Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Everything you know is a lie


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Everything you know is a lie Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/8/2016 9:15:27 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		1789, I think DominantWrestler. There was an earlier one but I believe it was superseded.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/8/2016 9:30:26 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"So when were oaths for American armed services established? "

American ? Well 1775 and it was only good for one year. What, you can't Google ?

The other thing is, what does it matter ? Confederate soldiers never swore allegiance to the US. Regardless, where is it written that secession is not allowed ? The federal government is the one who broke the law. Unlike most, I have read the Constitution though it was a long time ago, but I would have noticed something that says "If any state tries to get out of the union we will rub them out and rape their Women during our punishment raids which we will call reconstruction". I would have remembered something like that. Lincoln was like the proverbial mafia Don who won't let people quit.

Is that freedom ?

And don't give me the slavery shit, it was coming due to be abolished anyway. Plenty of Whites helped Blacks get up north. But then there was the Dred Scott decision. That decision was made by a northerner, in the federal government. That was in 1857. Seems the US government was quite supportive of slavery.

But I tell you what, I will not recite the Pledge Of Allegiance. I will take no oaths for this country. I am indigenous and owe them fucking nothing. I will not go and burn houses and rape Women and kill old Men for their oil companies. I will do everything in my power to keep younger people from joining the military. I won't attack, but I will only defend if a foreign power actually invades. Going to another country that has not attacked us is not defense. I wish about 80 % of US government "representatives" would die a horrible death. I wish the 911 hijackers would have concentrated on that but they figured there were more Jews at the WTC. But then they also knew that congress works what, 14 days a fucking year ? Fucking scum, almost all of them. I am loyal to the country, but the government can go fuck itself.

I've been pressured, at times, by the court system to swear to something and refused. Like "sign this". Well what happens if I don''t sign ? That is up to the judge. Well call him then, I ain't signing it. There was an epiphany, nothing happened. I found out if they want to sign, agreeing to something that means they do not have the authority to force you to do it. Fuck them and the beamer they drove in on.

T^T

(in reply to DominantWrestler)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/8/2016 9:45:15 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne]

Try again,

the EP only freed slaves in the states that seceded, not the remaining states.

the founders were terrorists you know.


The Emancipation Proclamation

quote:

President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, as the nation approached its third year of bloody civil war. The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free."



I dont recall any part of the constitution stating the president has the authority to dicktate



Exactly what I posted you fucking retard. There is no 'NO' to it. The amendment freed ALL the slaves. The emancipation freed the slaves (contraband) in the terrorist areas of secession.

You can cockgarble all you want, but Habeas Corpus was suspended constitutionally, you are the only one dicktaking here, you have no legal acumen, you are an imbecile according to Black's Law Dictionary: unable to understand the law, and ever unlikely to.



you talking about where lincoln threw the whole damned maryland legislature the sheriff and mayor in jail? A state that did not secede? Then after congress told him to fuck himself he did it again? that illegal use of presidential power, the same power used to out the southern legislatures? That habeas corpus?

Fuck the law I'm honest abe

Raelly?

The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free."

do you see where it says rebellious states? that means the confederate states which went to war with the union. Maybe you get your mom to read and explain it to you, because all the states were not rebel states. comprehension rules




No I am not talking about that, retard. Still, suspension of habeas corpus, via the constitution, sort of murky whats legal and not. As I said originally, you fucking retard, the emancipation freed only contraband, it was the constitutional amendment than freed all slaves. Maybe get a fucking pre-schooler to read my post to you; fuckwhistle.



glad you sorted that out since the emancipation proclamation wasnt an amendment and I have to look back but I am not so sure that the 13th was even legal since we had a 13th that has no record as being repealed.






Seems to me the south was not allowed to vote while at the same time da gubmint claims they never seceded, which means they were unlawfully blocked from legislative suffrage.

You see that copy of the 13th, it says nothing about slaves, as you can see it was official approved by the legislature and taught in schools. How did the slave one get in there?







