Once again you have failed to answer the question posed. Instead, you have used a liberal mainstay: you have resorted to name-calling. How utterly patriotic of you.
On 04/22/2011 08:34 AM, NoEinstein wrote:
J. Ashley: You have failed to come up with a way to have the USA survive with anarchy and zero taxes—your ideal. So, bug-off, airhead. — J. A. A. —On Apr 21, 9:47 pm, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:John, You have failed to come up with a plan for putting YOUR New Constitution before the People for a vote.Jonathan: You get only one vote. Whether or not my New Constitution ratifies will be determined by the popular vote of the People, without any state boundariesï¿½the way all presidential elections must be in order to be fair! ï¿½ J. A. Armistead ï¿½ On Apr 21, 11:53 am, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:INLINE:On 04/20/2011 08:25 PM, NoEinstein wrote:> Jonathan: You should move to Alaska and build yourself a log cabin inthe wilderness.How do you know that I don't live in a log cabin in Alaska?> Since you would be living by your own hand, you wouldhave nothing to be taxed, and thus should be happy.I do not pay income taxes now.> The POWER in myNew Constitution is revealed only by having a problem, then reading my document and realizing that the solution to that problem is spelled- out!YOUR New Constitution does not (and never will have) any "POWER." It will never be enacted.> Frequently, the answers are found on several non-contiguouspages. But anyone who can read will see that they are protected.Can you say: convoluted.> Forexample: Though the words "speeding ticket" are never used, I can guarantee you that no municipality in the country will ever pull over anyone for a victimless crime. My New Constitution prohibits having any "fines" go to the government. So, there is no motive for pulling anyone over, since none of that fine can go to defray the cost of government.How do you propose to enforce such a guarantee?> Fines can be used for helping groups like United Way,however.That would still fall under the category of "theft" of my property.> If the police pull you over, it is they who will be most injeopardy of getting fired or jailed if they aren't deferential to you. And no person is required to show their ï¿½IDï¿½ to anyone. The police canï¿½t, on a whim, stop anyone and ask to see ï¿½your papersï¿½ like Nazis did in Germany. They must be respectful of the people, unless someone is known (beyond reasonable doubt) to have committed some crime. Then, and only then can the police play their game of cops and robbers. ï¿½ J. A. A. ï¿½Again, how do you propose to enforce such a guarantees?On Apr 20, 12:31 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:John, As usual, I find several problem with what you wrote. 1) YOUR New Constitution is so convoluted that those who gained power under it would be using it for a doormat within months of its passage. (That point is mute, however, since YOUR New Constitution will NEVER gain acceptance.) 2) Any form of government that requires me -- through taxation (e.g., theft) -- to perpetuate its existence is unacceptable. 3) Civil liberties are privileges that are granted. That is in direct opposition to freedom. Freedom is "a state of exemption from the power or control of another." If a government exists, those living under its dictates (however benevolent they may appear), are never free. Under any form of government, freedom is always illegal. 4) Government is "social engineering." On 04/20/2011 01:32 AM, NoEinstein wrote:Dear Jonathan: I read your self description of your being an anarchist. Is that why you dislike having a New Constitution that actually tells government what it can and cannot do? The very best and most efficient government would be a wise, benevolent dictatorship. But that would end when the dictator died. Government under my New Constitution is mandated to be run efficiently. And "social engineering" is banned. You should be on my side, because my New Constitution will have civil liberties that are the maximum, and costs that are approaching the minimum. That means all Americans will get to keep most of their hard-earned money! Would you rather have Democrats stealing your money? Then, rally behind my save-the-USA document! ï¿½ J. A. Armistead ï¿½ Patriot On Apr 18, 3:03 pm, Jonathan Ashley<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:John, That you own stock in a company that routinely downgrades websites based on "link relevance" over "content relevance" says much about your credibility regarding the understanding of what freedom of expression means. That you believe Obama "has caused more economic and social harm to the USA than any other person who ever lived, including Hitler" seems ludicrous. Just how has he (as an individual) been able to pull off this tremendous task? On 04/17/2011 09:05 AM, NoEinstein wrote:Dear Mark: I own Google stock. It's an American multinational Corporation that's headquartered in Mountain View, California. Google World shows the new complex quite well. In many ways you are very naive. Your obvious desire to protect Barack Obama's neck from the noose is tantamount to looking-the-other-way to those who commit TREASON every day of their existence. Would you put on moderation someone who proposes that Libyan President Kadafi should be killed? Do you suppose it is Google's obligation to protect those who kill their citizens? Hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans have committed suicide because of the bad economy and the lack of jobs resulting from Obama's socialist-capitalist policies. He has caused more economic and social harm to the USA than any other person who ever lived, including Hitler. Treason is a recognized capital offense. Those in our government and in our law enforcement who don't press to have that bastard arrested, tried and hanged are themselves in violation of the Constitution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Keith suggested that you, Jonathan and MJ are anxious to read my next "missive". He's viewed you all in a favorable light, before. As for me, I suspect you are so screwed-up in the head that you are both for and against having a better government. That means you have schizophrenia. Get some couch- time, Mark. You need it! ï¿½ J. A. Armistead ï¿½ Patriot On Apr 16, 10:28 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE<markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:Einstein, Again, you mistake me for someone that is liable under the present, or your future, US Constitution. The message you received is the standard message sent to all new or moderated members, get used to it. It originates from outside the US and is also not liable under US law. Isn't the internet grand when the originating country has the responsibility for what is or is not allowed under their law(s). On Apr 16, 7:11 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:Dear Keith: I sensed that there was a common thread of "reasoning" in those you name. My last missive, as you say, was explaining why Jews are causing a lot of problems and expense while seeming to be such nice people. Israel should become a training place for successful capitalism. Only the latter can start to heal the deep wounds Muslims feel. Today, when I posted: "Can The Donald 'Fix' the Thin Ice that the USA is skating on?" There was a message (Mark's responsibility?) saying that moderators must approve what I say. Of course that in UNCONSTITUTIONAL by both the present Constitution, and by my New Constitution, which requires that Mark be fired from his job. If you butterfly conservatives are starting to understand what I'm saying, then you should like to know that about 85% of my New Constitution has now been copied and pasted for interested citizens to read. The last 15% relates to problems with government which I have batted heads with, first hand. Once people begin showing appreciation for the 85% of my non-Stalinesk document, the remainder will become available. But NOT on this forum. The full document will be presented as part of a book containing my many essays and detailed rational for why this country needs a New Constitution Now. You guys can help speed things along by talking-up my document on the NET. ï¿½ John A. Armistead ï¿½ Patriot On Apr 16, 4:17 pm, Keith In Kï¿½ln<keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:Hey John! I am atwitter with excitement and anticipation! Jonathan, Mark and MJ are already chomping at the bit to sling complimentary praise and one of them maybe even will write a haiku in your honor! Sugarshack Literal Truth might even have an orgasm in anticipation of reading your next missive! On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 4:21 AM, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:Stay tuned, People! Tomorrow I will write you another essay explaining why the "ritual" of most of our political-governmental processes are either unconstitutional, wasteful of economic resources, or otherwise stupid. ï¿½ John A. Armistead ï¿½ Patriot On Apr 14, 10:44 pm, NoEinstein<noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:Like me, the readers must be busy with spring buying and fix-up. The present discussions will affect the fortunes and the liberty (happiness) of your grandchildren. There won't be any more fortunes.. read more »