PDA

View Full Version : Other than the Presidential Election which is the best way to fight for our freedom?




dude58677
07-26-2015, 10:42 PM
A) State Nullification: Advantage- Allows a whole State to rebel against an unconstitutional law. Disadvantage: Needs to get a whole State legislature and Governor to agree. Also subject to grandstanding.

B) Jury Nullification: Advantages- Allows a single person to nullify an unconstitutional law by voting to acquit and forcing a mistrial and if lucky even an aquittal. Disadvantage- Wont protect you from civil asset forfeiture laws.

C) Militia: Advantages: Advantages- Terrifies public officials. Disadvantages- Could get you killed and if you don't like violence could get someone else killed.

D) Civil Disobedience: Advantages- might live a free life if no one knows you are disobeying the law and will make a public stand if they do. Disadvantages- Could land you time in jail given you have only yourself to protect. Might get you killed it facing a true tyrant.

Voluntarist
07-27-2015, 07:04 AM
xxxxx

staerker
07-27-2015, 07:19 AM
Technology. Certain advances have the potential to make governments obsolete.

EBounding
07-27-2015, 07:21 AM
Probably state nullification. Jury nullification would only be effective if hundreds of millions of people were educated about it and supported constitutional/limited government. With state nullification you only need to "persuade" a few hundred legislators.

Ronin Truth
07-27-2015, 09:07 AM
(Hint: FREEDOM, ain't never coming out of Washinton D.C..)

Dianne
07-27-2015, 09:11 AM
I would have had "Educate those around you, particularly the young" as the first item on the list. That's the only value I ever saw in the candidacy of Ron Paul.

I agree with education. Spread the word everywhere, including the internet; while the internet is still available to us.

For the purpose of this poll, I chose State Nullification. In-fact, Sanctuary Cities for felony illegal immigrants have set a precedent for the entire country to ignore Federal law. So let's do it.

Christopher A. Brown
07-27-2015, 02:05 PM
A) State Nullification: Advantage- Allows a whole State to rebel against an unconstitutional law. Disadvantage: Needs to get a whole State legislature and Governor to agree. Also subject to grandstanding.

B) Jury Nullification: Advantages- Allows a single person to nullify an unconstitutional law by voting to acquit and forcing a mistrial and if lucky even an aquittal. Disadvantage- Wont protect you from civil asset forfeiture laws.

C) Militia: Advantages: Advantages- Terrifies public officials. Disadvantages- Could get you killed and if you don't like violence could get someone else killed.

D) Civil Disobedience: Advantages- might live a free life if no one knows you are disobeying the law and will make a public stand if they do. Disadvantages- Could land you time in jail given you have only yourself to protect. Might get you killed it facing a true tyrant.

Dude, none of those will work, and your analysis are accurate. But it is good you've posted the thread with its shakedown of options. People need to see it in the light you present it in.

The infiltrated government has all of those bases covered. The one that is not mentioned and is mechanistically open under law is presented here.

Our only way out is critical thinking and decision to support that which we all have in common. In this case, the prime principles of constitutional intent. The process and perspective on it is presented here in these 2 threads.

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

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478049-Alter-or-Abolish-and-Control-of-the-States-How-The-Masters-Of-The-Congress-And-Courts-Work

This aspect has been covered by the infiltrated government by control over mass media of all types using misleading, disinformation, misinformation and general distractions that that have corrupted our populations. They are under informed, fearful of being manipulated, condoned to move in flock/herd actions controlled by mass media.

Add to this the covert infiltrators and other groups with agendas to prevent any effective unification here and other forums, and it is simply up to the individual to use their capacity to conduct critical thinking, read the Declaration of Independence, Article V of the constitution and agree upon prime constitutional intent to create a front of legal precedent which establishes the people as "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts.

This agreement:

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?

Is the key. By making it we identify ourselves as sincere Americans unconditionally in support of our rights and freedoms and established by the 1787 constitution carrying the intents of the Declaration of Independence before it.

It is by the incompetent and unaccountable examples that people here, who are not using the product of critical thinking to justify, simply making the agreement. Those that I've asked, and failed to make it, have been asked WHY? What sacrifice do they make by making this agreement? They do not even answer that question.

Now there are those like wiz watson who are obsessed with their own agenda and facetiously make the agreement seeking capitulation with their agenda. In wiz's case, its religious. HVAC refuses to explain why he does not just simply agree, as does gunny. All prominent posters act in this fashion. This is herd mentality or subversion, not independent thinking accountable to facts.