PINCHE TEJANO Blog Stream Groups Following Profile
The "Missing" 13th Amendment, an odd Constitution story

By pinche tejano
Tuesday Jul 10, 2007 · 3:35 PM CDT
92 Comments (92 New)
31

RSS
TAGS
Constitution
History
Share this article

So this is either one of the worst things ever to happen to the Constitution, or one of the most elaborate web hoaxes ever. This all started in seeing what Gonzo was lying about today. One of my favorite political sites, Wonkette, said this:

April 24, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an intelligence investigation in which agents accidentally violated the 2nd, 4th, 10th, 13th, and 17th amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Considering there is always a nugget of truth in their snark, when I saw the 13th amendment, my heart sank. My first though was the Northern Mariana Islands, you remember right, like 114 scandals ago? Fearing the worse*, like the USA supporting slavery at the justification of the Attorney General, I stumbled onto something even crazier.

Did you know the 13th Amendment supplanted an original 13th Amendment already on the books? I am being completely serious for once, follow me below the fold:

Let me start at the beginning, the American Revolution has just concluded and England has realized that they cannot squash the young republic with military might. So they went to the usual bag of tricks for politicians, honors and privilege. Though titles of nobility were prohibited by both Article VI of the Articles of Confederation (1777) and in Article I, Sect. 9 of the Constitution of the United States (1778), the Founding Fathers saw a considerable loophole. A loophole that today has given us Sir Rudy Giuliani, Sir Colin Powell and Sir Ronald Reagan.

It also had a secondary purpose, which would have an astounding today:
http://www.w3f.com/...

In the winter of 1983, archival research expert David Dodge, and former Baltimore police investigator Tom Dunn, were searching for evidence of government corruption in public records stored in the Belfast Library on the coast of Maine. By chance, they discovered the library's oldest authentic copy of the Constitution of the United States (printed in 1825). Both men were stunned to see this document included a 13th Amendment that no longer appears on current copies of the Constitution. Moreover, after studying the Amendment's language and historical context, they realized the principle intent of this "missing" 13th Amendment was to prohibit lawyers from serving in government.

So began a seven-year, nationwide search for the truth surrounding the most bizarre Constitutional puzzle in American history -- the unlawful removal of a ratified Amendment from the Constitution of the United States. Since 1983, Dodge and Dunn have uncovered additional copies of the Constitution with the "missing" 13th Amendment printed in at least eighteen separate publications by ten different states and territories over four decades from 1822 to 1860.

In June of this year, Dodge uncovered the evidence that this missing 13th Amendment had indeed been lawfully ratified by the state of Virginia and was therefore an authentic Amendment to the American Constitution. If the evidence is correct and no logical errors have been made, a 13th Amendment restricting lawyers from serving in government was ratified in 1819 and removed from our Constitution during the tumult of the Civil War.

Since the Amendment was never lawfully repealed, it is still the Law today. The implications are enormous.

So what is in this mystery 13th Amendment:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."
For those who want hard evidence, I offer up the Constitution of the United States of America, printed in 1825 in Portland, Maine:




If you want to verify this document, go here:
Maine State Archives
State Capitol - Station 84
Augusta, ME 04333-0084
(207)287-5295
[email protected]

Now the reason lawyer would have been prohibited is because the International Bar Association was charted by the King of England and headquartered in London. So any American lawyer who uses the term Esquire would be in violation of the Constitution, Article 1, Sect. 9. But since there was no penalty for this, it was largely ignored. This would also be pretty defunct today, as most of our lawyers belong to the ABA, or American Bar Association, so only fools who belong to the IBA would fall under this domain. So basically, unless you accept a foreign title, say Knight, you will not be affected and forced to forfeit your citizenship.

But back to this lost Amendment, I bet you are asking, was it ever ratified? Well, here is what I found:

There were 17 states in 1810, so 13 needed to ratify it:
Maryland, Dec. 25, 1810
Kentucky, Jan. 31, 1811
Ohio, Jan. 31, 1811
Delaware, Feb. 2, 1811
Pennsylvania, Feb. 6, 1811
New Jersey, Feb. 13, 1811http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/10/155241/107
Vermont, Oct. 24, 1811
Tennessee, Nov. 21, 1811
Georgia, Dec. 13, 1811
North Carolina, Dec. 23, 1811
Massachusetts, Feb. 27, 1812
New Hampshire, Dec. 10, 1812

This makes 12.

