RSS

Rising American Police State sees American People as Primary Enemy

26 Feb

It's not just a "radical" poster.  Obama in particular and government in general routinely violates the Constitution (the People's law).  As such, he is an "enemy" of the American people. [courtesy Google Images]

It’s not just a “radical” poster. Obama, in particular, and government, in general ,routinely violate the Constitution (the People’s law). As such, Obama and government are “enemies” of the American people.
[courtesy Google Images]

The principle enemy of the people of The United States of America is the government of the United States.  A lot of people would probably dismiss that opinion as crazy talk from the lunatic fringe.

But the adversarial relationship that exists between the American people and the American government is not the least bit unusual.  The primary enemy of the people of every nation is their own government.  Government seeks to convince that it’s “here to help us,” but it’s here to rule and exploit us.

Did Rome really fall to the barbarians?  Or did Rome fall to the Roman government’s excesses?

Was Italy ruined by the Allies in WWII?  Or was Italy actually destroyed by Mussolini and the Fascist Government?

How many Germans died in WWII?  Who reduced the nation of Germany to rubble–the Americans?  The Russians?  Or the Nazis?  Germany was destroyed by its own government.

Who destroyed the former Soviet Union?  The United States–or was it the Soviet Union’s government and its idiotic enforcement of the philosophy of communism?

Similarly, who’s responsible for bringing the USA to the edge of economic collapse changing the Land of the Free into a police state? Who’s responsible for the loss of our liberty, standard of living and the American Dream?

We the People are ultimately responsible, but that responsibility is primary based on our ignorance, apathy and willingness to trust our government.  But who is the real agent of our national decline and possible destruction?  Who’s the driving force pushing us to merge with Mexico and Canada and surrender our sovereignty to global bankers, fiat currency, multi-national corporations and the New World Order?  Our government.

The treasonous whores in the Cathouse on the Potomac are our principle enemies.  Not al Caida.  Not China or Russia.  Our government is our principle enemy.

The Founding Fathers understood this principle.  That’s why they enacted a Bill of Rights which is expressly intended to protect the People of the States of the Union from “misconstruction” or “abuse” of the “powers” of the Constitution.  The only people who have powers under the Constitution are the officers and employees of the federal government.  The Bill of Rights was to protect the American people from the tyranny of the federal government.

The rights of free speech, press and even religion are intended to protect us from our own government’s tyranny.  The right to keep and bear arms was intended from the beginning to protect us from our own government.  The second amendment was intended to preserve our capacity to shoot officers and employees of the federal government if they abused or misconstrued the powers they’d been granted under the Constitution.  (See, Preamble to the “Bill of Rights”.)

The American people don’t generally understand our adversarial relationship to government.  But government does, and that’s exactly why government wants us disarmed.  Government knows that Americans are beginning to wake up to the true nature of our relationship with government.  Government fears that if the people realize how badly we’ve been betrayed by our own government, that some Americans will begin to exercise their 2nd Amendment right to prevent the misconstruction and abuse of the powers of the Constitution.  Government knows that if the People ever really begin to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights, that government, itself, will be their target.

Therefore, as a matter of self-defense, government wants the American people disarmed.

It’s like bank robbery. The robbers don’t want to be shot when they rob the bank.   Therefore, the bank robbers seek to disarm the bank guards as a matter of self-defense.  The robbers walk into the bank, pull their guns and demand that the bank guards surrender whatever guns they have.  Once the bank guards are disarmed, the robbers an safely loot the bank. Likewise, once the American people are disarmed, our government can safely loot the country–not just of its wealth, but also of its rights.

The American people don’t want to face the fundamental truth that our relationship with government is adversarial.  I don’t blame them.  I don’t want to face that truth.  I don’t want to believe that we may one day be called to surrender to, or fight against, our own government.

But, I guarantee that the our government knows, faces and respects that truth.  Government knows that We the People are the primary enemies of Big Government.  Government is therefore making plans to deal with us as enemies.

Here’s a video that illustrates government’s awareness of the adversarial nature of its relationship to the American people:

video    00:06:37

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

255 responses to “Rising American Police State sees American People as Primary Enemy

  1. Applessence

    February 26, 2014 at 1:34 PM

    Alfred, ; ) not to be picky here, but referring to natural, creator-endowed, unalienable rights as ‘second amendment rights’ infers that the rights come FROM the second amendment, as opposed to being PROTECTED from infringement by the second amendment. I suppose GovCO loves it when we do this, as people seem to have come to ‘accept’ that their right to self defense from a tyrannical GovCo comes FROM the second amendment, so a lot of people spend time, money and energy defending their ‘second amendment rights’ (rights from a piece of government paper) and begging GovCo to not take them away.

    Unless I am missing something here, GovCo can only infringe on our natural, creator-endowed, UNALIENABLE rights, if we CONSENT and fail to prevent it ( and I don’t think the founding fathers are suggesting we beg GovCo to NOT take our rights away), otherwise, WE are in the driver’s set, as it were, and simply must say NO. HELL NO!, and display, if necessary, the courage and willingness to follow through with the Declaration of Independence:

    …“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”…

    THAT, I suspect, will get GovCo’s attention.

    Thank you for this article that will maybe clarify for the American people that the Government of the United States ( the private corporation located in the District of Columbia) is not only the primary enemy of a free republic, but they are a FOREIGN corporation, masquerading as a “government”, intent on taking away the freedom of Americans and serving only their own corporate interests.

    “sic semper evello mortem tyrannis”

     
    • J.M.

      February 26, 2014 at 4:00 PM

      Applessence, HOWDY,

      It is my understanding that the Constitution(s) do not “grant anything.” They, State & Federal Constitutions ONLY are SUPPOSED to SECURE those “rights” that are granted. The Holy Bible says in pertinent part: “WOE to those who deprived my people of their rights.” I think the forefathers KNEW what rights were being talked about, meant, etc.. What, if I may ask, do you think about this? Once again, the 39th Congress altered the 1789 Constitution into a 180 by creating ITS own class of “persons” & slowly but surely did things to cause practically EVERYONE to become that class or that status of “person.” The Creator is superior to that which is created. The 1789 Constitution is PURVIEWED via ALL the “appropriate legislation” so called Amendments and via appropriate legislation. A few rare birds have escaped this status & class by making certain adjustments, let’s say. ONCE AGAIN, anything I SAY is not for educational purposes. It is ONLY to HOPEFULLY, as Yartap says SHARE. BUT, I share information with SOME people <? I should not. Haven't figgered out a way to get around it yet.

       
      • applessence

        February 27, 2014 at 4:11 PM

        J.M., I am pretty sure the 1879 constitution is the US constitution for the District of Columbia, perhaps having been deceptively offered to Americans as a revision of The Constitution For The United States of America,c. 1791, but the 1879 constitution, just like all the “STATE OF……” constitutions that suddenly appeared, apply to federal territories deceptively named ‘similar to’ the names of the several states of the Union, specifically for the purpose of creating confusion and leading ultimately to Americans foregoing their American native/ state citizen/sovereign-by- International Treaty status by getting a ‘social security’ number, and checking, under penalty of pejury, no less, that little box that says “US citizen”, without wondering or questioning what, exactly a “US citizen” was, or is, which is a federal citizen of the District of Columbia.

        Federal citizens in the District of Columbia and the US territories do not have the protection of The Constitution For The United States of America, but rather have “civil rights” given to them by congress. Those “civil rights” can be taken away by congress just as quickly, as the constitution for the several states of the Union grants Congress complete and plenary power in the territories. Since The Constitution For The United States of America would not let the bankers and politicians infringe on the unalienable, creator-endowed rights of the people, all the bankers had to do was get the people to become territorial citizens, and then they could exert whatever ‘laws’ (corporate statutes) they wanted on their new ‘subjects.

        Congress has no ability to make laws within the states of the Union, only in the federal territories with similar sounding names (STATE OF CALIFORNIA, as opposed to the California Republic, or STATE OF NEW YORK, as opposed to New York State), and knowing that their legislation only applies in the territories, needed to get the people to willingly, if unknowingly, give up their sovereign status in favor of a territorial status (SSN and your address: CA 95401, as opposed to California, non-domestic mail zip exempt), hence all the BS today about all these territorial “unconstitutional” laws that the courts refuse to stop. They ARE “constitutional” in the federal States/’territories” of the District of Columbia, but NOT in the several states of the Union.

        As Alfred always points out: it’s a matter of venue. Where do YOU live and place yourself?

        From the U.S. Supreme Court:

        “All legislation is prima-facie territorial”
        American Banana Co. v. U.S. Fruit, 213 U.S. 347 at 357-358

        The “United States” is a Corporation:
        “A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government …”
        Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383

        CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL CODE
        SECTION 9301- 9342

        9307. (h) The United States is located in the District of Columbia.

        UNITED STATES CODE, TITLE 28, PART VI, CHAPTER 176, SUB CHAPTER A, Sec. 3002. Definitions (15)(A), p. 564 ”United States” means –
        (A) a Federal corporation;
        (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
        (C) an instrumentality of the United States

        From the U.S. Supreme Court:
        “All legislation is prima-facie territorial”
        American Banana Co. v. U.S. Fruit, 213 U.S. 347 at 357-358

        “It is a well-established principle of law that all federal regulations applies only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless a contrary intent appears”
        [Foley Brothers, Inc. v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281 (1949)]

        “The laws of Congress in respect to those matters[outside of Constitutionally delegated powers] do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government”
        [Caha v. U.S. 152 U.S. 211 (1894)

        “There is a canon of legislative construction which teaches Congress that, unless a contrary intent appears, [legislation] is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”
        U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222

        The following is from the Congressional Record of March 17, 1993:
        “It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress session of June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution to Suspend the Gold Standard and Abrogate the Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States governmental offices, officers, and departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.”

        Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis: thus ever death to tyrants

         
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 6:31 PM

      Applessence,
      @ >February 27, 2014 at 4:11 PM Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis: thus ever death to tyrants

      John Adams > The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea. AND,
      I, J.M., understand John Adams also said to a lady, “I must not write a word to you about politics, because you are a woman.”

       
      • J.M.

        February 27, 2014 at 6:36 PM

        Applesence, February 27, 2014 at 4:11 PM

        I also said, I understand dear one. I hope that whoever may not understand will read ALL of your message & research what you say in your message to see that you, Applessence, are telling the truth. < None of this posted.

         
      • hskiprob

        February 27, 2014 at 6:43 PM

        I have been told that women like politicians more than they like politics.

         
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 6:49 PM

      Applessence,
      @ > I am pretty sure the 1879 constitution ……..”

      I presumed this 1879 Constitution to be & meant the 1865 Constitution beginning with the 13th Amendment & the 1st “appropriate legislation” “power clause”. If I am mistaken, tell me more about this, new to me,1879 Constitution Thanks, Applessence

       
      • Applessence

        March 3, 2014 at 12:55 PM

        J.M., By legislative Act, on February 21, 1871, the District of Columbia was incorporated ( In the UK, I believe) ( Forty-first Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, page 419) and adopted for its constitution The Constitution For The United States of America, c. 1787, except with a few changes to insure that the Constitution OF the United States (located in the District of Columbia) protected the private corporation United States, rather than it’s ‘citizens’ (14th amendment ‘citizens’, or ‘persons’). That constitution was again reorganized June 11, 1878 –(16 Stat. 419 Chapter 62 ).

        On June 20, 1874, the President with advice of Senate abolished and replaced the 1871 government with a commission consisting of three persons. (18 Stat. at L. 116, chap. 337).

        A subsequent act approved June 11, 1878 (20 Stat. at L. 102, chap. 180) was enacted stating that the District of Columbia should ‘remain and continue a municipal corporation,’ as provided in 2 of the Revised Statutes relating to said District (brought forward from the act of 1871).

        DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. CAMDEN IRON WORKS,
        181 U.S. 453 (1901)
        http://supreme.justia.com/us/181/453/case.html

        METROPOLITAN R CO v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 132 U.S. 231 (1889)
        http://supreme.justia.com/us/132/1/case.html

        Corporate Officers
        ” … But by the Act of June 11, 1878 (20 Stat. chap. 180), a permanent form of government for the District was established. It provided …and that the commissioners therein provided for should be deemed and taken as officers of such corporation.”
        The District of Columbia v. Henry E. Woodbury,
        136 U.S. 472 (1890)
        http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/dccases/woodbury.htm

        “United States” is the “District of Columbia” incorporated.
        “The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a State” Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. § 1785,
        Also: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S. 0.1973, 14 L. Ed. 287

        In UNITED STATES CODE, Title 28,
        in Section 3002 Definitions,
        it states the following:
        (15) “United States” means—
        (A) a Federal corporation;

        US Titles and Codes, in their awkward definitions, call “DC” the “United States”

        The new “United States” includes States such as District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands. It does not include the 50 states united.
        i.e. Title 26 Section 7701 Definitions (a) (9) and (10) 42 U.S.C. 405 (2)(c)(vii)

        All Titles of the United States Code (USC) are strictly meant for the United States and none of the 50 states of the Union. Each of the 50 states have their own constitutions and laws. See Hepburn v. Ellzey, 2 Cranch, 445, 452, and John Barron v The Mayor and City of Baltimore 32 U.S. 243 (1833). These last two cases clearly state that the United States is not the 50 states of the Union.

        The source of this specific information ( though I have the same info in other files) is Jack Slevkoff, through a document called “American Governance”. He, while thoroughly investigating this material, is a “paytriot” and will not allow the material to be posted by anyone unless they pay him. While I will defend, to the death, his right to do that, my sentiments are more along the line of Alfred’s, inasmuch as if I have access to information that can free or improve the life of others, especially if I didn’t “pay” for the information in the first place, I am sorta honor-bound to pass that information along, without putting a “price” on it. Larry Stuler, on his blog llstulersblog.com (I think) has even more information on definitions in the codes for such words as “US citizen, US resident, and many of the other words and/or phrases we bandy about so casually today, not realizing that we are placing ourselves in a “federal place” or venue, as Alfred likes to refer to it, and subsequently undder the jurisdiction of Congress, as opposed to the protection of The Constitution For The United States of America, c.1787, and as amended c. 1791. lary feels the same as you and I and simply makes his research available, and he is incredibly thorough, with every statement he makes supported by cites from GovCo’s “codes” to support what he says.

        This is probably more info than you want, for which I apologize ; ) but, like Alfred, I may tend to be a bit long-winded, once I am ‘on a roll’. : )

         
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 7:37 PM

      Applessence,

      @ > ; ) but, like Alfred, I may tend to be a bit long-winded, once I am ‘on a roll’. : )

      Roll Beautiful River Roll on Beautiful River Roll on, I I have a notion you won’t get to the ocean alone.

      Wow !! I bet Alfred appreciates this comment from you if he is not aware of this information.
      Now, let somebody tell me that these appropriate legislation power clauses are of no purpose, meaning, etc. What you revealed was certainly not done by the “necessary & proper” power clause

      Applessence, I have lost track of the times I have said, that’s right, that’s right, that’s right when I read your & his comments. What can I say?? Hey Roll some more for those of us who do care.wow.

       
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 1:32 PM

      Applessence posted,

      @ >All Titles of the United States Code (USC) are strictly meant for the United States and none of the 50 states of the Union. Each of the 50 states have their own constitutions and laws.

      ALL of the/these “states” today, had to adopt/incorporate the 14th Amendment into their “State Constitutions” BEFORE they or ANY “state” could be “admitted” into the “New” “Federal Union of States.”

      ANY “State Constitution” itself, or at least once said, in the “State Constitution” this, i.e.> An agreement to be admitted into the (NEW) Federal Union of States, or in other words, no State could be admitted into the “Union” unless that particular State adopted the 14th Amendment & included it in the State Constitution.

      There is no doubt in my mind that Applessence already knows this. I am only saying this for those who may not know. So, once again, it’s the “Venue” issue, as Alfred talked about.

       
  2. genomega1

    February 26, 2014 at 1:39 PM

    Reblogged this on News You May Have Missed and commented:
    Rising American Police State sees American People as Primary Enemy

     
  3. EarlinOregon

    February 26, 2014 at 3:05 PM

    The Politics Of Obedience
    The Discourse Of Voluntary Servitude

    States are more vulnerable than people think.
    They can collapse in an instant — when consent is withdrawn.

    That is the thesis of The Politics of Obedience,
    one of the greatest and most thrilling political essays in the history of ideas.

    Written nearly a half-millennium ago,
    Étienne de La Boétie’s tract will shake the way you think of the state.

    His thesis and argument amount to the best answer to Machiavelli ever penned
    as well as one of the seminal essays in defense of liberty.

    Boétie’s task is to investigate the nature of the state
    and its strange status as a tiny minority of the population
    that adheres to different rules from everyone else
    and claims the authority to rule everyone else,
    maintaining a monopoly on law.

    And it’s obvious to Boétie that it can be overthrown in an instant
    if people withdraw their consent.

    But why don’t people recoil from the leach of the state?

    This question sends Boétie on a speculative journey
    to investigate the power of propaganda, fear, and ideology
    in causing people to acquiesce in their own subjection.

    He goes on to make a case as to why people ought to withdraw their consent immediately.
    He urges all people to rise up and cast off tyranny
    simply by refusing to concede that the state is in charge.

    “Resolve to serve no more,” he says, “and you are at once freed.
    I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over,
    but simply that you support him no longer;
    then you will behold him, like a great Colossus
    whose pedestal has been pulled away,
    fall of his own weight and break in pieces.”

    In all these areas, the author has anticipated Jefferson, Arendt, Gandhi, Spooner,
    and those who overthrew Soviet tyranny.
    This essay has profound relevance for understanding history as well as the present day.

    http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Voluntary-Servitude-Etienne-Boetie-ebook/dp/B00E1IWX2U/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1393444451&sr=1-2

    .

     
    • J.M.

      February 26, 2014 at 7:33 PM

      Hello EarlinOregon

      I’ve been thinking about cutting & pasting your advice, informative information, etc, & getting me a soapbox & reading as loud as I can every word you have posted over & over & over until I lose my voice. Now of course You will get credit for this information. My question is, will it help change anything? I don’t like to beat dead horses. I’m not doing enough & getting anywhere by going to “house to house” to talk to people. So, I thought maybe this soapbox idea might make a difference. Whatcha think? OR, any suggestions?? Other than aw shutup? lol

       
      • EarlinOregon

        February 27, 2014 at 2:42 PM

        How long has it been,
        since you Read your Bible?

         
      • EarlinOregon

        February 27, 2014 at 2:47 PM

        Those in Charge are Not going to Fix it,
        they are Not going to let us Fix it.

        Ask God for Salvation.

        Live your Life the Way you should,
        Help your Family and Friends become Saved,
        and Live the Life they Should.

         
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 7:15 PM

      EarlinOregon
      @How long has it been,
      @since you Read your Bible?

      Obviously you are another one who only reads responses to whatever you post & nothing else. I read everybodys messages. There is a reason for & WHY I do this. BESIDES, just READING the bible, doesn’t help much, if at all.

       
      • J.M.

        March 3, 2014 at 7:53 AM

        The Holy Bible ALSO says, PROVE ALL THINGS & HOLD FAST TO THAT WHICH IS GOOD. It DOES say this RIGHT !!! Prove all things & hold fast to that which is GOOD !!!

         
    • Doug

      March 1, 2014 at 8:24 AM

      My firm position is: God is always right and I’m usually not. If one will commit to living their life according to God’s simple plan laid out for us in the Bible, he/she will be content regardless of the world’s hatred towards them for doing so.

       
      • J.M.

        March 1, 2014 at 7:08 PM

        Doug,

        @ > My firm position is: God is always right and I’m usually not

        Same here, or in other words, I agree with what you, Doug, say. Hope you are not puzzled by me saying this.

         
  4. overkills

    February 26, 2014 at 3:36 PM

    the communist muslim in charge is taking our country down. the people need to start thinking about our country and not makeing money . the same goes for the freeloarders.they need to start to wake up and leason to what is going on with our country. and vote for tea party patriots to be put in our government. and the vietnam vets got to get to gather and fight for our constitution and our freedom one way our the other im a vietnam vet im getting old and it brakes my heart the way our country is going the people just dont care.god save us all.because someday you will answer to him. thank you.

     
  5. Californian

    February 26, 2014 at 4:03 PM

    Fear God and take your own part…Theodore Roosevelt.
    I fear God and have prepared to take my own part. A year ago, I was a Patriot. Now I am no longer ignorant thanks to internet and the law library. Now I am a Citizen of Heaven and free inhabitant of the California Republic.

     
  6. J.M.

    February 26, 2014 at 4:26 PM

    The link below is a 3 + minutes Video of a Mussolini speech. Obama & Mussolini show alike gestures, etc, to me anyway. ALSO this is the way I SAW Martens/Jetlag trying to get their high level reading & their higher than high level “understanding” of the sacred word of God crammed into dear hearts & gentle people. I don’t know if the link below will bring this video up. If not, just type in “mussolini speech” & this will bring it up. At about one minute into the video you will see arrogance etc. almost beyond belief & it just get worse as you watch.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOv..

     
  7. hskiprob

    February 26, 2014 at 7:00 PM

    In my opinion, government by it’s nature is unethical because it takes property from those it rightfully belongs to and gives it to those it does not rightfully belong to. A separate issue is our ethical obligation to contribute to our society and each person is different in that regard as each can and does contribute in different ways and means.