Freedom is independence, Independent, critical thinking is the beginning of freedom. Can you do it?

wizardwatson
07-27-2015, 02:21 PM
Dude, none of those will work, and your analysis are accurate. But it is good you've posted the thread with its shakedown of options. People need to see it in the light you present it in.

The infiltrated government has all of those bases covered. The one that is not mentioned and is mechanistically open under law is presented here.

Our only way out is critical thinking and decision to support that which we all have in common. In this case, the prime principles of constitutional intent. The process and perspective on it is presented here in these 2 threads.

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

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478049-Alter-or-Abolish-and-Control-of-the-States-How-The-Masters-Of-The-Congress-And-Courts-Work

This aspect has been covered by the infiltrated government by control over mass media of all types using misleading, disinformation, misinformation and general distractions that that have corrupted our populations. They are under informed, fearful of being manipulated, condoned to move in flock/herd actions controlled by mass media.

Add to this the covert infiltrators and other groups with agendas to prevent any effective unification here and other forums, and it is simply up to the individual to use their capacity to conduct critical thinking, read the Declaration of Independence, Article V of the constitution and agree upon prime constitutional intent to create a front of legal precedent which establishes the people as "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts.

This agreement:

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?

Is the key. By making it we identify ourselves as sincere Americans unconditionally in support of our rights and freedoms and established by the 1787 constitution carrying the intents of the Declaration of Independence before it.

It is by the incompetent and unaccountable examples that people here, who are not using the product of critical thinking to justify, simply making the agreement. Those that I've asked, and failed to make it, have been asked WHY? What sacrifice do they make by making this agreement? They do not even answer that question.

Now there are those like wiz watson who are obsessed with their own agenda and facetiously make the agreement seeking capitulation with their agenda. In wiz's case, its religious. HVAC refuses to explain why he does not just simply agree, as does gunny. All prominent posters act in this fashion. This is herd mentality or subversion, not independent thinking accountable to facts.

Freedom is independence, Independent, critical thinking is the beginning of freedom. Can you do it?

So, I waited around for over 3 years just to "facetiously agree" so that you would capitulate with MY agenda?

Dang.

It almost worked.

EDIT: For the record I do hope all people turn to Christ. So in a way you're right. But I didn't "facetiously agree". Well, maybe a little facetious, but that's only because I take the Lord more serious than anything else. But the agreement was sincere.

Keith and stuff
07-27-2015, 03:26 PM
E. Join the Free State Project (sign up here fspsign.org (http://fspsign.org) ) and do all of the above or something else that helps create liberty in our lifetime.

Has Ron Paul Interested You in Liberty in Your Lifetime?
Find out why he supports the Free State Project!
http://old.freestateproject.org/intro/ron_paul

fisharmor
07-27-2015, 03:29 PM
LOL this thread is already a train wreck.

Voluntayist hit the nail on the head and there isnt anything else to say.
Then staerker proves his point by assuming there was a time when the state wasn't obsolete,
and of course we get CAB trying to get us to think critically, as if many of us haven't already critically thought our way right past his tired ideas.

What can you all do? How about paying attention to this simple statement:

You're not ever going to draw us back, and you're not ever going to stop us from poaching your pals.

staerker
07-27-2015, 03:44 PM
LOL this thread is already a train wreck.

Voluntayist hit the nail on the head and there isnt anything else to say.
Then staerker proves his point by assuming there was a time when the state wasn't obsolete,
and of course we get CAB trying to get us to think critically, as if many of us haven't already critically thought our way right past his tired ideas.

What can you all do? How about paying attention to this simple statement:

You're not ever going to draw us back, and you're not ever going to stop us from poaching your pals.

?

The State has competitive utility, despite being immoral.

The world has always been, and always will be, a free "market" of ideas. Right now the State is winning.

Despite statelessness's current benefits, technology has the potential to uttering wipe from the universe the very idea of a need for a State (by the average non-authoritarian.)

This method is a lot more effective than educating and re-educating generations and generations of people who don't care one whit either way.

Attack the root cause: the need (albeit misplaced.)

r3volution 3.0
07-27-2015, 04:10 PM
Other elections: Congress, State, and local.

Of the options in the poll, state nullification would be best, but this requires winning lots of state elections first.

The others are pretty much useless IMO.

AngryCanadian
07-27-2015, 04:24 PM
I would have had "Educate those around you, particularly the young" as the first item on the list. That's the only value I ever saw in the candidacy of Ron Paul.


