret for your Prozac and
Fret for your pilot and
Fret for your contract and
Fret for your car.

It's a bullshit three ring circus sideshow of freaks

Here in this hopeless fucking hole we call L.A.
The only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
Any fucking time. Any fucking day.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.

Some say a comet will fall from the sky.
Followed by meteor showers and tidal waves.
Followed by fault lines that cannot sit still.
Followed by millions of dumbfounded dip shits.

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see Armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will cause
I sure could use a vacation from this

Stupid shit, silly shit, stupid shit...

One great big festering neon distraction,
I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied.

Learn to swim. [3x]

Mom's gonna fix it all soon.
Mom's comin' round to put it back the way it ought to be.

Learn to swim.

Fuck L Ron Hubbard and
Fuck all his clones.
Fuck all these gun-toting
Hip gangster wannabes.

Learn to swim.

Fuck retro anything.
Fuck your tattoos.
Fuck all you junkies and
Fuck your short memory.

Learn to swim.

Fuck smiley glad-hands
With hidden agendas.
Fuck these dysfunctional,
Insecure actresses.

Learn to swim.

Cause I'm praying for rain
And I'm praying for tidal waves
I wanna see the ground give way.
I wanna watch it all go down.
Mom, please flush it all away.
I wanna see it go right in and down.
I wanna watch it go right in.
Watch you flush it all away.

And they cried with a loud voice
saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true
dost thou not judge and avenge our
blood on them that dwell on the earth?

Time to bring it down again.
Don't just call me pessimist.
Try and read between the lines.

I can't imagine why you wouldn't
Welcome any change, my friend.

I wanna see it all come down.
Bring it down
Suck it down.
Flush it down.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCEeAn6_QJo&feature=youtu.be&t=308

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to wizardwatson again.. This is my "go to" song when bombarded by today's idiocy. When turned up to 11 on the volume knob it has a way of purging the filth and cleansing the soul like no other I've found.

[Ronin Truth]

People have wanted to talk to me forever. Now they have the chance and all I get is an army of insufferable bores. Well, if you call a couple posts a day an army, anyway.



WATSON Surname Meaning & Origin:

Watson is a patronymic surname meaning "son of Watt." The popular Middle English given names Wat or Watt were pet forms of the name Walter, meaning "ruler of the army." From the elements wald, meaning rule, and heri, meaning army.

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCKRI2wEw7I


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eLzLdeGBV0

Yeah, the Bell quote option occurred to me later also, and was my second choice. Are you perchance, just a stream of consciousness forum poster?

"Not that there is anything wrong with that." -- Seinfeld

[Anti Federalist]

Foot in mouth and head up asshole...whatcha' talkin' 'bout???

You must of been high...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2F_hGwD26g

[Anti Federalist]

///

[Ronin Truth]

Not really, but I do seem to be experiencing some double thread post vision, if that's of any real help. ;) :D

[wizardwatson]

Yeah, the Bell quote option occurred to me later also, and was my second choice. Are you perchance, just a stream of consciousness forum poster?

"Not that there is anything wrong with that." -- Seinfeld



Depends on the weather. Perhaps I just have a Wild Muse.

Matthew 5:48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

"To change with change is the changeless state" - Bruce Lee

"Water is the softest stuff on Earth. Yet it can break through rock. Be like water my friend." - Bruce Lee


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqHSbMR_udo

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Revealation 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses - Jesus

Two witnesses must take part in the engagement and wedding ceremonies if the marriage is to be legal and binding.

http://www.ketubah.com/templates/template28_article.cfm?article=12

The seven days of the chuppah (honeymoon) corresponds to the seven years of the Tribulation.

http://www.gindorf.us/coolstuff/writings/articles/wedding.html

The business about the proof of virginity has to do with honesty in dealings (sincere agreements?). You have to understand that in biblical days, as many cultures still do today, it was the parents who arranged a marriage.

http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswers/2006/11-02.htm

And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand (sounds like they don't understand sincere agreeements, am I right?)

...

I'm so confused.

If the Key of David isn't David's Key and The Church Is The Virgin But Not On Certain Layer of Cake Then Who Wrote The Book Of Love


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPHjJ-Jzyww

See, now isn't playing more fun than pretending to "know" ye doublminded charlatans?

Certain Tea Leaves you feeling relaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaxed.

The Socratic Method isn't nearly as useful as the Socratic Paradox.

Feedback back appreciated you lazy bums.

See you later. Nap time.

Lighten up. Some things are just funny. And mercy is a real thing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT4bsbiReDU&list=PLD8D8CF0B7377E042

"For starters, I pointed to the Bible and said, because it's in the FUCKIN' BIBLE YOU STUPID IDIOT!"

Me and the kiddo laughed our asses off watching that video like 10 times straight. Some things are so funny you expose your child to a little cussing. Truth.

Bwahahahaha!

[Ronin Truth]

Depends on the weather. Perhaps I just have a Wild Muse.

Matthew 5:48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

"To change with change is the changeless state" - Bruce Lee

"Water is the softest stuff on Earth. Yet it can break through rock. Be like water my friend." - Bruce Lee


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqHSbMR_udo

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Revealation 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses - Jesus

Two witnesses must take part in the engagement and wedding ceremonies if the marriage is to be legal and binding.

http://www.ketubah.com/templates/template28_article.cfm?article=12

The seven days of the chuppah (honeymoon) corresponds to the seven years of the Tribulation.

http://www.gindorf.us/coolstuff/writings/articles/wedding.html

The business about the proof of virginity has to do with honesty in dealings (sincere agreements?). You have to understand that in biblical days, as many cultures still do today, it was the parents who arranged a marriage.

http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswers/2006/11-02.htm

And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand (sounds like they don't understand sincere agreeements, am I right?)

...

I'm so confused.

If the Key of David isn't David's Key and The Church Is The Virgin But Not On Certain Layer of Cake Then Who Wrote The Book Of Love


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPHjJ-Jzyww

See, now isn't playing more fun than pretending to "know" ye doublminded charlatans?

Certain Tea Leaves you feeling relaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaxed.

The Socratic Method isn't nearly as useful as the Socratic Paradox.

Feedback back appreciated you lazy bums.

See you later. Nap time.

Lighten up. Some things are just funny. And mercy is a real thing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT4bsbiReDU&list=PLD8D8CF0B7377E042

"For starters, I pointed to the Bible and said, because it's in the FUCKIN' BIBLE YOU STUPID IDIOT!"

Me and the kiddo laughed our asses off watching that video like 10 times straight. Some things are so funny you expose your child to a little cussing. Truth.

Bwahahahaha!

Bruce never did a belly flop off the high board, or he wouldn't be talking about "soft" water.

Greek wild muse? Female? What's the name of the muse?

Sometimes my eyes just tend to glaze over and I then tend to doze off for a bit, when confronted with a wall o' text, etc.

FWIW, just an FYI.

On my RPF computer, this one, I have no sound capability. I've found silence to truly be golden, if that makes any difference. ;)

Soooo, not being a lip reader your videos are largely a waste for me. <shrug!>

[CPUd]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB7jRL2olUc

[Christopher A. Brown]

Wow, nearly a whole page of corporate conditioned posts.

America has need of populations unified behind effective action that can defend rights. This would be the truest American culture.

Americans will learn that no media will share an appreciation of that agreement which can fully defend unalienable rights. When families collectively realize that they must share the agreement which protects their children's futures, that truest American culture will incubate in an environment where parents teach their children along with their nieghbors about our first constitutional right that we can share action upon most meaningfully, to alter or abolish government destructive to our rights.

Young adults will see for the first time in generations, their parents discussing concrete action they can take which WILL ASSURE, if taken up by communities, that the young people can expect to have rights and freedoms, even justice.

With enough zeal in sharing the elements of agreement propelling our lawful and peaceful revolution, they may even see that Americans working reasonably and lawfully together to restore fully constitutional government and the republic over it, can even share realistic hope of stopping wholesale environmental destruction.

And sincere Americans do easily understand these prime principles, while the legal process seems new and strange, they also see how their numbers could cause some legislators of states to stand with them.

Accordingly, sharing that which engenders understanding upon prime rights, is the true path to an acceptable future.

[Christopher A. Brown]

By the way. Jeffrey Lebowski got a carton of milk on the day that Atta and Neo got their license renewed. That's kind of spooky.

It's interesting that Jeffrey Lebowski got a carton of milk (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478542-WizardWatson-s-Magnificent-9-11-Truth-Thread-Tale-of-the-Spooky-Shemitah&p=5932131&viewfull=1#post5932131) on 9/11, but not as spooky as this.

[Christopher A. Brown]

One of the greatest legal scenes imaginable comes from our potential lawful and peaceful
Revolution.

That culture of agreement upon prime constitutional intent must mature before this a reality. But, if Americans are to be free and have rights, to have tire futures where real hope is a part of life, that culture must develop. And it will come about as I described in my post on the previous page.

The scene is a state captitol.

Five thousand protestors with signs, many say, "Time to alter or abolish, Our first right!". And, "Restore the PURPOSE of free speech. It is an amicable but passionate gathering.
What is different is that law enforcement officers are smiling and discussing issues with protestors. No animosity exists there.

That is the first thing that unnerves the legislature inside their building. Cops in riot gear showed up perhaps for an hour or so, but left after protestors calmly and lucidly explained what they were doing. Some cops probably wanted to stay, oppressing, but others firmly told them to leave, then stayed themselves in ordinary uniform, mingling with the people in small groups and as individuals. Obviously keeping the peace, fully peacefully. Smiling and talking with families about the futures they all share.

As the legislature begins its session, the spokesperson for the protest moves into the building with an assistant carrying paper. They of course walk through a metal detector and enter the building.

When they are called to speak, and present, they calmly state that they are of the people which have learned their role of "masters of the congress and the courts" because ALL of the protestors outside can speak completely and in full agreement upon the most prime rights and constitutional intent shared by all citizens of all states.
They state that all of the legislators must share that agreement and that they have come to present that agreement. That they have been chosen by the people to bring that definition of intent and seek formal agreement with full acceptance of those same rights from all of the legislators.

A petition signed by many more than 5,000 is presented to the legislation as a whole. But one, commonly seem as unconstitutional legislator is singled out with a petition directed at them having the same request as the whole legislation.

In an alternative scenario, perhaps only that legislator is presented with a petition, with the same to the entire legislation 45 days later addressing the response or lack of it from that legislator.

In that scenario 45 days later. IF that legislator failed to respond or refused to agree with the prime constitutional intent of the peoples right to alter or abolish and their right to have free speech functionally serve the purpose of creating unity adequate to alter or abolish, the remaining legislators are asked to sign, because if they do not, the people of the state are deprived of their right to alter of abolish properly through Article V which demands that all amendments have constitutional intent.

Without legislators that recognize the most prime constitutional intent, how can the state possibly represent the people at Article V properly?

This is simple and fundamental to the law of the land.

Therefore, the legislation is presented with a demand to impeach any legislators that will not sign in acceptance of the petition.

Then the law starts to work, or try to fail. Whereupon truly good lawyers, and there must be a few that cannot find a way to practice law with enough good to be rewarding, so mostly don't, but in this case they do, and with great zeal shaming any judges that will not legally compel a reluctant legislation to follow the law.

After this process completes in one state, and there is only one lawful resolution to the matter, all legislators that refuse either resign or face impeachment proceedings, whereupon the protestors start upon media to publicize the event fully if they have not already.

Lawsuits are threatened if front page stories are not published. Having seen that judges cannot resist the peoples rightful and lawful agreement with imposition by authority for constitutional continuity, the papers reluctantly start publishing.

Then the wave of mass American agreement begins. TV's are shut off if they do not continue the story. Masses assemble in front of there headquarters to picket. Traffic finds parking and joins the protest. Attorneys hurriedly file lawsuits to assure that the media WILL be held accountable to the public trust.

Shareholders call the corporate offices concerned that viewer ship and profits will suffer. Smart corporate officers aquiese and settle out of court and begin reporting on the movement.

This is America after all.

