One True Path to Liberty®

[Ronin Truth]

Congratulations.

Now comes the hard part. You have to come up with a good reason to go.

Pretty close to some really good KC Barbecue. Beyond that I'm stumped.


Oh wait, http://www.historicdowntownliberty.org/intriguing-history/

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Of course it did.

Without the Constitution, this land mass was nothing but gaggle of colonies founded by the British

Unity OF THE PEOPLE occurred before the constitution, the paper formalized the agreement between states to recognize central government.

The Declaration Of Independence (DOI) did more for the peoples unity than anything, which is why the war was won.

The loyalists sabotaged the inclusion of the same principles or doctrines of philosophy which empowered the DOI in the creation of the first amendment. Leading to the lack of unity today and that which allowed the civil war.

You are against those principles creating unity in the people today. The NWO loves you.

 

[acptulsa]

Unity OF THE PEOPLE occurred before the constitution, the paper formalized the agreement between states to recognize central government.

The Declaration Of Independence (DOI) did more for the peoples unity than anything, which is why the war was won.

The loyalists sabotaged the inclusion of the same principles or doctrines of philosophy which empowered the DOI in the creation of the first amendment. Leading to the lack of unity today and that which allowed the civil war.

You are against those principles creating unity in the people today. The NWO loves you.

Your reading of history is faulty. Tories were everywhere during the Revolution.

And your reading of the present is faulty as well. You don't listen to others well enough to have the first clue what anyone believes. You only care if someone hangs on every word you say. And since literally no one on earth does hang on every word you say, literally everyone on earth is an agent in your eyes.

Either that or the NWO pays you--to convince the world that the only people in the world who even mention the NWO have their heads so far up their asses they know nothing but what they had for breakfast...

 

[Origanalist]

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Your reading of history is faulty. Tories were everywhere during the Revolution.

Hah! Change the topic, invent a red herring, WTF? Did you happen to post in the wrong thread?

The people, meaning those that believed in rights and freedom not under English rule, Americans, separated by their beliefs in freedom and natural law, were united because the purpose of free speech worked in their communities at the scale, density and extent they existed. Therefore the war was successfully fought for independence.

The Declaration of Independence expressed the unity.

After that the constitution was created to attempt to unite the states with a similar unity, as if they were the people. They were not the people and as the abridging of the purpose of free speech has compounded, the states are less of the people.

Therein is the reason this strategy WILL work.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?471555-A-lawful-and-peaceful-revolution

 

[acptulsa]

Hah! Change the topic, invent a red herring, WTF?

You chop a statement that illustrates my on-topic point, chop it off from the rest of my post, and say that, taken out of context, it looks like a red herring.

Why, yes. That is how to create a red herring. You have illustrated the process nicely.

The people were united because the purpose of free speech worked in their communities at the scale, density and extent they existed. Therefore the war was successfully fought for independence.

The people were not united. There were Tories among the colonists.

The rest of that paragraph doesn't seem to mean anything, though it is composed of good English words. But if it logically follows from the assertion that all the colonists were united, then it's historically inaccurate too.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

The people were not united. There were Tories among the colonists.

Labeling, Tories were not Americans, they were colonists. The "people" used in the framing documents desctibes colonists who rejected that status and became Americans.

The Tories were not and are not Americans in spirit, still infiltrators amongst "the people" which derived a good deal of the principles of the republic from the original people of the continent. The native people.

 

[acptulsa]

Labeling, Tories were not Americans, they were colonists. The "people" used in the framing documents desctibes colonists who rejected that status and became Americans.

The Tories were not and are not Americans in spirit, still infiltrators amongst "the people" which derived a good deal of the principles of the republic from the original people of the continent. The native people.

See, there's your answer. Labeling.

All the non-agents are united. All one of you. And the world's 6,999,999,999 agents don't count. Not one of us.

So, you're all set. What are you bitching about?

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

See, there's your answer. Labeling.

All the non-agents are united. All one of you. And the world's 6,999,999,999 agents don't count. Not one of us.

So, you're all set. What are you bitching about?

You don't count because you do not want unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.
It's only online that I find those that do not agree and accept that free speech has the purpose of enabling unity. Otherwise, it's all acceptance.

Of course the infiltrations of government will fight hard to prevent unity on the web. That would be a disaster for their plan of tyranny, so your agenda is obvious as you oppose unity here.

 

[acptulsa]

You don't count because you do not want unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.

You don't listen.

I do want unity adequate to that purpose.

I wish you were providing it, instead of blathering endlessly on about something that isn't providing it.

How loud do I have to scream it before you might condescend to hear it?

You need to learn a lesson from Rush Limbaugh before it's too late. If you don't use your ears once in a while, they'll atrophy and fall off.

 

[Ronin Truth]

Am I missing out on the audio version of RPF?

 

[acptulsa]

Am I missing out on the audio version of RPF?

What?

I can't hear you. Try switching to bold.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Is there a Bomb Congress, the White House, and SCOTUS Into Smithereens model?

 

[acptulsa]

Is there a Bomb Congress, the White House, and SCOTUS Into Smithereens model?

You're thinking of the One True Path to Leavenworth (TM).

 

[Ronin Truth]

What?

I can't hear you. Try switching to bold.

If you don't use your ears once in a while, they'll atrophy and fall off.

 

[acptulsa]

If you don't use your ears once in a while, they'll atrophy and fall off.

Don't tell me, tell Rush Limbaugh.

Oh, yeah, too late for him, isn't it?

 

[Origanalist]

[snip]
If the purpose of all of this is actually to provide unity by making everyone agree that only losers are dumb enough to try to engage you in a meaningful conversation, on the other hand, it just might be effective after all.

I wasn't going to say anything, but....

 

[Ronin Truth]

Don't tell me, tell Rush Limbaugh.

Oh, yeah, too late for him, isn't it?

WHAT?

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

I do want unity adequate to that purpose.

You contradict your own unaccountability.

Free speech has the purpose of enabling that unity, but only by Americans agreement upon the fact will our social structures realize it and know the purpose is abridged justifying unity to compel the manifestation of the purpose.

We often do not know what we had until it is gone. In this case we never had it, we had a facsimile. A fraud, half of a right.

Americans need to know what they really lost, before they'll demand its manifestation.

But you are against that unity and a lawful peaceful revolution, which is why you lost context on purpose in your reply.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

I wasn't going to say anything, but....

A lawful and peaceful revolution requires unity. If people are too misled to realize that there are inherent agreements already made under natural law; not meaning they consciously know them from their mislead state of mind; so they cannot overtly make them, they need some criticism for their ignorant hypocrisy.

Or maybe they are covert agents simply working in their group to confuse and mislead. My actions are designed to separate the sincere from the pretenders and educate to the simplicity of using our right to define constitutional intent to enforce the constitution.

Do you agree and accept that the purpose of free speech is to enable unity adequate alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights?