The 1st Amendment (a conversation in progress)

Tessy · 02-22-2008, 12:53 AM

I had a conversation today with a friend about the 1st amendment and
it took some very interesting turns. I decided to place the conversation
in point counter-point form on this site because I knew how appreciative
every one here would be of it.

Firstly I must preface this by saying that I can hardly believe a conversation
like this would be taking place anytime after about 2002 - but I find that
they do all to frequently. Thankfully most of the time the truth is allowed
to propagate even though occasionally the addiction to the cool-aid is too
powerful to overcome and word-game rebuttals or even name calling ensues.

A few members of this site fall into the later category and therefore deserve
the rich blessing of my continued participation as proof of love and feelings
of true brotherhood.

The parts appearing in blue are from my friend who put forth that the 1st
amendment needs to be used with restraint with her arguments for that
position clearly stated and unedited here:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is amazing Congressman Pete Clark has managed to stay in office
as long as he has. Then again, he is from California. The Democratic
flame-thrower had the floor during a health care debate by the United
States House of Representatives.
“You don't have money to fund the war or children," Stark said to House
Republicans. "But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if
we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to
get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."

Awesome! This guy rocks! I'd vote for him!

Stark’s comments were not only irresponsible, they were bordering on
treasonous.

When I think of treason I think of:

The Patriot Act I
The Patriot Act II
Speculation on Stephanopoulos
The pretense for the Iraq war.
The Use of Uranium 238 D.U munitions.
The undeclared illegal war itself.
The participation in the United Nations
The military actions taken in support of UN resolution.
The fact that neither the Pres. nor the VP have rebuked their membership
in the CFR (a known communist promoting organization) after taking office.
The participation in the SPP by heads of state in order to form the
NAU - essentially nullifying the Declaration of Independence, The
Constitution, and The Bill of Rights in one fell swoop.
China-Gate
Abu ghraib prison
The misuse and extension of the War Powers Act to declare the right to establish
a dictatorship and suspend the constitution on the presidents determination and
whim.
The illegal sales and profiteering of illegal weapons.
The establishment and use of a nation-wide criminal syndicated vote fraud
network.
Hundreds of counts of lying to the American people.
The unauthorized use of the NSA to spy on ALL of the American people
since the year 2000 and prior.
The purposeful capture and control of the press and media for political gain
and the manipulation of the American people.
The theft of privately owned land, buildings, and businesses in order to build
the NAFTA highways in many states but especially Texas.
The federal intervention of drug law enforcement over the top of state laws
to the contrary.
The continued use and support of an illegal but government sanctioned
counterfeiting operation known as the Federal Reserve.
Guantanamo Bay secret prison
The confiscation of personal property and the imprisonment of American
citizens for refusing to pay an illegal tax for which NO LAW exists on
the books.
I could go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and...

But let’s forget Stark;

Awe... I was just starting to like the guy!!!

his Oct. 18th outburst wasn’t his first. Stark personally attacked a congressman
from Oklahoma in 2001, claiming his children were illegitimate (when, in fact,
they were not).

On June 6, 2006, a school bus driver with a bus full of children flipped President
Bush the bird as he rode by in his motorcade.

In the eighteenth century, the individual in question probably would have
been found guilty of treason and sedition and, consequently, been tarred
and feathered. Fortunately for the bus driver, twenty-first century Americans
are not so barbaric and cruel. Still, the hostile sentiment lingers.

Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a fallen Army soldier, has gone so far as to
call President Bush a murderer.

She's right too and in more ways than one. She's talking about deaths as a
result of the war which is true and correct but I'm talking about something
MUCH more sinister. It's true of his father and both Clintons too!

Here's just one of MANY! Clinton Murder « No More Ignorance
There are MANY more on the Clintons and they pale in comparison to Bush senior, his
son and the current VP. When you're dealing with real mobsters real people get real
dead. Here’s a video worth watching which while only presenting rather huge amounts
of circumstantial evidence is very on target with many other investigations and common
assertions.

On college campuses students proudly flaunt “Buck Fush” t-shirts.

With any freedom, especially the freedom of speech, comes responsibility.
Radicals like Cindy Sheehan have long walked the fine line between free
speech and political dissent, and probably always will.

Did you know that our Constitution and the authors of the constitution both
DEMAND of us as U.S. citizens that political dissent be harbored and voiced
as a duty of being a citizen? Sounds to me like Cindy is a great American!

For the rest of us, we will speak with our vote.

Then your throat has already been cut and your tongue removed. Your new
found silence fills my ears as would the most hideous scream!

See the two videos on this page: The Truth 24/7 and visit the
Black Box Voting site and dig around there for awhile.

The American public should respect the highest office in our nation, regardless
of political loyalties. Anything less is shameful.

Respect is earned and suppressing dissent is the most shameful act an American
could ever perpetrate. Our entire Constitution and Bill of Rights is there for just
about the sole purpose of guaranteeing our right to dissent and promoting an
atmosphere and society where dissent thrives and the federal government is
powerless against against the individual except for guaranteeing that State laws
do not become too tyrannical.

If the American people don’t respect the Administration, how can we expect the
world to?

Only through corrosion or deceit could anyone.

--
I implore any of you here to take the time to watch and consider each of the links
I have provided for you. Sometimes waking up can be painful but after you move
around a bit and stretch your muscles the morning air is welcome and refreshing!

Donkey® · 02-22-2008, 02:08 AM

Stop drinking the kool aid. I can't even comprehend half of this crap. What's your point in a cliffs version?