[wizardwatson]

It's interesting that Jeffrey

Lebowski got a carton of milk (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478542-

WizardWatson-s-Magnificent-9-11-Truth-Thread-Tale-of-the-Spooky-Shemitah&p=5932131&viewfull=1#post5932131) on 9/11, but not as spooky as this.

Why are you derailing your own thread?

You are not honoring our agreement it seems. This is no crime, but it shows a lack of sincerity about your previously professed opinion of me.

This thread has two purposes.

1. To further the adoption of the agreement to all parties.
2. To provide a centralized place for wizardwatson and Chris Brown to have a discussion concerning the nature of the agreement.

It was established that me and you would discuss the nature, and yet when you reply directly to me, not only are you derailing, when we specifically said that the core issue would be the agreement, but you are attacking my credibility before others at the same time, violating the Greater Purpose of friendship. You say it's "more spooky" but you indicated no where in the post you pointed to what "spooky danger" you are referring to.

Again, this is no crime. I can only assume you are still drunk. You idolize your Key, and now that it has worked its power over you has increased.

Your key is not powerful. Your key is designed to find, not a sincere American. But an extremely healthy sincere American.

The Sphinx Moth meets the Ghost Orchid, perhaps?

I'm now leaning towards the opinion that you too carry fear with you. You are not scared to reveal your old man human face, but you fear to reveal your "oral histories". The "sacred" words of your precious church fathers.

I despise secrecy. If their words are truthful they should speak them openly. Illuminists, and all the other sorcerers which creep in the shadows have no power in the light. They are weak. Why would you honor their secrecy when they will not openly honor the agreement which you cherish and I have agreed to? If your agreement is the key to unity then what secret could they possess that is more sacred that warrants remaining hidden?

Your teachers have shown you the oral "histories" I know the oral "present".

You must step into the light. I will not speak of the Lord and of the Spirit in the dark.

You are right that the corporate media is poison. But it also uses (though bastardizing mostly) art. And art lives where true freedom lives. So to use art, no matter where it comes from, is not a condoning of corporate media necessarily. You have to communicate in the medium that others understand.

So the "classical" approach, of using what people know and are conditioned to is typically not useful. But sometimes it is. And to deny the classical approach simply as a reaction is but another form of conditioning that one can trap himself in.

Again, you seem to not know that you are blindfolded. And you certainly aren't giving any indication that you have a very solid picture of who I am. So let's recap.

In post #20 of this thread:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?476045-Rebooting-the-constitution-and-starting-a-micronation

...I entered into our agreement.

In this thread #38 we established rules.
In #40 I gave you the initiative and an opening to strike.
In #55 I countered.
But it seems in #68 I've completely knocked you out. Do you plan on entering the ring again? Are we finished? If you simply "know" of the oral histories, but don't understand what Dharma Combat is truly about then why go on bragging about it?

Perhaps, you have too much fear. Or perhaps you are still deluded that you will make any progress in here with your agreement key with others. I don't think you will. Especially if you continue to ignore our agreement. People will see the lack of sincerity. I've put it right here in words, in your thread.

.....

When I entered you "club". I used the phrase "throwing down the gauntlet". Do you know what this means? It is a term used to challenge someone to a dual. Dharma combat. But also, the beginning of the r3volution revival. I appear to be way ahead of you.

But the sense in which I really meant it, you would not easily decode.

I am a sentinel of this temple. And ancient Samurai.

...metaphorically speaking of course...

A "gauntlet" is an armored glove. In order to shake your hand, I must take it off. Words have meaning. Some words have more than one. Events almost always have more than one. We don't disagree I think on 9/11. I just have an opinion about a certain layer of meaning and I don't think you're layer that you are on concerning this topic is terribly relevant to what we need to discuss.

.....

What is the first lesson in combat? To punch? To kick? To fall?

No, the first lesson is the "ready position". To stand at attention.

As I said, we are only beginning. Before you can understand and communicate you must be paying attention.

.....

You are putting the cart before the horse. That is why I asked why the Greater Purpose comes after the lesser purpose. Why is the Greater purpose protected second, and the apparently "definite" purpose protected first in the order of the sentence? Who determines whether it is "possible"? What if the majority determines that it isn't "possible"? Couldn't the remove the Greater Purpose?

3 before 1.

Things must go in order, but sometimes they get confusing.

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

That is the order of the names and the order of glory. 1, 2, 3. The Holy Spirit testifies to the Son, the Son testifies to the Father. But why then is only blasphemy of the HOly Spirit unforgiveable? This is a great Mystery I will not delineate here.

So there are questions about your "priorities" if you catch my drift. I'm not saying that there isn't sometimes a reason to go out of order, but if the reason is valid it should make itself evident. If it doesn't become clear, then your sincerity might be in question.

.....

I will help you with your fear.

[I removed a photo from the movie Exorcist from this post 3/27/18]

If you cannot overcome your fears of cowardly men who creep in the shadows and demand you keep silent with covert rebuke, how will you overcome the fears that a Priest who exorcises demons must overcome?

My zip code is 66606 by the way.

Looking forward to your feedback. I am still interested in continuing the process. Can't really tell if you are right now.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Why are you derailing your own thread?

You are not honoring our agreement it seems.

Looking forward to your feedback. I am still interested in continuing the process. Can't really tell if you are right now.

Not derailing my own thread. In fact doing a lot to avoid it. I was replying and and notifying you of info pertinent to your thread. My previous 2 posts are dead centered on the thread topic here and very much a continuation of the process. No comment on that, but lots on . . . what???

I noticed the last few pages are extensive derailment, essentially spam with elements of cognitive dissonance from those who have not shown they agree with and accept prime constitutional intent, and I had nothing to do with that. All of that looks like a significant hijacking.

What about the issue of state legislators being critical to the manifestation of "alter or abolish" when Article V states, "shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof,"

Do you recognize that the intent of the Declaration of Independence must manifest through the performance of state legislators relating to the ability to propose and ratify amendments that only have constitutional intent?

[Anti Federalist]

The scene is a state captitol.

Five thousand protestors with signs, many say, "Time to alter or abolish, Our first right!". And, "Restore the PURPOSE of free speech. It is an amicable but passionate gathering.

What is different is that law enforcement officers are smiling and discussing issues with protestors. No animosity exists there.

That is the first thing that unnerves the legislature inside their building.

Cops in riot gear showed up perhaps for an hour or so, but left after protestors calmly and lucidly explained what they were doing.

Why?

Why is this different from a thousand other peaceful protests, where the cops in riot gear busted everybody's head and "followed orders"?


This is America after all.

My point, exactly.

[wizardwatson]

Not derailing my own thread. In fact doing a lot to avoid it. I was replying and and notifying you of info pertinent to your thread. My previous 2 posts are dead centered on the thread topic here and very much a continuation of the process. No comment on that, but lots on . . . what???

Do you recognize that the intent of the Declaration of Independence must manifest through the performance of state legislators relating to the ability to propose and ratify amendments that only have constitutional intent?

I noticed the last few pages are extensive derailment, essentially spam with elements of cognitive dissonance from those who have not shown they agree with and accept prime constitutional intent, and I had nothing to do with that. All of that looks like a significant hijacking.

Your only direct reply to me was #91. One whole sentence.

We designated this thread as our primary communication channel. Anything on the other threads is ancillary and largely to interact with the group. If you do not reply directly to my text, at least part of it, how am I to know you are talking to me and not the group? There was no need to give me a pointer in this thread to that one. I made it clear in this threads which threads I'm paying attention to. You giving me a pointer means you don't believe I'm checking those. And if you think that, it stands to reason you aren't taking me to seriously and also that I'm not taking you to seriously or that I'm "crazy". I'm not interested in following you around. We are speaking one to one. You are not the master of this domain. If you think age is a determining factor in anything you understand nought.

I've spent hours reading up on you. How much time have you spent reading my threads? I also believe I know have a more fundamental grasp on the mechanics involved in your litmus test than you do.

I'm not only talking to people right "now". This thread and all my threads are for future viewers as well. Because you see it as cognitive dissonance only shows your lack of attention, at the very least, and perhaps your lack of awareness in general.

I know they are all sleeping. But when they awake they will remember this dream from their sleep, as you will, and things that seem twisted will be made straight.

You claim a mystic side when you talk of the "oral traditions". Are you ashamed to talk of those things? Are you "saving" that up for the day when you succeed in your ambitions and then can tell everyone, "this is the secret to my success, I was one of the chosen to receive the blessed knowledge", blah, blah, barf.

I'm willing to answer specific questions about your idea. I have made quite a few observations already. But I will not follow you around and bend over backwards to please you by pretending that I'm not already way ahead of you in comprehending what's going on. Not here, or anywhere else.

If you fear taking me seriously in public, then you don't understand the very concept you are talking about. Do you have evidence that I'm not taking you seriously? Because I have evidence on that I'm the ONLY ONE you claim to be taking seriously, that you claim is "in sincere agreement with you". Have any others here agreed yet?

Do you not even understand the problem with doing things in the dark?

You say no one accepted "completely", but some did didn't they? They did because there was less light. You could get someone to agree pretty easy in the dark. You know why? Because then it comes down to safety in numbers. If it's just Chris and Dave in a cave, I would agree just not to make you mad. Do you see? This group, althought poisoned, is MORE bright and in the light. You had others in half-light, then agreed, and then you were booted. Makes perfect sense to me.

What this means is that less truth propagates in the dark. Because in the dark people are less willing to attack a lie for fear of persecution, and more willing to tell lies for the love of pride. So if we are to accerelerate our discussion and unfolding of truth, it is most efficient in public view on this forum.

Even if we were to talk on the phone we would have the same problem. You would be more willing to talk about meaningless crap and more willing to believe lies you are told.

You of all people should understand this best. So what we SHOULD be talking about is things you don't know or are having problems with or that you consider "great secrets". I have no great secrets. Not with you. You need to speak in code and beat around the bush and test me, go right ahead. But do it in the open. You haven't asked me any very good questions yet. And I think the reason you won't point out the errors in your idea I already see is because now you think it has more credbility because I understood it and you are afraid no one will adopt it. This is exactly the Rand Paul problem. Our movement is "half correct", so no one wants to expose Rand's problems for fear of lack of adoption. It is not hard to grasp.

But that makes your "idea" even more dangerous to you. Now that it's worked once, you've developed a false faith, not in your idea, but in your flawed strategy to propagate it.

Once you cross the river you no longer need the raft.

Plus, why do you give me your phone number if you aren't going to answer your texts?


What about the issue of state legislators being critical to the manifestation of "alter or abolish" when Article V states, "shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof,"

Woah, woah, woah. I thought we were talking about better ways to get people to agree? My only question, to simplify it for you, is that if you understand the "possible" greater purpose, how do you know they won't use "alter or abolish" to change the greater purpose? And if you understand that, why put it second in the sentence. Which I wanted to follow up with, by asking why you think the religion freedom is listed before speech.

The mystic stuff is going to be, well, mystic. I have no problem speaking plainly on your idea. But you see, we have to identify problems. If you are scared to discuss possible issues and problems because you don't want people thinking you don't know what you're talking about, then again, I have a firmer grasp on the mechanics of your litmus test than you do.

Why is it hard for you to realize or at least "entertain" the idea that I'm smarter than you? You already admitted on another thread that you dropped out of school at 8th grade. I'm not judging you for that. I'm judging you for how you are behaving.

The libertarian darling Albert J. Nock also was never formally schooled.

I, on the other hand, was the kid who spent his lunch hours in high school in the library, and being the only person who actually used the inter-library ordering system.

I cracked a NES game code algorithm in Swords and Serpents to start all my characters with 18's because the game was too hard to beat and it was annoying me.

I have never stopped studying.

I've studied everything really, quite extensively.

I'm always ready to start over.

Look at the facts. You've spent YEARS as a member of this forum. July, 2011. I've been right here year after year, month after month, and we ONLY NOW found each other. And you see my level of comprehension. Now that we're out in the open, what chance do you think there is that others are going to suddenly pop in? It was likely a one trick pony dude. I mean I will continue as well with you, I do believe it is a fundamentally sound grassroots strategy, but it is my belief me and you need to be talking about more than getting people into this.