Then the War of 1812 broke out, and Washington burned to the ground, and all our documents with it. But we won, of course, and we finally got back on track and according to Congressional Records on December 31, 1817 the House of Representatives resolved that President Monroe find out about the status of the Amendment. In a letter dated February 6, 1818, President Monroe reported to the House that the Secretary of State Adams had written to the governors of Virginia, South Carolina and Connecticut to tell them that the proposed Amendment had been ratified by twelve States and rejected by two (New York and Rhode Island), and asked the governors to notify him of their legislature's position. (House Document No. 76).

On February 28, 1818, Secretary of State Adams reported the rejection of the Amendment by South Carolina. [House Doc. No. 129]. So it all comes down to Virginia. There was no West Virginia at this point, keep that in mind.

On March 10, the Virginia legislature passed Act No. 280 (Virginia Archives of Richmond, "misc.' file, p. 299 for micro-film):

"Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that there shall be published an edition of the Laws of this Commonwealth in which shall be contained the following matters, that is to say: the Constitution of the United States and the amendments thereto..."
This act was the specific legislated instructions on what was, by law, to be included in the re-publication (a special edition) of the Virginia Civil Code. The Virginia Legislature had already agreed that all Acts were to go into effect on the same day -- the day that the Act to re-publish the Civil Code was enacted. Therefore, the 13th Amendment's official date of ratification would be the date of re-publication of the Virginia Civil Code: March 12, 1819.

That makes 13, and is officially in the Constitution.

So besides the Maine, and Virginia evidence, who else printed the now missing 13th Amendment?

War Dept. Document from 1825 Reveals Critical Clue to Missing 13th Amendment
By The Idaho Observer ( I know, I know, quite a source PT!)
http://www.proliberty.com/...

KANSAS CITY -- The Comfort Inn here was the third stop for Freedom Drive, 2002, and the place where Titles of Nobility Amendment (TONA) researcher Suzanne Nevling of San Francisco, California produced a copy of "Military Laws of the United States to which is prefixed the Constitution of the United States."

The book, published under authority of the War Department in 1825, proves that the original 13th Amendment that prohibits Americans from holding Titles of Nobility, was part of the Constitution until it was mysteriously replaced with a new 13th Amendment that banned slavery after the Civil War. "When we found this book last September we knew that we had found that the original 13th Amendment was part of the Constitution as of 1825," Nevling said.

Previous TONA research proves that on March 12, 1819, Virginia became the 13th and final state required for ratification of the original 13th Amendment when it published in the laws of Virginia Act No. 280 as passed by its legislature.

TONA research has shown that the state of Virginia forwarded copies of its revised code to the Department of State, the Congress, the Library of Congress and the President.
So, what about hardcopy? Ok.

Here is the Military Laws of the United States, 1825:




It appears again in 1840, in a Citizen's Handbook:




Colorado has it as late as 1867:





Kansas, 1868, including the "13th" Anti-Slavery Amendment listed at 14:




The True Republican, a book published in 1841:




The Constitution - Federalist of 1862:




The Whig Almanac - 1845:



There are many more.

Then something happened. Mainly, a Civil War.

After the Civil War, this Amendment was basically dropped down the memory hole, finding the 13th Amendment we know, and love, in its place. That was declared ratified on December 18, 1865, which would explain why Colorado and Kansas have our current day 13th Amendment as the 14th Amendment. Very, very odd.

So to find a counterpoint, I thought a lawyer site would be the best, and I find a good rebuttal:

http://www.thirdamendment.com/...

Even if Virginia ratified the amendment at any time during the ratification process, the amendment did not become part of the Constitution, because the amendment was never just one state away from this threshold. If Virginia ratified March 12th 1819, with the publication of their enactment book as hallucinatory conspiracy tinfoilers claim, the ratification came far too late to matter.