    As the size of government increases, the more revenue that must be extracted from society to pay for the expansion of government costs. Government appears to be almost like this self replicating parasite, that keeps growing, not be consensus, but by various factions attempting to maximize their own self interests. The military industrial complex as an example, has expanded drastically over the years but so has the agricultural department, education, Medicare, etc. No one entity is killing us but collectively, government just keeps on growing, creating a greater demand for taxation and regulatory fees. The Citizens can only handle so much taxation and regulation before they start to rebel. We are sadly way past that point, for the majority of Citizens. However, government keeps printing money and spending it through the government, hence government employees, gov. contractors and welfare recipients, both individuals and business, continue to be well off, while many in the private sector are drowning under the high cost of government and inflation from the increased government and deficit spending.

    People think that by taxing government employees, they are equally contributing to society. In actuality, they are just giving back some of what they take from the private sector through taxation, since they government employees are not the ones who create wealth, the private sector is. Government is an expense to society and the higher the expenses, the harder it is to make profits to pay higher wages, reinvestment, taxation, etc.

    It’s surely an antithetic relationship. Government is supposed to protect our rights, but it must take away our property rights to have the money to protect our rights. The question is, are we getting our money’s worth. It appears to me that the ruling class, I call the oligarchy, since a pretty small group actually controls the government, utilizes government to get the lower classes to pay for things that benefit them to a higher degree. For instance, national defense. The majority of wealth and assets in this country that need protecting, are owned by less than 5% of the population, but yet the lower and middle classes pay a greater share of their disposable income to government. The most the average person has in this country is a home. Most individuals can protect their own homes themselves and collectively they could protect most of America, if properly armed. The wealthy are who needs help protecting their property and interests. As we’ve all seen, the U.S. Military is around the world protecting the property and wealth of the multinational and the central banksters, who finance them. The answer is that the majority really never get their monies worth because they do not have the political and economic wealth and clout to make it happen.

    Government employees are of course content under this system until such time as the system fails under it’s own economic burdens as all nations have eventually done. Basically the government costs get so high the private sector can no longer afford to remain solvent thereby causing unemployment and mass bankruptcies.

    It appear almost impossible to reverse this trend, as there is a saying in socio-economics, that everyone wants to cut the budget, but they prefer that it is the other agencies budget. The politicians each with their special interests end up compromising by expanding and extending the debt ceiling, thus bringing our nation just that much closure to imploding. No one has the crystal ball or knows specially what will happen that triggers the event because history has shown us many different events in the various nations over the millenniums. If you don’t thing it can happen to us, that would make us the first in world history to survive this economic cycle.

     
    • J.M.

      February 26, 2014 at 7:51 PM

      Hi Skip, my great friend,
      @ > If you don’t thing it can happen to us, that would make us the first in world history to survive this economic cycle.

      THEN there IS HOPE. There’s always a FIRST time for everything !!! lol
      About this implosion. What do you see happening? It seems to me an implosion is inevitable.

       
      • hskiprob

        February 27, 2014 at 11:41 AM

        I can only speculate, I’m obviously not in the loop.
        About 5 or 6 years ago when I was working in gold & silver sales, I heard a couple of interesting conversations that a couple of the other brokers had with their clients. If it were from the same source, it wouldn’t be that interesting, but it was from different sources and improbably that any of the entities would have known one another. 1. A company similar to Brinks, according to it’s owner was transporting Ameros. 2. A printing company, according to an employee was in process of printing Ameros. 3. Another owner of an engraving company, had created some of the printing plates for the Amero. All these conversations were described by different brokers and I was the one that had the 3rd conversation. Co-incidental? Just google Amero, and you’ll spend all afternoon reading various articles, pictures and all.

        So basically it’s a currency exchange. What is does is wipes out all the “dirty/black market” money and allows them to suppress prices by lowering the amount of money in circulation. Generally it has been done by calling a bank holiday and allowing people, that can “prove” their money, time to exchange it. The key question is the ratio of $USDs to Ameros that they are going to try to implement. Will it be 1:1, I don’t think so. Will we get 1 Amero for every $2.00 we exchange? I wish I were in the loop.

        That’s what I would do if I were in their, the central banksters, shoes. If they just continue to allow the USD to inflate, it will eventually go to being worthless, as all fiat currencies have eventually done. The USD has already lost 97.31% of it value; not that far to go. I can remember a picture during the final days of the cold war. An ex-Russian soldier in an alley, had stacks of rubles in front of him, being used as kindle to keep him warm.

         
    • overkills

      February 26, 2014 at 8:28 PM

      we need smaller government and less spending .quit giving money to other countrys. for a start. then stop sending our jobs over to other countrys.the government should not throw stones in glass houses. and as for hope it is just about gone because the older people that care are about gone. we can reverse this we can start over like when the depression was over . people are going to half to live with a hole lot of nothing i dont know ,but this is how i fill. thank you

       
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 1:45 PM

      Skip,
      What was that saying, etc, about, ain’t worth a continental damn? It said something about a guy pushing a wheelbarrow FULL of Continental “dollars” approaching a merchant, & he went inside the place of business for a few seconds, came back out, & saw all the “money” on the ground because the wheelbarrow “disappeared.” Wheelbarrow was gone??? ANYWAY, a N.W.O. aka ONE world government having a one world currency makes sense. Don’t seem to make any difference what IT is called. I need some forms to fill out to be bailed out of debt like what was done for General Motors, remember? I need to be bailed out of debt too. Are you aware of who I need to contact to get these be bailed out of debt forms. I don’t really know what the correct or proper name of these bail out forms is. This is probably the “key” & that is, requesting the right thing. Any advice will be appreciated.

       
      • hskiprob

        February 27, 2014 at 5:49 PM

        J.M. I’m trying to get on the list as well. Either the debt relief or the printed money at the 0.25% interest is OK with me. Apparently, I have not yet made it onto the worthy status list.

         
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 7:03 PM

      Hello dear friend Skip,
      @ >I have been told that women like politicians more than they like politics.

      Back in the days when John Adams said, “I must not write a word to you about politics, because you are a woman.” “Overall” women were modest. Today, & for a long time, Skip, YOU are right. AND politicians love, excuse me, LUST for the opposite sex EXCEPT for the SADS, excuse me, Gays, there we go, yeah right, GAYS aka FAGGOTS, aka QUEERS & excepting of course the BI & TRI ITS. What is that song they play at Disneyland, Oh what a wonderful world, is that the name of it? Oh what a wonderful world?? Yeah, I think that’s it, OH WHAT A WONDERFUL WORLD. Let’s stay friends now.

       
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 7:19 PM

      Skip Robinson,
      @ I can only speculate, I’m obviously not in the loop.

      GOOD !!! That LOOP has a lot of LOOPHOLES so you don’t need to be in IT anyway.

       
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 7:46 PM

      @ > I’m trying to get on the list as well.

      People LIKE US are already on the loop’s list

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 1:53 PM

      @ > In my opinion, government by it’s nature is unethica…………..”

      That’s not just an opinion, it IS a FACT. It is TRUE.

       
  8. Timmy

    February 26, 2014 at 11:04 PM

    Al, very good. But please, as a man who trades in important ideas, and therefore language, get it right between “principle” and “principal”. Two entirely different words, with different meanings.

    Normally I accept that most people are ignorant of such things, but for someone like you, I think it important that you get this right. Great work as always, aside from that quibble. (But think of the difference between “inalienable” and “unalienable” rights, for example. Words matter. They are the containers for ideas and communication.)

     
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 12:11 AM

      Timmy
      Oh dear me. Nobody is perfect. I think you, Timmy knew exactly what each word meant, regardless of where it was accidently inserted. Am I right? But you know what? I betcha he is glad you brought this to his attention. Now remember, we are supposed to be brothers & sisters so don’t be upset with me for what I have said. OR, I’ll spank you with ALL of my stamp of approval documents. & YOU KNOW you don’t want any part of that.lol

       
  9. sherayx

    February 27, 2014 at 12:10 AM

    Madness.

     
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 12:15 AM

      Sherayx
      @ > Madness.

      Still, it doesn’t hurt to know. What is the latest info you have on Mountain man Ernie. Did the Militia arrest that Judge?

       
      • sherayx

        February 28, 2014 at 2:04 PM

        I am sure they haven’t, no it does not hurt to know. We r suppose to know now, or we wouldn’t. This has all been orchestrated, to lead us into believing we r so caught up, and through maybe it won’t be right away. And mountain man Ernie was one man against many, when that one man turns into many. And the enforcement wake up, and realize, before it’s their turn. Their r no militia’s every one that tried were strong armed, I call it that because that is what it is.along with a glob of madness. Thanks again for posting, peace

         
      • sherayx

        February 28, 2014 at 2:04 PM

        I am sure they haven’t, no it does not hurt to know. We r suppose to know now, or we wouldn’t. This has all been orchestrated, to lead us into believing we r so caught up, and through maybe it won’t be right away. And mountain man Ernie was one man against many, when that one man turns into many. And the enforcement wake up, and realize, before it’s their turn. Their r no militia’s every one that tried were strong armed, I call it that because that is what it is.along with a glob of madness. Thanks again for posting, peace

         
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 4:01 PM

      sherayx

      Thanks for responding. Well believe it or not my dear, there a few more of us Mountain Man Ernies out here. In my first “appearance” It was almost EXACTLY like Ernie’s. What I said would not be allowed to go through on this blog. & I said what I did with much emphasis & great vigor Know what I mean? Even mentioned the FLAG too except I said I am not subject to your yellow fringed flag quasi martial law/military jurisdiction Also told the magistrate with great vigor to take a long run off a short “dock.” just in case it was Admiralty/maritime I repeated the same mistakes as mentioned above EVERY TIME but finally it got to the point, I just didn’t say ONE WORD. A BIG difference in Ernie’s “appearances” & mine WAS & IS, I ALWAYS appeared in an ORANGE monkey suit Even for THEIR 1/2 jury trials. I wonder why? Now don’t you know they just bent over backwards to make me look like an innocent good.ol boy in front of THEIR 6 person “JURY” By the way, 6 is SATAN’S NUMBER but his number is just about up. sherayx, any info you get on Mountain Man, post it. I don’t think Alfred brought this up for no reason,i.e. original information. I’m interested even IF nobody else is.but I cannot accept that I’m the ONLY ONE who cares..ANYWAY, sherayx just so you know, Mountain Man Ernie ain’t alone.

       
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 7:44 PM

      @ > We r suppose to know

      We R ?? I didn’t know that.

       
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 9:45 PM

      sherayx
      February 27, 2014 at 12:10 AM

      @ > Madness

      YOU, sherayx, are a non-fictional female Sherlock Holmes. Yes U IS 2. Do you dye your hair? lol
      lol means a little bitty chuckle

       
      • sherayx

        March 8, 2014 at 10:37 PM

        Lol means a little bitty chuckle… it means laugh out loud.
        No sh-t Sherlock when did u get the first clue? Do u dye ur’s I think my hairdresser should only know for sure, don’t u?

         
      • J.M.

        March 9, 2014 at 1:23 PM

        Hi sherayx

        Coming from me, lol means, little bitty chuckle.Coming from me, LOL means laughing out loud. The picture of you, tells me, IF this IS a picture of you, then you ARE a very modest little girl. I like modesty & natural beauty. No make up. To me it’s phony but to each his/her own. I like your depth of perception too human nature in the raw.

         
  10. Al Lopez

    February 27, 2014 at 6:26 AM

    Reblogged this on The Firewall.

     
  11. Buck

    February 27, 2014 at 3:20 PM

    “treasonous whores in the Cathouse on the Potomac”

    So direct, succinct, and to the point. I like it!

     
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 12:51 AM

      @ >“treasonous whores in the Cathouse on the Potomac”

      Buck, SHAME ON YOU !!! Quit saying such NICE things about ALL those REPS, etc In D.O.C.

       
  12. Buck

    February 27, 2014 at 3:22 PM

    Al,

    I think you need to cover “inalienable” vs. “unalienable” again, just for Timmy.

     
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 10:49 PM

      Buck,
      @ > Al,
      @ >I think you need to cover “inalienable” vs. “unalienable” again, just for Timmy.

      Buck, you say, AGAIN. Please, if possible, tell me how I can see, read what WAS said about “inalienable” vs. “unalienable” by Alfred. I want to see what Alfred said. OR, if anyone can help me out in the regard, please do.

       
    • J.M.

      March 1, 2014 at 11:40 PM

      Buck
      February 27, 2014 at 3:22 PM
      @ Al,
      @ I think you need to cover “inalienable” vs. “unalienable” again, just for Timmy.

      Once again, WHERE is this information? What thread? Am I asking too much? Sure will appreciate you telling me. IT WILL BE TELLING OTHERS TOO !!!

       
      • Adask

        March 2, 2014 at 10:11 AM

        You could type “unalienable” into the search engine located near the top right corner of this blog. The result would be a list of several dozen articles that I’ve posted that touch on, or are devoted to, the subject of “unalienable”.

        Or, you could just go to: https://adask.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/unalienable-vs-inalienable/ which reflects the essence of the difference between the terms “unalienable” and “inalienable”.

         
  13. Toland

    February 27, 2014 at 5:49 PM

    If the principle enemy of We the People is our government, does this make those who would overthrow the government our friends?

     
    • hskiprob

      February 27, 2014 at 6:03 PM

      Toland, overthrowing the government has historically been a fruitless venture over the long term as the people in real power pulling the strings remain in power. The issue is government itself as currently being operated doesn’t work. You need a better system. Until such time as the Citizens control justice, you will never beat the oligarchs at the game they control as the literally pay off the judicial system.

       
      • Toland

        February 27, 2014 at 6:17 PM

        Greetings, hskiprob.

        Could you post the URL of the Wikipedia article on this “better system” you refer to? I’d like to read up on it, thanks.

        By the way, is that a picture of you in your avatar? Just curious.

         
      • hskiprob

        February 28, 2014 at 8:12 AM

        Toland, this is just an opinion that I have been trying to promote at http://rsjexperiment.wordpress.com/home/ I haven’t gotten much pushback on it, nor support which is interesting. That could be an indication that perhaps I might be on to something.

        Your constructive critic, or anybody else’s would highly appreciated.

         
      • J.M.

        March 3, 2014 at 8:12 AM

        @ >Toland, overthrowing the government has historically been a fruitless venture

        Overthrowing “human nature” will a fruitful venture. Human nature is the “natural pull to do wrong.”
        What is the “source of what is right & what is wrong, Skip? Regardless of what happens between you & me, you still have the “good qualities” I told you about, at least I hope you do. I don’t know what to think anymore about some people.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 3, 2014 at 9:12 AM

        J.M. – Some people believe that man is inherently evil and they use babies actions as examples. Children must go through learning processes to establish their moral code and they are the ones that choose their path. However, we are highly motivated by such things as culture, religion and government and thus we should perhaps look to those institutions as a source of the human dilemma. Robert Podolski, The BORG Wars – Big Business, Religion and Government have offered poor systems of social order and thus, he believes as I that such organizations pose the greatest threat to the human experience. Obviously enough people disagree with this and thus the world continued to be stuck in some what of a stale mate.

        Even those we have tons of experiential, historical and scientific knowledge and logical discourse that proves why government/socialism/fascism/communism fail, there is a huge group of educated people who still believe that there is a way to make government, as we know it, work at providing what is in the best interest of the majority. Organized Religion has sadly been both a benefactor and co-conspirator with such government polices over the ages.

         
      • J.M.

        March 5, 2014 at 3:16 PM

        Skip, You say,
        @ >Organized Religion has sadly been both a benefactor and co-conspirator with such government polices over the ages.

        I believe, you, Skip, are right. I suppose you could say, I am in an “Unorganized” “Religion.” Actually, this word, “Religion” is the wrong word to use in the “Church” I am in. The Enemy is very “religious” at/in doing what IT does too!! Oh yes indeed. Did you get my question to you about Thomas Jefferson, the man who you, Skip said, “surely he, Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian” and yet, he, Thomas Jefferson said, Christianity IS “the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man.”

        Why would Thomas Jefferson say something like that? If it takes a “Unitarian” to be that intelligent, I like that kind of “Unitarian” thinking. It seems to me that,Jefferson, as you Skip call him, was not a Unilateral Unitarian. What am I misunderstanding here?

         
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 11:18 AM

        I agree with Jefferson. I have said a similar thing. What I said is that Christianity is the only major religion that embraces offers love instead of hatred of those that do not believe as they do. Or at least that is supposed to be the case. Many have forgotten or seem to ignore that aspect of Christianity; forgiving people for their sins and mistakes. That does not mean that I have to believe that Jesus walked on water. I believe in the philosophy of Christ, I do not believe that Jesus’s real father wasn’t Joseph and that Mary was impregnated by him, or that he rose from the dead.

        I think that Jefferson’s editing of the Bible, provides a bit of insight into his belief but there are countless other examples of his belief system.

         
      • J.M.

        March 5, 2014 at 8:37 PM

        Hey Skipper,

        You never did answer my question on what it was you were trying to “persuade” me to do. When you get time, if ever, & although Q rahsity kilt the K-utt, tell me what it is you were trying to persuade me into. > You, Skip, say, > My intention is not to mock you, it is to try to persuade you.

         
      • J.M.

        March 8, 2014 at 2:02 PM

        Skip,

        @ I think that Jefferson’s editing of the Bible, provides a bit of insight into his belief but there are countless other examples of his belief system

        How do I go about finding out MORE about this Jefferson’s EDITING of the Bible ???

         
      • hskiprob

        March 8, 2014 at 2:35 PM

        J.M. Google the Jefferson Bible. I’m pretty sure it is in the Library of Congress.

         
      • EarlatOregon

        March 8, 2014 at 10:42 PM

        Jefferson Bible

        The Jefferson Bible,
        Smithsonian Edition:
        The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth

        In 1804 Thomas Jefferson decided to study the gospels
        to see if he could distill the essence of Jesus’ teachings
        into a concise book that could be quickly read and easily understood.

        After completion of The Life and Morals, about 1820,
        The most complete form Jefferson produced was inherited by his grandson,
        Thomas Jefferson Randolph,
        and was published in 1895 by the National Museum in Washington.

        Once published in black-and-white facsimile by the Government Printing Office in 1900
        as a gift for new members of Congress,
        the Jefferson Bible has never before been published in color in its complete form.

        The Jefferson Bible, Smithsonian Edition
        is an exact facsimile reproduction based on the original copy in the Smithsonian collections.

        The Jefferson Bible is the result,
        offering valuable insights into the teachings of Jesus Christ
        and into the mind and beliefs of Thomas Jefferson.

        http://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Bible-Smithsonian-Morals-Nazareth/dp/158834312X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1394336233&sr=1-2&keywords=jefferson+bible

         
      • hskiprob

        March 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM

        Jefferson, I’ve read, took out all the miracles and what I call hocus pocus out of the Bible when he edited it. The one thing for sure, he was even less fond of religious leaders, such as priests or others of the Church.

        Like myself, I believe Jefferson though Jesus to be one of the great men in history, but not the begotten son of God. A couple of quotes to give you some insight. There are more.

        “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.” -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816

        “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814

         
      • J.M.

        March 10, 2014 at 3:37 PM

        @ >I think that Jefferson’s editing of the Bible

        Many people are STILL following “Jefferson’s” lead today. They, the serious well meaning students of the Bible discard certain scriptures because the scriptures APPEAR to contradict or be in conflict with “other” scriptures. Actually, they just don’t “appear” to be in conflict, they ARE in conflict with other scriptures to some other people. I thought so too, well NO, I KNEW so too, or so I thought. There WAS a time I thought the Bible was/is the most confusing, contradictory piece of junk imaginable. I actually hated it. I remember kicking the Bible one time in disgust. But, “God” was calling me to understand the Bible & a little piece at a time. I say this based on what happened which IS a long story. See, I was trying to understand this Bible with my own mind & nothing else. That WAS the problem & I mean to say it WAS/IS A BIG PROBLEM. People with a high IQ & with a sincere approach CAN understand this Bible to some degree or another. I do not have a high IQ & I’m not saying I understand EVERYTHING written in the Bible. I do not think I do understand EVERYTHING written.BUT, I have challenged ANYONE to bring up ANYTHING written in the Bible that seems to be in conflict with something else.So far, no takers. HOWEVER, as I said, I do not understand “everything” & just maybe, someone might bring up a scripture that I might, or not understand either. I will be honest enough to say I don’t know what it means, or yes it does seem to be a contradiction, etc. BUT here is another thing. I am not going to discard that seemingly conflicting scripture BECAUSE of prior other experiences that PROVED I was DEAD WRONG in my prior understanding. Those of US who are “called to understand” WILL come to understand AS WE YIELD & to the extent we do so,i.e. YIELD. I am not ashamed to say I lay flat on the floor, which I think is being more humble than down on both knees to pray. Actually, I do both, lay flat on the floor & then on my knees YES BOTH KNEES to hopefully cover one of the ways as being acceptable. But, we can be sitting too OR standing. It depends on our “heart condition” as to whether or not our prayer will be heard & accepted. Know what I mean???

         
      • hskiprob

        March 10, 2014 at 5:12 PM

        J.M. This is not pointed towards you but have you noticed as soon as you try to get people to do anything for others today, especially when it takes real time and even a little effort, especially from the more educated class, they run for the hills. As if college is teaching people to be selfish and competitive towards one another rather the working together.

         
      • J.M.

        March 10, 2014 at 5:52 PM

        Skip, you say,
        @ J.M. This is not pointed towards you but have you noticed as soon as you try to get people to do anything for others today, especially when it takes real time and even a little effort, especially from the more educated class, they run for the hills. As if college is teaching people to be selfish and competitive towards one another rather the working together.

        1. If it’s not pointed towards me, why are you sending this message to me?
        2. If it’s not pointed towards me, who is the you it is pointed towards?

        @ the more educated class, they run for the hills

        Education does have its benefits. I never said they were dummies..

        @ working together.

        Once again for the 5th time now, why do you & others REFUSE my request to answer my PLEA for help? MY ONE & ONLY PLEA? How is THIS working together? Well, it’s obviously working for ALL of you & yours. Anyway, things will all workout in the end

        2 For men shall be lovers of their “own selves”, covetous, “boasters”, “proud”, “blasphemers”, disobedient to parents,(Is your Son disobedient to you?) “unthankful, unholy,”

        3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, “despisers of those that are good, or those who are trying to be good.

        4 Traitors, “heady”, “highminded”, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

        5 Having a form of godliness, but “denying the power thereof”: from such turn away.

        So come on back & show just how highminded, haughty, boastful, & how PROUD you are of yourself.

        In other words, keep up the good work, & keep working together. I remember you saying the only way to “deal with people like me is to RIDICULE people like me. Once again, I see a long rope. I may be banned before it happens, but it’s going to happen sooner or later. Keep ridiculing. You just might ridicule the RIGHT one. One means, Man.

         
    • Doug

      March 1, 2014 at 8:27 AM

      The enemy of my enemy could deliver worse consequences … but, we may have to take that chance in order to remove the baby killers in D.C.

       
  14. hskiprob

    February 27, 2014 at 5:58 PM

    My understanding is that unalienable and inalienable are synonymous, if you are being serious.

     
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 7:34 PM

      @ > My understanding is that unalienable and inalienable are synonymous, if you are being serious.”

      Well I’m SERIOUS. WHY the change in ONE letter? Oh yeah that’s right the U takes more ink to print than the I & using the I saves INK & PRINTING COSTS. We have Holidays & we have Holydays. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE. ONLY ONE LETTER IS CHANGED. I -Y

       
      • hskiprob

        February 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM

        J.M. Apparently you don’t like the idea the “in” and “un” may have enough similarities so that they are synonymous when alienable is added to them. Jefferson used unalienable. We also have to, too and two. Lots more problems with the Inglish language, to worry about it. You want a kick. Try reading the Magna Charta and ixplain all the clauses in it to me.

         
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 8:50 PM

      Skip, I like the letter U in the word UNalienable. NO !!! I do not like the letter I in the word INALIENABLE Once again, WHY the change in ONE letter?? Which came FIRST, UNalienable or INalienable.??? Skip, I’m not upset with YOU. I AM pissed BECAUSE I KNOW or, think I do, WHY the change took place. BUT, I guess it don’t matter no more no how. Well NO !! It does MATTER, at least to me. NOW REMEMBER, I will ALWAYS stand to be corrected with one & only one exception. Just don’t try to confuse me with the FACTS. lol. Look Skip, You might as well get accustomed to it. I ain’t gonna let you get away from being my friend. I gonna hang on your back like a tick on a dog’s back.lol

       
      • J.M.

        February 27, 2014 at 10:54 PM

        @ >Well NO !! It does MATTER,
        Maybe I should have said,Well YES, IT DOES MATTER. Got to cross every T & dot every i. I sorry.

         
      • hskiprob

        February 28, 2014 at 7:38 AM

        JM – I’d like to know the differential aspects of “un” and “in” alienable. I’m sure you’ve read the differences in the definition of money over the course of our history.

         
      • palani

        March 1, 2014 at 8:40 PM

        @hskiprob “the “in” and “un” may have enough similarities so that they are synonymous”

        Your neighbors car is on fire in his driveway. Nobody is around. You run into his garage hoping to find an extinguisher. Instead you find two containers. One container is marked ‘INFLAMMABLE’ and the other container is marked ‘UNFLAMMABLE’. But you really don’t care which one you pick because they are synonymous?

        If you have any doubt as to the meaning here is the DOT HAZARD CLASS III sign for INFLAMMABLE. http://www.accuform.com/transport-shipping/hazard-class-3-MSLSP4

         
      • Yartap

        March 2, 2014 at 7:58 PM

        Hi Skip, Here you go….

        UNALIENABLE vs. INALIENABLE

        The etymology of the two differing prefixes, “un” and “in,” come from different origins. “In” comes from the Latin; while “un” comes from the Old English origin of the 16th century. “Un” disputes the Latin-derived cognate “in,”- the right to form the negation of certain words (indigestable / undigestable, etc.), and though both might be deployed in cooperation to indicate shades of meaning (unfamous/infamous), typically they are not.

        But, our definitions of unalienable and inalienable come from American courts.

        “Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred.”
        Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition,
        “You cannot surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and cannot under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual’s have unalienable rights.”
        “Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights.” Morrison v. State, Mo. App. 252 S.W. 2d 97, 101

        “You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons have inalienable rights. Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights.”
        “It has been well said, by one of the ablest judges of the age, that a “constitution is not to receive a technical construction, like a common law instrument or a stature. It is to be interpreted so as to carry out the great principles of the government, not to defeat them.” Per Gibson, C.J. in Commonwealth v. Clark, 7 Watts & S. (Pa.), 133. Butler V. Com. of Pennsylvania, 51 U.S. 402 (1850)

        “The very highest duty of the States, when they entered into the Union under the Constitution, was to protect all persons within their boundaries in the enjoyment of these “unalienable rights with which they were endowed by their Creator.”, U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

        “….The first ten amendments to the Constitution, adopted as they were soon after the adoption of the Constitution, are in the nature of a bill of rights, and were adopted in order to quiet the apprehension of many, that without some such declaration of rights the government would assume, and might be held to possess, the power to trespass upon those rights of persons and property which by the Declaration of Independence were affirmed to be unalienable rights. United States v. Twin City Power Co., 350 U.S. 222 (1956)”

         
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 9:10 PM

      @ >Try reading the Magna Charta and ixplain all the clauses in it to me.

      Who am I to try & explain anything to anybody?? People consider the source. I’m not a good source. Actually I am thought of as a BAD source by some people & called a FOOL for saying some things I do. BUT later when these same people come across a SCHOLAR that says the same thing I did and was called a FOOL for saying it, all of a sudden they can’t get the Scholarly information posted QUICK enough. LOOK-E here what this scholar says.This makes sense BECAUSE it IS a scholarly opinion?? But, still I ain’t smart enough to know that it ain’t gonna do no good for me to keep on keeping on being the FOOL I am said to be. You, Skip, say Thomas Jefferson used UN UN UNalienable. What’s wrong with that? I think what we are having here is a failure to communicate. OF course I KNOW it must be my fault. I’m serious.

      Thomas Jefferson, > I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. AND, But friendship is precious, not only in the shade, but in the sunshine of life, and thanks to a benevolent arrangement the greater part of life is sunshine.

       
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 11:11 PM

      Skip,
      @ >Try reading the Magna Charta and ixplain all the clauses in it to me.

      palani can but I don’t think palani will. I only know my understanding of it. BESIDES has it made any difference as to what it says? WHO CARES??? What about ALL of the other founding documents??? WHO CARES?? Aren’t they all just a lot of toilet paper with CRIMINAL SURNAMES signed on them ??? ASK Mladen, aka Mark. Besides that, my understanding of the Supreme Court Justice Scalia saying the Constitution IS DEAD is a different than what some other people think. DEAD to me means just that. DEAD !!! It doesn’t have any LIFE in it anymore. IT IS NO LONGER A LIVING DOCUMENT.

       
      • hskiprob

        February 28, 2014 at 7:28 AM

        J.M. Partially true. The oligarchs will utilized the Constitution when it favors or protects their interests or actions and abrogate it when it does not. If the people would standup and attempt to protect their rights, it would make it, at least, more difficult for them. Of course there are those who benefit financially by acquiescing their rights and going along with both the usurpations of rights and the abrogations of the Constitution, like the corrupt Judges and prosecutors.

         
    • J.M.

      March 2, 2014 at 12:08 AM

      Skip,
      @ “The officers intentionally destroyed the video and thereby put exculpatory evidence as far as the search is concerned or evidence favorable to the accused out of the reach of the accused,” Martin’s attorney claimed. “We feel that for no other reason the search is invalid and any evidence found as a result of that search should be suppressed.”

      The appellate court found no merit in this argument.

      @ >“The United States Supreme Court has held that ‘unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law.’”

      Skip, that which is showing above is a cut & paste from your link. What “due process of law do you think the court is referring to? Here is where some people’s lack of knowledge is falling short. Do you want me to explain WHY the Court said, “NO MERIT?” Or, do you already know.? “Due process of law is the KEY.. The Court IS right. BUT The Court is RIGHT for WRONG REASONS. WANT TO KNOW WHY ?

       
      • hskiprob

        March 2, 2014 at 9:06 AM

        J.M. – Yes, please explain the answer on merit and why you think the judge was right for the wrong reasons.

        I’ll agree that abortions are murder for this discussion and this discussion only because the majority of people agree as I. Lousy answer I know and not my real answer.

        There are two reason that I do not believe abortion should be against man’s law. Note that I acknowledge man’s law and Gods law are potentially two separate entities.

        Why we lie to one another about how great the other person looks, is that a sin? It’s called a white lie. I would agree that abortion is also a sin but I would not encourage society to place government into the position of enforcing this particular sin, just as I do not believe government should enforce many sins, especially those that are considered malum prohibitum, such as vice or jay walking.

        Here is my real answer: I do not trust our justice system, devious people and religious zealots to properly and justly enforce abortion. When I speak of religious zealots, I’m describing those individuals who found it God’s work to hang the Martyrs of Boston Common, The Salem Witch Hunts, the Christian Crusades, murdering abortion doctors, etc. The devious people are those who are willing to lie under oath to achieve an evil means, such as false accusations. The justice system; I should not have to explain why they are so often wrong in their enforcement in the various aspects of the law. Just ask the families of all those people who have been imprisoned and/or put to death, later to be found innocent, through such means as DNA or withheld evidence.

        In conclusion, I believe the punishment for the sin of abortion should be left in Gods hands. I think it is wise to give way to God to either forgive those and/or punish them.

         
    • J.M.

      March 2, 2014 at 10:19 AM

      @ >Skip, you say, ” I think it is wise to give way to God to either forgive those and/or punish them.

      I, J M. say, Oh lord please give me a long black Cadillac. I deserve at least this much there’s no doubt about that. And oh lord please make me a multimillionaire then I’ll have lots of friends & lots of girls who really care. Lord it ain’t fair for you to deprive me of these things. So let’s get movin let’s get groovin is there anything else to explain???? Skip, quit saying all these witch hunts,etc., were Christian activities. You said you have a “Christian” for a friend, Jeff, I think you said. And yet you say Jeff would sure like to know about “that scripture” Remember?? It’s in the FIRST Book of the Bible, FIRST CHAPTER and he, Jeff is a Christian?? Dear LORD. NO WONDER MY KING & MY “God” said, how long must I endure you? I have to be away for a while. When I get back I will TRY to answer you question about “that” Court decision. In the meantime, check “that” Constitution out & see if you can LOCATE 2 “due process of law provisions.” If you don’t care enough to do that. I won’t care enough to “paint” you a “picture.”

       
      • J.M.

        March 2, 2014 at 10:28 AM

        P.S. I said when I get back. I may not get back. I am a member of the “BARE BUMPER CLUB.” So far, the bare bumper club has only ONE member.

         
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 2:12 PM

      Skip, you say,

      @ > There are two reason that I do not believe abortion should be against man’s law. Note that I acknowledge man’s law and Gods law are potentially two separate entities.

      Do what??? How can “God’s LAW say, do not commit murder & you, Skip, say, that you do not believe committing murder should be against man’s law?? ABORTION IS MURDER !!!!

       
  15. hskiprob

    February 28, 2014 at 7:18 AM

    J.M. Looked it up in Black’s Law and it’s synonymous. Not subject to alienation. Things that cannot be sold, bought or transfers to other. Incapable of being alien, that is sold or transferred. Rights that cannot be abridged because they are so fundamental.

    When I ixplain it, I tell people it is those thing that humans desire that are necessary to them to go out into the world so that they may do those things necessary to survive and pursue happiness. I must work and I should be able to choose those jobs which make me happy and which others will compensate me for my work. I would not probably be very happy, if I do not get paid for my work, because how than, would I be able to pay others to do work that I cannot do.

    Capitalism is the ability to find something that people need or desire, and be able to fulfill that need or desire without taking away the rights of others.

     
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 10:34 AM

      Dear Skip,
      Your friendship means more to me than debating whether Unalienable v. Inalienable mean the same thing. Still, WHY the one letter change? Didn’t you say that Thomas Jefferson used or said Unalienable? Al,

      “I think you need to cover “inalienable” vs. “unalienable” again, just for Timmy.”

      I asked Buck IF he would tell me how I could find where Alfred discussed this. As you can see, I did not get an answer. It’s not just for me. IF Buck had cared enough to tell me how I could find out about Alfred’s discussion on “inalienable” vs. “unalienable” this would be a service for everybody. Apparently this is not taken into consideration. Since I asked for this HELP it’s not important enough to respond to. Anyway, you my buddy,Skip.

       
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 10:55 AM

      Skip,
      Only PART of SOME of my messages sent to you are going through,e.g. the last one. This is BAD. Ok as far as Noah’s Are goes it’s one more of those 5 senses deals. IF it don’t fit, it’s just more B.S. Noah’s Ark was the largest ship ever built UP TO & until our own lifetime. Figure out the building instructions given in the Bible. STILL, it will not fit into OUR 5 senses. Ask Alfred Adask IF HE believes this Noah’s Ark “tale.” You know what? I bet he will say yes. BUT even if he says NO, I will STILL believe it is a TRUE STORY. There are always more than one way to get the job done, per ALL those animals fitting into Noah’s ark. IF all of this message does not post, I’m outta here.

       
      • J.M.

        February 28, 2014 at 10:56 AM

        It ALL posted.

         
      • EarlinOregon

        February 28, 2014 at 7:09 PM

        If you put Baby animals on that Ark,

        they will Fit,
        they Eat Less,
        and they Dont fight.

         
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 10:03 PM

      @ >There are stories from around the world of the great flood and many tell different versions, some even predating the Biblical story. All the rest must be wrong??

      I believe that what is said in the Bible about the “FLOOD” & the Noah’s Ark Bible Story IF that’s what you want to call it is TRUE. If you want to ridicule it that is your business. I AM NOT asking you to believe it. I am not upset with YOU, Skip, for NOT believing it. WHY are you upset with me FOR believing it. YOU Skip, are not being FAIR. It never fails. ANYTIME The Bible is brought up it always leads into bitterness,etc. Why don’t you just admit it YOU are at BEST an agnostic. BUT that’s ok. That’s YOUR business.Also, it’s NOT my problem. You have your problems I have mine. This will BE the LAST time I post this that which is showing below. Maybe it will not post. Maybe ONLY part of this message will post. I don’t know. Quit mocking me Skip.Quit goading me.

      Thomas Jefferson, > I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. AND, But friendship is precious, not only in the shade, but in the sunshine of life, and thanks to a benevolent arrangement the greater part of life is sunshine.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 1, 2014 at 8:41 AM

        J.M. As far as agnosticism, why much a person believe in the Bible to believe in God? Why can’t each person have their own relationship with God and live their lives the way they each interpret, rather than by the rules and principles set in a specific book? To me that is the essence of deism or the Unitarian belief.

        My intention is not to mock you, it is to try to persuade you. I have not one bit of malice or any other attitude towards you and actually love your spirit as I do some of my own family. Two brothers, my only daughter and my best friend, Jeff who I have mentioned before are Christians. I fear my son is an atheist. I wish I could say to them and ask them the things I ask you, as I think you are man enough to read my thoughts and opinions and “not” take them as malice. Sadly, religion, the spiritual belief systems of human beings, is a contentious matter in our world. We cannot deny that and how it would be a great thing to be able to even bridge that gap of contention a small amount.

        As an example Noah’s Ark being a “cruise”. I surely was inputting a bit of sarcastic, but I was really trying to instill some humor into my analysis of the event, not to mock you, but to make it a bit more interesting. If the event is real, can you imagine the turbulent seas that they would have had to encounter and endure. I doubt the rains were just drizzles. A boat, even of that magnitude would have been tossed around, like a dingy in a hurricane. The “cruise” would have not been the sunset one to remember.

        I believe there is enough scientific evidence that proves the great flood occurred, but I do not believe it was due to the wrath of God, nor do I believe the great amount of bloodshed during the Civil War, as Lincoln noted in a speech, was due to God punishing our nation for legalized slavery.

        Another Christian libertarian friend of my who now deceased, actually said that America will never be a great nation, until abortion is criminalized.

        How can anyone believe such a notion????? and how can someone like Lincoln, an obvious bright man, think such a thing. People who are apposes to slavery are subject to the wrath of God, because they have not been able to expel as the tyrants/fascists that remain in our nation? It doesn’t make sense, to me at least, that God would act in this manner. To me, these are the erroneous beliefs of men, who grasp onto any idea the can find, to support their spiritually sense. As if to say to themselves, it must be this, there can be no other reason. It the same thing with those cultures which actually believed, that they must sacrifice a virgin, to appease the Gods.

         
    • J.M.

      March 1, 2014 at 4:01 AM

      Hey Skip,
      Because of newly discovered “evidence” & facts, I now have to say you are RIGHT. Our beloved President uses INALIENABLE. So since he is the Commander and Chief of the U no what & since HE says INalienable that must be the correct term or word. I am so sorry to have been in error for so long. See we need to consider the SOURCE.Agreed? Of course. STILL, I guess I will never understand why & for what purpose a single vowel change took place but it’s no big deal. When I am wrong I WILL FESS UP & SAY SO. Obama uses inalienable & that’s what we need to remember above anything else.

       
    • J.M.

      March 1, 2014 at 3:10 PM

      Skip, I hope ALL of this posts.

      @ > J.M. As far as agnosticism, why much a person believe in the Bible to believe in God? Why can’t each person have their own relationship with God and live their lives the way they each interpret, rather than by the rules and principles set in a specific book? To me that is the essence of deism or the Unitarian belief.

      What is your “source” of your beliefs?

      @ > My intention is not to mock you, it is to try to persuade you. I have not one bit of malice or any other attitude towards you and actually love your spirit as I do some of my own family. Two brothers, my only daughter and my best friend, Jeff who I have mentioned before are Christians. I fear my son is an atheist. I wish I could say to them and ask them the things I ask you, as I think you are man enough to read my thoughts and opinions and “not” take them as malice. Sadly, religion, the spiritual belief systems of human beings, is a contentious matter in our world. We cannot deny that and how it would be a great thing to be able to even bridge that gap of contention a small amount.

      Persuade me? persuade me to do, or be, or think like,what?
      I certainly do not take anything you,Skip, say in your words above, 2nd paragraph, to be malice. I see humbleness, which has different degrees of course. No, dear one, I cannot read your thoughts. I do respond to what it SEEMS like you are saying. This is where people who care CAN help one another out in that a reply should say, we either are or we are not understanding one another’s meaning, etc. About your son. ONLY those who absolutely & “KNOWINGLY” reject the teachings of the ONE & ONLY “God” are the ones to be concerned about. We cannot reject anything we are not aware of Also, when you put > lol As an example Noah’s Ark being a “cruise”. I surely was inputting a bit of sarcastic, but I was really trying to instill some humor into my analysis of the event, not to mock you, but to make it a bit more interesting. If the event is real, can you imagine the turbulent seas that they would have had to encounter and endure. I doubt the rains were just drizzles. A boat, even of that magnitude would have been tossed around, like a dingy in a hurricane. The “cruise” would have not been the sunset one to remember.

      Once again, lol says a lot. LOL says a lot too. Remember what I said about your frog in the pocket remark, how, IF you did not put lol after that, remember how I said it would have UPSET me? BUT, since you did have the lol after your statement it made me smile & chuckle. However, if you had put LOL. I would not have responded to you at all & NEVER would respond to you again. IT IS so HARD to express TRUE feelings & intentions sending messages like this EVEN when ALL the message goes through and which sometimes does NOT all post, go through. & when this happens what does go through is out of order, context, it’s really a mess at times.

      @ >I believe there is enough scientific evidence that proves the great flood occurred, but I do not believe it was due to the wrath of God, nor do I believe the great amount of bloodshed during the Civil War, as Lincoln noted in a speech, was due to God punishing our nation for legalized slavery.

      I appreciate your honesty. I’m with you on your thoughts, > due to God punishing our nation for legalized slavery. As to your belief of WHY the Flood, I believe otherwise. BUT this difference of opinion, belief, or whatever anyone wants to call it, should not matter 1 iota as to the diminishing to ANY degree of a TRUE friendship

      @ >Another Christian libertarian friend of my who now deceased, actually said that America will never be a great nation, until abortion is criminalized.

      Abortion IS CRIMINAL !!!! IT’S MURDER !!!!

      @ How can anyone believe such a notion????? and how can someone like Lincoln, an obvious bright man, think such a thing. People who are apposes to slavery are subject to the wrath of God, because they have not been able to expel as the tyrants/fascists that remain in our nation? It doesn’t make sense, to me at least, that God would act in this manner. To me, these are the erroneous beliefs of men, who grasp onto any idea the can find, to support their spiritually sense. As if to say to themselves, it must be this, there can be no other reason. It the same thing with those cultures which actually believed, that they must sacrifice a virgin, to appease the Gods.

      As we sew, so shall we reap. A puzzle for me is, WHY must the innocent suffer the consequences?
      E.g., If a man or woman has, well let’s say, AIDS, & the woman becomes pregnant, the poor innocent child is BORN, HOW?? UNLESS THE CHILD IS ABORTED, of course, it is the result of SOMEBODY BREAKING a LAW or, LAWS. This LAW MAKER is REJECTED. I don’t have ALL of the answers either, not by a long shot.BUT I do KNOW WHY things ARE the WAY they ARE. But, once again,TRAGIC to say, this is where all the disagreements, bickering, hatred,, etc. starts & this meaning, What I KNOW doesn’t “jive” with what SOME other people KNOW. I don’t want to.try to persuade ANYONE to believe what I believe. I WILL always stand ready to be corrected BUT I also have to consider the source. I’m not very good at this, YET. As YOU, Skip, there are some devious people in this world, They ARE ALL SMARTER than I am. BUT I don’t want to be SMART “LIKE” THEY ARE. I hope all of this posts. Shalom

       
      • J.M.

        March 1, 2014 at 3:21 PM

        Skip,
        My message Did not post correctly. What can I say. Your comments & my comments to your comments were SEPARATE. Now it’s intermixed in the 3rd paragraph & with part of my comment NOT posting in the 3rd paragraph oh well. What do we do. This only happens when Bible issues are being discussed. At least as best as I can recall. I have this same problem with e mails too .This is a fairly new computer, about 5 months old.

         
      • EarlinOregon

        March 1, 2014 at 4:56 PM

        J.M.

        People who say there is no God,
        do so
        either because they want to do Sin,
        or
        there is someone in their Life ,
        they have not Forgiven.
        .

        .

        Ask your son these Questions –

        Who in your Life,
        have you not Forgiven?

        Have you ever Hurt someone,
        by what you have Said or Done?

        Do you want to be Forgiven,
        for the Hurt that you have Done?
        .
        .

        (finally)
        .
        .

        How can God Forgive you,
        unless you Forgive?

         
      • J.M.

        March 1, 2014 at 5:48 PM

        @ > As YOU, Skip, there are some devious people in this world.

        See what I mean? I KNOW there was a SAY word in the above statement. What is showing above IS saying, Skip YOU are devious. It should have posted this way, >As YOU, Skip, SAY, there are some devious people in this world. This IS an entirely different meaning. Sooner or later, I am going to be banned if this keeps up. AND it’s easy to see why. ALL that needs to happen is for the message to be sent to Alfred. I hope you Skip, understand what I am saying. ANYONE who receives a message from me that says he/she is devious would be upset with me.

         
    • J.M.

      March 2, 2014 at 9:42 AM

      @ > Skip, you ask, > “As far as agnosticism, why much a person believe in the Bible to believe in God?”

      Is this your way of saying you ARE an agnostic? I think it is. Then you say you are sad or “fear” that your son is an atheist? I wonder why. OK I just saw your request to explain the “court decision.” Also, in one of my posts/messages to you it said, Skip, you are devious. I don’t know how the word “say” got deleted. I KNOW I saw it. Maybe I’m losing it. The statement should have showed up on your end like this, > As YOU, Skip,SAY, there are some devious people in this world,

       
      • J.M.

        March 2, 2014 at 7:32 PM

        @ > ANYONE who receives a message from me that says he/she is devious would be upset with me.

        Anyone other than self centered ANIMALS.

         
    • J.M.

      March 2, 2014 at 1:17 PM

      Made it back SAFE. Don’t know about the sound part tho.. I LOVE my “LORD.” HE IS SO GOOD TO ME !!!!! My mind needs to rest. Don’t know how to make my mind rest. Body, yes, mind no. Sometimes I wish I didn’t care for others like I do. It’s apparently a part of the OVERCOMING process.

      Ok Skip, did you see or find any TWO due process of law clauses in the “Constitution(s)?” I mean, the 1789 AND the Constitution beginning with the 13th Amendment, THAT Constitution which started the 180 degree TURN? If not FORGET IT.

       
    • J.M.

      March 2, 2014 at 3:09 PM

      SKIP,
      You, Skip, SAY > J.M. Looked it up in Black’s Law and it’s synonymous

      ok. So, What MR BLACK says, supersedes, overrides, replaces, overrules, overturns the MEANING, as understood when UNalienable was written in the Statute of 1776 aka the Declaration of Independence. ok I’ll go along with Mr. BLACK. AND also I like to be with the MAJORITY AND also, I like to be wishywashy BECAUSE it’s the right thing to do. I want to be with the WINNERS.

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 2:19 PM

      Skip,
      @ > J.M. As far as agnosticism, why much a person believe in the Bible to believe in God?

      What does “believing” in “God” mean to you, Skip?? What do you mean by belief ?? Just saying “God” exists?? What about DOING or TRYING to do what “God” SAYS to do?

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 2:25 PM

      Skip, per UNalienable v. INalienable,you say,

      @ Which ever way it is, the ignore it anyway.

      If you had said this UP FRONT look at ALL the energy, time, etc. that would have been saved & NOT WASTED & we would still be friends.

       
    • J.M.

      March 10, 2014 at 6:12 PM

      Skip,
      @ >.J.M. dude we have heard this before and know what you mean.

      You don’t know crap from shinola about some things & neither do I. We both have at least that much in common. I read in a case one time, I do have some good ones, where the court said, We will make our judgement based on the Holy Bible & the common law, in that the Holy Bible IS the source of the common law. I got the cite for that one. Are you interested? Oh it’s not done this way no mo, I know. But just thought you might be interested so you could have something else to condemn & ridicule. By the Common Law & by the Holy Bible which is the source of the common law, yep, that’s what the court said. Yes they did too.

       
  16. kanani

    February 28, 2014 at 8:34 AM

    Prepare your & your family’s face to be stamped on by a boot; for eternity.

    George Orwell

     
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 10:07 AM

      Kanani
      @> Prepare your & your family’s face to be stamped on by a boot; for eternity.

      WONDERFUL !! MAKE MY ETERNITY. Not ANYTHING GREATER CAN HAPPEN. I doubt that you know why. BUT, a FEW people understand what I mean.

       
      • hskiprob

        February 28, 2014 at 10:29 AM

        J.M. – dude we have heard this before and know what you mean. I think he is meaning more reality than spiritual eternity, but I could be wrong.

        It like believing the story of Noah’s Ark. Is it a true depiction of what exactly happened or is it a spiritual novel depicting a historic event. Trying to get all those critters on a big boat and feeding them, shoveling their poop and stopping them from killing one another for forty days and nights, would have been an incredible “cruise”.

        There are stories from around the world of the great flood and many tell different versions, some even predating the Biblical story. All the rest must be wrong??

         
      • EarlinOregon

        February 28, 2014 at 7:13 PM

        those stories may have predated,
        the available Copies of the Bible,
        being written,
        but those stories,
        are just Retold versions of the Bible-writings.

         
  17. J.M.

    February 28, 2014 at 11:03 AM

    @ >I think he is meaning more reality than spiritual eternity, but I could be wrong.

    Only Kanani could explain but I don’t think Kanani will. Eternity means, to me, NEVER ENDING, GONE, GOOD BYE THAT”S ALL SHE WROTE DEAR JOHN YO SADDLE GONE, IT”S ALL OVER ROVER GOODBYE FOREVER FOREVER FOREVER FOREVER FOREVER. < How long is that?

     
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM

      @ >dude we………….”

      I know I’m the DUDE but WHO ARE THE WE???? Are you, Skip NOW thinking I am one of those “devious” people? I say what is on my heart & mind. It’s just that ONCE AGAIN,sometimes, only part of my messages post & THEN what does post is out of order. GIVE ME A BREAK !!!

       
    • J.M.

      February 28, 2014 at 9:48 PM

      I think this IS what kanani meant. RIGHT Kanani? Your no response will be presumed to be that YES J.M. you are RIGHT. Eternity means, NEVER ENDING, GONE, GOOD BYE THAT”S ALL SHE WROTE DEAR JOHN YO SADDLE GONE, IT”S ALL OVER ROVER, GOODBYE FOREVER, & FOREVER, FOREVER, FOREVER, FOREVER & FOREVERMORE. < How long is that?

       
  18. J.M.

    February 28, 2014 at 11:39 PM

    Job 16:20

    My friends scorn me, but I pour out my tears to God.

    Yes, our so called fair weather friends scorn, goad, belittle, mock & laugh. but that’s ok. I know the end result. For the umpteenth time, that’s all that matters is the END RESULT. Saying this tho only makes them laugh HARDER.What arrogance to think IF don’t fit into their 5 puny little senses it doesn’t exist. Thank you Almighty Heavenly Father for giving US the strength to endure all this ridicule, mockery, goading & poison mental darts that sink deep into our hearts. Help me to STOP being STUPID. AND IF there any others like me,STUPID because we want to be trusting, help them too but I doubt that there are any others, as stupid as I am. We don’t really lose friends. You cannot lose something you NEVER really had. Not anything is lost but something IS gained. AND it’s for our good. I’m a lurnunn Thank you for your concern.Thank you for your patience. Thank you for caring

     
    • J.M.

      March 2, 2014 at 7:20 PM

      Sorry, I was talking to myself.

       
      • J.M.

        March 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM

        Just another don’t think twice remark. It has more to do with what I was thinking & who I was thanking. Putting my feelings in print. & made public. Really sharp ain’t I.

         
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 11:52 AM

      Re : @ “Their” 5 puny little senses.

      Actually, these 5 wonderful marvelous senses is overwhelming evidence of a SUPERIOR Intelligence existing IF anyone would “think” about it but since we have always had them we just take them for granted. I once knew a man, & he was born blind. One day, out of many times, I saw him in his wheelchair, & when I said hey Robbin, how are you, He said, Jim !!! Nice to SEE you. He obviously could see “more” & HEAR more than some of us do.

       
      • J.M.

        March 3, 2014 at 5:22 PM

        Actually, these 5 wonderful marvelous senses ARE overwhelming evidence of a SUPERIOR Intelligence existing.

        ARE not IS.

         
  19. J.M.

    March 1, 2014 at 6:05 PM

    EarlinOregon

    @ > People who say there is no God, do so either because they want to do Sin, or there is someone in their Life they have not Forgiven.

    My belief is, there IS a lot more to it than what you, EarlinOregon, are saying. I KNEW of families that had several children. SOME turned out decent. Some of their brothers & sisters DID NOT. They ALL had the SAME “upbringing.” Born, Bred, & Reared/RAISED the SAME way. Different results. I think EACH “person” IS “unique.” BUT this does not make ANYONE more “special” than anyone else.

     
  20. Sam Kadasky

    March 2, 2014 at 6:34 PM

    Inalienable is a French word meaning not alienable. The Latin prefix in- means “not”, e.g. inescapable, inexpensive, invariable.

    The native English equivalent is unalienable, also meaning not alienable. The Latin prefix un- means “not”, e.g. uncertain, unemotionally, untidy.

    Alienable means capable of sale or transfer.

    As often happens, the English language uses both a native word and an imported French synonym interchangeably.

    Thomas Jefferson wrote “inalienable” in his draft of the Declaration of Independence. Benjamin Franklin, who was a newspaper editor, changed it to unalienable.

     
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 11:33 AM

      HAY SAM. WOW !!! That was sure enlightening. Your ENTIRE message. I didn’t know ANY of that.
      THANKS HEAPS !!!

       
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 11:38 AM

      Heaps. By heaps, I mean,a large, disordered pile of things which fits your message, Sam.

       
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 5:34 PM

      @ >Thomas Jefferson wrote “inalienable” in his draft of the Declaration of Independence.

      RIGHT !!! This IS what we need to remember first & foremost & above all & anything & everything else. The final finished document itself is ……..ahhhhhh take it or leave it or whatever, it’s not important no how & no way. it’s the DRAFT that matters. This is what IS IMPORTANT. IS is important better than WAS important? shucks I dunno, Whatcha think IS or WAS??? WAS it or IS it ???

       
      • hskiprob

        March 3, 2014 at 5:48 PM

        If this is true, It appears Jefferson didn’t mind either word. “Thomas Jefferson wrote “inalienable” in his draft of the Declaration of Independence. Benjamin Franklin, who was a newspaper editor, changed it to unalienable.”

        Which ever way it is, the ignore it anyway.

         
  21. J.M.

    March 2, 2014 at 7:19 PM

    palani

    March 1, 2014 at 8:40 PM

    @hskiprob “the “in” and “un” may have enough similarities so that they are synonymous”

    You light up my life OH YEAH !!! Way to go palani. You are precious. I think I have lost another friend tho It is sad. Will these weary go rounds ever stop/ apparently not.The, or one of the first things I said to Skip, was, You have a happy smile.

     
  22. J.M.

    March 2, 2014 at 11:25 PM

    ” Morrison v. State, Mo. App. 252 S.W. 2d 97, 101
    ” Per Gibson, C.J. in Commonwealth v. Clark, 7 Watts & S. (Pa.), 133. Butler V. Com. of Pennsylvania, 51 U.S. 402 (1850)
    United States v. Twin City Power Co., 350 U.S. 222 (1956)”

    The way it was is not the way it is. When Any court talks about the way it was BEFORE the WAR amendments were added doesn’t apply to the way it is today. When excerpts are cut & pasted from Court decisions talking about something the way it was in 1850 & we take what they say to STILL apply today just isn’t the way it is. If we only want to know how it WAS this is one thing. If we want to know how it IS, today, IS another thing. Besides, the way it IS, today, I had a case that came right out & CLEARLY said UP FRONT, that Children were property of the Federal Government. It did not get into the aspect of whether or not “grown ups” were property of the Federal Government. Did it have too? If anyone asks me for the case this will mean you don’t think I’m telling the truth.I got so disgusted with some of the cases I had, I burned them. Temporary insanity I guess. U.S. v. Twin City Power Company talking about Unalienable Rights?? ok

     
    • J.M.

      March 3, 2014 at 8:33 AM

      Yartap,
      Sorry, You get the credit for the above cases. What I said is my understanding, not yours. So if anyone wants to be upset, be upset with me, not yartap.

       
  23. Sam Kadasky

    March 3, 2014 at 6:44 PM

    hskiprob,

    We can be sure that Jefferson wrote inalienable, because we have it in his own handwriting. Maybe someone at the time recorded the reason why this was changed to unalienable. I’ll have to look into that sometime.

    Jefferson also wrote “life, liberty and property”. Property was changed to the pursuit of happiness.

    Interesting to compare the Virginia Declaration of Rights, by George Mason in 1776 a bit earlier, which Jefferson obviously modeled his after.

    “That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

     
  24. J.M.

    March 3, 2014 at 8:22 PM

    @ Sam Kadasky

    @ > We can be sure that Jefferson wrote inalienable, because we have it in his own handwriting.

    We can be sure that Jefferson wrote inalienable, because we have it in his own handwriting
    Sure, We can be sure of this. I don’t really know for sure whose “handwriting” this IS on the FINAL Document but the “handwriting sure is purty, ain’t it. Help me out here, Sam Kadasky, whose handwriting is that or this on the FINAL document? The one with with the purty handwriting? Actually, I think whoever WROTE, did the handwriting, had beautiful handwriting ability. But, who WAS / IS the hand writer? The document says unalienable < little case u and Rights, Capital case R. I have wondered about that. What's the deal about that sorta thing? little case u, capital case R ???

     
    • hskiprob

      March 4, 2014 at 10:24 AM

      J.M. As to unalienable and inalienable. As you know Jefferson considered himself a unitarian and then as now, there is always intellectual conflict going on. As politicians operating in a diverse society and culture, they tried to appeal to the largest number of Citizens. We see what happened to Paine after he wrote, The Age of Reason, as the Church of England was still securely embrace by the Crown. Exiled!!!

      What ever Franklin said to Jefferson to get him to change it, there can be a couple of possibly conclusions; either he found Franklin’s reasoning correct or he found it not important enough to quibble over.

      Interestingly, Franklin, despite his libertine nature, was not happy with Paine’s book. Franklin was a very complex man and perhaps one of the most pragmatic of them all. I wouldn’t have put it past Franklin to chastise Paine for his book, for purely political reasons. I believe Franklin was also a unitarian, as I think Paine was. Were they really atheists hiding under the guise of deism, we shall never know. What we do know is that they were able to meld a new society based on the protection of “Rights” however one deems them to exists. As John Adams said; “rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.” To me this is one of the great statements that provides to each, a satisfactory explanation, no matter if one is a Christian, Agnostic, Unitarian or Atheist, as to how our rights are derived.

      The other great comment is “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”.

      If one considers this as sarcasm to achieve a political goal, appeasing both the government of Caesar and the always present anti-tax protest movement, it’s beautiful. I believe Jesus was quit libertarian, so I obviously side with it being said in sarcasm.

       
      • J.M.

        March 4, 2014 at 11:42 AM

        hskiprob
        Your message of >March 4, 2014 at 10:24 AM

        Hi Skip, I am at a loss to understand why your message was sent to me. Then again, I lately cannot remember prior comments as I am exchanging messages with other people. BUT, since you did direct your message to me, J.M. (Jim Madison) let me ask you a couple of things. Earlier, in another comment from you, you said, in pertinent part: > “before 600 AD.” What does 600 AD mean, to you? 600 AD from what? Also, you say that Jesus, in your opinion, made sarcastic statements. If this is true,You are most certainly a man after his own heart. AND, you know I am telling the truth. BUT, to me this is belittling the “Jesus” I am aware of. Now, let’s be up & up about this, would you appreciate it if I or ANYONE made belittling statements about you children or their Mom. your wife? Please don’t answer this question with sarcasm. I know I left the door open for you to do this, but I am asking this sincerely. Jesus is my elder brother & I don’t like anyone belittling him. I don’t like anyone belittling you either, Skip.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 3:06 PM

        I didn’t write that, it was posted by somebody else. I think it means 600 years after the roman calendar was implemented.

        I was not being sarcastic with what I said of Jesus. I think that reply was really brilliant. Very quick on his feet. I don’t believe Jesus was a big fan of either the money changers, the Roman government or their tax collectors either. I don’t think he was a big fan of the Jews that were trading with the enemy and why they killed him.

        You may think it is belittling him but I surely don’t.

         
      • J.M.

        March 4, 2014 at 4:17 PM

        Skip, you say,

        @ > I was not being sarcastic with what I said of Jesus. I think that reply was really brilliant. Very quick on his feet.

        @ > The other great comment is “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”.

        @ > If one considers this as sarcasm to achieve a political goal, appeasing both the government of Caesar and the always present anti-tax protest movement, it’s beautiful. I believe Jesus was quit libertarian, so I obviously side with it being said in sarcasm.

        so I obviously side with it being said in sarcasm.so I obviously side with it being said in sarcasm. so I obviously side with it being said in sarcasm.

        Then please help me to understand what I am misunderstanding about your statements . It seems to me, that you, Skip, are saying, > so I obviously side with it being said in sarcasm. < IF I put the dates of your comments, will this help? I honestly think, I, J.M. am not understanding what you, Skip, are saying. It's not you, It's me not understanding. BUT I want to understand. Help me out here. Are you, Skip, saying, Jesus statement WAS / IS a sarcastic statement, or no, or not ?

        ok, I do understand that you believe 600 AD refers to a calendar date.< You were specific. Your answer provided what I wanted to understand about your understanding of 600 AD & you know what? You just might have made me aware of something I have been in error on for MANY MANY years. I now will have to go back to the drawing board. I LOVE to be steered steered straight. I'm not ashamed 1 iota to say I have been wrong & it's easy to do WHEN we TRULY want to be right.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 5:49 PM

        Yes I think Jesus was being sarcastic when he said that. I don’t believe Jesus was an advocate of taxation, and by saying what he did, he was not lying or acquiescing to the Romans. If he would have said strait out that He is apposed to taxation, he would have even died younger as the killed people back than for tax evasion or even promoting tax evasion. How each of us interpret this statement is also interesting.

        Didn’t he say something to one of the disciples, that if you think we owe the tax, then you pay it?

         
      • J.M.

        March 4, 2014 at 7:31 PM

        Skip, you say to Toland

        @ >Toland, yes, that’s me, and, no I’m not a cloned shill ………………..”

        OH NO !!!! YOU’RE NOT !!!??? I didn’t know that. lol

         
      • J.M.

        March 4, 2014 at 7:46 PM

        Skip, You ask,

        @ > Didn’t he say something to one of the disciples, that if you think we owe the tax, then you pay it?

        I remember Jesus told one of the disciples to go to a certain stream/creek, & there would be a certain fish there that would have a coin in it’s mouth & to pay that “certain tax” with that coin, Yes I do remember that. However, it’s another one of those MANY “tales” that doesn’t fit into ANY of the 5 senses so we know what to do about that don’t we ? It’s just I ain’t smart enough to know it ain’t true Also, I don’t think Jesus was being sarcastic when he told that certain disciple what he did about the coin in the fish’s mouth. Just ain’t smart enough to know. I’m glad I’m not very smart. Know what I mean??

         
      • J.M.