All my spidey senses, say there's things you know that I will know more about. Perhaps, you have secrets and keys that I've been waiting for as well.

So tell me what QUESTIONS you have. What problems you see.

If you want to evaluate what I know, or if I'm sincere in certain areas, by all means. But stop saying I'm trying to cause cognitive dissonance. You look ridiculous after thanking God that you found someone like me.

[wizardwatson]

None of the above. It has already been clearly established that Bryan is, in fact, a reptilian ...
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?215066-Here-is-proof-that-reptilians-runs-this-forum


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClwIj3x24Q4

[CPUd]

Why?

Why is this different from a thousand other peaceful protests, where the cops in riot gear busted everybody's head and "followed orders"?



My point, exactly.

You missed the "calmly and lucidly" part. This is where they explain to the riot squad the 1787 constitution and abridgement of free speech. Then the people in the crowd will ask each officer if he accept the true purpose of free speech, then ones who don't will expose themselves as coginfil agents and immediately be dismissed by the ones who do.

[HVACTech]

I think I see the malfunction here..


agreement upon prime constitutional intent

our Constitution is simply our version of the "Rule of Law" in any given Republic.
therefore, the Constitution does not contain the "prime intent"

;)

[Spikender]

Do you recognize that the intent of the Declaration of Independence must manifest through the performance of state legislators relating to the ability to propose and ratify amendments that only have constitutional intent?

Do you recognize that most of the posters taking part in this particular topic are facetious in their actions and are simply utilizing you as a practice dummy with which to sharpen their supposed wits in an attempt to shred you down and discover your true intentions and possibly your true reason for creating this topic and posing these tough questions in increasingly elaborately worded and confusing ways that make the questions themselves difficult to answer?

[Christopher A. Brown]

I think I see the malfunction here..

our Constitution is simply our version of the "Rule of Law" in any given Republic.
therefore, the Constitution does not contain the "prime intent"
;)

You'll be going up against Lincoln and what he said in an 1859 speech in Illinois.

"the people are the rightful masters of the congress and the courts"

And everyone knows that congress and the courts can only interpret the constitutions intent, not define it.

We contain it with our agreement, but the framing documents get very close as guides and Article V is law by which we define it with our states as part of each amendment.

Your agreement gets so empty that constitutional intent does not exist.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Do you recognize that most of the posters taking part in this particular topic are facetious in their actions and are simply utilizing you as a practice dummy with which to sharpen their supposed wits in an attempt to shred you down and discover your true intentions and possibly your true reason for creating this topic and posing these tough questions in increasingly elaborately worded and confusing ways that make the questions themselves difficult to answer?

Hah, of course. But they fail and the answers eventually become easier to
Make as well as understand as they grow in simplicity. I'm getting better with practice.

[Spikender]

Hah, of course. But they fail and the answers eventually become easier to
Make as well as understand as they grow in simplicity. I'm getting better with practice.

Cool.

You have to understand, with a lot of people, especially on this website, it's never "yes" or "no". It's always "Well..." and then three paragraphs later there still hasn't been an answer in the affirmative or the negative.

Don't worry, bud, you'll break through to people eventually.

[Christopher A. Brown]

You missed the "calmly and lucidly" part. This is where they explain to the riot squad the 1787 constitution and abridgement of free speech. Then the people in the crowd will ask each officer if he accept the true purpose of free speech, then ones who don't will expose themselves as coginfil agents and immediately be dismissed by the ones who do.

Wrong, one or two officers completely get it and school their peers while the people approve. Cops can be very lucid when they know they are absolutely correct in non stressful situations.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Cool.

You have to understand, with a lot of people, especially on this website, it's never "yes" or "no". It's always "Well..." and then three paragraphs later there still hasn't been an answer in the affirmative or the negative.

Don't worry, bud, you'll break through to people eventually.

Exactly!

[Christopher A. Brown]

Your only direct reply to me was #91. One whole sentence.

You already admitted on another thread that you dropped out of school at 8th grade.

It's hard to find a relative, coherent, intact sentence to reply to. Let alone seeing that more than one is copied and pasted or selected properly while working on a phone.

You can't find that admission because it doesn't exist.

I was permanently expelled from the Santa Barbara County high school system in the 3rd month of 8th grade for telling off a teacher. I did it far too well, no yelling, no cussing, just facts, observations of her psychological abuses and failures as a teacher for 3 months. She left the classroom in tears.

The class loved it because they watched her try and provoke me for 3 months. The school admins were very threatened by it and could not have me becoming a default leader.

I wish you would have answered the question. As close as you got was composing a malformed question in reply.


My only question, to simplify it for you, is that if you understand the "possible" greater purpose, how do you know they won't use "alter or abolish" to change the greater purpose?

Apples and oranges.

Alter or abolish addresses what we do to government destructive to unalienable rights.

The greater purpose of free speech is that practice of it creates understanding which leads to; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Or it enables the unity needed to alter or abolish.

You have things quite confused, at least you have most of the pieces. Happy to get it straightened out for you:-)

[wizardwatson]

It's had to find a relative, coherent intact sentence to reply too. Let alone

seeing that more than one is copied and pasted or selected properly on a phone.

You can't find that admission because it doesn't exist.

I was permanently expelled from the Santa Barbara a County high school system in the 3rd month of 8th grade for

telling off a teacher. I did it far too well, no yelling, no cussing, just facts, observations of her psychological

abuses and failures as a teacher for 3 months.

The class loved it. The school admins were very threatened by it and could not have me becoming a default leader.

I wish you would have answered the question. As close as you got was composing a malformed question.

Ugh, you apparently still are under the impression that you have some kind of advantage. You are outgunned, dude.

The admission does exist. Excuse me for saying "dropped out" instead of expelled.


You really are deeply conditioned by the system, and probably graduated high

school where the social conditioning got you all programming into thinking like a socialist. I was such a rebel, I

was permanently expelled from the Santa Barbara high school system in 8th grade and have not been back.

source thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?473730-Constitutional-Intent-Baltimore-thread-

split&p=5855617&viewfull=1#post5855617

So yes, you didn't 'admit' to dropping out. But the point was only that you didn't have a formal education.


Apples and oranges.

Alter or abolish addresses what we do to government destructive to unalienable rights.

The greater purpose is that understanding leads to; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship

and love protecting life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Or it enables the unity needed to alter or abolish.

You have things quite confused,

Or maybe you are confused.

I'm simply asking that what if people don't think the greater purpose is forgiveness, tolerance, love, etc? Couldn't they alter or abolish to support hate and evil instead?

In other words, what is the SOURCE of the morality? How do we determine the greater purpose? I guess maybe I'm trying to understand how exactly the "leads to" mechanism works.

As far as the mystical stuff, you've made it clear that while you claim to be an expert and understand it, you do not wish to discuss it with me. Which is your choice. I may just have to find someone who is willing.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Ugh, you apparently still are under the impression that you have some kind of advantage. You are outgunned, dude.

I'm simply asking that what if people don't think the greater purpose is forgiveness, tolerance, love, etc? Couldn't they alter or abolish to support hate and evil instead?

In other words, what is the SOURCE of the morality? How do we determine the greater purpose? I guess maybe I'm trying to understand how exactly the "leads to" mechanism works.

Okay, you have a keyboard and can type fast. That I'll admit:-)

People would have to come up with some alternative that they can agree upon. They haven't and won't.

God is love and the source of morality, sheesh, you of all people should know that well. Hint = natural law.

We determine the greater purpose by shutting off corporate entertainment and then use our own survival and evolution in discussion as entertainment. Can you think of anything better that excludes those?:-)

[wizardwatson]

Okay, you have a keyboard and can type fast. That I'll admit:-)

People would have to come up with some alternative that they can agree upon. They haven't and won't.

God is love and the source of morality, sheesh, you of all people should know that well. Hint = natural law.

We determine the greater purpose by shutting off corporate entertainment and then use our own survival and evolution in discussion as entertainment. Can you think of anything better that excludes those?:-)

That God is love is spoken in the New Testament. You are using the words of the apostles. Do you also agree that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that only through him can mankind be saved?

Ultimately, that is the primary question. You see, while you're system you've developed is quite clever, there is already a system in place which is designed to save mankind. That system was put in place by the Creator of the universe.

So natural law is simply the law that is written on our hearts.


Jeremiah 31 33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

And the cornerstone, the center of this nexus is the Lord Jesus Christ himself.


Matthew 5 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

So although I have agreed with the Founders intent, I made it quite clear that it wasn't my intent. Because my intent is not to pretend that anyone but the Lord is in control of things.

[wizardwatson]

Okay, you have a keyboard and can type fast. That I'll admit:-)

People would have to come up with some alternative that they can agree upon. They haven't and won't.

God is love and the source of morality, sheesh, you of all people should know that well. Hint = natural law.

We determine the greater purpose by shutting off corporate entertainment and then use our own survival and evolution in discussion as entertainment. Can you think of anything better that excludes those?:-)

So your "litmus test", has a corresponding version as relates to being a Christian.


1 John 4 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. 5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. 6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

Now, it's clear to me that you do not. Which means the spirit of the anti-christ needs to be removed from you. I was trying to do that. You resisted the process.

I am the keeper of the gates of this temple. Last man standing so to speak. You can play around here with all the other evil spirits if you'd like, but I doubt you will make any progress. This is a Christian movement at root.

[wizardwatson]

Do you recognize that most of the posters taking part in this particular topic are facetious in their actions and are simply utilizing you as a practice dummy with which to sharpen their supposed wits in an attempt to shred you down and discover your true intentions and possibly your true reason for creating this topic and posing these tough questions in increasingly elaborately worded and confusing ways that make the questions themselves difficult to answer?

Is this reply supposed to be ironic?

Because it is.

[Christopher A. Brown]

You see, while you're system you've developed is quite clever, there is already a system in place which is designed to save mankind. That system was put in place by the Creator of the universe.

You are mistaken in thinking I claim to have developed the system for unity and government I'm trying to promote.

Firstly, the framers of the founding documents created the system of the peoples control over government I seek to inform people of and invoke.

Secondly they learned of the greater purpose of free speech from the first people of this land. The belief systems of the colonists destroyed their civilization and now is destroying the descendants of colonists.

Notice the greater meaning of free speech is not in the first amendment. The belief systems of the colonists would not allow it, which is why freedom of religion is mentioned first. The greater meaning of free speech was seen to compete with those belief systems which under the more recent fears of crusade and inquisition then controlled a majority of the powerful people. Thusly religion was placed before freedom of speech and the greater meaning was not only left out, it was COMPLETELY REMOVED from written history.

Today, not only can Americans not unify, they cannot believe the needed unity to restore the republic the framers fashioned can be created.

That is how well the belief systems of religion have worked.

Whereas the practices of the first people derived from the creator very directly; via their acceptance of and capacity to work with their unconscious existence; to develop the understanding to create the greater meaning of free speech as a doctrine of civility that supports survival and evolution by nurturing the process of understanding itself, has survived and tries to return.

It is only through that capacity, despite remaining deeply suppressed, that the first people have managed to return the greater meaning of free speech through me, in the hopes that understanding and love can cause a return of a respect for the practice leading to understanding adequate to protect life on this planet.

So that system the creator put in place is our spirit of working together to survive and it is trying, free of dogmatic adhesion, to work.

To combine these things again, the system of creating understanding is needed to enable the unity required to effectively alter or abolish the corrupted government becoming destructive to our unalienable rights.

[Christopher A. Brown]

What this means is that less truth propagates in the dark. Because in the dark people are less willing to attack a lie for fear of persecution, and more willing to tell lies for the love of pride.

The metaphors of dark and light need to be consistent with historical uses, convention, rather than used as labels subject to distorted meanings.

Light means something can be seen, dark means it cannot.

So what is said is that people who do not have information, because it is hidden, are subject to fear which weakens them. Weakened because they do not understand, they do not have enough information for that.

The word "pride" is being used in the paragraph as a metaphor of what is really response to social fears that are operated on unconsciously due to childhood conditioning and that which occurs later.

I have a hard time imagining how the confusion propagated to ask the following.


In other words, what is the SOURCE of the morality? How do we determine the greater purpose?

Again, apples and oranges.

The source of morality is love and understanding from natural sources, our instincts, as God rendered them over the vastness of time. The purpose was that we have a guide for survival and evolution towards the eternal.

[wizardwatson]

You are mistaken in thinking I claim to have developed the system for unity and government I'm trying to promote.

Firstly, the framers of the founding documents created the system of the peoples control over government I seek to inform people of and invoke.

Secondly they learned of the greater purpose of free speech from the first people of this land. The belief systems of the colonists destroyed their civilization and now is destroying the descendants of colonists.

Notice the greater meaning of free speech is not in the first amendment. The belief systems of the colonists would not allow it, which is why freedom of religion is mentioned first. The greater meaning of free speech was seen to compete with those belief systems which under the more recent fears of crusade and inquisition then controlled a majority of the powerful people. Thusly religion was placed before freedom of speech and the greater meaning was not only left out, it was COMPLETELY REMOVED from written history.

Today, not only can Americans not unify, they cannot believe the needed unity to restore the republic the framers fashioned can be created.

That is how well the belief systems of religion have worked.

Whereas the practices of the first people derived from the creator very directly; via their acceptance of and capacity to work with their unconscious existence; to develop the understanding to create the greater meaning of free speech as a doctrine of civility that supports survival and evolution by nurturing the process of understanding itself, has survived and tries to return.

It is only through that capacity, despite remaining deeply suppressed, that the first people have managed to return the greater meaning of free speech through me, in the hopes that understanding and love can cause a return of a respect for the practice leading to understanding adequate to protect life on this planet.

So that system the creator put in place is our spirit of working together to survive and it is trying, free of dogmatic adhesion, to work.

To combine these things again, the system of creating understanding is needed to enable the unity required to effectively alter or abolish the corrupted government becoming destructive to our unalienable rights.

Well, I'll admit, this is a lot more straightforward. But all we've really established is that we have a serious point of disagreement on a very fundamental level. We both agree with the Founders intent, but we both disagree about where it all went wrong. You say it's because dogmatic adhesion was in the way, I say it's because the people forgot God and turned from his ways.

So essentially you say the problem is because of abandoning the wisdom of the "First People".

I say it's from abandoning the laws of the God of Abraham.

Just want to point out here that the laws of the God of Abraham are public knowledge while your hypnosis based cryptology is shrouded in mystery and purposefully hidden for unknown reasons.

How exactly do we resolve this? There's no way in a thousand years as far as I'm concerned that I'd abandon my faith, what is to be done with me and the many others who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? How can we coexist?

[Christopher A. Brown]

Well, I'll admit, this is a lot more straightforward. But all we've really established is that we have a serious point of disagreement on a very fundamental level. We both agree with the Founders intent, but we both disagree about where it all went wrong. You say it's because dogmatic adhesion was in the way, I say it's because the people forgot God and turned from his ways.

So essentially you say the problem is because of abandoning the wisdom of the "First People".

I say it's from abandoning the laws of the God of Abraham.

How exactly do we resolve this? There's no way in a thousand years as far as I'm concerned that I'd abandon my faith, what is to be done with me and the many others who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? How can we coexist?

If the leadership that removed the greater meaning of free speech knew in the beginning, why did they or anyone abandon laws of God?

Then, minimizing the proper term of "destroying the first people and removing the greater meaning of free speech" lacks fidelity to understanding, tending to occlude, to obscure, to darken the truth.

But, to be fair, the worst of that happened occurred after the civil war when crusaders took over the federal government. Keeping that distinct difference present is important to both of our positions.

There is no need to abandon your beliefs, but there is a need to recognize the natural law underlying them in terms free of dogma that allow understanding.

[wizardwatson]

The metaphors of dark and light need to be consistent with historical uses, convention, rather than used as labels subject to distorted meanings.

Light means something can be seen, dark means it cannot.

So what is said is that people who do not have information, because it is hidden, are subject to fear which weakens them. Weakened because they do not understand, they do not have enough information for that.

The word "pride" is being used in the paragraph as a metaphor of what is really response to social fears that are operated on unconsciously due to childhood conditioning and that which occurs later.

Why take something I said that's simple and make it more complex? Why not simplify it further.

People gossip and talk about others when no one is looking. Aggression enhancing.
People are more willing to give into gossip when their small group is doing it. Peer pressure. Won't attack what they know is a lie.
People are more willing to boast when there's no one to contradict and peer pressure rules the group. Love of pride.

So it's always better to promote social unity in the open. Secret groups within the group break it down. Even if the "group" is a nebulous set of rule based behavior designed to inhibit unity as you describe.

[wizardwatson]

I have a hard time imagining how the confusion propagated to ask the following.


In other words, what is the SOURCE of the morality? How do we determine the greater purpose?

Again, apples and oranges.

The source of morality is love and understanding from natural sources, our instincts, as God rendered them over the vastness of time. The purpose was that we have a guide for survival and evolution towards the eternal.

It's very simple why there is confusion. You are blaspheming the name of God, consistently. You keep saying God is like this and this and this.

There is only one God. And there is no one with him. And this God sent his Son into the world.

You don't believe that.

So who is this God you speak of?

Because it isn't the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Why take something I said that's simple and make it more complex? Why not simplify it further.


Cognitive distortions, labels, are only functional when used within a framework of understanding.

Simplification at the expense of accuracy is not worth it.

Here is a list of cognitive distortions for later reference.

COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS

1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories. If things are less than perfect self is viewed as failure

2. Over generalization: Single event is viewed as continuous failure.

3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.

4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.

5. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.

6. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established

7. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.

8. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation. ie.

9. "Should" statements: Self imposed rules about behavior creating guilt at self inability to adhere and anger at others in their inability to conform to self's rules.

10. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.

11. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.

12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

[wizardwatson]

Cognitive distortions, labels, are only functional when used within a framework of understanding.

Simplification at the expense of accuracy is not worth it.

Here is a list of cognitive distortions for later reference.

COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS

1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories. If things are less than perfect self is viewed as failure

2. Over generalization: Single event is viewed as continuous failure.

3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.

4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.

5. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.

6. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established

7. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.

8. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation. ie.

9. "Should" statements: Self imposed rules about behavior creating guilt at self inability to adhere and anger at others in their inability to conform to self's rules.

10. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.

11. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.

12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

God = Creator of Universe, God of Bible, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Holy One of Israel, Father of Lord Jesus Christ

Is that accurate enough?

When you use the label God, what do you mean? I don't think I'm the one distorting or being inaccurate here. At least not on the very important matter of God.

[Ender]

Cognitive distortions, labels, are only functional when used within a framework of understanding.

Simplification at the expense of accuracy is not worth it.

Here is a list of cognitive distortions for later reference.

COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS

1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories. If things are less than perfect self is viewed as failure

2. Over generalization: Single event is viewed as continuous failure.

3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.

4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.

5. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.

6. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established

7. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.

8. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation. ie.

9. "Should" statements: Self imposed rules about behavior creating guilt at self inability to adhere and anger at others in their inability to conform to self's rules.

10. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.

11. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.

12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

WRONG.

Over talking/explaining/rambling and pontification distort ALL messages.

Try the KISS principle: Keep It Simple Stupid

You will be amazed at how much more understanding and support you will get.

[Christopher A. Brown]

WRONG.

Over talking/explaining/rambling and pontification distort ALL messages.

Try the KISS principle: Keep It Simple Stupid

You will be amazed at how much more understanding and support you will get.

That's the NWO formula, they do not want understanding.

Judicious and proper use of cognitive distortions prevents an immense amount of "Over talking/explaining/rambling and pontification" because things cannot always be simplified in the language we use.

Most things after being understood, appear simpler.

If this is not true, apply your understanding to simply restate complexity you object to.

[wizardwatson]

That's the NWO formula, they do not want understanding.

Judicious and proper use of cognitive distortions prevents an immense amount of "Over talking/explaining/rambling and pontification" because things cannot always be simplified in the language we use.

Most things after being understood, appear simpler.

If this is not true, apply your understanding to simply restate complexity you object to.

Which cognitive distortion am I using by asking you who God is? You want to use that label but everyone knows that when you say God, you're talking about Jesus' Father. Do you believe that the God of Abraham is a lie?

[wizardwatson]

That's the NWO formula, they do not want understanding.

Judicious and proper use of cognitive distortions prevents an immense amount of "Over talking/explaining/rambling and pontification" because things cannot always be simplified in the language we use.

Most things after being understood, appear simpler.

If this is not true, apply your understanding to simply restate complexity you object to.

In fact let me be even more clear. There is no basis for moral law other than revealed law. Morals are commands of God. They are "written on our hearts". When we disobey we are punished. When we obey we are blessed. Pretty simple.

If you don't believe in God, then what is the basis of your morals? You can't keep saying "God" created them without defining what God you are talking about. This is not complicated.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Which cognitive distortion am I using by asking you who God is?

Well, the term "who" distorts by framing the question as a entity who can be described with a single name eternally recognized. That's a distorted notion leading to huge problems.

Whereas the terms, "what God is" can describe with no alienation over time and does not have to be complete as long as it is applied to an individual
perceptions.

[wizardwatson]

Well, the term "who" distorts by framing the question as a entity who can be described with a single name eternally recognized. That's a distorted notion leading to huge problems.

Whereas the terms, "what God is" can describe with no alienation over time and does not have to be complete as long as it is applied to an individual
perceptions.

See, this will not do, friend. I'm being ultra-specific. The "God of the Bible". Who walked with Abraham. Whose image we are made in.

That means he walks and talks and has arms and legs. He walked in the Garden of Eden. He walked by Moses on Mt. Sinai. He is a conscious living breathing entity.

He has very specific names.

Now, you can either say you do believe or you don't believe. Clearly, you don't believe but you are having trouble saying it. Is it because you are worried that here in the temple known as Ron Paul Forums that some lurking Christian isn't going to see you as a leader or something if you disagree that the God of Abraham is the one true God?

God is a "who", not an "it".

He CAN be described by a name eternally recognized.


Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Everlasting Father

The Everlasting Father is so in tune with people's attempts to deny Him he put "Everlasting" right into one of His eternally recognized names.

[Christopher A. Brown]

Most important is that this thread remain on topic.

A lawful and peaceful revolution is in all likelihood the only thing that will preserve our unalienable rights and comprehensively protect our collective futures,

So far there has no coherent opposition to the interpretation of the framing documents as having an intent to empower us to alter or abolish.

Or that obviously the framers intended for us to have the power over government to do so. That extends to a de facto acceptance that our unity provides that power.

Finally, the logic that freedom of speech is ultimately intended to enable unity adequate to alter or abolish is unchallenged with any coherent reasoning.

Therein it is established that the first amendment has a very serious deficiency which is easily related to our current dilemma and political confusion.

[Christopher A. Brown]

See, this will not do, friend.

That is correct because the thread is going off topic. For clarity, a little is okay, but that's it.

Unity needs to work on commonality that can be consciously apprehended and my last post outlines that.

[wizardwatson]

That is correct because the thread is going off topic. For clarity, a little is okay, but that's it.

Unity needs to work on commonality that can be consciously apprehended and my last post outlines that.

Hahahaha!

Snapping your fingers at me, old man? Where's all that peace and love and understanding? Am I stepping on your toes?

I don't step on toes, I step on necks. Hehe. That's a Chuck Norris quote. But you know what? That whole myth about Chuck Norris? Him being bad ass and all. Guess what? Bruce Lee KICKED HIS EVERLOVIN' ASS.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYHZEu7Y7DU

Don't know why I pointed that out. Oh, yeah I do...anyway, I digress.

....

You see, children? This is the respect I get for being here 8 long years.

Nada enchilada.

Coming in sheeps clothing talking of love and peace and freedom and when they get pressed for integrity they start bossing around.

Another statist coming into the temple to devour the remnant of Jacob.

....

Chris, since, your time has now ended in the temple. Let me recap the general course of events:

Starting on this post from another thread...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?476045-Rebooting-the-constitution-and-starting-a-micronation&p=5927188&viewfull=1#post5927188

...I said...


He's Back!

...and then Chris said...


How about you? I know I've asked before, but its good the lurkers see your group

in action.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government

destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter

or abolish?

...and then I said...


You, know. I actually do agree with those two statements.

What's your point?

I prefer 'inalienable' by the way, but tomato tomato.

...and then Chris said...


That makes you educated and capable of critical thinking relating to your

education about the framing documents and their basic intents. Unlike most members here.

You've gained more credibility than you may realize in my opinion, if that matters.

"Unalienable" is more accurate according to legal terms. Your rights cannot be "Liened". I do believe they mean the

same basic things but the legal origins of "unalienable" probably apply more directly because that is exactly the

termed used in the Declaration of Independence.

My point is that covert cognitive infiltrators cannot make that agreement and accept those principles because it

goes directly against their agenda of preventing unity. Now I know you are a sincere American. There is no

other way to tell in this medium.

...and then I said...


I'm not sure how you know that I'm a sincere American.

The statement I said I agree with is about the framers, not me.

The statement says "do you agree the framers intended". I didn't say I was on their side.

But you seem lonely. I'll be in your club.

So I joined your club. And all you've done since then is try to Lord over me, blasphemed to curry favor (don't know what the hell you were thinking there), simultaneously say I'm the only one who ever "got it" while also accusing me of cognitive infiltration or whatever at the same time when I try to get clarification, and you like so many here won't agree to define simple words like what you mean when you say "God" or "Liberty".

So guess what? As rare as this meeting was. As long as it's been since I tried to work with someone or had faith in someone, I have no attachment to you. You will not deny God, nor will you accept Him. Therefore, you have some spirit in you that claims the realm of spirituality but denies the true source. This is the spirit of the anti-christ.

Not saying you are the anti-christ, as like a specific entity, but you are extremely dangerous from a mystic point of view as far as I'm concerned.

You are not in the temple of your own accord. You are here because the Lord let you in here. And now you are cast out. I don't care if another seeker doesn't come along for 1000 years. I will not bend the laws of God for your serpentine idea of love and peace and understanding. My faith was forged in the fires of affliction, not in some sorcerers hypnotic trance.

I have no doubt that the religion of the beast and the anti-christ will come from some "Native people's" idea of religion. That's why I'm so careful discussing this with you. The God of Abraham saw fit to warn us. This psychobabble you spew is nothing but demonic puppetry that's ultimately for the glory of the Lord.

I mean, seriously, read this as a sane person who has absolutely no spiritual belief or opinions...


Whereas the practices of the first people derived from the creator very directly; via their acceptance of and capacity to work with their unconscious existence; to develop the understanding to create the greater meaning of free speech as a doctrine of civility that supports survival and evolution by nurturing the process of understanding itself, has survived and tries to return.

It is only through that capacity, despite remaining deeply suppressed, that the first people have managed to return the greater meaning of free speech through me, in the hopes that understanding and love can cause a return of a respect for the practice leading to understanding adequate to protect life on this planet.

So Chris is the savior of the world? Do you have any idea the red flags this sets off for a true Christian?

You don't even understand that the God of Abraham made the evil!!! Because the mysteries are blocked for you.

I leave your "club", and I cast you out of the temple. I am the master of this domain. You and your kind have no power here. This place is won for Christ. I will pray to the Spirit to remove whatever evil you have brought here.


For all you Christian lurkers, behold the cleverness we will have to deal with very shortly. This is why it is written....


Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 25 Behold, I have told you before.

Come quickly, Lord Jesus.

To all the Christians out there...

I did learn something from him. That all of these things concerning us must be done in the light. We must speak openly in the light. If we agree to talk behind closed doors they have their way with us. I encourage any true seekers after the Kingdom of God to click the "Red Pill" link in my signature, and have a look at the Shemitah thread. The time is short and you will learn a lot of important stuff that could not only help you but others understand as well..

Love you guys.

...

Bye, Chris!!! You're going to have to find some water from somewhere else..here's an idea...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Prc1UfuokY

Does no one remember? I mean, it doesn't surprise me that the usurpers that walk around here don't see me, but does no one remember the old days? Why am only I standing up to this gobbledy-gook?

[Christopher A. Brown]

Actually all I've been trying to do is to keep the thread on topic. Your perceptions are probably tilted from my inability to follow your religious focus, which has almost nothing to do with the topic. Only in that the agreement the lawful and peaceful revolution is based in is commonly held natural law, and that is not religious, it's spiritual.

Our commonality as Americans needs to be unconditionally based in our acceptance of prime constitutional intent as serving us and those we love. Hopefully you can find your way back to that.

[wizardwatson]

Actually all I've been trying to do is to keep the thread on topic. Your perceptions are probably tilted from my inability to follow your religious focus, which has almost nothing to do with the topic. Only in that the agreement the lawful and peaceful revolution is based in is commonly held natural law, and that is not religious, thats spiritual.

Our commonality as Americans needs to be unconditionally based in our acceptance of prime constitutional intent as serving us and those we love. Hopefully you can find your way back to that.

Juxtaposition "religious" with "spiritual" to refute me?

Is this intellectual limbo we're playing now?

How low can you go?

I've cast you out. You are unworthy to drink from the fountain.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCTPyEI0sxw

Do not pass go, do not collect $200

I do think you understand how I feel about animal skin wearing Natives. Educate yourself.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj1wcs7SZj0

Thanks for the free parking.

[Christopher A. Brown]

The deep and lasting beauty of our lawful and peaceful revolution is that we end up with the purpose of free speech serving us.

Since that purpose has never existed in our modern world, even that world where printing presses were common, we really do not know to what extent it can serve us. In this post I detail what leads to states legislations becoming purified by the states citizens grasp of constitutional intent and where the ending of the abridging of free speech can go.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution&p=5932141&viewfull=1#post5932141

After that, when 38 states are holding conventions in them, proposing amendments to the constitution. A natural and absolutely priority will establish. That priority will center on constitutional intent. That is the point where "Preparatory Amendment" becomes the only clear set of amendments that DO have constitutional intent.

1) End the abridging of the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech.
2) Secure the vote.
3) Campaign finance reform.

It is pretty clear that Article V has a democratic streak running through it. It is fairly well recognized that some amendments should have states voters determining ratifications, either directly or indirectly through the preliminary legislative evaluations of proposals. Standard existing direct democracy online would be good for this with a concluding official ballot vote to make it official.

Since an Article V convention has not happened in 226 years, when it should have 100 years ago, this is a clear sign that MORE democratic ratification should occur rather than less.

Back to "Preparatory Amendment":
At a point states begin to address HOW to end the abridging of free speech. This really should become sort of a televised debate so that the process of removal of the "Greater Meaning of Free Speech" from our written history is appreciated. I mean that is REALLY dark, bad thing to do, because the "Greater Meaning of Free Speech" is a very beautiful thing that absolutely supports human survival. And, since ecosystems potential to support life are measured by the abundance of natural life in them, it supports all living things.

So that televised debate can have some of the original signers of the petition to states legislators speaking, debating HOW to best amend and end the abridging.

I feel that simply revising the 1st Amendment is the obvious way because unalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence needs to be included in the 1st Amendment because that is what the purpose of free speech is about, protecting those vital rights.

One thing that is important is to maintain the same spirit of adaptability that the current 1st Amendment has. I feel my draft does that. The bolded portion is key to that.

REV. Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Congress shall see that nothing abridges the freedom of speech and the primary methods or systems of it shall not be abridged and be first accessible for the purpose of the unity of the people in order to alter or abolish government destructive to their unalienable rights, or with its possible greater meaning through understanding one another in; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Congress shall see that nothing abridges freedom of the press in its service to the unity of the people; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances or defense of this constitution.

The "the primary methods or systems of it" is the phrase that meets the criteria.

Those systems obviously includes TV and radio, but also the internet, because it is a vital two way medium where the ordinary person can express their opinions.
This would return the usenet to the people as it was funded to be the global village of opinions.

But what sorts those opinions when they count in the millions?

There I have an idea, a very powerful idea. The idea is to develop forum software that allows the public using it to rate their own opinions AND, automatically make the highest rated opinion on a given subject the FIRST opinion seen.

Now, this software not only rates opinions on given topics, it can also be designed to rate the topics according to relative importance within ALL the topics.

This software is fully doable, and an anonymous member took it in 2012 to a major software producer to get an opinion on the concept. The question the software producer was hit with was, "Can this software be written?", then, "Will your company write it". It's concept and basic functions or code requirements are communicated on a 2 page .pdf. The CEO of this company spent about 10 minutes reading, and thinking, then said.
"Yes, we could write this software, but this company is not going to be the company that puts the public in dominance over corporations."

Of course anonymous and myself were stating that as a goal for the software, so we might of shot ourselves in the foot by saying so, but I feel the CEO would have figured that out without it being stated and said the same thing. After all, such intentions and issues with corporations and that organizations like anonymous and others oppose what they are doing is common knowledge.

So that is one contribution I have to the functionality of the "primary methods or systems of" free speech that is very tangible. And, if developed, it will be nothing short of revolutionizing web forums. At the same time, each independent subject on web forums will become a knowledge base upon that subject that will be accessible and for the most part, already be refined when we go to seek the needed information.

When it comes to the BIOLOGICAL purpose of free speech, "That information vital to survival be shared and understood", this forum software proposal will EXCELL! Suddenly, the issue of educating the public and making up for the last 100 years of dumbing down and corporate manipulation sequestering technologies can be well recovered from.

There is a really bright future for humanity if we can agree upon our purposes here, and how to make sure corrupt government NEVER gets in the way again, and is completely subdued to the level of a very informative, perhaps scary soap opera:-) And I do recommend we keep the corruption alive in theatre. We allow it to express itself in a harmless arena, and respect the terrifying potentials which are currently threatening us, just so we do not forget how bad it can get.

[wizardwatson]

Wanted to say, I was actually impressed by your mechanic. I first pegged you as an irrational actor. After understanding your litmus test it makes sense. It's very clever, actually. And you did it in the ideal place and it worked. to structure our communication?


Hahahaha!

Snapping your fingers at me, old man? Where's all that peace and love and understanding? Am I stepping on your toes?

I don't step on toes, I step on necks.

I leave your "club", and I cast you out of the temple. I am the master of this domain. You and your kind have no power here. This place is won for Christ. I will pray to the Spirit to remove whatever evil you have brought here.

Bye, Chris!!! You're going to have to find some water from somewhere else..here's an idea...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Prc1UfuokY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh7tgX_Uaqs

It really did, didn't it.

What can I say, I work fast.

[Christopher A. Brown]

One of the most powerful aspects of the revision of the 1st amendment drafted is the inclusion of purposes that the federal government must support which compliment the prohibitions of the constitution and Bill of a Rights.

The bolded portion is the specific part this post will explain.

REV. Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Congress shall see that nothing abridges the freedom of speech and the primary methods or systems of it shall not be abridged and be first accessible for the purpose of the unity of the people in order to alter or abolish government destructive to their unalienable rights, or with its possible greater meaning through understanding one another in; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Congress shall see that nothing abridges freedom of the press in its service to the unity of the people; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances or defense of this constitution.

What this part does;
"with its possible greater meaning through understanding one another in; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Is define speech which government must support if it is shown such specific speech seeking support is not found or cannot be made widely known while also vital to the defense or protection of unalienable rights.

There are concepts in our world; which is a product of dynamic coercions extending back thousands of years; which cannot be shared, that must be shared, or our adaptations will not be adequate and our survival not assured.

Our collective agreement, our constitution needs to reflect and empower the ability to share that which IS needed for survival. Some of those adaptations cannot be implemented at the last minute, they require preparation and considerable foresight by the entire public.

Accordingly, "through understanding one another" that absolute of adaptation can be found. Often the discoveries of need require "forgiveness" and "tolerance" to get past unreasonable objections of history to find the "acceptance" and "respect" for the need to change and adapt in certain ways.

The oppressive social elements that would try and control us, therein preventing our adaptation, causing our extinction have endeavored to create unreasonable fears and rejection preventing the "trust" and "friendship" needed to protect the continuity of life which we "love", for perpetuity.

That reasoning is what provides the lawful justification for the economic imposition upon major communication corporations that sees quality documentary type educational productions that are positioned in time and place to be seen by a maximum number of people.

This is already happening with PBS and NPR to a degree, but there is far too much control by non profit type corporations that are created to exclude certain information that might impede the infiltrated governments agenda that is eventually directed at tyranny. Logically, those economic burdens would be removed, and replaced wit more functional burdens.

Curiously, there is nothing inherently bad with corporations. It is the inception and intent of those creating them that cause them to be as destructive and onerous to independence and freedom as they are. Their current operation is at least thrice removed from service to living things. One, profits at any expense to the environment, two empowerment of behaviors that are destructive to the environment. Third, because the PURPOSE of free speech is abridged, the behaviors of one and two can be glorified, promoted and honored without any reason from the peoples of the public having any way to compete.

With the current structure of capitalism, wherein no doctrine of philosophically, lawfully correct direction can be created, assuring our survival AND our evolution into excellence as yet unforeseen or defined, is inhibited if not PROHIBITED because such activity can be made to be seen as limiting profits.
Materialism is promoted as the ultimate experience in life, which is a perspective serving consumerism, profits and environmental destruction.

Since human beings have needs, which are based in materialism, such a fact is easily misrepresented by corporations who ignore the massive spiritual benefits of ACTUALLY protecting the lives of future generations by reasonable sacrifices in our material existences.

[Christopher A. Brown]

The key to our lawful revolution lies within restoring the purpose of free speech. With that we can educate ourselves, create an informed opinion and democratically direct our government within the principles of the republic.

However, another prime aspect which needs to be addressed in preparation for Article V is securing the vote.

Something like this would be proposed to be integrated into all states laws by the states ratifying the amendment requiring states to keep voting records in a manner which allows the public to cross check and monitor the tallying of votes. In research I found that the method of voting is not in such question.

One thing is identification. State identification should be adequate.
Voter verification, or addressing reports of non qualified voters needs looking at, such as registering pets to vote, deceased people, etc.

One suggestion that makes sense is that the most secure ballot is one with the selection circled by the voter. OCR software can be created to recognize repeated ballots with the same circle around the voters selections. The punch hole system apparently has been shown to be used in fraud.

The most vocal critics of vote security indicate that the counting and tallying of votes is the weakest area. This proposal addresses that and makes all of the data redundant which allows cross checks by the public.

HERE IS THE COMMON PRACTICE OF TALLYING VOTES:
Each county registrar collects ballots in whatever way they do. The public can usually observe the counts in some way. What I've learned from research, is that critics indicate the initial counting part is not the major problem, I agree. This is a suggested procedure that could create accountability in the tally process after the initial count.

PROCESS:
The county takes the numbers and uploads them along perhaps with a database that may work with a spreadsheet type environment. OR, could be made to so the public could download the database and check it.

Three levels of database are needed; county, state and federal.

If duplicate servers for each state were in other states. So when one county of one state uploads their voter data, all of the other states get copies all at once. A second file formate that cannot be altered is created so that the raw files can be checked against it. This makes it so the public software can be used by the public to check the raw files veracity before they run a check on the county and states files or uses of final digital tallies.

The server access records for uploads are also available to the public from all servers mentioned in this proposal, so they can see counties and states uploading activity. Any changes would be recorded.

Then the state totals the counties votes electronically and uploads their total to the nations servers in another database of the state total votes that is on federal servers, which also have copies of each counties, and states totals.

The federal government has no votes of its own to count and only counts the total votes of the states counties. The FEC uses that database to count the votes.
_________

Some trials in a few states could determine any flaws in this system and perfect it prior to the process becoming law by amendment.

[wizardwatson]

There are 3 basics amendments needed to prepare the people for proper participation in Article V. They deal with opening up the peoples information systems for the peoples purposes.

Basically all informations systems are the peoples first. Without this, dark organizations of control contrary to survival and evolution can prolificate within them and people cannot counter the darkness. Even those living in the dark suffer eventually from that. They might not care, but people do.

The 3 amendments first end the abridging of the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech, then secure the vote and reform campaign finance.

Since revision of the 1st amendment us viewed with such great contention, I've written a draft of where I think it should go. The others might best be effected in ways I do not well know of within our systems so I haven't bothered to draft amendments there. Others who know those systems far better will produce the best results.

REV. Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Congress shall see that nothing abridges the freedom of speech and the primary methods or systems of it shall not be abridged and be first accessible for the purpose of the unity of the people in order to alter or abolish government destructive to their unalienable rights, or with its possible greater meaning through understanding one another in; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Congress shall see that nothing abridges freedom of the press in its service to the unity of the people; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances or defense of this constitution.

There is also proposed legislation for states created to become compliant. It uses state power over corporate licensure in states to compel broadcast networks to produce qualifying informations.

To qualify, a subject or information must be NOT widely available in its nature, or be so unknown that most people cannot come up with search terms. It also must be something that cannot be promoted within the average persons economic means on a scale justifying its relationship to common interests of defending vital rights.

A petition to a state legislator with a yet to be determined number of signatures which is then carried to a state Supreme Court for the production of a court order to the largest television broadcast corporation to produce a 1/2 hour or 2 hour production at current audience production standards. That is to be broadcast nationally on their network to prime time audiences for a yet to be determined number of times and repetitive schedule OR contingent upon testing of public awareness and understanding of the subject matter.



We enter into the mystical again, IF there is a collective unconscious. Is support the prime intents of the constitution, of Americans conscious AND unconscious the question? If so, the latter will be hard to measure. Your notes on the timing of your composition of post #5 and agreeing with the prime constitutional intent I've set forth is as good a measure of the latter as anything.

We now find again an area of mysticism and conspiracy.

A book titled "The Hundredth Monkey" is missing from our planet. The original was published in 1962 by 23 Japanese biologists with no marketing or publicity. It was replaced by a book of the same name in 1974 written by Ken Keyes. The original was only published in 2 printings of a total of 20k copies. The replacement was published in the millions and heavily publicized. Today people only know of the replacement, not if the original which was SCIENCE documenting dream state communication between primates on a remote South Pacific island.

The replacement marginalized the phenomena by associating it with a politically charged issue relating to nuclear weapons while completely leaving out the science,

I'm sure you will agree that a conspiracy doing such a thing is of the darkest possible intentions.

There is at least one copy left on the planet and I read it. Where it went, I don't know. I read it in 1988 and did not know its full
Importance until 1998. By then the person that compelled me (yes, compelled) to read it had forgotten they ever had it. Memory, it turns out, consistently plays a major role in our evolution. It is basically controlled from the unconscious mind and in the 3rd .pdf of those posted in your 9/11 thread you will find a concept I've developed and graphically positioned called the "resolute barrier" which I believe can or mostly controls our ability to remember things.

The basics I've come to understand from the reading of the original "hundredth monkey" which I returned a few days after to read a second time, realizing how profound the research was are as follows after integrating a number if other aspects into one, whole concept.

There are 2 states. Of consciousness for living things. both are collective AND individual. Mammals have a significantly greater individual existence as groups of different genera.

Humans collective conscious comprises waking state communications of ALL types. Human collective unconscious communications have 2 types. One is individual telepathic emission which may reach many perceivers, not all necessarily need to be present, and the other is dream state communication which may be global or universal depending on the importance of it to life in the universe, to God.

The original book was obviously removed to prevent humanity from being aware of dream state influences upon conscious waking state performance. The design was to influence humanity without it conscious awareness and essentially de evolve its conscious performance and make it more controlled centering material power within specific groups of people for their purposes.

I noticed your timetable of 2 millennia in the Rabbis writings, corresponding to the influence of Christ as well as Jewish events in the later 1960's that may correspond.

There are at least 2 significant scientists that read the original book and incorporate its information in speculative advancement of the potentials. One is Rupert Sheldrake and the other I shall find the name of an edit it in to this paragraph with some specifics after I re find the info.

Accordingly, I have no idea of how many supporters of the 2 prime constitutional intents there are. I have to assume, that naturally, unconsciously, because those intents are developed human social natural law, that a large percentage of the planets human beings are supporters.

The sacred task is to make that support conscious and active socially.

I could not even venture a hues as to how many conscious supporters there are. I would speculate there are very many. Most however are very likely wrestling with their resolute barrier and fears created by the same dark forces using dream state manipulation over time, as well as conscious collective manipulation, misinformation, misleading, corruptive influences etc., that removed the original book.

The prime dream state directive programmed into populations is, Thou shalt not be causal to change." That unconscious directive is socially reinforced in a myriad of different ways with unconscious conditioning of social fears.



I shall be truthful here. You are unique and the first to accept it with the full cognition you exhibit.


I thank God, and you!

Your cognitive capacities and spiritually positive focus are exceptional so I anticipate some very interesting correlations in the mystical realm related to 9/11 and your interpretations of the a Rabbis writings.



I do believe that there is an unconscious barrier to the support which exists unconsciously here and elsewhere. Since we are both cognitively addressing the constitutions intent as well as what support for it may exist, how it may exist, I can only surmise the barrier is breaking down.

Unconscious social fears assimilated at childhood control us all, with UNDERSTANDING all fears can be properly dealt with.

Your post #5 and the issue of "reputation" as well as the covert infiltrations group impositions of social fear structures invoking individual conditioning is certainly relevant to "how many" conscious supporters there are, or could be.



Was that the salon.com link on cognitive infiltration?

After I understood your "sincere agreement" tactic and tried to work with you, you showed your true colors and I broke our relationship off.

But since you continue attacking me and calling me a fear-monger (hilarious considering you are calling everyone an agent) and a liar and stupid, I want to remind you and everyone else what you said about me here in this thread in post #53 when I gave my assessment of your idea for unity.

This post, specifically the bolded, enlarged, red letters, will be my evidence for you being a liar when you say in some other thread that I am one to curry favor with the mob you have claimed ad infinitum is nothing but agents.

[Christopher A. Brown]

There are 3 basic amendments needed to prepare the people for proper participation in Article V. They deal with opening up the peoples information systems for the peoples purposes.

Basically all informations systems are the peoples first. Without this, dark organizations of control contrary to survival and evolution can prolificate within them and people cannot counter the darkness. Even those living in the dark suffer eventually from that. They might not care, but people do.

The 3 amendments first end the abridging of the ultimate PURPOSE of free speech, then secure the vote and reform campaign finance.

Since revision of the 1st amendment us viewed with such great contention, I've written a draft of where I think it should go. The others might best be effected in ways I do not well know of within our systems so I haven't bothered to draft amendments there. Others who know those systems far better will produce the best results.

REV. Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Congress shall see that nothing abridges the freedom of speech and the primary methods or systems of it shall not be abridged and be first accessible for the purpose of the unity of the people in order to alter or abolish government destructive to their unalienable rights, or with its possible greater meaning through understanding one another in; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Congress shall see that nothing abridges freedom of the press in its service to the unity of the people; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances or defense of this constitution.

There is also proposed legislation for states created to become compliant. It uses state power over corporate licensure in states to compel broadcast networks to produce qualifying informations.

To qualify, a subject or information must be NOT widely available in its nature, or be so unknown that most people cannot come up with search terms. It also must be something that cannot be promoted within the average persons economic means on a scale justifying its relationship to common interests of defending vital rights.

A petition to a state legislator with a yet to be determined number of signatures which is then carried to a state Supreme Court for the production of a court order to the largest television broadcast corporation to produce a 1/2 hour or 2 hour production at current audience production standards. That is to be broadcast nationally on their network to prime time audiences for a yet to be determined number of times and repetitive schedule OR contingent upon testing of public awareness and understanding of the subject matter.

We enter into the mystical again, IF there is a collective unconscious. Is support the prime intents of the constitution, of Americans conscious AND unconscious the question? If so, the latter will be hard to measure. Your notes on the timing of your composition of post #5 and agreeing with the prime constitutional intent I've set forth is as good a measure of the latter as anything.

