Dear Jonathan: Get this and get this good: Your "pushy" attitude on
MY post about MY New Constitution pegs you as a likely socialist-
communist. You are not wanted here, nor anywhere else in the USA! —
John A. Armistead — Patriot
>
On Feb 23, 2:56 pm, Jonathan Ashley <[email protected]>
wrote:
> How does John expect to implement his New Constitution if no one is ever
> allowed to read it? He sounds like a wanna-be dictator in the making.
>
> On 2/23/2011 11:45 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote:
>
> > That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has
> > scarcely been commented on. I am NOT wishing to have your nor anyone
> > else's feedback on what I have written! Most would love to see the
> > entire document so that they can make grandiose criticisms about this
> > or that. From my personal life, I have had head-to-head run-ins with
> > our corrupt state, local, and federal governments that allow me to
> > speak from personal experience that few if any other person could
> > have
> > had. That is why my New Constitution will immediately fire or kick
> > out of office any public official or employee, including the
> > President
> > himself, who does not respond appropriately for a logical request of
> > a
> > single law-abiding citizen for the redress of a grievance. To wit:
>
> > Substitute "Obamacare" and thats what the DEMS slammed down your
> > throats.
>
> > On Feb 22, 11:07 am, NoEinstein<[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Dear Keith: Thanks for your rational-toned reply. My New
> >> Constitution will indeed be copyrighted. But only those parts of it
> >> not copied and adapted from the original, public-domain document.
> >> This isn't being done for making money from the sale of copies, but to
> >> be sure no crazies print 'modified copies' that would, maliciously,
> >> make me look bad�as part of a socialist/communist plot to side-track
> >> my efforts.
>
> >> I'm not sure you nor others realize that my document has, for fourteen
> >> years, withstood the test of correcting the daily crises highlighted
> >> in the news, and the regular injustices coming from our courts. What
> >> is included is at least ten times broader in scope than the original
> >> constitution. Realize that I have had the advantage (over the
> >> Founding Fathers) of seeing what has and what hasn't worked with our
> >> Constitution.
>
> >> That 40% of my New Constitution which has been made public has
> >> scarcely been commented on. I am NOT wishing to have your nor anyone
> >> else's feedback on what I have written! Most would love to see the
> >> entire document so that they can make grandiose criticisms about this
> >> or that. From my personal life, I have had head-to-head run-ins with
> >> our corrupt state, local, and federal governments that allow me to
> >> speak from personal experience that few if any other person could have
> >> had. That is why my New Constitution will immediately fire or kick
> >> out of office any public official or employee, including the President
> >> himself, who does not respond appropriately for a logical request of a
> >> single law-abiding citizen for the redress of a grievance. To wit:
>
> >> "1st Amendment: No law shall be made regarding the establishment of
> >> peaceable religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, but
> >> government, its campaigns, processes, slogans, and disbursements shall
> >> be secular. No law nor private or civil action shall abridge: the
> >> freedom of speech; the freedom of a fair and pro-democracy press or
> >> other medium; the right of People to peaceably assemble; *** and the
> >> right of any Citizen or group to petition government or any of its
> >> branches or departments for redress of grievances. Citizens so
> >> petitioning government shall receive appropriate, relevant, timely,
> >> comprehensive, helpful and just responses from proper authorities who
> >> have thoroughly read, understood, and addressed each salient aspect of
> >> the grievances or requests for directions or clarifications. Failure
> >> to so respond to a rightful petition for redress of a grievance shall,
> >> on a single provable instance, terminate the apt one�s employment,
> >> especially those in management or public office�including judges and
> >> justices�who ignore, frustrate or give the run-around to any competent
> >> Citizen who has been diligent in having a grievance properly
> >> addressed, or in having his or her civil rights fully upheld. No
> >> judge or justice shall presume that by performing the above required
> >> duties, that they in any way might be compromising their objectivity
> >> or fairness in court; justice be not �blind�, but well informed.
