How cops became the standing army of oppression.

[heavenlyboy34]

Indeed, what you state is true because lawyers assume that they and the government they control are the great aspects about the United States. They also think the two party system was the major advancement over The U.S. Constitution and The Declaration of Independence. In actuality, the American Movement later on was the process which shined a light on our Founders, on the new order they established within The Declaration of Independence, and on the laws implemented within The U.S. Constitution to advance that new order.
This might sound like a criminal thing to say, but when talking about why these United States are great, I don't need to speak to a lawyer.

Indeed. I always find it odd when people try to say that the Constitution or some other legal document is what makes America great/unique. This is some combination of animism, idolatry, and self-deprecation. Indeed, if all the laws and lawyers disappeared while we were sleeping, most everyone would wake up and go about their business as usual-much like how we treat a an intersection's broken traffic light as a 4 way stop.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Indeed. I always find it odd when people try to say that the Constitution or some other legal document is what makes America great/unique. This is some combination of animism, idolatry, and self-deprecation. Indeed, if all the laws and lawyers disappeared while we were sleeping, most everyone would wake up and go about their business as usual-much like how we treat a an intersection's broken traffic light as a 4 way stop.

We should question our lawyers and politicians pressuring them to clarify why they would think of themselves as intelligent. Most lawyers think of law in terms of empowerment. Young people desire to go to law school to be empowered to fight against the old lawyers. By the time they advance to do anything, they become old and wise lawyers themselves. In the meantime, the people suffer.

In the end, it doesn't matter how rational is the society we live just as long as the ruling process of the law itself is, by nature, irrational. Just how significant are the certifications of expertise granted when they are ultimately deemed legally official by lawyering clowns? Back when the king officially certified such expertise, his purpose was to cause a detriment towards the commoner and a benefit to himself.

 

[seyferjm]

I went to Radley's breakout session at the ISFLC, very interesting but sobering to think about the mount of power the police have.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

We should question our lawyers and politicians pressuring them to clarify why they would think of themselves as intelligent. Most lawyers think of law in terms of empowerment. Young people desire to go to law school to be empowered to fight against the old lawyers. By the time they advance to do anything, they become old and wise lawyers themselves. In the meantime, the people suffer.

In the end, it doesn't matter how rational is the society we live just as long as the ruling process of the law itself is, by nature, irrational. Just how significant are the certifications of expertise granted when they are ultimately deemed legally official by lawyering clowns? Back when the king officially certified such expertise, his purpose was to cause a detriment towards the commoner and a benefit to himself.

Only in relatively rare instances. It is in a king's best interests to keep commoners happy and productive, as this is how kingdoms grow and survive. Republics, on the other hand, redistribute wealth and call it "growth".

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Only in relatively rare instances. It is in a king's best interests to keep commoners happy and productive, as this is how kingdoms grow and survive. Republics, on the other hand, redistribute wealth and call it "growth".

Regarding the inclusion of "All men," the king has always managed to step in to compromise any hard fought after gain won by the commoners. He would do this by allowing just a small portion of the commoners within his Aristocracy by officially designating them titles of expertise. As in Braveheart when the king compromised the efforts of William Wallace by offering shares of property to the Scottish royalty to become part of his military nobility. In other words, the king owned all property and, as they were on his property, all things as well. If the king wanted the shares of the property back that he was sharing, he could just recall it all.

As a Christian, I look at it this way. When the ultimate tyrant Himself reduced towards the manifestation of His Will during the Last Supper, with this being the inheritance He gave to the people, He gave his body as bread to be eaten and his blood as wine to be drank. In other words, Christ commanded that we devour Him in whatever way necessary concerning our happiness. This is in direct contrast to the book of Genesis when as just part of His fullness, as the Father that is, He commanded the strong to rise up and become dominant by consuming the weak.

As a majority of people trying just to control tyranny, we have been at this forever. So, it is no small matter when the tyrant takes back that which was won by so much precious blood.

 

[Henry Rogue]

Only in relatively rare instances. It is in a king's best interests to keep commoners happy and productive, as this is how kingdoms grow and survive. Republics, on the other hand, redistribute wealth and call it "growth".