We now find again an area of mysticism and conspiracy.

A book titled "The Hundredth Monkey" is missing from our planet. The original was published in 1962 by 23 Japanese biologists with no marketing or publicity. It was replaced by a book of the same name in 1974 written by Ken Keyes. The original was only published in 2 printings of a total of 20k copies. The replacement was published in the millions and heavily publicized. Today people only know of the replacement, not if the original which was SCIENCE documenting dream state communication between primates on a remote South Pacific island.

The replacement marginalized the phenomena by associating it with a politically charged issue relating to nuclear weapons while completely leaving out the science,

I'm sure you will agree that a conspiracy doing such a thing is of the darkest possible intentions.

There is at least one copy left on the planet and I read it. Where it went, I don't know. I read it in 1988 and did not know its full
Importance until 1998. By then the person that compelled me (yes, compelled) to read it had forgotten they ever had it. Memory, it turns out, consistently plays a major role in our evolution. It is basically controlled from the unconscious mind and in the 3rd .pdf of those posted in your 9/11 thread you will find a concept I've developed and graphically positioned called the "resolute barrier" which I believe can or mostly controls our ability to remember things.

The basics I've come to understand from the reading of the original "hundredth monkey" which I returned a few days after to read a second time, realizing how profound the research was are as follows after integrating a number if other aspects into one, whole concept.

There are 2 states. Of consciousness for living things. both are collective AND individual. Mammals have a significantly greater individual existence as groups of different genera.

Humans collective conscious comprises waking state communications of ALL types. Human collective unconscious communications have 2 types. One is individual telepathic emission which may reach many perceivers, not all necessarily need to be present, and the other is dream state communication which may be global or universal depending on the importance of it to life in the universe, to God.

The original book was obviously removed to prevent humanity from being aware of dream state influences upon conscious waking state performance. The design was to influence humanity without it conscious awareness and essentially de evolve its conscious performance and make it more controlled centering material power within specific groups of people for their purposes.

I noticed your timetable of 2 millennia in the Rabbis writings, corresponding to the influence of Christ as well as Jewish events in the later 1960's that may correspond.

There are at least 2 significant scientists that read the original book and incorporate its information in speculative advancement of the potentials. One is Rupert Sheldrake and the other I shall find the name of an edit it in to this paragraph with some specifics after I re find the info.

Accordingly, I have no idea of how many supporters of the 2 prime constitutional intents there are. I have to assume, that naturally, unconsciously, because those intents are developed human social natural law, that a large percentage of the planets human beings are supporters.

The sacred task is to make that support conscious and active socially.

I could not even venture a hues as to how many conscious supporters there are. I would speculate there are very many. Most however are very likely wrestling with their resolute barrier and fears created by the same dark forces using dream state manipulation over time, as well as conscious collective manipulation, misinformation, misleading, corruptive influences etc., that removed the original book.

The prime dream state directive programmed into populations is, Thou shalt not be causal to change." That unconscious directive is socially reinforced in a myriad of different ways with unconscious conditioning of social fears.

I shall be truthful here. You are unique and the first to accept it with the full cognition you exhibit.


I thank God, and you!

Your cognitive capacities and spiritually positive focus are exceptional so I anticipate some very interesting correlations in the mystical realm related to 9/11 and your interpretations of the a Rabbis writings.

I do believe that there is an unconscious barrier to the support which exists unconsciously here and elsewhere. Since we are both cognitively addressing the constitutions intent as well as what support for it may exist, how it may exist, I can only surmise the barrier is breaking down.

Unconscious social fears assimilated at childhood control us all, with UNDERSTANDING all fears can be properly dealt with.

Your post #5 and the issue of "reputation" as well as the covert infiltrations group impositions of social fear structures invoking individual conditioning is certainly relevant to "how many" conscious supporters there are, or could be.

Was that the salon.com link on cognitive infiltration?


After I understood your "sincere agreement" tactic and tried to work with you, you showed your true colors and I broke our relationship off.

But since you continue attacking me and calling me a fear-monger (hilarious considering you are calling everyone an agent) and a liar and stupid, I want to remind you and everyone else what you said about me here in this thread in post #53 when I gave my assessment of your idea for unity.

This post, specifically the bolded, enlarged, red letters, will be my evidence for you being a liar when you say in some other thread that I am one to curry favor with the mob you have claimed ad infinitum is nothing but agents.

Yep, you are unique, but not quite in the way I'd hoped.

Consistency in what we exhibit is vital to function. Uh, both are lacking in your behavior.

So what revelations have you come up with in your thread about the rabbis writings?

Calling people agents is not fear mongering. It is confrontational. Get your terms straight.

Actually I waited to start posting substance in the threads lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution) and alter or abolish by the "master of the congress of the court" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478049-Alter-or-Abolish-and-Control-of-the-States-How-The-Masters-Of-The-Congress-And-Courts-Work&highlight=alter+abolish) so I could demonstrate what functionality is rather than having to get involved with your adversarial act related to my non acceptance or outright inability to participate in your religiosity.

I have no way of knowing who is an agent and who is not except for seeking agreement upon something agents would never agree to. If people are doing what agents want done, how do I know they are NOT agents? Of course, some people are just whacked, even if they do agree with the framers relating to their intent to alter or abolish or the purpose of free speech.

But hey, you still are trying to do what the agents want done. So some people are just not predictable. I understand.

[wizardwatson]

Yep, you are unique, but not quite in the way I'd hoped.

Consistency in what we exhibit is vital to function. Uh, both are lacking in your behavior.

So what revelations have you come up with in your thread about the rabbis writings?

Calling people agents is not fear mongering. It is confrontational. Get your terms straight.

Actually I waited to start posting substance in the threads lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution) and alter or abolish by the "master of the congress of the court" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478049-Alter-or-Abolish-and-Control-of-the-States-How-The-Masters-Of-The-Congress-And-Courts-Work&highlight=alter+abolish) show I could demonstrate what functionality is rather than having to get involved with your adversarial act related to my non acceptance or outright inability to participate in your religiosity.

I have no way of knowing who is an agent and who is not except for seeking agreement upon something agents would never agree to. If people are doing what agents want done, how do I know they are NOT agents? Of course, some people are just whacked, even if the do agree with the framers relating to their intent to alter or abolish or the purpose of free speech.

But hey, you still are trying to do what the agents want done. So some people are just not predictable. I understand.

...

[Christopher A. Brown]

Clearly "Preparatory Amendment is the approach to a lawful and peaceful revolution.

The primary effect of ending the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech will have resounding effects that will perpetually benefit the people in assuring their unalienable rights are secure.

At each and every moment of significant change where a corrupted media or press would misrepresent, deprive or subvert the truth to the public, they will have a superior watching over them.

If any usurpations of the power of media and the press to do good, to protect unalienable rights with truth, ANY citizen who knows the truth, and it might possibly be just one, can get that truth before the nations people.

A good example can be found in 9/11 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471836-WTC-really-had-concrete-core-(split-thread)&p=5937028#post5937028). A good part of the nation knows that they do not know the truth. What they use instead is a generalization. "Inside job" typifies that generalization. The lack of detail explaining the event brings the assertion into question for any who fearfully, for whatever reason, believe the official version.

There is enough independently verifiable fact in truth which is available, but it cannot be shared with the masses. If it could, the masses would align to learn more. But the information cannot be shared.

[Christopher A. Brown]

As I endeavor to define the benefits and needs for preparatory amendment I learn quite a bit about the 2 preparations I advocate, but do not know a great deal about.

Of course I've understood that campaign finance reform is intrinsically related to the PURPOSE of free speech, but I had not expected the convolutions I have found.

A well written paper on citizens united was one of the most straight forward that was found. Here is an excerpt.

http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-myth-of-campaign-finance-reform

WORSE THAN THE DISEASE

As Madison understood, some people will always try to use government for their private aims. But with the Madisonian restraints on government rent-seeking largely discarded, campaign-finance regulation becomes a futile and misguided effort — one that, as Madison argued, is not only bound to fail, but also bound to make matters worse.

A classic example is the Tillman Act and its ban on corporate *contributions. The law was easily evaded, it turns out, by having corporations make "expenditures" independently of campaigns, or by having executives make personal contributions reimbursed by their companies. And when the Tillman Act was extended to include unions in 1947, unions and corporations formed the first political action committees to collect contributions from members, shareholders, and managers to use for political purposes.

Later, when the Federal Election Campaign Act imposed dramatic contribution limits, parties and donors discovered "soft money" — *unregulated contributions that could not be used directly for candidate advocacy, but could be used for "party-building" *activities. Such party-building *activities soon came to include "issue ads" — thinly veiled attacks on the *opposition, or praise for one's own *candidates — that stopped just short of urging people to vote for or against a candidate (instead typically ending with "Call Congressman John Doe, and tell him to support a better minimum wage for America's workers"). When the McCain-Feingold bill banned soft money, the parties — especially the Democrats — effectively farmed out many of their traditional functions to activist groups such as ACORN and MoveOn. When McCain-Feingold sought to restrain interest-group "issue ads" by prohibiting ads that mention a candidate from appearing within 60 days of an election, groups responded by running ads just outside the 60-day *window. The National Rifle Association responded by launching its own satellite radio station to take advantage of the law's exception for broadcasters. Citizens United began to make movies.

Preventing this type of "circumvention" of the law has been a fixation of the "reform community" from the outset. Yet each effort has led to laws more restrictive of basic rights, more convoluted, and more detached from Madison's insights. Each effort also appears to be self-defeating, since the circumvention argument knows no bounds. As Madison would have appreciated, every time we close off one avenue of political participation, politically active Americans will turn to the next most effective legal means of carrying on their activity. That next most effective means will then become the loophole that must be closed.

Not necessarily contained in that excerpt, is the observation that corporations contributions to camping a made need for regulation to begin with. Whereupon the convolutions began.

My one observation at this point is the clear relationship of the intent of campaign finance regulation and the PURPOSE of free speech.

Rudimentarily, constitutionally, political campaigns must serve the same purpose as the biological root purpose of free speech; to assure information vital to survival is shared and understood.

Or, that the candidate who is most likely to represent the protection and continuity of unalienable rights has opportunity to share and be understood.

I wonder what links and writing upon campaign finance corruption and reform people here can come up with?

[paleocon1]

A 'peaceful' revolution to significantly change the USA regime is impossible. The regime can maintain itself with less than 30% of the population in its corner and its got more than that simply from those for whom the regime is a meal ticket.

[Christopher A. Brown]

A 'peaceful' revolution to significantly change the USA regime is impossible. The regime can maintain itself with less than 30% of the population in its corner and its got more than that simply from those for whom the regime is a meal ticket.

Are you strictly referring to population supporting it or states supporting it?

I ask because this lawful and peaceful revolution is conducted by states lawfully, constitutionally through Article V.

If you are suggesting that 30% can control states with unconstitutional bullshit, then you are talking about a class argument that has to be won with bullshit in a public arena.

Can you provide an example of how that argument would go related to the constitutional intent peaceful and lawful revolutionaries will be using as defined with the revolution proposed in this thread?

Particularly relating to how that 30% will support state legislators in denying prime constitutional intent, trying to bypass the public arena.

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/aFzt8N3.gif

[Christopher A. Brown]

cryptic spam

Cpud, in his own little comic world thinking that everyone thinks like he thinks. OMG, we can only hope you are aberration.

[Christopher A. Brown]

A 'peaceful' revolution to significantly change the USA regime is impossible. The regime can maintain itself with less than 30% of the population in its corner and its got more than that simply from those for whom the regime is a meal ticket.

As I thought, paleocon cannot provide example of the argument the unidentified 30% would implement to control states during conventions that are a part of Article V.

Whereas the strategy defined for our lawful, peaceful revolution, must control states if the people are in agreement upon prime constitutional intent.

We have a situation where the only vision citizens have is that created by the infiltrated government using media within an exclusive relationship with the people in their homes. Despite the fact people know the media info is not useful for political change, they cling to it as the only information they have in common.