Bribing with money always seems to work otherwise your going to waste educating.

cajuncocoa
07-27-2015, 04:41 PM
What are the only two things that have EVER gotten them to listen to any group making demands? Either violence or civil disobedience. Since I would never advocate violence (I'm a libertarian) I have to advocate for civil disobedience. Disrupt the flow of everyday life in a non-threatening way....but disrupt it. That's the ONLY way they listen.

Christopher A. Brown
07-27-2015, 05:14 PM
So, I waited around for over 3 years just to "facetiously agree" so that you would capitulate with MY agenda?

Dang.

It almost worked.

EDIT: For the record I do hope all people turn to Christ. So in a way you're right. But I didn't "facetiously agree". Well, maybe a little facetious, but that's only because I take the Lord more serious than anything else. But the agreement was sincere.

Well then get serious and stop preaching.

Christopher A. Brown
07-27-2015, 10:35 PM
What are the only two things that have EVER gotten them to listen to any group making demands? Either violence or civil disobedience. Since I would never advocate violence (I'm a libertarian) I have to advocate for civil disobedience. Disrupt the flow of everyday life in a non-threatening way....but disrupt it. That's the ONLY way they listen.

Historically there is a streak of accuracy in what you say. But there is also a narrow but solid streak of uncertainty because America and a constitution such as it has, with the basis it has has never existed in history before 226 years ago.

Article V is is a very real sense, a lawful revolution by the states against the federal government. It is totally intended to be a peaceful event.

But it has to be done right, and "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts", the people, are the only ones that can define constitutional intent. Their solid and explicit agreement is required. That is why I'm doing what I'm doing here.

If we do it right, every single REAL law enforcement officer will know it and as long as we run with due process they will be with us. It WILL take an impressive display of unity however.

I tried to explain this to OWS, way too controlled by socialists to get it. That's why law enforcement walked all over them.

The cops have all taken an oath, this movement is what can hold them too it.

Unity that is very sincerely based in agreement upon constitutional intent is powerful in the context of large groups and an oath with parallel intent. When a unified group starts up with the simple logic which shows state legislators MUST agree with the movement using states to alter or abolish, OR the people are deprived of that right. Legislators must agree because that is the only way Amendments ratified will have sure constitutional intent.

It can only fail if you fail to unify. It will not be easy, but it will work and after it gets moving it will be very uplifting and move fast.

I recommend many small 4th of July parades in neighborhoods across America next year. No fireworks, only discussion and sharing about constitutional intent. A speech every other house in a 2 block long parade by one of the people of the neighborhood who understand well how the agreements work with legal process.

As I post in the thread about our lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution), these are things children can understand and understand them correctly. At about 9 years of age, over a few months of teaching that is confirmed by specific questions to teachers in their schools.

Probably a good idea to tel them not to talk about the whole concept, just confirm critical aspects. They need to understand that they and there parents are going to be working with many other people to correct government. The truth is very important to give to children, but it protects itself, so make that clear.

Or it could be delivered to the school officials and other parents by a group of 5 or more familes that understands it well at a PTA meeting . Give them a heads up, not to mess with the kids developing understanding, just confirm the facts the kids ask about.

America is coming out of a dark age.

Christopher A. Brown
07-27-2015, 10:50 PM
Other elections: Congress, State, and local.

Of the options in the poll, state nullification would be best, but this requires winning lots of state elections first.


Which is not very far from what is proposed for a lawful and peaceful revolution (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution). Another way to see it is how the masters of the congress and courts work in the states (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?478049-Alter-or-Abolish-and-Control-of-the-States-How-The-Masters-Of-The-Congress-And-Courts-Work)

wizardwatson
07-28-2015, 12:15 AM
Well then get serious and stop preaching.


Matthew 16: 24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Your constant focus on your hatred of my preaching only confirms the spirit of the anti-christ you carry.

No doubt future revisions of the 1st amendment will remove religious freedom and future statutes will outlaw it all together.

As it will "violate the Greater Purpose of Free Speech" as defined by you know-better-than-the-sheep smarties.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 08:00 AM
Your constant focus on your hatred of my preaching only confirms the spirit of the anti-christ you carry.


You've been trying hard to invoke hatred, but it's not there. Your saying does not make it there as bad as you want it to justify your position.

The preaching is not functional. It divides with anachronistic posturing.

You use fear, not love.

Humanity has need of science not beliefs.