When the amendment was submitted to the states in 1810, 13 ratifications were required; Louisiana was admitted to the Union on April 30, 1812, raising the required number of ratifications to 14. Prior to that date the amendment had received only 11 ratifications

New Hampshire ratified on December 9, 1812, raising the total number of ratifications to 12 out of the needed 14. But Indiana was admitted on December 11, 1816, raising the required number of ratifications to 15. Mississippi's admission on December 10, 1817, did not change the threshold, but Illinois's admission on December 3, 1818 raised the threshold to 16.

You might saunter over to your constitution and have a gander at article five. Another mind blowing miraculous hallucination that doesn't stand up to reality. Sorry, Charlie.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/8/2016 10:03:09 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Every confederate soldier was a traitor and every state that rebelled gave up constitutional rights by seceding. Lincoln could have legally executed every confederate soldier and all those who gave them aid, but he didn't. Lincoln took the high ground. I can't believe your major sources for this came from an Alabama lifestyle website


Bullshit. If you hold that to be true then the founders of this country were subject to execution by the English.

you hear the bullshit stories about once you are in the (non-existent) mafia you can never get out ?

This country is like that ?

What's more they got petitions for secession in all fifty states, though that is because the number of signatures required was fixed and not scaled to population.

So, I disagree, I think any state should be able to leave the union and not even give a reason. Look what Britain is doing, leaving the EU, would you propose to force them to stay militarily ? It is about the same thing.

A couple of states are really considering leaving the union. Now if they get the money the federal government extracts from their Citizens they would probably do just fine. Have their own military, defend their own borders. (yup, Texas) Not support over a hundred military bases around the world.

Bottom line is you are fucking wrong on this.

T^T

Today, the most famous offenders of the eighteenth-century English treason laws are the American revolutionaries. The Declaration of Independence violates the 3rd law of treason in this statement: 3. "If a man do levy war against our lord the king in his realm"

"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other out Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.". When John Hancock, Samuel Adams, and other founding fathers signed this statement, they did not sign some empty philosophical statement, they signed their death warrant.

.....it marks the point of no return: either the revolutionaries were going to gain their independence from England and create a new country, or they were going to lose the war to the best army in the world, forfeit everything they owned, ruin their families, and be drawn and quartered.

HERE

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/8/2016 10:09:19 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Kinda what I said, but you went to a blog to get an even more longwinded version.

T^T

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/8/2016 10:56:40 PM   
DominantWrestler


Posts: 338
Joined: 7/4/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"So when were oaths for American armed services established? "

American ? Well 1775 and it was only good for one year. What, you can't Google ?

The other thing is, what does it matter ? Confederate soldiers never swore allegiance to the US. Regardless, where is it written that secession is not allowed ? The federal government is the one who broke the law. Unlike most, I have read the Constitution though it was a long time ago, but I would have noticed something that says "If any state tries to get out of the union we will rub them out and rape their Women during our punishment raids which we will call reconstruction". I would have remembered something like that. Lincoln was like the proverbial mafia Don who won't let people quit.

Is that freedom ?

And don't give me the slavery shit, it was coming due to be abolished anyway. Plenty of Whites helped Blacks get up north. But then there was the Dred Scott decision. That decision was made by a northerner, in the federal government. That was in 1857. Seems the US government was quite supportive of slavery.

But I tell you what, I will not recite the Pledge Of Allegiance. I will take no oaths for this country. I am indigenous and owe them fucking nothing. I will not go and burn houses and rape Women and kill old Men for their oil companies. I will do everything in my power to keep younger people from joining the military. I won't attack, but I will only defend if a foreign power actually invades. Going to another country that has not attacked us is not defense. I wish about 80 % of US government "representatives" would die a horrible death. I wish the 911 hijackers would have concentrated on that but they figured there were more Jews at the WTC. But then they also knew that congress works what, 14 days a fucking year ? Fucking scum, almost all of them. I am loyal to the country, but the government can go fuck itself.

I've been pressured, at times, by the court system to swear to something and refused. Like "sign this". Well what happens if I don''t sign ? That is up to the judge. Well call him then, I ain't signing it. There was an epiphany, nothing happened. I found out if they want to sign, agreeing to something that means they do not have the authority to force you to do it. Fuck them and the beamer they drove in on.