[phill4paul]

As I thought, paleocon cannot provide example of the argument the unidentified 30% would implement to control states during conventions that are a part of Article V.

Whereas the strategy defined for our kawful, peaceful revolution, must control states if the people are in agreement upon prime constitutional intent.

We have a situation where the only vision citizens have is that created by the infiltrated government using media within an exclusive relationship with the people in their homes. Despite the fact people know the media info is not useful for political change, they cling to it as the only information they have,

I'm down with a kawful revolution.

http://media.giphy.com/media/TnlwFJF0vV00o/giphy.gif

[Christopher A. Brown]

I'm down with a kawful revolution.


You've not yet shown that you agree with and accept the prime constitutional intent that makes it possible.

But I shall keep presenting it in case at some point you actually mean what you say.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

[phill4paul]

You've not yet shown that you agree with and accept the prime constitutional intent that makes it possible.

But I shall keep presenting it in case at some point you actually mean what you say.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

I'm a carpenter. Sometimes a framer. And your diatribes are a half bubble off plumb.

[TheTexan]

This thread needs a lawful & peaceful revolution

[Christopher A. Brown]

I'm a carpenter. Sometimes a framer. And your diatribes are a half bubble off plumb.

Framers and carpenters make the best assistants for surveyors, they have a fairly rudimentary understanding of the things you refer to.

I'm a surveyor.

Get rid of the bubble and things will make sense. You will find that it is all a perfect 90 from the string of the plumb to the water in the trough.

This is consistent with the fact that you, nor anyone has never explained how the framers intended for Americans to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights IF the unity derived from constitutionally focused free speech was NOT intended to serve the purpose of giving the people power over government.

Accordingly, check your measurements and layout for action serving our futures. You will find it lacking.

[phill4paul]

Framers and carpenters make the best assistants for surveyors, they have a fairly rudimentary understanding of the things you refer to.

I'm a surveyor.

Get rid of the bubble and things will make sense. You will find that it is all a perfect 90 from the string of the plumb to the water in the trough.

This is consistent with the fact that you, nor anyone has never explained how the framers intended for Americans to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights IF the unity derived from constitutionally focused free speech was NOT intended to serve the purpose of giving the people power over government.

Accordingly, check your measurements and layout for action serving our futures. You will find it lacking.

My measurements and layout, or lack there of, are quite sound when I regard the foundation upon which it rests. Boundaries and lines are important to surveyors but hold little value when actually building upon that which is measured. Critical analysis tells me I cannot build such a large abode on this soap stone sub-strata.

[wizardwatson]

I'm a carpenter. Sometimes a framer. And your diatribes are a half bubble off plumb.


Framers and carpenters make the best assistants for surveyors, they have a fairly rudimentary understanding of the things you refer to.

I'm a surveyor.

Get rid of the bubble and things will make sense. You will find that it is all a perfect 90 from the string of the plumb to the water in the trough.

This is consistent with the fact that you, nor anyone has never explained how the framers intended for Americans to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights IF the unity derived from constitutionally focused free speech was NOT intended to serve the purpose of giving the people power over government.

Accordingly, check your measurements and layout for action serving our futures. You will find it lacking.


My measurements and layout, or lack there of, are quite sound when I regard the foundation upon which it rests. Boundaries and lines are important to surveyors but hold little value when actually building upon that which is measured. Critical analysis tells me I cannot build such a large abode on this soap stone sub-strata.

First things first, I'm a craftsman...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXiwYUCe_bY

[Christopher A. Brown]

My measurements and layout, or lack there of, are quite sound when I regard the foundation upon which it rests. Boundaries and lines are important to surveyors but hold little value when actually building upon that which is measured. Critical analysis tells me I cannot build such a large abode on this soap stone sub-strata.

It's the only ground you/we have to stand on, let alone build upon.

The original framers designed well, but their appurtenances were imperfect and not serviceable with the onslaught of occupants and their various agendas. Still, we can ascertain the framers intent, straighten the passages, plumb the walls then reinforce as needed.

We need to do this before the roof fails!

The agendas of the squatters in the kitchen can be evicted and the goods they've stolen from our house separated from their putrid spoils. We only need to agree on which side the door hinges on, and whether its worth dirtying our boot kicking them out before the renovation starts.

[Christopher A. Brown]

First things first, I'm a craftsman...


Nice aluminum handled pipe wrench Al's got there.

Yes, and I am too. Multiple disciplines. Wood since age 13. Exotic hard woods I'm a bit ashamed to say. Bone, brass and copper too. I excelled at 3D inlays of bone and abalone.
A welder since age 17. But the mechanical work started at age 11. The entire honda 50 engine including the 3 speed trans was apart and together within 10 months. At 13 a 55 4 door Chevy wagon with a 265 came along. It's power glide 3:60 gears and 2 barrel were replaced with 4:11s, a three speed on the tree and a 4 barrel.
By 25 I was doing lots of geometry and trig building trick gates, installing big v8's in old 40's & 50's trucks and busses.
A 75 foot double masted, gaff rigged schooner previously owned by Errol Flynn got the benefit of my wood working skills and welding as it had a steel framework under a pine plank hull with teak deck and mahogany galley.
In there somewhere fiberglass skills of mold making and fabrication provided work when I needed that.

But free form wood sculpture as an art captured hundreds of hours of time. See my avatar. That is not a Borg appendage off my right shoulder. It is a highly polished ceanothis burl which got first place in a 1974 sculptors guild show here.

But the craftsmanship and artistry was all consolidated in the business of grading (some youtube videos linked) (http://algoxy.com/docdirt/), heavy equipment operation, long hours, high pay. Big diesel powered chisels. Soon augmented with 3D control over job sites. Helping owners from the topo phase, through the grading and drainage plans, certified by a civil engineer I teamed with went for 30 years without ever making a business card. All repeat and referral business.

But still, a 6 inch crescent wrench with my fathers name engraved in it, along with a few other tools I still have of his are my most prized hand tools.

Both grandfathers were master craftsman. One trained in the Swedish army as a master blacksmith, the other, one of the last master carpenters in America that could layout and build a spiral staircase with only a framing square and hand tools.

Artistry, craftsmanship and quality are things I live and breath. This extends into original music all composed and played in open G. It extends into video production and 2.5 hours of historical documentary produced from 2005 through 2009. All broadcast hundreds of times on public access TV.

In 1998 a need for lawsuits arose. As a pro se litigant I've taken on the impossible, not succeeded by any means, but dented the armor of corruption enough so the evil vessel of power transporting us to hell is not catching air like its dark masters want, and it's taking on water in vital holds.

Function, craftsmanship, art and beauty, these are devotions I know.

[Christopher A. Brown]

I wonder what links and writing upon campaign finance corruption and reform people here can come up with?

Nothing it appears. Too bad, if minds were put to it, I imagine they could come up with some interesting perspective. That is what is needed. We've been in the box of partisanship so long, perspective is needed.

They seem mostly consumed with mocking prime constitutional intent, or those trying to use it as a point of unification.


From my thinking upon the PURPOSE of free speech, mostly about what it will be like after Americans learn some of the deeper truths in control of their world, thing that have happened, why, etc., Americans are going to change.

But in the interim, it seems to me that fairness in campaigning needs to be the standard. So until after the PURPOSE of free speech has manifested meaningfully, and America is changed and on its true path after being diverted by a dark infiltration empowered with dynamic secrecy, campaign finance should probably be a common fund with equal time in debates, campaign promotions etc.

It's not going to work to have the big corporatists trying to lie to the public with the money they have after the truth has been widely shared. They are going to know that too. They can promote candidates, but not contribute to candidates. Accordingly, their reputations will follow them in their promotion. Corporatists with good reputations will be able to effectively promote, the others will damage campaigns if they try.

Think about it.

What if America knew the truth on the most important issues we can think of? How would lies in campaigning stand a chance? The only thing that will really work is alignment with the peoples definitions of constitutional intent. That will be an EXCELLENT political atmosphere for refining our constitutional republic with democratic direction from educated people.

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/VIOBXd7.jpg

[Christopher A. Brown]

In order to get some perspective on what campaign finance reform
might look like, or directions it could go, it seemed like looking at socialist countries might provide some insight.

Sweden
http://www.idea.int/political-finance/country.cfm?id=197

Denmark
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/17/denm-j17.html?view=article_mobile

Ending the abridging of the purpose of free speech will likely radically change the character of political campaigns making campaign finance reform unneeded.

Ironic that America is so deeply misinformed or uninformed that the issue of political campaigns and how they will operate is very difficult to imagine after America gets real information.

This of course depends on how much truth the individual American knows. The less you know, the easier politics under those conditions is to imagine. The more you know, the more you realize the shock that Americans will
undergo; therein is where the difficulty in imagining arises.

How will Americans react to truths that have been concealed from them? What kind of change will this bring to the nature of political campaigns?

[wizardwatson]

In order to get some perspective on what campaign finance reform
might look like, or directions it could go, it seemed like looking at socialist countries might provide some insight.

Sweden
http://www.idea.int/political-finance/country.cfm?id=197

Denmark
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/17/denm-j17.html?view=article_mobile

Ending the abridging of the purpose of free speech will likely radically change the character of political campaigns making campaign finance reform unneeded.

Ironic that America is so deeply misinformed or uninformed that the issue of political campaigns and how they will operate is very difficult to imagine after America gets real information.

This of course depends on how much truth the individual American knows. The less you know, the easier politics under those conditions is to imagine. The more you know, the more you realize the shock that Americans will
undergo; therein is where the difficulty in imagining arises.

How will Americans react to truths that have been concealed from them? What kind of change will this bring to the nature of political campaigns?

Where have you been Chris? Four months you've been gone.

Was reminded of you yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1tAYmMjLdY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1tAYmMjLdY

[Ronin Truth]

'Periodic revolution, “at least once every 20 years,” was “a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” ' -- Thomas Jefferson 3rd US President (1801-1809)

[wizardwatson]

I have conceptualized software for a new type of forum called "Poll to Post" that will greatly enhance and speed this process.

http://algoxy.com/poly/poll_to_post.html

Where have you been Chris?

Anyway, I read over your "poll to post" software idea. I think it's overkill. It seems merely another manifestation of your goal to "divine" who the good guys are, or in this case, divine who the good posters are. Your never-ending quest to find that one in 10,000 SiNcErE aMeRiCaN.

I was taken most by this point in the text linked above:


Since the diversity of topic and division of topic appears as such a force of confusion in this medium, I feel that many posters have a degree of anxiety they self treat with their expressions. There are no bad intentions in this case. Only a varyingly manifested indulgence in compulsion.

Interesting observation, but I'd say the topics are irrelevant. People like to self-express in this medium. Topic is just a function of what doesn't bore them. The goal itself is self-expression! It isn't something they are doing to deal with the anxiety of the topic. It is basic human vanity of staring at an idealized version of ourselves in the mirror of bulletin boards.

A fancy divination method might help you find a metric to determine who real activists are, but you still need a strategy. And finding strategists-while certainly helpful to a general strategy-still is no replacement.

You had a method. That is something. You still have no organization.

Anyway, you've been gone a couple years now. Guess I'm talking to myself.

[phill4paul]

Thanks wiz....

http://castleofspirits.com/bloodymary.jpg

[osan]

The most meaningful revolution would be one that reinstates the Articles of Confederation as the main fundamental document controlling the power of the American state. As many have pointed out, despite the many libertarian concepts and checks and balances put into the Constitution, there were enough holes in it for crafty advocates of central power to circumvent it over time, into the total state fiasco we have now.

Since there is virtually zero chance of dispensing with "government", I would prefer to see a new constitution. Long ago I contrived a basic architecture for such an instrument that greatly outstrips the current document for clarity, completeness, and correctness. There needs to be a core document that specifies the Immutable Law. It would further specify the ethical framework within which all agents of "government" would be bound, along with the draconian punishments to be meted out to those who stray beyond the limitations set forth therein.

By the time I would be done, most "government" workers would be running for the exits, a million letters of immediate resignation resting on a million desktops, the unbridled making no effort to hide itself from public consumption.