        March 5, 2014 at 5:17 PM

        Skip, You say, & FINALLY,
        @ > “Yes I think Jesus was being sarcastic ”

        THANK YOU, Skip. I am still your friend. I like honesty. I don’t call that, saying, Emanuel, aka Jesus, was sarcastic, belittling, or, mocking. He also said, Go tell that Fox To do so & so. He was really a down to earth type sorta guy. He’s my elder brother. It’s a family affair kinda thing. He is also 2nd in RANK over the entire UNIVERSE. He at this instant is sitting on the right hand side of the # ONE Commander and Chief. They never have ANY arguments over whether something should be done this way or that way. They respect one another. It’s kinda like a love sorta thing. Today, tho, if two people are engaging in an act of adultery, it’s called, making love. Skip did you know that “God” approves of two males frolicking it out with each other just as long as it is done in love? Did you know that. golly, I didn’t know that, but it’s true. HOWEVER, if it’s a lustful relationship, it is not approved of. It MUST be a loving relationship. I wish I could be more specific.

         
  25. J.M.

    March 3, 2014 at 11:30 PM

    Yartap,
    to Skip
    @ > “You cannot surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual……….”

    Right. And God said, let us make individuals in our image & we will let these individuals have dominion over everything that is on the earth. Also, I think there was another place where God said, woe to those who deny my created individuals of their individual rights. It is in the 10th Chapter of, wow, forget the book, think it was?is Jeremiah, but I’ll look it up & let you know what book.

    Yartap, a while back you “shared” with me the awareness of new knowledge you had about something called the Sumerian Tablets, remember? I am, at this time, “sharing” thoughts with “Teo.” Do you know Teo? Tell me more about your thoughts about this Sumerian Tablets. Teo said it gives a better, clearer explanation than The Holy Bible does of how Adam came into existence. Also, if you will, tell me what you think overall about this Sumerian Tablets. Anyway, I do appreciate you coming up with “Holy Bible scriptures” about the “image” issue & the covering of the head.I know Alfred appreciated this too. Thanks, Yartap

     
  26. J.M.

    March 3, 2014 at 11:36 PM

    Yartap,
    Isaiah 10th Chapter, not Jeremiah

     
  27. Timmy

    March 4, 2014 at 12:34 AM

    Well, my point was mainly that words matter, especially when discussing important ideas. We should try to be as precise and specific as we can be. Definitely true that it is irrelevant now in the USSA, since those who control the courts/agencies/prisons/police are willfully and totally ignoring almost all of the founding principles.

    In other words, the ideas don’t matter much anymore, when the government itself is constantly violating and ignoring the very principles and documents that originally brought it into existence.

    Those who think they are going to “restore the Republic” or some such, no matter how noble of intention, are demonstrating their ignorance of history. That’s not how the life cycle of nations or cultures work. Never has been and I doubt this will be the first time in the millennia. The majority love their servitude, and empower and embrace it daily. They are feeding the monster, and with glee. We are on the swift and final downslide… there may be a renaissance one day, but it is far in the future at this point.

    Plan accordingly… if ye be wise.

     
    • Toland

      March 4, 2014 at 12:49 AM

      Timmy,

      We the People are going to restore our Republic, because there is no force on Earth that can stop us doing so once we set our minds to it.

      “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom – go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!” – Samuel Adams

       
      • J.M.

        March 4, 2014 at 4:15 AM

        @ >We the People are going to restore our Republic,

        When do you think this big event is going to take place? I mean, within how many months, or years. Or could it maybe be in a week or two, month maybe? What about 2 or 3 months? 4 or 5, or possibly 7 or possibly 8 months? What about 10 or 11 months?

         
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 8:31 AM

        Republics or democracies historically have not been restored, they have been destroyed and/or terminated. No society that I’m aware of, except the Celts of Ireland, have lasted more than a few hundred years under the same governing structure, most having to reconstitute themselves, just to do it again a few hundred years later, of less.

        From Murray Rothbard’s book, “For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto“; “The most remarkable historical example of a society of libertarian law and courts, however, has been neglected by historians until very recently. And this was also a society where not only the courts and the law were largely libertarian, but where they operated within a purely state-less and libertarian society. This was ancient Ireland—an Ireland which persisted in this libertarian path for roughly a thousand years until its brutal conquest by England in the seventeenth century. And, in contrast to many similarly functioning primitive tribes (such as the Ibos in West Africa, and many European tribes), preconquest Ireland was not in any sense a “primitive” society: it was a highly complex society that was, for centuries, the most advanced, most scholarly, and most civilized in all of Western Europe. For a thousand years, then, ancient Celtic Ireland had no State or anything like it. As the leading authority on ancient Irish law has written:

        “There was no legislature, no bailiffs, no police, no public enforcement of justice. . . . There was no trace of State-administered justice.”

         
      • Toland

        March 4, 2014 at 9:04 AM

        hskiprob > “Republics or democracies historically have not been restored, they have been destroyed and/or terminated.”

        America is not about repeating the past or being determined by the past, it’s about making our own future. Statements like “man will never fly” don’t discourage us.

        Nor do we pay much attention to those who advocate a post-nation state (e.g. post-America), open-border, “return to the dark ages” Utopia for Billionaires, like Murray Rothbard.

        “Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.” – Lord Kelvin, president of the Royal Society, 1895

         
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 3:46 PM

        Toland, First, there is plenty of evidence of why government doesn’t work for what is in the best interest of the majority. I should not have to provide this information to you because it is so prevalent. Just goggle; why government doesn’t work or why democracy fails. There is a plethora of info on the subject. Too much to read in even a few days.

        Secondly, Murray Rothbard was a college professor and author on Austrian economics, hardly a Billionaire, not even a millionaire. He dedicated his life to providing the truth, not making money. He should be a millionaire, his work is brilliant and most important, honest. To bad so many people don’t read.

        The Roman Republic was a ruthless totalitarian regime who raped and pillaged almost their entire period of dominance. The Greek Democracies failed as have all societies that legalize force.

        I’m just given you the information, use it how you see fit. Continue to believe the lies that have been past down for centuries by the royal families of Europe and their financiers. Continue to be a good servant and obey your rulers.

         
      • Toland

        March 4, 2014 at 4:21 PM

        hskiprob,

        You misunderstood. I didn’t say Murray Rothbard was a billionaire. I said he was an advocate for the Utopia for Billionaires. When you look past the naive nonsense, that’s the practical result of anarcho-capitalism: the complete conquest of the nations by big money.

        > “Continue to be a good servant and obey your rulers.”

        A frequently repeated line in the obnoxious anarcho-capitalist sales pitch. No wonder so few people are buying it, despite the heavy marketing campaign by all the cloned shills on the internet.

        And you didn’t answer if that was a picture of you in your avatar.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 5:12 PM

        Toland, when true or highly capitalistic societies have existed, that has not been the case. The exact opposite in fact. When capitalism doesn’t exist, is when there is a billionaires utopia. Our current state of affairs is a good example, in that over the last 30 years as the size, scope and power of government has increased, the wealth of our society has flowed to the highest few. We call them the 1%s but it is most likely that of the top 10%, most wealth is in the top .1% – One article I read noted that about 140 corporations own 66% of the wealth in Europe and the Americas. The difficulty in believing this analysis was, that I know for a fact, that many “Trusts” also hold vast amounts of wealth owned by the heirs of such people like JP Morgan.

        What you stated before is a meme that those in power want you to believe for they use the very mechanism of government to maintain their powers. We have been erroneous taught that government is the protector of individual rights and the majority. This is a lie and I can give you the vast array of evidence as proof. A book I just read, How Capitalism Saved America, by Economist Thomas DiLorenzo, goes heavily into how and why what I said above holds true. A very good book that dispels many of the anti-capitalist myths used by the ruling oligarchy to mislead the masses and control the means of production. It all about controlling the natural resources and the distribution of them.

        In my spare time I’ve read and studied socio-economics all my life. I like many started out as a Democrat. I’ve just about heard every line in the book and the politicians are telling us the same lies they did 40 years ago. Funny how Johnson’s great society still remains a dream, except we now have 48 million people that require food stamps to eat and the vase amount of social welfare programs have created more poverty. From the corruption in the military industrial complex, to the police precincts around the country, the one thing we can say, is that a vast number of Americans have been financially rapped and pillaged by out government and much of that money has surely gone to the wealthiest people in our country and around the world.

        Keep believing in the democratic socialist dream because reality is to frightening for most.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 5:39 PM

        Toland, yes, that’s me, and, no I’m not a cloned shill, nor do I know any. I wish someone would pay me. I have run into a couple of progressives, who I thought might be one, that used a vast arsenal of logical fallacies to discourage discourse, but I have not found that to be true from any of the libertarians that I’ve thus far come into contact with on the various blogs I frequent. I was able to point out a couple of them on one blog and after providing specific details of their red journalism, they I assume, were asked to leave the blog because they are gone.

         
      • Toland

        March 4, 2014 at 6:08 PM

        > “Keep believing in the democratic socialist dream because reality is to frightening for most.”

        Another piece of boorish presumption from the overworked marketing script of anarcho-capitalist spam.

        It only takes a single candle flame to dispel the darkness. What that means here is a single history lesson dispels the anarcho-capitalism. Namely, the history of the economic prosperity of societies, which went hand-in-hand with the development of the nation state for hundreds of years. The lessons of history are against anarcho-capitalism, which is why its marketing – in common with marketing in general – concentrates on what-if daydreams.

        No first-world economy has ever existed, or is even plausible with current means, absent the legal and other infrastructures of government. But that’s okay to the billionaire underwriters of anarcho-capitalism. They want to rule over a low-birthrate, eco-friendly, pre-industrial population of third-world serfs with zero collective political power. A return to the Dark Ages.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 5, 2014 at 6:12 PM

        As long as the wealthy class lives in slender, who cares about the majority. Every nationstate has suppressed the majority through excessive taxation and the redistribution to the wealthy. Perhaps you should actually read the various anarcho capitalist literature coming from academia in every scientific genre instead of regurgitating the memes using the various logical fallacies you are using. You think the Roman Empire is impressive, I think they were barbaric pieces of crap the destroyed the lives and stole the property of millions. The friggin Brits invaded all but 30 nations of the world. The French and Spanish killed 3/4 of the population of the Americas. NationStates were created by soulless evil individuals who told the commoners they were sent by God to rule over them. Of course when the commoners fought back, they were put to death for blasphemy.

         
      • J.M.

        March 5, 2014 at 10:09 PM

        Toland to Skip

        @ >You misunderstood.

        Toland, it’s my fault.

         
      • J.M.

        March 8, 2014 at 2:35 PM

        @ > We the People are going to restore our Republic

        Yeah Right!!! GOOD LUCK !!!

         
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 5:07 PM

        Toland,

        @ > We the People are going to restore our Republic, because there is no force on Earth that can stop us doing so once we set our minds to it.

        6,000 years is not enough. We only need more time
        Trying to think of a word that will rhyme with time
        but all we need is a little more time then I KNOW like YOU we’ll find
        happiness & peace on earth, all we need is a little more time

         
    • J.M.

      March 4, 2014 at 4:05 AM

      Oh dear me, Timmy, It is really, well I guess impossible for me to express my feelings, thoughts, heart & mind in this manner, i.e. over the internet. Here is where I stand, but I have posted it at least 3 times & it does not get the attention of anyone. But see, I don’t even know if your comment is meant for me. You know who it is meant for, I would like to know how who is to know who your message is meant for. I am presuming your message is meant for me by what I think I am understanding in your 1st two sentences. ANYWAY, Daniel 12, Matthew 24, Mt. of Olives prophecy
      AND, the following;

      In 1961 the late President John F. Kennedy warned a hushed United Nations Assembly:
      “Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind.”
      “Today,” he said, “every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this
      planet may no longer be habitable…. The mere existence of modern weapons
      10 MILLION TIMES more powerful than any that the world has ever seen, and only minutes away from any target on earth is a source of horror. Together,” said President Kennedy grimly, “we shall save our planet or together we shall perish in its flames”

      What President Kennedy told the United Nations in 1961 was not the ranting of a
      wild eyed fanatic, but is the day today reality of the world in which we live. Today, the
      estimated number of stockpiled nuclear bombs is already enough to wipe out the world’s
      population many times over! Former U.N. Secretary General U Thant warned in 1969: “I do not
      wish to seem overdramatic, but I can only conclude from information that is available
      to me as Secretary General that the members of the United Nations have perhaps 10 years left in which to subordinate their ancient quarrels and launch a global partnership to curb the arms race, to improve the human environment, to defuse the population explosion, and to supply the required
      momentum to world development efforts.”Many other world renowned statesmen and scientists, too numerous to quote speak fearfully of the END OF THE WORLD meaning, the END of human civilization

      Has technology increased ? There are still a few people alive who recall the horse & buggy days. What do we have now ?
      I have said before that Almighty God has his hand stretched out holding back at this instant the dire warning of President Kennedy. If no one else can see this, it is TRAGIC. I really don’t know if you see or not. I’m not God, but when you say, “but it is far in the future at this point.” what am I supposed to think

      Plan accordingly… if ye be wise.

       
  28. Robert Snyder

    March 4, 2014 at 5:58 AM

    H.J.R. 192 makes us all enemies of our own government. Try to teach that to the public and they will think you a lunatic but it’s the truth.

     
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 2:37 PM

      @ >H.J.R. 192 makes us all enemies of our own government.

      BOY, that’s a real eye opener.

       
  29. hskiprob

    March 4, 2014 at 8:46 AM

    Irish anarchy appears to even have lasted longer: The normal count is from 600 AD to the 1640 AD invasion by the English for a little over a thousand years. But my post talks about what was before 600 AD. There is no reason not to believe the archaeological evidence of no state going back well over 9,000 years.

    We have written records of the 1,000 years and we have evidence of the 9,000 years.

     
    • J.M.

      March 4, 2014 at 11:14 AM

      Skip,
      @ > But my post talks about what was before 600 AD.

      Before 600 AD. What does 600 AD mean? I think if I can understand what 600 AD means, I will understand what “before” 600 AD means, so what does 600 AD mean?

       
    • J.M.

      March 4, 2014 at 3:41 PM

      The normal count is from 600 AD to the 1640 AD ……………..”

      600 AD to the 1640 AD FROM WHAT? What happened in 600AD?

       
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 3:55 PM

        This is what one author, Mark Stoval wrote about Rothbard. Hope this explains it.

        Notice that Rothbard and others have said that the Irish Anarchy lasted a thousand years. Rothbard wrote, “This was ancient Ireland—an Ireland which persisted in this libertarian path for roughly a thousand years until its brutal conquest by England in the seventeenth century.” But what happened around 600 AD that marks the starting point of the Irish anarchy? We find that the documentation of this libertarian period began around 600 AD when Christian monks and priests came to Ireland as they were fleeing the violent upheavals surrounding the fall of the Roman Empire. These monks are the ones to bring modern writing to the Irish. The Irish had a form of written communication that did not document history — that was done by their “oral traditions”. The Christian clergy over a long period of time assembled a book called the “Book of Invasions” to document in written fashion the Irish oral traditions.

         
    • J.M.

      March 4, 2014 at 4:48 PM

      Skip,

      Don’t know if we are on the same page here, & IF NOT it’s me, NOT YOU. I have been taught, since I was 4 years old, that the the date, regardless of what date it is, IS the anniversary, let’s say of the death burial & resurrection of Jesus Christ. The 1787/1789 Constitution says, in pertinent part, done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven. See what I mean? Year of our Lord. Why in you opinion. are the words,> year of our Lord there < ??? See why I am confused???

       
      • hskiprob

        March 4, 2014 at 5:23 PM

        I pretty sure Christmas, Dec. 15, does not celebrate the exact day of Jesus’s birth nor is the calendar depict either his birth or death year. Lot’s of different opinions on the matter though. It is and would have been hard for me to believe that the Romans, despite being such wonderful people, would have used either of such events to start their new calendar. lol. I kind of prefer the astrological calendar that was used for thousands of years before that. I just never really liked the Romans so I’m kind of biased.

         
    • J.M.

      March 4, 2014 at 7:18 PM

      Skip,
      @ > I kind of prefer the astrological calendar that was used for thousands of years before that

      ME TOO !!!!!!- AGREED !!!!!! SAME HERE !!!!!

      @ I just never really liked the Romans so I’m kind of biased.

      ME TOO !!!!!!- AGREED !!!!!! SAME HERE !!!!! IF you are referring to the “Romans” & who those Romans were as I do. For another time & another place. discussion.

      Skip, I HATE to lose someone I admire, but, e.g., I had to say good bye to my Mother, Dad, & my brother because of my “religious beliefs.” I asked them the same, why do you belittle, ridicule, & mock me because of my sincerely held religious beliefs? I said, I don’t say a word to you about not believing what I do.I’m not upset with you for not believing what I do, so Why do you continue to mock me? I HAD TO. I had to make a choice.It almost destroyed me, but I had a choice of destruction. ANYWAY, Skip, What do you think the founding Fathers meant by, “in the year of our Lord ? What do you think that meant to them, in the year of our lord?

       
      • hskiprob

        March 5, 2014 at 6:57 AM

        J.M. Good Question. Year of Our Lord. The Romans legalized the calendar therefore that was the legal means and term for application to legal documents. Even Jefferson, surely not a Christian, used it in his formal documents. The number of people such as Jefferson, embracing the unitarian perspective, Jefferson thought was a very large segment of society. That doesn’t make it right or wrong, just an opinion. One must remember the level of religious persecution that laid heavy on society at the time, up until the constitution. I believe that this issue, “the freedom of Religion was a huge part of the American Revolution. America was as tired of the Church of England as the Crown.

         
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 11:36 AM

      Skip,
      @ Skip, you say, Even Jefferson, surely not a Christian, used it in his formal documents

      Skip, it is my understanding that Thomas Jefferson ALSO considered the religion of Christianity as having “the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man.”

      What am I misunderstanding here? It’s obvious that I am misunderstanding everything “lately”

      I fail to understand how Thomas Jefferson, SURELY not a Christian,as you,Skip,SAY he was SURELY NOT can even think this way. What am I “misunderstanding” here?

       
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 11:31 PM

      @ >Even Jefferson, surely not a Christian, used it in his formal documents. The number of people such as Jefferson, embracing the unitarian perspective, Jefferson thought was a very large segment of society.

      That’s a fairly good “persuasion” TRY but I need a little more than that before I can be “persuaded” to become Unitarian. What else ya got?

       
      • hskiprob

        March 8, 2014 at 9:28 AM

        Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason was a best seller for its day. When I read it, I found it intellectually and ethically refreshing that he was so able to articulate the many thoughts and ideas that show and question the “inconsistencies” of organized religion and more importantly the dogmas they follow. If it does not persuade a person, than I would be unable to do so. His pamphlet Common Sense, also a best seller of the day, did the same thing for economics and the relationship with liberty, as the Age of Reason did for Religion. Because of his earnings from the pamphlets, he was able to give many away in a hope that it would help to continue the rebellion against the Crown and Church. Even though he was forced into exile, it obviously worked, because their are many indications that these two writing had a profound affect on our history and nation. Thanks to those like the Pilgrims, the Martyr of Boston Common, The Witches of Salem, and their defenders, as there were many, they have forced religious persecution into oblivion in many parts of the world. There however is still much work to be done.

        One must understand, that people, for thousands of years have been “forced” to believe in the Bible and other Dogmas under the threat of even their lives. If you did not teach your child “proper” Christian ideology, in 1650, they, the Members of the Church of England, would take them away from you in Boston Bay Colony and give then to those that would do it “properly”. The Roman Catholics we were told were in an adversarial relationship to the Church of England at that time, but a lot of evidence suggest otherwise. Many believe the money behind the church and crown was a combination of money from both the Egyptian and Roman oligarchies, that still remains in power today. Instead of the monarchs of Europe, Asia and Middle East having their own banks, the Lenders/Money Changers have replaced them with individual Central Banks, the BIS, The World Bank, the IMF and Sovereign Funds.

        Between the Tax Collector and the Clergy, the human race has been usurped of the lives, their liberty, their property and their pursuits of happiness. It has been a co-conspiratorial relationship lasting a least three thousand years.

         
  30. Timmy

    March 4, 2014 at 10:41 PM

    Skip, thanks much for the historical perspective. I happen to agree. I also claim my 98% Irish heritage. LIBERTAS

    JM, my last comment wasn’t aimed at any individual; sometimes I just want to make a general statement for all. To contribute to the general thread, if you will.

    All you “Christians” on here, might want to bone up a little on the Book of Revelation. The earthly battle shall be ENTIRELY lost. The only thing that ends the final surge of total evil is His return.

    And from the Gospels:
    “My Kingdom is not of this earth…” etc.
    “No man would survive that time, except God cuts that time short…” etc.

    Might be good to spend a little less time with books, and a little more time in The Book, with all respect.

    Of course we should still strive and fight for freedom. That’s a principle. Just don’t plan on winning anytime soon. Your minds are so black/white conditioned to react, that you automatically assume people like myself and Skip are lackeys or boot lickers of the man, simply because you don’t comprehend what we are trying to get across.

    It’s astonishing to me that followers of Adask demonstrate such low levels of open mindedness, sound reason, and tolerance for others thoughts. What exactly do you think liberty and freedom are, if you can’t even freely enjoy a civil conversation without constant ad hominem attacks?

    I appreciate everyone, and only want the best for all of us.
    I guess I would just like to see more careful consideration, and less thoughtless reactionism.

     
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 1:04 AM

      Timmy,
      @ You say, my last comment wasn’t aimed at any individual…………..”

      ooops I’m sorry Timmy. I apparently for some reason, unknown to me, did not see your statement above, otherwise if I would known your message was not meant for me. My BAD. My mistake. Actually, at the time, I was answering because you started out; > JM, my last comment wasn’t aimed at any individual; < I overlooked the word individual because of the JM you started with.