T^T


Considering I have attempted to be civil with you, I'd hope you wouldn't be instantly demeaning

As for the subject at hand, assuming United States law followed any othe precedence of English law, the law our system has been based upon for a thousand years has long established rules on treason, which qualifies all confederate soldiers as traitors. As if that wasn't enough, confederate soldiers that had sworn service when joining the national military would be unreprehensible traitors, like general Lee

< Message edited by DominantWrestler -- 8/8/2016 11:10:52 PM >

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 12:20:39 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Demeaning when ? Separate it and quote it.

If you say the people of the south who tried to break away from the union deserve death, then the founders of this country deserved death. The difference is they won and the south did not.

If you are saying that they had actually sworn an oath the the US government, then they should have all officially resigned in writing.

An ex-boss of mine was from Byelorussia and had fought in the Russian army. Then he emigrated here and fought in the US army. Are you saying he deserved to die for that ?

I am saying that I owe the government nothing, and neither did the confederates. You want to start this I drive on their roads and enjoy piped in water ad whatever else, they charged my Parents and Grandparents for that. They did not put one fucking dime of their own money into it, they took it, by force, from me and my ancestors.

And Obama with this "You didn't build that" bullshit, he has never build a goddamn thing in his life. Community organizer, probably because he was incompetent as a lawyer and couldn't get you out of a speeding ticket if the cop was falling down drunk. How dare he insult the working class we used to have in this country who did it ? What about putting a Man on the moon, you didn't built that ? Well then who the fuck did ? Talk about the shit that Romney and Trump said, I think Obama has a "STFU" team to tell him what not to say. It is nice he did not start WW3 but then he does have a few months to do it.

Got kids ? What happens if you do and they reinstate the draft and go send them to wallow in depleted uranium and through the VA and non-disclosure agreements cover up the fact that they are dying from it ?

We owe them nothing. We pay the to defend this country and they fail EVERY TIME. Over a half a trillion dollars for their friends to build boat anchors. (I think they did actually get them of the ground but have a way to go still) Ad their friends suck down your money with cost overruns written ibnto contracts that no sane person would sign if using their own money. Want to say I do not understand the complexity ? Bullshit, I understand it completely. They are stealing from us. We would have a stronger military if we had bought MIGs. With the ridiculous money they are giving to their friends we could have so many MIGs we could take over the world.

The Confederacy was against a bunch of monetary policy as well as a few tariffs and taxes they saw as unfair. But those few families that owned slaves did not fight the war themselves. Forget everything they taught in school, under close examination it does not make sense. Which explains the title of the OP.

And demeaning, I still don't see where, at least in what you quoted.

T^T

(in reply to DominantWrestler)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 4:57:12 AM   
DominantWrestler


Posts: 338
Joined: 7/4/2010
Status: offline 		Ben Franklin mentioned that they could hang for their crimes against the crown

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 7:09:21 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Ben Franklin mentioned that they could hang for their crimes against the crown


Yes, and ? They belonged to a monarchy at the time. Did the south ?

What to you think about Brexit ? They got into a union and found out it wasn't in their best interest and are leaving. Tell me the difference.

T^T

(in reply to DominantWrestler)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 8:06:02 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		One did not author an act of war against the union (that would be the first of many glaring differences).

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 11:50:02 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline 		The north violated the contract what choice did the south have? nutsuck or fight.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 11:57:19 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Every confederate soldier was a traitor and every state that rebelled gave up constitutional rights by seceding. Lincoln could have legally executed every confederate soldier and all those who gave them aid, but he didn't. Lincoln took the high ground. I can't believe your major sources for this came from an Alabama lifestyle website


Bullshit. If you hold that to be true then the founders of this country were subject to execution by the English.

you hear the bullshit stories about once you are in the (non-existent) mafia you can never get out ?

This country is like that ?

What's more they got petitions for secession in all fifty states, though that is because the number of signatures required was fixed and not scaled to population.

So, I disagree, I think any state should be able to leave the union and not even give a reason. Look what Britain is doing, leaving the EU, would you propose to force them to stay militarily ? It is about the same thing.