> >> Freedom of the press or other medium mandates that there be reasonable
> >> truthfulness in reporting. Wanton distortion of the truth, or
> >> deliberate omission of the truth�except in cases of obvious fiction or
> >> satire�is prohibited. Stating or implying that a particular news
> >> medium has a collective voice (we) or position on any issue is
> >> prohibited, as for example via: anonymous editorials; regularly
> >> occurring accompanying comments; commentary programs financed by, or
> >> ideologically screened by, the same news medium; editorials named as
> >> being authored by management; editorial comments by others that are in
> >> any way ideologically censored, omitted or screened; or by comments
> >> occurring at specific times or designated locations that most would
> >> come to associate with the management of such medium, even if such are
> >> innocuous. No medium shall be a forum for promoting the ideology of
> >> its management or owners, nor shall they employ anyone who uses such
> >> job to hawk their personal political preferences�at risk of loss of
> >> license or closure of the business. Flagrantly editing news to
> >> promote the ideology of management is a felony. No medium shall
> >> analyze, assess, summarize, or make subjective judgments about any
> >> pending election or referendum. Nor shall they invite others outside
> >> of the media to do so. But factual, thorough coverage of the
> >> candidates or referenda issues�on an as occurs basis�is allowed,
> >> provided there are no comments, nor actions, as above, and provided
> >> the same unbiased coverage is given to all of the candidates or to all
> >> of the referenda issues. It shall be a 10 year felony to repress
> >> truthful news reporting in any medium by threatening legal action. No
> >> medium can be sued for libel for presenting material authored by
> >> others, but if a person is harmed by the medium�s content, they shall
> >> be allowed to reply�without editing�in
that medium. Each medium shall
> >> respond to breaking news without considering the response of any other
> >> medium. Injuries due to improper news coverage or non coverage shall
> >> not be excused by the media response. A medium reporting on
> >> government shall do so thoroughly, objectively, and with detachment�
> >> being neither laudatory nor critical by form, and not repressing
> >> thoughtful dissent nor its coverage. Every medium shall favor the
> >> truth over supposition, without parity nor bias. False or deceptive
> >> commercial advertising is prohibited. Deliberate use by any
> >> candidate, their staffs or election committees, of false or deceptive
> >> campaign speeches, slogans, advertisements, humor, or innuendo is a
> >> felony. No organization, nor part of the media, nor any special
> >> interest group(s) shall in any way endorse a slate of candidates for
> >> public office; flagrant violation is a felony. No medium shall
> >> display active public records without the free consent of the apt
> >> parties."
>
> >> Keith, the above should highlight the extreme attention to detail I've
> >> put into my document. No person, by a casual comment, shall have the
> >> "right" to denigrate my efforts. The following proviso is at the
> >> closing of my New Constitution:
>
> >> "Notes: (1.) *Italicized text represents portions of the New
> >> Constitution which shall be omitted unless separately and specifically
> >> approved by 60% of the voters. Voting to approve the New Constitution
> >> shall not be a vote on italicized portions. (2.) Any person, group or
> >> business which polls the People on their support or non support of
> >> this New Constitution or its parts prior to the national referendum,
> >> shall, retroactively, be guilty of a felony(s). (3.) The news media
> >> standards required, herein, as relates to coverage concerning this
> >> document, shall, following ratification of the New Constitution by the
> >> People, be retroactively applied to any news medium or person therein�
> >> including the full punishments relating thereto�for non compliance
> >> with the standards. Likewise, any judge or justice acting counter to
> >> this New Constitution regarding news coverage issues or any part of
> >> the ratification process shall be held fully accountable. The macro-
> >> will of the Citizens shall be Supreme!"
>
> >> � John A. Armistead � Patriot
>
> >> On Feb 20, 12:54 pm, Keith In K�ln<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>> Good Afternoon John,
> >>> Like Jonathan, Michael, and Mark, I too would like to see your New
> >>> Constitution that you ave talked about for at least several years.
> >>> Yes, I realize that you have posted various parts and pieces of this
> >>> document, but why not post the damn thing, for us to read and try to
> >>> understand?
> >>> Why the hesitation? Are you concerned about some sort of copyright
> >>> infringement? If that is the case, then
I can understand.....To a degree,
> >>> and you need only state that this is the cause of your hesitation.
> >>> Although I disagree with Michael (MJ) on
a number of occasions, I will say
> >>> that he is a well thought, well meaning
and logical gentleman and not one
> >>> who is apt to hurl insult or personal attacks on the board.
> >>> Just a thought, but obviously we'd love to see your work!
> >>> KeithInTampa (Today)
> >>> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 7:30 PM,
NoEinstein<[email protected]>wrote:
> >>>> Folks: The following was prompted by a direct email to me. (See
> >>>> below.) I'd like to share it with you. � John A. Armistead �
> >>>> Patriot
> >>>> 02/19/11
> >>>> Dear Robert (Prezioso):
> >>>> My first essay 'title-set" on
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