      Timmy

      February 26, 2014 at 11:04 PM

      Al, very good. But please, as a man who trades in important ideas, and therefore language, get it right between “principle” and “principal”. Two entirely different words, with different meanings.

      Normally I accept that most people are ignorant of such things, but for someone like you, I think it important that you get this right. Great work as always, aside from that quibble. (But think of the difference between “inalienable” and “unalienable” rights, for example. Words matter. They are the containers for ideas and communication.)
      AND, YOU, Timmy say,

      It’s astonishing to me that followers of Adask demonstrate such low levels of open mindedness, sound reason, and tolerance for others thoughts.

      I see what you mean Timmy

       
      • J.M.

        March 7, 2014 at 11:40 PM

        Timmy, you say, in pertinent part

        @ All you “Christians” on here, might want to bone up a little on the Book of Revelation.
        @ > Might be good to spend a little less time with books, and a little more time in The Book, with all respect.

        Once again, What BOOKS say the following ???

        For then there will be great tribulation (affliction, distress, and oppression) such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now—no, and never will be [again].(B)

        And if those days had not been shortened, no man would endure and survive, but for the sake of the elect (God’s chosen ones) those days will be shortened;. AND,

        And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.

        You, Timmy say,
        @ I guess I would just like to see more careful consideration, and less thoughtless reactionism.

        What is your reaction to the above statements, FROM those BOOKS ?

        You,Timmy,say,

        @ >It’s astonishing to me that followers of Adask demonstrate such low levels of open mindedness, sound reason, and tolerance for others thoughts.

        I understand that statement from you Timmy, Yes it is astonishing

        I, J. M, just like you Timmy,. guess I would just like to see more careful consideration, and less thoughtless reactionism TOO.

         
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 4:43 AM

      Timmy,
      @ All you “Christians” on here, might want to bone up a little …………..”

      Huh?? Bone up a little??

       
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 3:36 PM

      Timmy, you say,
      And from the Gospels:
      “My Kingdom is not of this earth…” etc.

      True statement.Absolutely TRUE. It WILL be the Kingdom OR Government OF/FROM Heaven Or “God” in full force & effect HERE on this Earth. HERE is WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE. There are no problems IN Heaven, & of course you are aware that there are 3 heavens. We both know that. Where will the saints be ruling with Christ for a thousand years? Why will Satan be CHAINED for a thousand Years? WHY will Satan be loosed AFTER the 1,000 years are complete? The answers are in Revelation 20, or at least I think that is the Chapter. If not, I will correct myself as to the Chapter & post it later, if I’m not banned.

       
  31. J.M.

    March 4, 2014 at 11:26 PM

    To Timmy & whom it may concern
    What BOOKS say the following ???

    For then there will be great tribulation (affliction, distress, and oppression) such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now—no, and never will be [again].(B)

    And if those days had not been shortened, no man would endure and survive, but for the sake of the elect (God’s chosen ones) those days will be shortened;. AND,

    And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.

    @ I guess I would just like to see more careful consideration, and less thoughtless reactionism.

    What is your reaction to the above statements?

    @ >It’s astonishing to me that followers of Adask demonstrate such low levels of open mindedness, sound reason, and tolerance for others thoughts.

    I understand that statement from you Timmy, Yes it is astonishing

    I, J. M, just like you Timmy,. guess I would just like to see more careful consideration, and less thoughtless reactionism.

     
  32. J.M.

    March 5, 2014 at 1:39 PM

    Yartap, you say,

    @ > All individual’s have unalienable rights.”

    I say, No, not true.

     
    • hskiprob

      March 6, 2014 at 11:32 AM

      J.M. wrote: @ > All individual’s have unalienable rights.”
      I say, No, not true.

      Why would you side with totalitarian and fascist rule which does not believe that all Rights are unalienable. You do not believe that people should be able to go out in society and do those things necessary to provide their livelihood and their pursuits of happiness as long as they do not take away the rights of others?

       
      • J.M.

        March 6, 2014 at 2:30 PM

        Skip, you say, “in pertinent part” All individual’s have unalienable rights.”

        True you damn right I said this & I’m ALSO saying this too

        Skip, You are a cherry picker of what you want to respond to. My explanation of WHY I said what I did is above, Yartap to Skip, March 3, 2014 at 11:30 PM I am going to ask you to do me a favor. PLEASE!!!!! Go to the Beware of posting cell phone & digital camera photos on line thread & read what I posted, originally posted by Jethro, on another thread, & where I ask in the last two statements at the bottom of that post IF I am understanding what is being said. OR, Skip please read that post & tell me what you think it is saying PLEASE. I try to share information but it’s practically impossible to get anyone to share with me what I want to understand. I wonder why??

         
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 2:37 PM

        J.M. I’m doing my best to try to keep up with you. I must have missed the prior posts. sorry.

         
      • J.M.

        March 6, 2014 at 2:38 PM

        my messages are not being posted as I WROTE them. I said Skip you say in pertinent that I,J.M. said ……”

        Now, I will either get some help on what I asked in the Beware of Posting Cell Phone and Digital Camera Photos On Line or I will be out of everybody’s hair & off of all your backs. I think I am understanding what is happening but I may not be understanding. I ask for help in understanding but who cares to help It’s what I am asking in the Beware of Posting Cell Phone and Digital Camera Photos On Line.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 3:35 PM

        J.M. I think if the State is so ruthless that it violates every aspect of human privacy and dignity, than they will get you no matter what. I have never violated the rights or property of another human being other than by an accident when I ran into another car many years ago causing a few hundred dollars of damage, yet there are those that continuously attempt to violate my rights.

         
      • J.M.

        March 6, 2014 at 3:00 PM

        Maybe IF I had said, YEAH RIGHT, my message would have been understood

        Yartap,
        to Skip
        @ > “You cannot surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual……….”

        Right. And God said, let us make individuals in our image & we will let these individuals have dominion over everything that is on the earth. Also, I think there was another place where God said, woe to those who deny my created individuals of their individual rights. It is in the 10th Chapter of, wow, forget the book, think it was?is Jeremiah, but I’ll look it up & let you know what book.

        IT’S INDIVIDUALS INDIVIDUALS INDIVIDUALS INDIVIDUALS INDIVIDUALS INDIVIDUALS
        DAMN IT !!!!! I AM NOT AN INDIVIDUAL. YOU can be an “individual” if you want to be NOWHERE in the Holy Bible does it say “God” created INDIVIDUALS. I was trying to say I would agree IF IF IF “God” said, Let us create individuals in our image. BUT THIS NOT WHAT “God” said. It is WRITTEN,Let US create MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN MAN, except for the caps. BIG DIFFERENCE in Man AND INDIVIDUAL BIG BIG DIFFERENCE.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 3:24 PM

        J.M. So I can’t call you an individual, as defined as “one human being by themselves used an adjective or noun”? You’re “in” or “un” alien then. A brother from another planet. lol. When you take these positions, it makes it really hard to communicate unless you go into detail. Do you really think that God is opposed to the word “individual”. Are we only allowed to use words from the English Bibles? I will allow you to maintain your MANly rights than. lol You have rights, and if you believe that you derive these rights from God, that’s good enough from me as long as you allow me to have all my unalienable Rights, we can be great, great friends. The minute you, Toland and the taxman/usurpers comieth to my door, then and only then will we have a problem. lol

         
      • J.M.

        March 6, 2014 at 5:00 PM

        Skip,
        @ > J.M. So I can’t call you an individual, as defined as “one human being by themselves used an adjective or noun”?

        WAS it you Skip, or some else that said, what we have here is, a word game with, Gov-Co

        My dear friend you can call me anything you want to except I do not like to be called a “caucasian” I do have a personal hangup with this word. It’s a personal thing & I won’t waste your time trying to explain why. Honkie, cracker, whitey doesn’t bother me 1 iota. Fact is, it makes me chuckle when I am called this. BUT, only N words call me cracker, etc.

        Skipper, The gov-co uses the word individual. The word man has 3 letters. Why is a word with many more letters, e.g. individual preferred or chosen over the 3 letter word of, man ?? Please, let’s not get into this individual v. man, like we did on unalienable v. inalienable. Many people have a problem with the word, person. In & of itself, I don’t have a problem with it. IT DEPENDS on how it is defined in the statutes, etc.

        To digress, do you think it is possible that in this high age of technology which is continuing to advance, is it possible that “somebody” might have access in some way to corrupt, alter, etc. messages like THIS ONE I will be trying to send to you?? A SHORT as possible answer will be appreciated. OR, even better, A NO RESPONSE from you will be deemed by me to mean you are saying, YES.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 5:31 PM

        I have no problem with Person either, as long as it is not used as a definition of a corporation or some other crap like that. I’m not a corporation, I’m an individual person. I am a beige colored male sovereign natural born Citizen, domiciled in the State of Florida and the United States of America. I’m not a U.S. Citizens as defined by the IRC in several sections. I don’t care what they gov-co calls me. I’m only within their jurisdiction, in some circumstances. I do not reside or domicile myself in the District of Columbia, and therefore I am bound only the laws legislated by Congress when they are legislating for the 50 States. When Congress is legislating for DC and it’s forts, arsenals, territories, etc. I’m not bound by those laws. Sadly most people have no idea what I’m taking about even though these laws are well established by Congress and the Courts. The problem is that the Courts have long ago and so many times since, abrogated the Constitution, that it is seldom useful to the Citizens anymore. I would like to change this, but I have yet to find others that wish to take on such an important challenge. It only like one of the most important things there is. Ahh justice, who needs that.

         
      • J.M.

        March 7, 2014 at 11:43 PM

        Skip
        @ J.M. I’m doing my best to try to keep up with you

        Just trust & try, it ain’t that hard to do.

         
      • J.M.

        March 8, 2014 at 2:39 PM

        @ > I pretty sure Christmas, Dec. 15, does not celebrate the exact day of Jesus’s birth

        There are a few others who are pretty sure of this/that too.

         
      • J.M.

        March 8, 2014 at 2:56 PM

        @ Revelation, is that better smart ass.

        Yes. Are you keeping up with me?

         
      • J.M.

        March 9, 2014 at 10:54 PM

        Harry Skip Robinson, you say, in pertinent part,

        @ >I’m an individual person & as long as it is not used as a definition of a corporation or some other crap like that. I’m not a corporation, I’m an individual person.

        Same difference, i.e., > an individual person IS, in the mind of gov-co, a definition of a corporation or some other crap like that. I am forced that the likes of you, Harry Skip Robinson, are fishing to see what some people on this blog know & understand. If you people were a little more humble, I would think otherwise. However, I cannot say for sure what you & your ILK are up to. I do know this. NONE of you will help me to understand something I’m not sure of. I ask for help from ALL of you & it’s as tho you don’t even “see” it. & I ask repeatedly, but so far, NONE of you will help me. But that’s ok

         
      • hskiprob

        March 10, 2014 at 9:34 AM

        J.M. An individual is not always a corporation. In tax law, corporations are treated as individuals in some circumstances. Not the other way around as some in the Tea Party movement believe. There are 5 or 6 different definitions of the United States and how they affect Citizens is much more important than as individuals. Individuals, depending on their Citizenship, could be liable for the various jurisdictions covered under the different. Citizenship is much more important the “individual” under the law.

        I surely don’t believe that rational though and logic should be considered high minded. Considering scientific evidence is not high minded.

         
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 5:26 PM

        @ >All you “Christians” on here, might want to bone up a little on the Book of Revelation. The earthly battle shall be ENTIRELY lost. The only thing that ends the final surge of total evil is His return.

        Apparently you mean me too. You say ALL you Christians. Then you said earlier,>Well, my point was mainly that words matter, especially when discussing important ideas. We should try to be as precise and specific as we can be. Well, thanks Timmy, I’ll try to “bone up harder.”

         
  33. Timmy

    March 5, 2014 at 8:08 PM

    JM, yes I agree. Clearly it will all happen right here on earth. My point was simply what comes before the final resolution and ultimate Kingdom. “First, the Man of Sin must be revealed…”

    And he will be. In fullness of evil, beyond any Cesar or Stalin’s worst day.

     
    • J.M.

      March 5, 2014 at 8:52 PM

      Timmy,

      “First, the Man of Sin must be revealed…”

      Is it me? Am I “the man of sin?” Sure it happens on earth. For when Satan is released he tries to do what ? < Timmy this question is not for you. I'm just HOPING that someone will care enough to go to Revelation 20 & see for himself or herself. BUT, Timmy, do you think I might be that man of sin? A yes, no, or don't know answer will be sufficient.

       
    • J.M.

      March 10, 2014 at 2:33 AM

      @ >“First, the Man of Sin must be revealed…”

      Once again, Timmy, why did you bring up this particular scripture? I have been aware of this scripture for YEARS. But you brought this scripture up for a reason. I would like to know the reason. If you do not respond THIS TIME, & this is the 3rd time I have asked you about it, there is something suspicious going on here. I’m serious. See, I KNOW that Satan KNOWS what the scriptures mean better than 99.9% of all people.Except for the scriptures that apply to him. So, quoting scriptures eloquently is not a true sign of a Bond servant of Emanuel, a.k.a. Jesus. But you had & have a reason for bringing this scripture up, Why? Did you think I was not aware of it? Ok, let’s say I am not aware of it Help me out in knowing “more” about this “man of sin.” See, there are women preachers too. And they sure do know how to wax eloquently. I am a sheep, in the sense of, well, like in the sense of Emanuel was aka the “lamb of “God.” But in case You might want to try & explain to me why he was aka the lamb of God, there is no need to do that. I know why. He is aka the Good Shepherd. I am one of his sheep, I hope. Tell me what you understand about this “man of sin.” If you think it might be me, I think if I was, or if I am, I could find a bigger venue to work in than this one, don’t you?

       
  34. hskiprob

    March 6, 2014 at 11:57 AM

    This is a very interesting article on Jesus and taxation. You should know my position by now: http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/ludlow/ludlow1.html

    I would like to get others take on the issue.

     
    • J.M.

      March 6, 2014 at 3:18 PM

      Skip, per your link, in pertinent part > We can only speculate about why Pilate avoided the tax issue.

      I don’t have to speculate WHY. Apparently Pilate had inherited some of the WISDOM King Solomon had BEFORE King Solomon BECAME a “freakin moron” and of WHICH he MOST CERTAINLY did BECOME a freakin moron. BUT !!!!!! King Solomon WAS not ALWAYS a freakin moron UNTIL he became a freakin moron. Anyway, Pilate said, I find no fault in him. That’s not IMPORTANT IS IT ????? !!!!!! I,J .M. find NO FAULT in Emanuel aka Jesus EITHER. & in ALL HONESTY, I am WEARY of some others continually FINDING FAULT > Let-him-alone !!!!! UNDERSTAND ?!?! I doubt it. I’m going back to listen to Joni Mitchell sing Both sides now AGAIN

       
    • J.M.

      March 6, 2014 at 5:15 PM

      @ >Revelation, is that better smart ass.

      temper-temper-temper. Well it WAS critically important to you there was no difference it the U in Unalienable and the I in inalienable. Why does one letter added or deleted make a Big difference OR No difference in something else? Also once again. you said,a while back you were trying to “persuade” me. I asked you what is it you are trying to “persuade” me to do? You refuse to answer that question. WHY ? I’m not advanced enough to know. I need you to tell me If you say even an idiot should understand. Well I’m below that grade.My next level UP will be in the idiot range.Try to regain your composure & settle down. Being mad is unhealthy. I want you to stay healthy. I really do.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

        In a contract or legal proceeding yes, one letter or even one comma can make a difference. It shouldn’t, but lawyers will be lawyers and therefore if they can find a way to get around a contract, like government trying to find another way to tax us, they will. One concept of law is that the intent of the contract is more important than the individual elements of the contract itself. Just like our Constitution was “supposed” to be. I think the definitions of the terms used in law are more important than their spellings. Words and even grammar has changed over the millenniums and are really and most importantly supposed to help us communicate. In that sense, one letter is unimportant.

         
    • J.M.

      March 6, 2014 at 5:32 PM

      @ >Revelation, is that better smart ass. Now you’re starting to show your true colors.

      Well how about M apples. I thought the same thing about you. See, we both know that 99 + percent of ALL readers, posters,etc., could care less about seeing what is really going on by reading ALL the exchanges going on between you & me I know most,IF ANY, are chomping at the bits & saying go get him Skip. I understand this. Only Jethro & Alfred have the depth of perception to see what is happening but both have full plates already overflowing & the chances of either one coming to my rescue are, 2, slim & none Oh there are some others who know but he/she does not want to get involved. It’s like in situations where somebody is being raped or beaten to death but nobody wants to get involved. Know what I mean?

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 2:54 PM

      @ >J.M. I don’t know if I would call it a void.

      Let’s call it an emptiness then. It’s really an IN or UNcompletness. But, see, there is a COMPLETE answer to fill that, whatever you want to call it. It’s just that you refuse to acknowledge this completeness exists & this IS because you are smart enough to know it cannot be possible because your senses KNOW better. If it don’t FIT it’s just more B.S. I would like to be smart too but not that smart

       
      • hskiprob

        March 9, 2014 at 12:50 PM

        J.M. Emptiness. Now you’re trying to tell me how I feel. I love you man but this is exactly why I’m afraid and leery of those who think they know what is best for others. I see my happiness level and compared to most others, I am one of the chosen ones.

         
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 6:56 PM

      @ > J.M. Atheists take the position that there is no God. How can they know that for sure? Just how can we know for sure there is a God. IT’S A BELIEF.

      It takes MORE faith to believe in evil-lew-shun than it does to believe in a SUPREME Superior Intelligence. I ain’t got enough SENSE to know HOW to believe in EVIL-LEW-SHUN. Now, IF I had the super-“dupe”-er intelligence that you have I think I just might be able to believe like you do but I just ain’t that smart.

      @ > IT’S A BELIEF.

      REALLY, I didn’t know that. Don’t YOU believe in SOMETHING? That’s A BELIEF too, isn’t it? How can we do away with this BELIEF THANG? Let’s work on something to do away with BELIEF. We can’t have anymore of this IT’S A BELIEF CRAP. Think we might be able to get a law passed prohibiting BELIEF.? Making it a 1st degree felony OR WORSE? Also, IF we can get a law on the books making it a CAPITAL Offense & immediate DEATH no ifs ands or buts? Good idea? Let’s make this our project. Hey Timmy, did I spell capital right? Should it be Capitol, instead? Help me out here Timmy

       
      • hskiprob

        March 9, 2014 at 11:02 AM

        J.M. It’s a belief, the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, deists, etc. etc. etc. don’t believe. Just as you do not believed their beliefs.

        If it were a fact such as the existence of the moon, everyone would believe it.

        Many believe, because they have been told, that just by believing something, that makes it so. Every religion is predicated on this basis concept, thus each considers themselves, as God’s chosen people.

        How can they all be God’s chosen people when they do not believe one another?????

         
      • J.M.

        March 9, 2014 at 10:30 PM

        To: Harry Skip Robinson, you say
        @ > YOU are one of the chosen ones by saying, “I am one of the chosen ones.” Read your own words again

        You are, ohhh my.

        Chosen ones of WHO? Bob Dylan is one of those chosen ones TOO. Said he made a bargain with IT. YES IT IT IT. Dylan say this IT is the commander & chief of the unseen world. oh my I forgot, I promised to not bother you anymore. Just made a liar out of myself. Well maybe I could TWIST the scripture around that says,tho “God” be true, let every individual, excuse me, person, there we go, no that ain’t right either, MAN yep that’s it, MAN, Tho God be true let every man be a liar. I will repent of this sin, & ask forgiveness. I don’t want to be a liar. It is another weakness. I have a long way to go in TRYING to become perfect,like you are, Harry Skip Robinson. No, what this scripture really means, IS, to the best of my understanding, it means The statement is an idiomatic affirmation that “God” remains right if any man, indeed if all men, were to contest him.

        You are one of the chosen ones utt ohhh.

         
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 7:17 PM

      @ I will not attempt to persuade someone whom intentionally and maliciously ridicules me.

      You have got things ass backwards. Anyone with the sense of a goose would see who ridiculed who IF IF IF he/she read all of the exchanges message wise between you & me. Skip, you are not going to “persuade” me to CHANGE my sincerely held “religious” beliefs. You said organized religion is a part of our problems. I understand & agree. I tired to explain to you that I am in an UNORGANIZED Religion. With everything ass backwards in understanding, etc. you should KNOW what I mean by, Unorganized. The Bible says, bitter will be called sweet,etc. Is the Unitarianism BELIEF organized or unorganized?

       
      • J.M.

        March 10, 2014 at 2:43 AM

        Skip, you say,

        @ I will not attempt to persuade someone whom intentionally and maliciously ridicules me.

        I think you are forgetting to put lol after a lot of your statements, lately..LOL

         
    • J.M.

      March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

      @ > J.M. Emptiness. Now you’re trying to tell me how I feel.

      No, it’s how you think.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 10, 2014 at 1:41 PM

        It is interesting to note, how you have responded, when others, such as I do not agree with you. Sadly, it is the typical response and why all ego based religions have caused so many deaths and adversity. And you say it is the way I think? Hmmm.

        It would appear to me that any supportable religion would not require telling those that do not agree that they are going to hell, they are not the chosen ones and therefore because of their stupidity, you do not know that the ends times are here nor will you be chosen to stay.