I belive science can show us God within ourselves, but you are too confused and disoriented by just the beginnings of it which basically originate within existing logic, science and medicine.

http://algoxy.com/law/treasonresist/graphicunconscious/oneyearofyourlife-S1.pdf

http://algoxy.com/law/treasonresist/graphicunconscious/onedayofyourlife-S2.pdf

http://algoxy.com/law/treasonresist/graphicunconscious/onedayofyourlife-S3.pdf

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 08:10 AM
Technology. Certain advances have the potential to make governments obsolete.

Are you referring to direct democracy?

wizardwatson
07-28-2015, 08:13 AM
You've been trying hard to invoke hatred, but it's not there. Your saying does not make it there as bad as you want it to justify your position.

The preaching is not functional. It divides with anachronistic posturing.

You use fear, not love.

Humanity has need of science not beliefs.

I belief science can show us God, but you are too confused and disoriented by just the beginnings of it which basically originate within existing logic.

http://algoxy.com/law/treasonresist/graphicunconscious/oneyearofyourlife-S1.pdf

http://algoxy.com/law/treasonresist/graphicunconscious/onedayofyourlife-S2.pdf

http://algoxy.com/law/treasonresist/graphicunconscious/onedayofyourlife-S3.pdf

Oh, I see. You're just smart and I'm stupid. I get it. So you pity me for being religious is that it?

The Truth is a sword, my friend.


Matthew 10 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

And, good Lord I WISH people had fear of the Lord. The sad thing is they don't. If they did, we'd be in a lot better position.


Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Every word you write only confirms more and more that you are spiritually backwards and the fact that you talk of science and love with a silver tongue only makes you dangerous.

You are blind. You don't know into where you have walked.

I understood you strategy and "science" within a few hours of reading you. You seem to have understood 'dick' about me, since we've encountered one another.

But, by all means, keep wandering around here thinking that you will make any progress when the Gatekeeper has marked you. Fire up another bowl, maybe it will maintain the illusion.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 08:15 AM
and of course we get CAB trying to get us to think critically, as if many of us haven't already critically thought our way right past his tired ideas.

Please define your thinking past what you call my "ideas" which are really only continued definition of the framers ideas. Or provide a link where such thinking has been stated.

You've not been accountable in the past, and I don't expect it here, now.

tod evans
07-28-2015, 08:17 AM
Tyrannical governments have never been cast off by either protest or education.

Anything that resembles a "militia" in the literal sense of the word will never get off the ground as long as governments employees are permitted to hide from the citizenry.

So in my opinion none of the 4 options are workable.

Government will not shrink itself, exposing governments employees, where they live, where they worship, where they shop..........Now that will shrink government!

Call it by the name of your choice, but whether the cockroaches scurry to another dark crevice or get swatted with a shoe they'd be gone for a while.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 08:18 AM
Oh, I see. You're just smart and I'm stupid. I get it. So you pity me for being religious is that it?

Your attempt to apply cognitive distortions is obvious.

I'll leave the burning of herbs to the young.

If you've read and understood my implementation os science and psychology/psychiatry, then you will easily explain the "RESOLUTE BARRIER" as it relates to the book "emotions and memory" by David Rappaport.
http://algoxy.com/psych/psyimages/emomem176.jpeg
The line at top. Explain why that happens with relation to the "RESOLUTE BARRIER" of sheet 3.

wizardwatson
07-28-2015, 08:50 AM
Your attempt to apply cognitive distortions is obvious.

Law defines Article V which is the manifestation of the intent of alter or abolish. We will shrink government as an alteration of it.

If you call vehemently disagreeing with your goals and premise "cognitive distortion" well then, guilty as charged I guess.

I went to the root of your tactic.

You said here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution&p=5935922&viewfull=1#post5935922

that I was the one who understood it best. Now that I have problems with certain pieces and with other areas of your tactics and philosophy you want to damage my credibility.

Good luck.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 09:05 AM
Government will not shrink itself, exposing governments employees, where they live, where they worship, where they shop..........Now that will shrink government!


Article V is law. When "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" use it to amend in ways that shrink government, it will shrink.

Anti Federalist
07-28-2015, 10:17 AM
Article V is law. When "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" use it to amend in ways that shrink government, it will shrink.

"They" do not care about the law.

That is what I think you are missing.