A couple of states are really considering leaving the union. Now if they get the money the federal government extracts from their Citizens they would probably do just fine. Have their own military, defend their own borders. (yup, Texas) Not support over a hundred military bases around the world.

Bottom line is you are fucking wrong on this.

T^T

Today, the most famous offenders of the eighteenth-century English treason laws are the American revolutionaries. The Declaration of Independence violates the 3rd law of treason in this statement: 3. "If a man do levy war against our lord the king in his realm"

"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other out Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.". When John Hancock, Samuel Adams, and other founding fathers signed this statement, they did not sign some empty philosophical statement, they signed their death warrant.

.....it marks the point of no return: either the revolutionaries were going to gain their independence from England and create a new country, or they were going to lose the war to the best army in the world, forfeit everything they owned, ruin their families, and be drawn and quartered.

HERE



what 'new country'? Our foundational law is brit.
History does not tell us what obligations we are held to with britain, at least all I know about is 5%. How about lord baltimore for instance did he lose his feudal grant from the king? I think not. Our land titles are all 'in fee' and taxed, forfeited no different than its ever been done in brittyland based upon legal euphemisms and distinctions without a difference.

All I see is a glorified drama queen corporate reconstruction.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 11:58:35 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
what 'new country'? Our foundational law is brit.

Yeah? You owe us a fair bit of tea tax then, don't you?

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 12:12:47 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Ben Franklin mentioned that they could hang for their crimes against the crown


Yes, and ? They belonged to a monarchy at the time. Did the south ?

What to you think about Brexit ? They got into a union and found out it wasn't in their best interest and are leaving. Tell me the difference.

T^T



yup the only purpose was to facilitate intercourse (trade) and watch each others 6. Slavery is just the cover story and a good one it is, it was on its way out in the south as well as the north as I believe you said earlier. The north wanted to force the south into buying goods from the north and taxed the shit out of them when they wanted to buy goods from england and france. The north violated the intended purpose of the covenant-trust-compact, and used slavery as a cover story to appear to be the good guys. Same MO has been used for everything most people 'think' they know about history since. The constitution as we have it now was never authorized to be created in the convention.



quote:



Patrick Henry, June 4, 1788
Henry's statesmanship did not end with the Revolution and the achievement of independence.

I have the highest veneration for those gentlemen; but, sir, give me leave to demand, What right had they to say, We, the people? My political curiosity, exclusive of my anxious solicitude for the public welfare, leads me to ask, Who authorized them to speak the language of, We, the people, instead of, We, the states? States are the characteristics and the soul of a confederation. If the states be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great, consolidated, national government, of the people of all the states. I have the highest respect for those gentlemen who formed the Convention, and, were some of them not here, I would express some testimonial of esteem for them. America had, on a former occasion, put the utmost confidence in them--a confidence which was well placed; and I am sure, sir, I would give up any thing to them; I would cheerfully confide in them as my representatives. But, sir, on this great occasion, I would demand the cause of their conduct. Even from that illustrious man who saved us by his valor [George Washington], I would have a reason for his conduct: that liberty which he has given us by his valor, tells me to ask this reason; and sure I am, were he here, he would give us that reason. But there are other gentlemen here, who can give us this information.

The people gave them no power to use their name. That they exceeded their power is perfectly clear. It is not mere curiosity that actuates me: I wish to hear the real, actual, existing danger, which should lead us to take those steps, so dangerous in my conception. Disorders have arisen in other parts of America; but here, sir, no dangers, no insurrection or tumult have happened; every thing has been calm and tranquil. But, notwithstanding this, we are wandering on the great ocean of human affairs. I see no landmark to guide us. We are running we know not whither. Difference of opinion has gone to a degree of inflammatory resentment in different parts of the country, which has been occasioned by this perilous innovation. The federal Convention ought to have amended the old system; for this purpose they were solely delegated; the object of their mission extended to no other consideration. You must, therefore, forgive the solicitation of one unworthy member to know what danger could have arisen under the present Confederation, and what are the causes of this



The reason they originally considered it unnecessary for bill of rights is because the bill of rights 1649 from england was assumed to be in full force. Well that didnt take long strip, and despite the reservation of off limits to the gubmint the present day BoR didnt take long to strip either.