         
    • J.M.

      March 10, 2014 at 6:50 PM

      @ > I would like to get others take on the issue.

      I.would like to get others take on the issue too. But, who cares.

       
  35. hskiprob

    March 6, 2014 at 12:51 PM

    When I first read Revelations, I must say that I did not get the same sense of what many Christians foresaw as the world’s future. Many people throughout history appear to have confused their personal and societal historical affairs with Biblical prophecy. I find this to be a common belief in today’s world. We are surely going through some turbulent times as we start the age of Aquarius but I’m not convinced the new age provides the catalyst for Biblical prophecy. Something about the 4th generation after Israel becomes a nation? My understanding that this has already come and passed.

    What we are facing today is because of poor social policies that for some, it is an advancement in social awareness and consciousness and for others, it is ignoring the human spirit and nature to not be shackled by barbaric rules and laws passed down for millenniums by an often time collusion of church and state. Our founding fathers, although quite imperfect and faced with huge obstacles, enemies and human differences, put into effect, arguably the best Constituted from of government ever created. However, with it’s intent of protecting individual rights, through specific government limitations, it did not accomplish they intent of either the founding majority leadership or the Citizens. It has failed at what it had intended.

    Instead we have embraced Marxist rule and have implement the majority of the planks of communism. This can easily be confirmed, as all one must do is take the ten platforms of communism as delineated in the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and see how many of them have been placed into law in this country. We all know why communism doesn’t work and have many examples of it’s failings. Cuba in the 50’s and 2,000’s, India prior to opening their markets, The collapsed of the largest communist society, the USSR in 1989 and China, prior to it’s opening up it’s markets and becoming more capitalist in recent years. However Marxist rule for those in power is obviously a drug as China, India and most nation states are experiencing today, as their oligarchs will do even the most gruesome atrocities to remain in power. 264 million people killed by their own governments in the 20th century alone. I have to keep reminding all the fascists out there.

    The world greatest problem is that these two factions; those that believe in the power of legalized initiation of force by the nation state and those that believe in a society that protects individual rights and property are at odds. When the factions are as polarized as they are today, the outcome is not going to be pretty for the majority and this has nothing to do with Biblical prophecy. It’s not God’s fault it’s ours.

     
    • J.M.

      March 6, 2014 at 3:28 PM

      @ When I first read Revelations,

      Huh?? Where is this, Revelations, or, what is, Revelations? Same as the U in Unalienable & the I in Inalienable, No difference ??? YEAH RIGHT Do you think BLACK’S LAW Dictionary might be able to help me locate, Revelations, & explain to me what it means?

       
      • hskiprob

        March 6, 2014 at 3:58 PM

        Revelation, is that better smart ass. Now you’re starting to show your true colors. When I looked it up before writing it, I added the “s” because so many people pronounce it that way. I though it was interesting. I wanted to see if you would pounce on it in all your glory and wisdom, as ridicule. Thanks and that was very Christian of you.

        J.M. You are willing to give up you family because of your beliefs, that the Bible is the word of God and that Jesus is the begotten Son of God. It appears to me that any book that promotes such arrogance and ostracism should be carefully views with great skepticism and I do not see any skepticism from you, despite the “multitude” of differing opinions by some of the greatest scholars in world history.

        I will not attempt to persuade someone whom intentionally and maliciously ridicules me. If you want to continue I will, it’s up to you depending if you can keep your arrogance and malicious attitude from coming through.

         
    • J.M.

      March 6, 2014 at 7:11 PM

      Skip, re: your entire message of/on
      @ >March 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM ,

      Yes & once upon a time a man’s handshake was his bond.

      You, Skip also say,> “In a contract or legal proceeding yes, one letter or even one comma can make a difference.”

      Ohhhh is that right? I didn’t know that. But one letter added to a word, like an s to Revelation, does what? Read your own comment again, Skip.You browbeat me to death about me straining at gnats over the U and I, and I bring up one letter to your attention that you added & look how you, Skip, responded. SEE, I believe what is good for the GOOSE is good for the Goose-E. Know what I mean ? See what I’m saying ?

       
      • hskiprob

        March 7, 2014 at 2:47 PM

        J.M. I would rather read about your interpretations of “Revolutions”, than discuss the ramifications of a couple of letters being incorrect in a specific word. I would even prefer starting a Voluntary Association of Jurists that could actually be beneficial to our world, than battling over words as attorneys do, to elude justice. With the un and in controversy, I was trying to mitigate what I thought was a difference of opinion between two people and since I had already researched this for a previous writing I had done, I was up on the issue; nothing more.

        As you can see, I get a kick out of language. I’m much more concerned with content. It ‘s just like my incorrect use of Revolutions in this first sentence, yet you understand exactly what I am asking you to write about, even though the word is totally incorrect.

        Just think what the Jews were having to do to communicate effectively during the Roman occupation of Israel, or what ever it was called back then. I think that many Christians do not take this, the potential of secret codes,

         
    • J.M.

      March 6, 2014 at 7:56 PM

      Skip, you say,

      @ >J.M. You are willing to give up you family because of your beliefs, that the Bible is the word of God and that Jesus is the begotten Son of God.

      IF my family put “God” FIRST & FOREMOST in their life we would have been ONE HAPPY FAMILY.
      They did not do this. THEY REFUSED TO DO THIS. Skip look, I have had enough of your lack of understanding because of your superior, you think, understanding. YOU REFUSE to WANT TO EVEN WANT TO UNDERSTAND that there is anything else wiser or smarter than you are. And you say you fear your son is an atheist. Why are you not PROUD of this? Let me alone..

       
      • hskiprob

        March 7, 2014 at 8:23 AM

        J.M. Atheists take the position that there is no God. How can they know that for sure? Just how can we know for sure there is a God. IT’S A BELIEF. You cannot prove God doesn’t or does exist, or everyone would either believe it or not. It surely not worth giving your family up over. My son doesn’t speak with me because I’m an anarcho-capitalist.

         
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 7:35 AM

      @ > However, with it’s intent of protecting individual rights, ”

      There you go. This is a correct way to use the word “individual.” I like the way you used the word, individual, as in, individual rights. But, when the prostituting attorney says, Your honor, please instruct the individual who is speaking to state his name for the record, < get the picture? OR let's put it this way, Here is what is being said, your honor please instruct the artificial entity person who is speaking to state his name for the record. < Get the picture, ……..now?

       
      • J.M.

        March 7, 2014 at 8:14 PM

        Skip, you say, in pertinent part,

        @ > J.M. I would rather read about your interpretations of “Revolutions”, ………………..”

        “Revolutions” ??? I’m lost as to what you are asking or mean. Honest. Revolutions??? Maybe you meant your statement for someone else. I have made this mistake before, several times I have made a lot of mistakes in every way possible, I guess. Some I catch, some I apparently don’t. If you explain to me what you mean by, Revolutions, this might help. IF my understanding is aka only an interpretation I’ll go along with that. BUT, I don’t knowingly “interpret” anything. An interpretation means to me, an opinion. What’s an opinion worth?? I KNOW some things. I do not KNOW MANY things. BUT, what I do KNOW, I KNOW I KNOW IT. We can KNOW some things IF we want to.

         
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 2:00 PM

      Skip,

      @ >J.M. You are willing to give up you family because of your beliefs, that the Bible is the word of God and that Jesus is the begotten Son of God.

      Matthew 10:37 >> Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

      It’s not hard to understand, at least for me. But, it is HARD to do. Tell me about it.

      I agree that not anybody will accept PROOFS that “God” exists that refuse to want to believe it. It’s like Adrian, a poster said, IF you cannot see it, it clearly doesn’t exist. I said to Adrian, don’t ever jump a 4 or 5 story building. It’s not the fall that hurts, it’s the sudden stop. Mr.Problem Gravity is very clear about this. You understand this Skip, I know you will say I’m right about this.

      Skip, there is a void in your heart, I know there is. But you want the void to stay void.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 7, 2014 at 2:37 PM

        J.M. I don’t know if I would call it a void. I think I’m more disappointed with our world and more importantly the people. It was very hard for me to accept when growing up how dishonest and unethical people were. One of the reasons I believe this to be, is that the masses have always excepted unscrupulous leaders via various governing methods, none of which end up benefiting the majority. One of my big problems with the major religions, it that they appear to acquiesce to the institutionalization of the legalization of the initiation of force, which I believe and can easily prove, has tremendous negative consequences.

         
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM

      Harry (Skip) Robinson

      “Radio and TV signals fill the room we are in right now, and if our eyes and ears were built a little differently, we would actually be able to see and hear them, just the way we can see sunbeams streaming through the window onto the furniture and hear the cat purring on our lap. If we could “see” the radio and TV signals all around us, we would be overwhelmed by the many songs, the personalities, and the comedies, dramas, news programs, and action movies all competing for our attention.”
      Mark Macey said this.Trying to come up with something said FROM someone who has credibility whatcha think, Skipper ?)

       
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 3:22 PM

      Skip,
      When I learn to “care” for anyone it’s hard to let go. Same with my family. I think people who care has experienced what you have. I know I have. Yes it’s more than disappointing, it’s heart rendering, at least for me. It makes my eyes moist to put it mildly.

      @ > You say, in pertinent part; > which I believe and can easily prove, has tremendous negative consequences.

      Not if I don’t want to believe it, you cannot prove it. Same applies to anyone else.

      “………“rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.” < As John Adams said, AND, he also said;

      "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

       
      • hskiprob

        March 8, 2014 at 1:26 PM

        J.M. It is fairly common knowledge that both Jefferson and John Adams were unitarians/deists. Their belief in God, as mine, however is not predicated on the Bible or any other dogma which would account for the many references of God in their writings. What I have found is, if you do find something about Jesus in any of their writings, it is not of their belief in him as a savior, but of their understanding of his philosophy. I think both Washington and Franklin were also deists which accounts for many of their opinions. For myself, although I would not be considered a Christian by most, because of my lack of belief, that the Bible is not the word of God, I try to follow his philosophy. Many people have contributed to the benefit of mankind and Jesus was surely one of them.

         
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 6:19 PM

      Skipper, you say, in pertinent part,

      @ >As you can see, I get a kick out of language. I’m much more concerned with content.

      As for me, I am much more concerned with the “quality” of the content. Also, it’s obvious to me, that some “Christian” Commenters only post or respond to something he/she can show his/her more advanced superior knowledge of which is a nice way to say he/she is smarter than the one being commented to. But if the less smarter one asks a question to the one who is more intelligent, & if the more intelligent one sees he/she has been caught in her/his own trap, then that shuts him/her up. This is due to vanity & ego & good traits like this. In a nutshell, these types of so called Christians will only post something to wake up the world as to how intelligent he/she is. WHEN we ask some of these “Christians” to help us to understand something, he/she is not concerned about that, ohhhh yes, the more intelligent one WILL comment if his/her comment is STILL a superior knowledge comment. It’s like who is going to out do who. SELFISH. I have said up front I only have a 6th grade education but I can tell you this, a contrite heart is more important in the eyes of my “God” that being able to write like a scribe. Timmy, for one, knows what I mean.

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 5:54 PM

      SKIPPER, SUPP !!! What’s happenin? Run it down faw meh.

      @ >J.M. It is fairly common knowledge that both Jefferson and John Adams were unitarians/deists.

      So what. Big deal. Skip did you know that the Pope is a Catholic. It’s true. It really is, Skip.

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 6:01 PM

      @ >Their belief in God, as mine, however is not predicated on the Bible or any other dogma which would account for the many references of God in their writings. What I have found is, if you do find something about Jesus in any of their writings, it is not of their belief in him as a savior, but of their understanding of his philosophy.

      I don’t care if the whole world turns into Unitarians. I’m not

      @ but of their understanding of his philosophy.

      Well then they sure did not understand much.

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 6:27 PM

      @ >Many people have contributed to the benefit of mankind and Jesus was surely one of them.

      NAW !!! you’re kidding. Is that right? I didn’t know that. Hey Skip. Have you ever heard of a book called the Holy Bible? Do you have one in your home? If so, WHY? If you do, it’s probably got so much dust on it you would need a vacuum cleaner to get the dust off of it. Have you ever heard of something called the Mayflower Compact? Have you ever read ANY of the EARLY Court decisions including the TOP Supreme Court saying this Country IS a CHRISTIAN NATION? Now look-E here I know it ain’t that way NO MO but it WAS, ONCE UPON A TIME The reason we are having ALL these PROBLEMS IS BECAUSE This Country Ain’t a Christian Nation NO MO Why don’t you suggest to Alfred Adask That I be banned. Convert HIM into a UNIT MAN & I guarantee I will be BANNED BARRED or whatever it is. If I can ever figure out how to come back on AFTER I am banned I am going to use the user name if that is what it is, I’ll SNEAK back on with the name of, Frank N. Stein. This is future advance notice SO when you see the name of Frank N. Stein, you will know it’s me. I had a browser change before. I did not know I would have to put the e-mail address back in to respond AND my user name. I just put J.M because I did not know if my comment would post. Well, it did post. NOW, I’m stuck with it. This goes back a while. BUT if I knew how to change this commenting by a different name, I am going to change it to Frank N. Stein. So. get prepared & LOOK OUT

       
      • hskiprob

        March 9, 2014 at 11:58 AM

        J.M. I’m related to John Robinson through we believe was his brother who is mentioned as being part owner of one of the properties in Leland, Holland. So yes, I’ve heard of the Mayflower Compact. We really need to go the Holland and England to research more. We have not been able to confirm one person in our tree, who we believe was William Robinson, father of Samuel and granddad of Captain Samuel Robinson, who was the father of Vermont and a prominent Green Mountain Boys. Moses Robinson, my grandfather’s Silas’s brother, was the 2nd Gov. of Vermont. There is a painting of Moses, Jefferson and Samuel Adams out in front of their Inn in Bennington. The Battle of Bennington was fought over the armory of the continental army and the Green Mountain Boys, which just happened to be my Grandfather’s barn. Both Captain Samuel and Silas. Many think the Green Mountain Boys, as Vermont wrote a Declaration of Independence even before the more famous one, were the ones that may have started the Crowns using force against the colonists. A longer story.

         
    • J.M.

      March 10, 2014 at 3:02 AM

      Skip,
      @ >With the un and in controversy, I was trying to mitigate what I thought was a difference of opinion between two people and since I had already researched this for a previous writing I had done, I was up on the issue; nothing more.

      ok. But see it’s the FINAL document, that document with the purty handwriting that is more important to me than the DRAFT. The FINAL eloquent purty handwritten document that says, in pertinent part; unalienable Rights. I wonder why Rights is in upper & lower case & unalienable is in all lower case? Since I ain’t figgered that out yet, maybe you could persuade me on and as to why that is, i.e. little case u & capital case R. You won’t get any buttin heads like 2 billy goats battle from me about that. Truth is, I don’t know what the answer is. Help me out here.on that trivial matter.

       
  36. Timmy

    March 6, 2014 at 10:57 PM

    “It’s not God’s fault, it’s ours…” Umm, yeah that is precisely what Biblical prophecy says. God is kind enough to give anyone who cares to listen advance notice and warning. I think that’s pretty nice of Him, personally. Interestingly, the Biblical prophecy track record, after about 5k years so far, is right on. With more to come obviously….

     
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 1:06 AM

      Right on. I hear you. I don’t have itching ears. But, is it the best is yet to come or the worst is yet to come BEFORE the Best that will surely come, aka the second coming? No response is necessary. We both know the answer to this.

       
    • J.M.

      March 7, 2014 at 7:41 AM

      Timmy,
      ..@ > …….after about 5k years so far, is right on.

      I made the error of saying, 6.000 + years when I should have said, 6,000 – years. Same mistake repeatedly. It’s really about 5,800 or thereabouts, right?

       
  37. Timmy

    March 7, 2014 at 9:08 PM

    in my estimation, yes. 4 ‘days’ pre Cross; 2 days post; the end, and then 1 “day” of millennial (sabbath) bliss. 7k years total… getting close to the finale. For those of you who are ignorant, no, I didn’t say the earth is 7k years old. If you care to read Genesis 1, you’ll see quite clearly that the planet is already there; it existed prior to the creation week events described. Plain as day, some might say…

     
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 12:05 AM

      @ >In my estimation, yes. 4 ‘days’ pre Cross; 2 days post; the end, and then 1 “day” of millennial (sabbath) bliss. 7k years total… getting close to the finale. For those of you who are ignorant, no, I didn’t say the earth is 7k years old. If you care to read Genesis 1, you’ll see quite clearly that the planet is already there; it existed prior to the creation week events described. Plain as day, some might say

      Ohhhh I wish I could express the joy you have just brought to me. Thank you Heavenly Father. If it’s estimation, then we have the EXACT SAME estimation. I don’t call this a coincidence. When/where 2 or more are gathered in his name we arrive at the SAME understanding. Thank you Thank you Thank you Thank you !!!!!

       
      • J.M.

        March 8, 2014 at 12:13 AM

        All is well that ends well. It is the end result that matters. NOW I KNOW you are the Timmy that said on a prior thread, oh dear me this thread is like the blind leading the blind. Remember? I do. I was “following” the exchange, the “sharing.”There were 2 commenters.I won’t mention either name but one of them agreed with you. He said, I agree. Fun-nee.

         
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 11:24 AM

      Oh by the way, Timmy, When you said, on that prior thread, “oh dear me, what we have here on this thread is/are like the blind leading the blind,” I too thought EXACTLY the same thing. But, I still understand, as for me, there are some things I do not understand. BUT, I do KNOW the most IMPORTANT thing, & understanding this & DOING or TRYING to do it, leads into more understanding of other things. You know this too..

       
    • J.M.

      March 8, 2014 at 4:55 PM

      @ > If you care to read Genesis 1, you’ll see quite clearly that the planet is already there; it existed prior to the creation week events described. Plain as day, some might say

      Plain as day to me too. Here we go, tho,Timmy. You, Timmy, say: You’ll see quite clearly………..”

      WHY is it that most, IF NOT ALL cannot see this quite clearly ?? Is it CLEAR to ONLY you & me? Sure seems to be. And you know what Timmy? I believe you & I also understand alike what happened that ” brought forth” creation week.” Actually, I think it was partially a “restoration” of the way it WAS before the earth BECAME out of whack, with the addition of Adam & Eve being created. In other words, Adam & Eve were created about 5,800 years ago or thereabouts, i.e., for anyone else who might be interested. If anyone, including Timmy, disagrees, please explain why I am in error other than just your opinion. I find it hard to see at least at this time that Timmy will disagree. Anyway I also am inclined to think there will be no takers. Who cares ? We just need to get us sumuhhdat GOLD.

       
  38. hskiprob

    March 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM

    J.M. How do we explain the archeological finds of such things as a mastodon bone with an etching of a mastodon and a man on it, believed to be some where in the range of 22,000 to 25,000 years old. I don’t think that Mastodons knew how to draw. lol There is some very good evidence that man existed 10,000 years ago with known (written)events going back to even before that time. This culture lived then, another culture lived after that and one lived before that one. etc. To pin point that Adam and Eve lived only 5,800 years ago does not fit the history science has validated over the last several hundred years.

    As I told you my friend Jeff, thinks as you. Trying to say that science is that far off due to the amount of oxygen in the air at that time and thus would effect carbon dating, etc. The problem is that we also have writings from those times and earlier. However, we must rely on the so called experts on this subject, because of the necessity of translations, etc.

    I listen to almost all the ancient alien programs and some of it actually makes some sense. Jeff’s pastor believe that aliens have played a role in Biblical history. Archeological evidence supports the great flood. One interesting find is that we, Jeff and I have found while diving, coral remained deeper in the Atlantic Ocean off Florida, then they generally live indicating that the oceans were much shallower, 35 feet +/-, some time in the past.

     
    • J.M.

      March 9, 2014 at 1:54 PM

      Skip, you say,

      @ > However, we must rely on the so called experts on this subject, because of the necessity of translations, etc.

      Don’t include me as being one who must rely on “the so called experts.” I am relying on THE ONE & ONLY EXPERT. What follows is WHO this EXPERT IS, not WAS but IS.

      MY KING MY GOD and THE ONE & ONLY EXPERT

      My King was born King. The Bible says He’s a Seven Way King.
      He’s the King of the Jews – that’s an Ethnic King.
      He’s the King of Israel – that’s a National King.
      He’s the King of righteousness. He’s the King of the ages.
      He’s the King of Heaven. He’s the King of glory. He’s the King of kings
      and He is the Lord of lords.Now that’s my King and my “God.”

      Well, I wonder if you know Him. Do you know Him? Do you know my King and my “God?” NO !!
      David said the Heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork.
      My King is the only one of whom there are no means of measure that can define His limitless love.
      No far seeing telescope can bring into visibility the coastline of the shore of His supplies.
      No barriers can hinder Him from pouring out His blessing.

      He’s enduringly strong. He’s entirely sincere. He’s eternally steadfast.
      He’s immortally graceful. He’s imperially powerful. He’s impartially merciful. That’s my King.
      He’s God’s Son. He’s the sinner’s saviour. He’s the centerpiece of civilization.
      He stands alone in Himself. He’s honest. He’s unique. He’s unparalleled.
      He’s unprecedented. He’s supreme. He’s pre-eminent.He’s the grandest idea in literature.
      He’s the highest personality in philosophy.
      He’s the supreme problem in higher criticism.
      He’s the fundamental doctrine of historic theology.
      He’s the carnal necessity of spiritual religion.
      That’s my King.and my “God.”