The law is whatever "they" say it is.

dude58677
07-28-2015, 12:09 PM
The key here is that like the issues facing our nation do not come in separate compartments neither do these methods. It is best to use these methods in combination with others. You might start out with civil disobedience without anyone knowing you are disobeying the government. If people find out then you would take a stand but make it clear that you won't rule out using militia(Oathkeepers). If they don't budge then you would call in the Oathkeepers but if the Oathkeepers are not available( most likely they should be) or any militia then you would surrender and go to court. You would then hope for jury nullification. If you are aquitted you need the Oathkeepers to protect your property from forfeiture. If convicted then the Oathkeepers would have to come into rescue you or have them after you are released. If the government runs away and you can't get released then you would advocate for State Nullification. But all of this is a very extreme situation. The Oathkeepers should mainly be used as peace and freedom through strength.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 08:03 PM
"They" do not care about the law.

That is what I think you are missing.

The law is whatever "they" say it is.

If we agree, our numbers are so great, and lower level government are of us, and we will be fully with the law, the elite will not matter.

The military will join us.

But this agreement upon prime constitutional intent needs to expand greatly, then it will work.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 08:14 PM
The key here is that like the issues facing our nation do not come in separate compartments neither do these methods. It is best to use these methods in combination with others. You might start out with civil disobedience without anyone knowing you are disobeying the government. If people find out then you would take a stand but make it clear that you won't rule out using militia(Oathkeepers). If they don't budge then you would call in the Oathkeepers but if the Oathkeepers are not available( most likely they should be) or any militia then you would surrender and go to court. You would then hope for jury nullification. If you are aquitted you need the Oathkeepers to protect your property from forfeiture. If convicted then the Oathkeepers would have to come into rescue you or have them after you are released. If the government runs away and you can't get released then you would advocate for State Nullification. But all of this is a very extreme situation. The Oathkeepers should mainly be used as peace and freedom through strength.

The oath keepers are very limited and so far have applied themselves about right.

Small one act encounters of disobedience, nullification by juries, even state nullifications do not have breadth needed to deal with the problem. More symptomatic with band aid action than anything

I'm very glad it's a there, but none of it even gets close to a long term overall strategy that puts the infiltrated federal government COMPLETELY out of business.

That is what I am proposing, state by state until "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" take 38 states into conventions in the states with preparatory amendment and end the abridging of the purpose of free speech, secure the vote and reform campaign finance.

We can take our time, because once we start, the infiltrators will know we are coming and start to back away. They cannot run the economy into the ditch fast enough to create widespread strife and do it without being totally obvious.

I do not advocate taking any more time than is needed. The only thing standing on our way are the sincere Americans reading that could join in and agree, but are not figuring that this is vitally needed as possible.

phill4paul
07-28-2015, 08:19 PM
Ignore government. Don't let them steal from you. If there was a consensus to simply ignore government I think freedom could be had.

TheTexan
07-28-2015, 08:49 PM
Vote really hard... in all elections, not just Presidential elections

fisharmor
07-28-2015, 09:28 PM
Please define your thinking past what you call my "ideas" which are really only continued definition of the framers ideas. Or provide a link where such thinking has been stated.

You've not been accountable in the past, and I don't expect it here, now.

Every single post you've ever made on this site boils down to one statement:

"Seriously, it'll work this time, guys."

The framers' ideas crashed and burned during the framers' lifetimes.

This isn't on me: it's on you. Show one way in the last 240 years where these ideas actually worked.

Christopher A. Brown
07-28-2015, 11:17 PM
Every single post you've ever made on this site boils down to one statement:

"Seriously, it'll work this time, guys."

The framers' ideas crashed and burned during the framers' lifetimes.

This isn't on me: it's on you. Show one way in the last 240 years where these ideas actually worked.

There's that old unaccountability I recognize.

But hey, misrepresenting history is a new twist.

Loyalist Tory's using the printed media mislead voters so badly the framers ideas were almost foriegn to many.

dude58677
07-28-2015, 11:59 PM
The oath keepers are very limited and so far have applied themselves about right.

Small one act encounters of disobedience, nullification by juries, even state nullifications do not have breadth needed to deal with the problem. More symptomatic with band aid action than anything

I'm very glad it's a there, but none of it even gets close to a long term overall strategy that puts the infiltrated federal government COMPLETELY out of business.

That is what I am proposing, state by state until "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" take 38 states into conventions in the states with preparatory amendment and end the abridging of the purpose of free speech, secure the vote and reform campaign finance.

We can take our time, because once we start, the infiltrators will know we are coming and start to back away. They cannot run the economy into the ditch fast enough to create widespread strife and do it without being totally obvious.

I do not advocate taking any more time than is needed. The only thing standing on our way are the sincere Americans reading that could join in and agree, but are not figuring that this is vitally needed as possible.

Of course all these are band aid actions. That's the point. It is temporary relief in the meantime while we wait to get a good leader in the White House who will fully support the Constitution.

Occam's Banana
07-29-2015, 05:33 AM
Other than the Presidential Election which is the best way to fight for our freedom?

Other than going for a walk, which is the best way to take a nap?

Christopher A. Brown
07-29-2015, 08:26 AM
The public is deprived of quality information, and has been since the Declaration of Independence.

Add that to the fact that the public has no reasonable way to conduct discourse upon the information to refine their opinions, and therein is the reason the ideals the framers established or the democracy designed to support them does not serve the American people. In fact, the misleading is so huge that democracy is a disservice to those people.

This has been true since just after the Bill of a Rights. Thomas Jefferson was outraged by what the press was doing.


"I deplore... the putrid state into which our newspapers have passed and the malignity, the vulgarity, and mendacious spirit of those who write for them... These ordures are rapidly depraving the public taste and lessening its relish for sound food. As vehicles of information and a curb on our funtionaries, they have rendered themselves useless by forfeiting all title to belief... This has, in a great degree, been produced by the violence and malignity of party spirit." --Thomas Jefferson to Walter Jones, 1814. ME 14:46

"Our printers raven on the agonies of their victims, as wolves do on the blood of the lamb." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1811. ME 13:59

"From forty years' experience of the wretched guess-work of the newspapers of what is not done in open daylight, and of their falsehood even as to that, I rarely think them worth reading, and almost never worth notice." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1816. ME 14:430

"Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:224

"As for what is not true, you will always find abundance in the newspapers." --Thomas Jefferson to Barnabas Bidwell, 1806. ME 11:118

"Advertisements... contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper." --Thomas Jefferson to Nathaniel Macon, 1819. ME 15:179

"The press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Seymour, 1807.

Sowing Dissension

"A coalition of sentiments is not for the interest of printers. They, like the clergy, live by the zeal they can kindle and the schisms they can create. It is contest of opinion in politics as well as religion which makes us take great interest in them and bestow our money liberally on those who furnish aliment to our appetite... So the printers can never leave us in a state of perfect rest and union of opinion. They would be no longer useful and would have to go to the plough." --Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1801. ME 10:254

"These people [i.e., the printers] think they have a right to everything, however secret or sacred." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1815. ME 14:345

"To divide those by lying tales whom truths cannot divide, is the hackneyed policy of the gossips of every society." --Thomas Jefferson to George Clinton, 1803. ME 10:440

"[We] have seen too much... of the conduct of the press in countries where it is free, to consider the gazettes as evidence of the sentiments of any part of the government; [we] have seen them bestow on the government itself, in all its parts, its full share of inculpation." --Thomas Jefferson to George Hammond, 1792. ME 8:300

"Nations, like individuals, wish to enjoy a fair reputation. It is therefore desirable for us that the slanders on our country, disseminated by hired or prejudiced travellers, should be corrected." --Thomas Jefferson to James Ogilvie, 1811. ME 13:69

"Our newspapers, for the most part, present only the caricatures of disaffected minds. Indeed, the abuses of the freedom of the press here have been carried to a length never before known or borne by any civilized nation." --Thomas Jefferson to M. Pictet, 1803. ME 10:357

"For the present, lying and scribbling must be free to those mean enough to deal in them, and in the dark." --Thomas Jefferson to Edmund Randolph, 1792. ME 8:411

Effects on the Nation

"Our people, merely for want of intelligence which they may rely on, are become lethargic and insensible of the state they are in." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1777. ME 4:288, Papers 2:19

"The materials now bearing on the public mind will infallibly restore it to its republican soundness... if the knowledge of facts can only be disseminated among the people." --Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1799. ME 10:104

"I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens who, reading newspapers, live and die in the belief that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time, whereas the accounts they have read in newspapers are just as true a history of any other period of the world as of the present, except that the real names of the day are affixed to their fables. General facts may indeed be collected from them... but no details can be relied on." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:224

"History may distort truth, and will distort it for a time, by the superior efforts at justification of those who are conscious of needing it most." --Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:442

"A truth now and then projecting into the ocean of newspaper lies serves like headlands to correct our course. Indeed, my scepticism as to everything I see in a newspaper makes me indifferent whether I ever see one." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1815. ME 14:226