Nothing but a house of cards, its no surprise that we have such strong arm methods and cops shooting unarmed kids with near impunity today. Worse with the historical asshelmets in this country today a constitutional convention would be jumping from the pan to the fire, the only solution if there is one, is to 'strictly' enforce the BoR as it is stated, without gubmint dictating how they insist the people to interpret it.

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 8/9/2016 12:23:59 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 12:14:33 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
what 'new country'? Our foundational law is brit.

Yeah? You owe us a fair bit of tea tax then, don't you?


when are you going to pay up for saving your asses from the war you 'created' and forced hitler into?

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 12:23:12 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Uh, says patrick henry, who did not attend that convention, nobody gives a fuck. He was on the losing side of the issue from the start.

You will say obamacare is repealed based on the same untutored tinfoiling, however, it didn't get repealed.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 12:29:34 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline 		Innocent of the fraud perpetrated upon the people.
Patrick Henry, American Hero, 'comprehends' the problems 'they' dealt with, you 200 years later cant even read most of the time much less comprehend.
Henry warned us about the shit mess this would lead to, and we have to today.
House of cards built and operated on orwellian fraud and deceit.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/9/2016 12:36:08 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		No, he didn't and wasn't any hero, a lawyer and career politician who owned many slaves and a 10K acre plantation. No simple honest patriot there. More like a Lindsay Graham.

Everything you 'know' is a lie.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 8/9/2016 12:54:26 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/10/2016 2:15:07 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline 		your shitstick gobblers as usual are legally clueless.
no law exists capping the time it takes for a state to ratify.
law respects the status and condition of the time of the event,
virginia could have ratified it today and it would be valid.

If you get a speeding ticket yesterday, and speeding is repealed removed from the statutes tomorrow, you are still liable to the law existing at the time UNLESS ticketing for speeding was ruled unconstitutional or nullification of all tickets pending are explicitly declared nulled you will pay the ticket.

Thats the way law works in the real world.

quote:


1 U.S. Code § 109 - Repeal of statutes as affecting existing liabilities

US Code

The repeal of any statute shall not have the effect to release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under such statute, unless the repealing Act shall so expressly provide, and such statute shall be treated as still remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture, or liability. The expiration of a temporary statute shall not have the effect to release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under such statute, unless the temporary statute shall so expressly provide, and such statute shall be treated as still remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture, or liability.
(July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 635.)


PH is a hero, he blew the whistle on the gubmint fraud of the creation of the constitutional kingdom.

Now instead of choking on shitsticks how about you show us:

a) 'any' time limitation on the ratification process.
b) 'any' legislation that overrules due process

c) 'any'thing more than your choking on nutsuck shitschtick


< Message edited by Real0ne -- 8/10/2016 2:18:15 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Everything you know is a lie - 8/10/2016 2:37:42 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

your shitstick gobblers as usual are legally clueless.
no law exists capping the time it takes for a state to ratify.
law respects the status and condition of the time of the event,
virginia could have ratified it today and it would be valid.




Oh fuck your cockgargling. You are the only one who are talking about time limits. Lets pretend they did not ratify it in 1819, then you are around 21 votes short of ratification today, lets pretend they did ratify it in 1819, then you are only 20 votes short today. I never said anything about the validity of ratifications, they can vote 2 million years from now, and it would be valid. Thing is, it wasn't ratified to be the 13th amendment, and the 13th amendment we now have is going to remain there, so it would have to go back to the legislature to be renamed and numbered.

You are the clueless one, both legally and mentally.

You got caught AGAIN rolling your little balls of shit and eating them, and you are looking to detract from your toiletlicking, but its right here in black and white.


All your horseshit you shovel here is based on latin root words that do not contain the meaning of the compound, and on the ignorance of most facts. Everything you 'know' is lying stupid horseshit.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 8/10/2016 2:44:43 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Everything you know is a lie Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109