      He’s the miracle of the age. He’s the superlative of everything good that you choose to call Him.
      He’s the only one able to supply all our needs simultaneously. He supplies strength for the weak.
      He’s available for the tempted and the tried. He sympathizes and He saves.
      He’s the Almighty God who guides and keeps all his people. He heals the sick.
      He cleanses the lepers.He forgives sinners upon repentance He discharged debtors.
      He delivers the captives. He defends the feeble. He blesses the young.
      He serves the unfortunate. He regards the aged.
      He rewards the diligent and He beautifies the meek.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      Do you know Him? No, I wish you did. Well, my King is a King of knowledge. He’s the wellspring of wisdom.
      He’s the doorway of deliverance. He’s the pathway of peace. He’s the roadway of righteousness.
      He’s the highway of holiness. He’s the gateway of glory. He’s the master of the mighty.
      He’s the captain of the conquerors. He’s the head of the heroes. He’s the leader of the legislatures.

      He’s the overseer of the overcomers. He’s the governor of governors. He’s the prince of princes.
      He’s the King of kings and He’s the Lord of lords.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      His office is manifold. His promise is sure. His light is matchless. His goodness is limitless.
      His mercy is everlasting. His love never changes. His Word is enough.
      His grace is sufficient. His reign is righteous.
      His yoke is easy and His burden is light.
      I WISH I COULD DESCRIBE HIM TO YOU . .
      but He’s indescribable. That’s my King and my “God”. He’s incomprehensible,
      He’s invincible, and He is irresistible.

      I’m coming to tell you this, that the heavens of heavens can’t contain Him,
      let alone some man explain Him.
      You can’t get Him out of your mind. You can’t get Him off of your hands.
      You can’t outlive Him and you can’t live without Him.
      The Pharisees couldn’t stand Him, but they found out they couldn’t stop Him.
      Pilate couldn’t find any fault in Him.
      The witnesses couldn’t get their testimonies to agree about Him.
      Herod couldn’t kill Him. Death couldn’t handle Him and the grave couldn’t hold Him.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      He always has been and He always will be.
      I’m talking about the fact that He had no predecessor
      and He’ll have no successor.
      There’s nobody before Him and there will be nobody greater than Him.
      You can’t impeach Him NOW, and He’s not going to resign.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory.
      Well, all the power belongs to my King.
      We’re around here talking about black power and white power and green power,
      but in the end all that matters is God’s power.Thine is the power. Yes. And the glory
      We try to get prestige and honor and glory for ourselves, but the glory is all His.Yes.
      Thine is the Kingdom and the power and glory, forever and ever and ever and ever. How long is that?
      Forever and ever and ever and ever. . . And when you get through with all of the ever’s, then . . .Amen!

      AND YET, the above words do not do him justice, my King and my “God.” The EXPERT

      Skip, Farethewell
      .

       
      • hskiprob

        March 9, 2014 at 7:13 PM

        You must be really blessed my friend if you get all your insights from your own mind.

         
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 3:10 AM

      @ J.M. How do we explain …………….”

      Don’t ask me, & don’t include me as one of the we in how do we explain. Once again, you, Skip, said the only way to deal with people like me is to ridicule me. What does this say about yourself? Don’t ridicule me by trying to explain this either. I know what ridicule is & I know what a ridiculer is. I also know what & who a blasphemer, boaster, haughty highminded, lover of himself & PROUD of it is too. You are doing to me what I have been told would happen. It was not a warning, it was & IS a way My “God” is letting me know that he is pleased with me

       
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 3:34 AM

      Skip,
      @ J.M. I’m related to ………………………………………………………………………………..”

      To the best of my knowledge, I’m not, at least closely related to all of those famous names But if I knew I was, I would, like you, probably feel important & superior too. Once again, for the umpteenth time I am admitting that you DID have me hoodwinked. You DID have me hooked. I am going through a learning experience,. It’s just one more of my weaknesses, in that I want to think of everyone as a child of The Eternal God except for those who prove to be otherwise. Some of your kind I see from the gitgo. Some I do not. I Know who your “spiritual Father” is. But he has you so deceived you have no inkling of what I’m saying. You think ridiculing me is coming ONLY from your own mind. Yes it IS coming from your mind it’s just that you don’t know who put that thought in your mind to start with, or “his either.” You have already told me who the “he” is.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 11, 2014 at 2:32 PM

        J.M. It is not us, but other historians that say we are related. We, as I said, just haven’t been able to confirm or deny it and for Doug and I we need concrete evidence such as church records, census records or grave marker/sites. We have that missing link issue who we believe is the father of our verified William in 1668 MA, born in 1640, who we believe was also a William born in 1609-11?. It appears we’re related to the brother of John, but because of the missing link, however we don;t know how the other historians verified this. It appears to have passed down through the families as we are surely linked with those of pilgrim heritage. We had no idea until about 5 years ago that we were even related to Captain Samuel Robinson of Bennington and his father Samuel of Mass who owned the Tavern across from Harvard University so we are still searching. The Tavern is where the story tells how Captain Samuel met, as a young man, so many prominent people.

        Just trying to tell you honestly what we know so you don’t have to be so critical. That seems to be part of your nature and I can only believe that this must come from your ego based religion. You have such good qualities in so many other ways, that I tell you this.

        I said “appears” in my previous post to be 100% honest as I always try to be, because Doug and I are not 100% sure that the other historians have it 100% right. What we do know is that we are not direct descendants of John so how the other historian came to understand our connection, we do not know. Hopefully there will be records in either England or Holland that may provide the proof.

         
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 4:00 AM

      @ You cannot prove God doesn’t or does exist,……….

      “God” will SOON prove it himself & the way you are now, you will hate him for doing so. But you sure won’t ridicule HIM. You may TRY but you won’t believe what the results will be. YOU did not watch the Long standing problem Degrasse video did you? You would even ridicule Degrasse. for KNOWING there IS “SOMETHING” there. You are far far gone Skip. YOU will REFUSE to accept even the possibility that there IS a LIFEGIVER that gives you EVERY BREATH OF AIR YOU BREATHE, altho MAN has & IS doing a great job of polluting the air But,You try to poison minds. You are all kind after kind. DESTROYERS. of everything GOOD or TRYING to be good. What else ya got? Ridicule me sum mo. Beginnin to make me feel good. See, your ridicule is making me happy. Oh shucks. Now you will probably stop. But I do want you to have the last word. Last man, excuse me, Last Individual standing in this world & at this time is the winner. Go for it. don’t bother me. I ain’t lyin.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 11, 2014 at 9:00 AM

        J.M. – All ego based religions believe that only their perceived interpretation of God’s will/message is acceptable and all others are infidels, goyims or some other word to describe non-believers. The Old Testament and the Koran even go on to say that if the infidels even try to persuade you to be a non-believer, even if they are your brother, you “must” kill them. I must excuse myself for Hindu as I am not as well versed in that religion or any other ego based religions, that may also have this element in their dogma. It appears the Hindu do, as they are often in physical conflict with Muslims but this could be self defense.

        The ruling world elites have long been in power, perhaps as long as three to four thousand years, and as I mentioned before, coming from a combination of Egypt, Roman and Jewish banking and wealth. King

        They have used ego based religions throughout the ages as a method of retaining their power, using many different methods. One of the methods is divide and concur. You look at just about every feuding country on the planet and you will find as one of the feuding elements, an ego based religion behind one of the participants. In our country we have even seen the entrance of ego based theoretical science enter into the mix, spurring on the mixed economic or progressive model, already disproven as a workable socio-economic model. Proponents of the big bang theory and ancient alien theorists come to mind.

        Many even think that the Royal Families of Europe were behind or at least paid for the writings of Karl Marx and Richard Engels, especially the Communist Manifesto, but that is another discussion.

        Government and ego based religions, as we have seen so many times in history, are at their worse when in collusion with one another. It is interesting that many societies around the world appear to have adopted the basic son of God ideology during the same or very similar periods in history. Wen on government body found it useful, others most likely followed.

        Of course government is going to hide this from the masses, like the Roman Church that did not even allow the reading of the Bible except those ordained by the church until the 1600s, even than at first under threat.

        By placing a church as an element of society, it provides the “ethical” code, often times based an malum prohibitum law, that grants suppression of the masses to the ruling oligarchy. An example is not being able to drink alcohol is many Muslim countries. It’s all about trying to control those people in society that are most willing to be defiant against the ruling oligarchy. Government want good little soldiers and servant to carry out their desires and ego based religion gives them one method of achieving this. Off with the heads of all infidels. This is exactly what the Pilgrims/Seperatists were up against in the late 1500’s in England, except it was the baby brother of the Roman Church, the Church of England. If you have studied biblical alterations and church dogma, it changed throughout history based on what the oligarchy could or could not sell their Citizens, as the Citizenry become more educated.

        All these ego based religions appear to be concoctions of the ruling oligarchies of the societies they ruled over. Heavy indoctrination using fear based (going to hell) or the government will put you to death for being an infidel, if you don’t believe, occurred in English speaking countries even after the early 1700s. The Salem Witch Hunts in America and England before the respective revolutions. Religion persecution is still occurring around the planet, in various methods, and is a part of all ego based religions.

         
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 4:24 AM

      @ It would appear to me that any supportable religion would not require telling those that do not agree that they are going to hell……….”

      YOU CUT & PAST MY COMMENT WHERE I SAID YOU WERE GOING TO HELL !!! QUIT LYING or planting seeds to lead someone to think that is what I told you. WHEN I told you that You have a happy smile in your picture I guess that is what I wanted to see. NOW when I look at your picture I see a sarcastic smile. I TRY to see the BEST in EVERYBODY, Another shortcoming.of mine. I don’t know IF I will ever change this weakness. I have been this way ALL my life. Could be tho, I might qualify for a doorkeeper later in the worldwide Government of “God.” Maybe not. YES you have been discouraging to put it mildly but as I said I don’t give up. A winner never quits & a quitter never wins. YOU OR NOBODY WILL EVER MAKE ME QUIT, Find some easier prey.

       
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 2:38 PM

      @ J.M. – All ego based religions believe that only their perceived interpretation of God’s will/message is acceptable and all others are infidels, goyims or some other word to describe non-believers.

      You know this better than most people do.

       
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 2:51 PM

      @ >I said “appears” in my previous post to be 100% honest

      Is this an ego based religion trait too? I try to be 100% honest too, so I guess it’s another ego based religion trait. As far as records go, everything you & I do & say is being recorded, a record is being kept. It’s called the Book of life, Some people will be blotted out of this Book, & I very well could wind up being one blotted out myself because I must “endure” until the end of mt life here on those earth, but it’s from another ego based source.

       
      • J.M.

        March 11, 2014 at 2:55 PM

        @ I must “endure” until the end of mt life here on those earth, but it’s from another ego based source.< My BAD

        I must “endure” until the end of MY life here on THIS earth, but it’s from another ego based source.

         
      • hskiprob

        March 11, 2014 at 3:42 PM

        J.M. I remember reading years ago about the question of how we as libertarians or anyone who deems themselves patriots or wanting to be a good Citizen, live and deal in a world where governments have and continue to legalize the initiation of force, and abuse it.

        It seems to me that this is one of the greatest present evils that has been going on a very long time, perhaps from the very time government was created. No one really had a good answer and yet many offered many different methods by no real solutions. Just ways to manage within a very corrupt and evil system.

        The overwhelming response was that “it is what it is” and there is not much you can do about it. I disagreed with them, but that’s another issue.

        My point is that, and this is only an opinion, but one that has served me well. There are many many things that life offered that we will just not understand nor may not even be yet allowed by God to understand as human beings. If we can not know yet, why worry about it and those things that don’t really provide us with a better human experience, we will find out when God wants us to.

        I kept hearing people explain our existence to me and what I really came to conclude, is that most of the things we believe, when it comes to non-emperical elements, really doesn’t matter. Once I let the idea sink in and stopped really caring so much about finding out where we came from, bla bla bla, I became freed of that burden, allowing myself to focus on things I believe God would want me to focus on while living on earth. I can always find out later what God want’s me to do next, if that is his plan. Does it really matter if the Biblical story of Jesus’s resurrection is true. It’s his philosophy that he want’s us to follow here on earth. He surely doesn’t want us to live exactly as he did, because everyone would than be crucified at 29 years old.

        So now as I walk down the path of life, I keep all my senses open to the possibilities that God may provide and want of me as other human being interact with me. I keep spreading the various seeds looking for those to help me plant them. Somethings grow and somethings do not and that is jsut the way life is.

         
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 3:19 PM

      Skip, re: your entire message on/of > March 11, 2014 at 9:00 AM

      If I read (< pronounced red) all the books as you have & understood them as you do I would be confused too. I just need to stay in the "unorganized" Church I am, hopefully still in. Once again, I am in a learning, & overcoming experience but I think My Teacher is getting a little weary with me in trying to explain MY & ONLY MY understanding of my Teacher's instructions to ANYONE who thinks it's just another EGO TRIP, because to you, Skip, it is all ego based. I am not angry at you for not understanding what I do but you ridicule me for understanding how & what I understand. Once again, what follows is MORE EGO BASED KNOWLEDGE.You can apply the following to me but you need to consider the SOURCE, before you do.

      2 Timothy 3:2-5 ALL of what is showing below IS because of being disobedient to, YHWH ha Elohiym

      2 For men shall be lovers of their "own selves", covetous, "boasters", "proud", "blasphemers", disobedient to parents,(Is your Son disobedient to you?) "unthankful, unholy,"

      3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, "despisers of those that are good, or those who are trying to be good.

      4 Traitors, "heady", "highminded", lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

      5 Having a form of godliness, but "denying the power thereof": from such turn away.

       
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 4:36 PM

      To: Skip,

      @ > J.M. I remember reading years ago about the question of how we as libertarians or anyone who deems themselves patriots or wanting to be a good Citizen, live and deal in a world where governments have and continue to legalize the initiation of force, and abuse it.

      It’s because something called, “human nature.” The natural inclination to do wrong. My “ego based source” as you, Skip, call it, advises me to try & overcome this downward pull to develop “character.” Character is knowing right from wrong & TRYING to overcome the downward pull to do wrong & do what is good instead. Something “good” is caring for others. Trying to make others happy. But the “source” of this advice is as you,Skip call it, ego based advice.

      @ > It seems to me that this is one of the greatest present evils that has been going on a very long time, perhaps from the very time government was created. No one really had a good answer and yet many offered many different methods by no real solutions. Just ways to manage within a very corrupt and evil system.

      The “good answer” is rejected & ridiculed.

      @ > The overwhelming response was that “it is what it is” and there is not much you can do about it. I disagreed with them, but that’s another issue.

      I too disagree with “them”

      @ > My point is that, and this is only an opinion, but one that has served me well. There are many many things that life offered that we will just not understand nor may not even be yet allowed by God to understand as human beings. If we can not know yet, why worry about it and those things that don’t really provide us with a better human experience, we will find out when God wants us to.

      When we ridicule the “basics” because it is “ego based” no more understanding will be given.

      @ > I kept hearing people explain our existence to me and what I really came to conclude, is that most of the things we believe, when it comes to non-emperical elements, really doesn’t matter. Once I let the idea sink in and stopped really caring so much about finding out where we came from, bla bla bla, I became freed of that burden, allowing myself to focus on things I believe God would want me to focus on while living on earth. I can always find out later what God want’s me to do next, if that is his plan. Does it really matter if the Biblical story of Jesus’s resurrection is true. It’s his philosophy that he want’s us to follow here on earth. He surely doesn’t want us to live exactly as he did, because everyone would than be crucified at 29 years old.

      Seems to me, Skip, & based on your “non ego based” knowledge & understanding, & trying to follow his philosophy only ends in death. You don’t want that, I’m sure, do you? I think he was “about 33, not 29 but what does it matter, he’s dead anyway, at least you say so. I think he is ALIVE & doing quite well, thank you.

      So now as I walk down the path of life, I keep all my senses open to the possibilities that God may provide and want of me as other human being interact with me. I keep spreading the various seeds looking for those to help me plant them. Somethings grow and somethings do not and that is jsut the way life is.

      I do not want to plant the seeds that you do. You plant “your” seeds & I’ll try to plant seeds my ego based teacher gives me to plant.

       
      • hskiprob

        March 11, 2014 at 11:33 PM

        J.M. Good luck

         
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 12:29 AM

      @ J.M. Good luck

      The best to you & yours.

       
  39. J.M.

    March 9, 2014 at 1:10 PM

    Morning Skip, well it is still morning where I am, so it’s good afternoon to you where you are

    @ > J.M. How do we explain the archeological finds of such things as a mastodon bone with an etching of a mastodon and a man on it, believed to be some where in the range of 22,000 to 25,000 years old.

    Skip, I may have misunderstood you but I thought you said all these dating methods were flawed.

    ANYWAY, I WAS exchanging comments with “Teo” on the Brief History of Gold thread & I said to Teo in pertinent part: > “Anyway, the earth has been here for thousands of years LONGER than most people think, in my opinion. It may very well be hundreds of thousands of years or EVEN LONGER.”

    Skip, IF I am understanding YOU, then it’s because you are not understanding my understanding of >>> Be fruitful & multiply & REPLENISH the earth. NOW, I believe this “instruction” OR whatever you want to call it was SAID about 6000 years ago. Maybe, Skip, you are not understanding what Timmy & I understand alike about “creation week.” Then again, you will refuse to understand because it IS in the scriptures & it will not fit into your 5 sense capacity. I do not mean to belittle you by saying this but it is like trying to teach a child algebra before the child is taught arithmetic.

    Pardon this digression, but remember what you said about BELIEF??? You do believe in yourself, don’t you? Sure you do. This is where some knowledge & understanding stops, is limited, & limited to. This far & no farther or further. Some people use both words. Adam & Eve, were created approx. 6,000 years ago. This IS my belief The earth & the Universe has been here for who knows how long, maybe millions of years. I don’t know & it’s not important to me to know how long. There are other things MORE important to know about & understand.

     
  40. J.M.

    March 9, 2014 at 9:47 PM

    @ >You must be really blessed my friend if you get all your insights from your own mind.

    Well, you at least said, IF I get ALL of my INSIGHT from MY OWN MIND. I don’t, so relax.

    I am NOT Harry Skip Robinson, & most other people LIKE Harry Skip Robinson. I thought you, Harry Skip Robinson, would at least be able to understand that much. I admit I hope for the best and sadly find out it’s for the worse. Being made in the image of “God” doesn’t mean we ARE “God.” For those who care it means to develop this image to actually BECOME like him in every way, except he will always be Commander & Chief. Not like in too many chiefs & not enough Indians.

    IMAGE of God, examples

    Man has the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, “like” YHWH ha Elohiym

    Man has the ability to reason, invent, imagine, be creative, and understand new concepts,”like” YHWH ha Elohiym

    Man has the ability to love, “like” YHWH ha Elohiym

    Man has self-control choice,and he is not simply driven by instinct, hunger, fear, etc. “like” mere animals. You Skip have made your choice. So have I. We have chosen 2 different sources.

    Man is able to make complex decisions, “like” YHWH ha Elohiym, not with just our own mind.but with the help of, YHWH ha Elohiym.

    God endowed man with intellectual ability which was and is far superior to that of any animal.
    But since we do not appreciate this & we are unthankful for this ability, we create our own misery like in having an atheist Son for example. Know what I mean?

    Man is capable of logic. < A BIG Problem for "animals." & most people too,& when he/she will only use his/her mind & ONLY his/her mind.

    Man only, of all God's creatures, either has or can have a spirit or God-consciousnes that is, a capacity for knowing God and holding spiritual communion with Him through prayer, praise, and worship Most people don't want this for different reasons, all selfish reasons tho.

    Need anymore examples???

    In the "meantime" the Holy Bible says a little something about the "end times." & people like YOU SKIPPER

    2 Timothy 3:2-5 ALL of what is showing below IS because of being disobedient to, YHWH ha Elohiym

    2 For men shall be lovers of their "own selves", covetous, "boasters", "proud", "blasphemers", disobedient to parents,(Is your Son disobedient to you?) "unthankful, unholy,"

    3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, "despisers of those that are good, or those who are trying to be good.

    4 Traitors, "heady", "highminded", lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

    5 Having a form of godliness, but "denying the power thereof": from such turn away.
    I need to obey this Skip, I am turning AWAY from you. This will be my LAST message to you. So come on back & show just how highminded, haughty, boastful, & how PROUD you are of yourself.

     
  41. Timmy

    March 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM

    as far as the original “alienable” vs “inalienable”…. for what it’s worth:

    http://www.gemworld.com/USA-Unalienable.htm

     
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 2:50 AM

      Timmy,
      @ >as far as the original “alienable” vs “inalienable”…. for what it’s worth:

      As far as your link goes, I much prefer what the FINAL purty handwritten document says than what the link you provided with brings up, i.e. all the mixture of facts v fiction goes cases included.

      Thanks anyway. Remember you said previously that when you did not mention anyone specifically your comment is for, it’s to everyone in general, whatever that means, everyone in general & since you are not specific about who everyone in general is not included, or who is not included in everyone in general, I’m only letting you know my thoughts,etc. Know what I mean?

       
  42. Timmy

    March 19, 2014 at 10:03 PM

    Huh??

     
  43. prayerwarriorpsychicnot

    April 9, 2014 at 12:16 AM

    Reblogged this on Citizens, not serfs.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s