Are you serious Clark? Defending monarchy? Whether one is ruled by a single king or a majority of fools, it's still bad news for the individual.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Regarding the inclusion of "All men," the king has always managed to step in to compromise any hard fought after gain won by the commoners. He would do this by allowing just a small portion of the commoners within his Aristocracy by officially designating them titles of expertise. As in Braveheart when the king compromised the efforts of William Wallace by offering shares of property to the Scottish royalty to become part of his military nobility. In other words, the king owned all property and, as they were on his property, all things as well. If the king wanted the shares of the property back that he was sharing, he could just recall it all.

As a Christian, I look at it this way. When the ultimate tyrant Himself reduced towards the manifestation of His Will during the Last Supper, with this being the inheritance He gave to the people, He gave his body as bread to be eaten and his blood as wine to be drank. In other words, Christ commanded that we devour Him in whatever way necessary concerning our happiness. This is in direct contrast to the book of Genesis when as just part of His fullness, as the Father that is, He commanded the strong to rise up and become dominant by consuming the weak.

As a majority of people trying just to control tyranny, we have been at this forever. So, it is no small matter when the tyrant takes back that which was won by so much precious blood.

Indeed, but is that really tyrannical? Did you know presidents and politicians bestow various titles upon people here as well? They have benign sounding names like Congressional Medal Of Honor Recipient and so on. The "New American Paradyme" or whatever you feel like calling it isn't really "new" at all. It's just redressing of the Old World style. (except among the people in many ways. Being the productive and creative among us-however despised by the political class-many of them have managed to separate themselves from the tyranny of State mind control)

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Are you serious Clark? Defending monarchy? Whether one is ruled by a single king or a majority of fools, it's still bad news for the individual.

I defend monarchy against they Tyranny Of The Majority-democracy and Republicanism. (these are avant-garde concepts established by elites to fool the masses into believing they are "free") If concerned about individual liberty, we can't really defend any well-established form of mass governance. For this, we have to look to peaceful and voluntary styles of living and co-operating.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Indeed, but is that really tyrannical? Did you know presidents and politicians bestow various titles upon people here as well? They have benign sounding names like Congressional Medal Of Honor Recipient and so on. The "New American Paradyme" or whatever you feel like calling it isn't really "new" at all. It's just redressing of the Old World style. (except among the people in many ways. Being the productive and creative among us-however despised by the political class-many of them have managed to separate themselves from the tyranny of State mind control)

As it was their plan to break with legal precedence, which as a legal method is another traditional fallacy still being utilized in our courts, our Founders turned to writing the Declaration of Independence. In order so that they would be legitimate in doing so, instead of utilizing the norm of legal precedence, they had to turn instead to another method blessed by the Church which was the scientific method of natural law. Though it doesn't say within the Declaration of Independence that our Founders declared a natural law, they clearly did so in order to break with the bounds of legal precedence.

The fact that the old Puritan order continues to threaten this new order with legal precedence isn't a fact, but a shameful situation.

Newton =

Every action has an equal or opposite reaction.

Our Founders reducing politics existentially to a natural law =

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

---------------------------
In their stunning declaration, our Founders demonstrated that they were plugged in to the Greek philosophers of Plato and Socrates by the way they formalized certain terms in the higher case. If you don't know what I'm referring to here, consider yourself a tyrant as king George didn't get it either.

 

[rubioneocon]

The kind of tyranny taking place here at UC-Santa Barbara February 2010 at the start of the Karl Rove book signing tour.

We dont care about left or right we care about war we care about spending !


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fE3T12G9gk

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

The kind of tyranny taking place here at UC-Santa Barbara February 2010 at the start of the Karl Rove book signing tour.

We dont care about left or right we care about war we care about spending !


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fE3T12G9gk

In order to save California, you may need to retreat for a long while by moving away to something other than a social communist state.

All those suited cool fellows act the way that they do because they feel with absolute certainty that they possess both the empowerment and the intelligent argument. In sobering them up, one needs to demonstrate on multiple levels how they don't possess the intelligent argument and, as a consequence, how they don't possess the empowerment either; but, that they are impostors who either need to step down or convert over to the side of the people.

 

[rubioneocon]

In order to save California, you may need to retreat for a long while by moving away to something other than a social communist state.

watch the youtube please first before you think you know what you speak/write of . . .

Thanks much !

 

[rubioneocon]

. . .
As a majority of people trying just to control tyranny, we have been at this forever. So, it is no small matter when the tyrant takes back that which was won by so much precious blood.

So philosophical Uncle . . .
but DO get out of your ivory tower sometimes and put those sandals/boots on the ground, please.