"The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:225

"We... who are retired from the business of the world are glad to catch a glimpse of truth here and there as we can, to guide our path through the boundless field of fable in which we are bewildered by public prints, and even by those calling themselves histories. A word of truth to us is like the drop of water supplicated from the tip of Lazarus' finger. It is as an observation of latitude and longitude to the mariner long enveloped in clouds, for correcting the ship's way." --Thomas Jefferson to John Quincy Adams, 1817. ME 15:145

"I may say from intimate knowledge, that we should have lost the services of the greatest character of our country (i.e., George Washington) had he been assailed with the degree of abandoned licentiousness now practised... He would have thrown up the helm in a burst of indignation." --Thomas Jefferson to James Sullivan, 1805. ME 11:73

"The public... say so from all quarters... that they wish to hear reason instead of disgusting blackguardism." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1799. ME 10:98

"The firmness with which the people have withstood the... abuses of the press, the discernment they have manifested between truth and falsehood, show that they may safely be trusted to hear everything true and false and to form a correct judgment between them." --Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, 1804.

"The printers and the public are very different personages. The former may lead the latter a little out of their track while the deviation is insensible; but the moment they usurp their direction and that of their government, they will be reduced to their true places." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1811. ME 13:59

"I would wish you to distribute [some pamphlets], not to sound men who have no occasion for them, but to such as have been misled, are candid and will be open to the conviction of truth, and are of influence among their neighbors. It is the sick who need medicine, and not the well." --Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1799. ME 10:104

Dealing With the Press

"During the course of [my] administration [as President], and in order to disturb it, the artillery of the press has been leveled against us, charged with whatsoever its licentiousness could devise or dare. These abuses of an institution so important to freedom and science are deeply to be regretted, inasmuch as they tend to lessen its usefulness and to sap its safety; they might, indeed, have been corrected by the wholesome punishments reserved and provided by the laws of the several States against falsehood and defamation; but public duties more urgent press on the time of public servants, and the offenders have therefore been left to find their punishment in the public indignation." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:380

"The Chief Magistrate cannot enter the arena of the newspapers." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1811. ME 13:64

"I have been for some time used as the property of the newspapers, a fair mark for every man's dirt." --Thomas Jefferson to Peregrine Fitzhugh, 1798. ME 10:1

"I have from the beginning determined to submit myself as the subject on whom may be proved the impotency of a free press in a country like ours against those who conduct themselves honestly and enter into no intrigue. I admit at the same time that restraining the press to truth, as the present laws do, is the only way of making it useful. But I have thought necessary first to prove it can never be dangerous." --Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1808.

"I had laid it down as a law to myself to take no notice of the thousand calumnies issued against me, but to trust my character to my own conduct and the good sense and candor of my fellow citizens." --Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas, 1809. ME 12:288

"The man who fears no truths has nothing to fear from lies." --Thomas Jefferson to George Logan, 1816.

"I feel no falsehood and fear no truth." --Thomas Jefferson to Isaac Hillard, 1810.

"[One printer's] malignity, like that of the rest of his tribe of brother printers who deal out calumnies for federal readers, gives me no pain. When a printer cooks up a falsehood, it is as easy to put it into the mouth of a [great man] as of a smaller man, and safer in that of a dead than a living one." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law, 1811.

"From a very early period of my life, I had laid it down as a rule of conduct, never to write a word for the public papers." --Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. ME 9:340

"I never in my life had, directly or indirectly, written one sentence for a newspaper; which is an absolute truth." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1800. ME 1:435

"At a very early period of my life, I determined never to put a sentence into any newspaper. I have religiously adhered to the resolution through my life, and have great reason to be contented with it. Were I to undertake to answer the calumnies of the newspapers, it would be more than all my own time and that of twenty aids could effect. For while I should be answering one, twenty new ones would be invented. I have thought it better to trust to the justice of my countrymen, that they would judge me by what they see of my conduct on the stage where they have placed me, and what they knew of me before the epoch since which a particular party has supposed it might answer some view of theirs to vilify me in the public eye. Some, I know, will not reflect how apocryphal is the testimony of enemies so palpably betraying the views with which they give it. But this is an injury to which duty requires every one to submit whom the public think proper to call into its councils." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Smith, 1798. ME 10:58

"[I have seen] repeated instances of the publication of what has not been intended for the public eye, and the malignity with which political enemies torture every sentence from me into meanings imagined by their own wickedness only... Not fearing these political bull-dogs, I yet avoid putting myself in the way of being baited by them, and do not wish to volunteer away that portion of tranquillity, which a firm execution of my duties will permit me to enjoy." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:226

"Conscious that there was not a truth on earth which I feared should be known, I have lent myself willingly as the subject of a great experiment, which was to prove that an administration, conducting itself with integrity and common understanding, cannot be battered down even by the falsehoods of a licentious press, and consequently still less by the press as restrained within the legal and wholesome limits of truth. This experiment was wanting for the world to demonstrate the falsehood of the pretext that freedom of the press is incompatible with orderly government. I have never, therefore, even contradicted the thousands of calumnies so industriously propagated against myself. But the fact being once established, that the press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood, I leave to others to restore it to its strength by recalling it within the pale of truth. Within that, it is a noble institution, equally the friend of science and of civil liberty." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Seymour, 1807. ME 11:155

Reforming the Press

"My opinion of the manner in which a newspaper should be conducted so as to be most useful [is]... 'by restraining it to true facts and sound principle only.' Yet I fear such a paper would find few subscribers. It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more completely deprive the nation of its benefits than is done by its abandoned prostitution to falsehood." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:224

"Perhaps an editor might begin a reformation in some such way as this. Divide his paper into four chapters, heading the 1st, Truths. 2nd, Probabilities. 3rd, Possibilities. 4th, Lies. The first chapter would be very short, as it would contain little more than authentic papers and information from such sources as the editor would be willing to risk his own reputation for their truth. The second would contain what, from a mature consideration of all circumstances, his judgment should conclude to be probably true. This, however, should rather contain too little than too much. The third and fourth should be professedly for those readers who would rather have lies for their money than the blank paper they would occupy." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:225

"An editor [should] set his face against the demoralizing practice of feeding the public mind habitually on slander and the depravity of taste which this nauseous aliment induces. Defamation is becoming a necessary of life, insomuch that a dish of tea in the morning or evening cannot be digested without this stimulant. Even those who do not believe these abominations, still read them with complaisance to their auditors, and instead of the abhorrence and indignation which should fill a virtuous mind, betray a secret pleasure in the possibility that some may believe them, though they do not themselves. It seems to escape them, that it is not he who prints, but he who pays for printing a slander, who is its real author." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:225

Christopher A. Brown
07-29-2015, 08:32 AM
Of course all these are band aid actions. That's the point. It is temporary relief in the meantime while we wait to get a good leader in the White House who will fully support the Constitution.

Yes, but JFK was good, look what happened. See my last post.

If the people cannot be informed in a way to support their good leaders, or the laws which protect their lives with due process in the case if assasination, why would any step forward?

Clearly, the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech is the central and founding problem.

Ronin Truth
07-29-2015, 10:59 AM
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Christopher A. Brown
07-29-2015, 03:40 PM
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandhi

I don't understand, he was accountable, but you are not. What are you trying to say?

staerker
07-29-2015, 04:24 PM
Are you referring to direct democracy?

No, I mean great ideas, that force government solutions out of existence.

Current example: cryptocurrencies vs. bank controlled Fiat.

Sure, we all know sound money is better than Fiat. But it has been unable to compete effectively.

Cue future solutions.

Christopher A. Brown
07-29-2015, 08:40 PM
No, I mean great ideas, that force government solutions out of existence.

Current example: cryptocurrencies vs. bank controlled Fiat.

Sure, we all know sound money is better than Fiat. But it has been unable to compete effectively.

Cue future solutions.

I like the notion, but to be effective the same issue of unity is needed, or such lucrative activity/ideas that no one will bother with the government structure including its economics.

I should think that if such things were likely, or even possible, a few fairly advantageous ideas would be competing slightly.

I would venture that alternative societal structures that are more rewarding with greater stability and security might be something close to what you suggest rather than ideas that would merge with existing society.

Christopher A. Brown
08-02-2015, 09:53 AM
Every single post you've ever made on this site boils down to one statement:

"Seriously, it'll work this time, guys."

The framers' ideas crashed and burned during the framers' lifetimes.

This isn't on me: it's on you. Show one way in the last 240 years where these ideas actually worked.

I have posted facts showing that that the press prevented the people from learning about the framers intentions or subverted those intentions starting right after the framing documents were signed.

The framers ideas will work, but the people must be functional to make them work.

I would appreciate some logical function from you regarding the facts posted.