Tessy · 02-22-2008, 02:20 AM

Is there a cliffs version to War And Peace or Mobby Dick? That was the
cliffs version.

Really. I guess it needs about 6 or 7 hours to watch
everything. There's a common thread of meaning I suppose though.

He who gives up his liberties for safety (or comfort) deserves neither.

That's actually pretty close to quote I think by B. Franklin.

Phantom · 02-22-2008, 08:03 AM

It seems the conversation you had was with yourself, because that "transcript" doesn't resemble anything two separate individuals would cook up together. If I had not read your posts before, I would think you were trying to deceive us, but since it seems you believe everything you post, I won't draw such a conclusion.

Keep educating us though, I enjoy the reading, even if it is difficult at times.

bheld · 02-22-2008, 08:53 AM

I'm happy for you that you found your voice but please don't flatter yourself by thinking you're the only enlightened one around.

The "Wake up from the Matrix" strategy of political discourse isn't very effective anyway.

kinggovernor · 02-22-2008, 12:08 PM

is Stark your other personality?

Tessy · 02-22-2008, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

is Stark your other personality?

No. He's a congressman or something.

Originally Posted by bheld

I'm happy for you that you found your voice but please don't flatter yourself by thinking you're the only enlightened one around.

The "Wake up from the Matrix" strategy of political discourse isn't very effective anyway.

True! And I hope I'm not flattering myself too much - just enough to
make it fun

Also I'm not really seeing it as "waking up the matrix"
as much as that I have buttloads of free time on my hands and I spend
it (almost) all on researching and investigating these things. So I think
of it mostly as an info-share firstly. Of course one affect on those that
don't have the time to find these things and verify them might be a kind
of wake-up and that would be great if so.

I'm pretty much a n00b at talking to others about it tho so I'll probably
make lots of mistakes.

Originally Posted by Phantom

It seems the conversation you had was with yourself, because that "transcript" doesn't resemble anything two separate individuals would cook up together. If I had not read your posts before, I would think you were trying to deceive us, but since it seems you believe everything you post, I won't draw such a conclusion.

Keep educating us though, I enjoy the reading, even if it is difficult at times.

Yeah, this is a political site so either I only say what I've verified myself
or I (try to) mention that's it's for amusement or speculative examination.
If I wanna present unverified opinion in terms of strong probabilities there's
plenty of sites like that out there. Or if I wanna role play with myself which
could be fun, there's plenty of creative writing sites around.

Thanks for the encouragement!

RMNIXON · 02-22-2008, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Stop drinking the kool aid. I can't even comprehend half of this crap. What's your point in a cliffs version?

I am thinking a substance much stronger than Kool Aid is involved.

When Nixon and Donkey are on the page some strange kind of strage alignment is taking place!

Tessy · 02-23-2008, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

I am thinking a substance much stronger than Kool Aid is involved.

When Nixon and Donkey are on the page some strange kind of strage alignment is taking place!

Is that what you were thinking?

Rule by fear or rule by law?

San Francisco Chronicle Acknowledges ENDGAME By Homeland Security

Now finally four years after this specific legislation and related programs were
implemented a "main stream" media source has the guts to write about it. The
only problem with this is that they are underplaying the extremity and the
whimsical nature by which one may be imprisoned without official charges and
without the right to any representation. They do mention this but it's actually
much worse than they allege!

They say the congress has "yet to hold a single hearing" on any of this but
what they're not telling you is that the entire home land security committee has
asked to see the full text of this "secret document" and congress was told that
Bush is now above congress and informed they were not allowed to see it.

So it looks to me like a preemptive strike on the American people from our
own federal government with no recourse to the law offered at all.

Heh,
don't even mind your 1st amendment rights.

My only hope is that everyone goes the brave route and confronts this head
on and not hide, cower, and cooperate with this tyranny. Otherwise neighbors
will be turning in each other just to stay out of prison. Of course we know from
history that all they gain is a week or a month and then they end up going away
as well.

If what's coming is what I think is what's coming you all better start having
neighborhood BBQ's and meetings right away. The other thing this article is
not mentioning is the federal program which has now paid over 26,000 pastors
preachers and ministers to encourage everyone to go along peaceably, hand in
your guns, and take your shots like good little sheep. So the town church is NOT
where you want to go for organization!

I guess people like Donkey and Nixon here will be the first to start turning
in everyone and pointing fingers. That's what I'm thinking!!!

Jas0n · 02-24-2008, 11:38 AM

Cindy Sheehan isn't a good American, she's an idiot. Please don't get caught in the trap laid by your friend, or that article, or whatever it is that you found ... just because a person is a political dissenter doesn't make that person a "good American." Sheehan wants to sell us out to the Communists. Those pictures of her and Chavez all buddied up are disgusting - that's the same Chavez that swears it'll be him and Iran that take America down completely. And if you think that President Bush is a murderer for committing American troops to Iraq (a war I am not in favor of), maybe you should research some of the works of Communist regimes in recent history. Start with the killing fields in Cambodia, make your way east to the gulags of Soviet Russia, and then research - if you can - China's methods of quieting political dissenters.

Sheehan is an idiot. If you want good Americans, and one of your qualifications is that the person has bucked the government somehow, I suggest you start your research with Commodore Vanderbilt or James Jerome Hill.

RMNIXON · 02-24-2008, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by Tessy

I guess people like Donkey and Nixon here will be the first to start turning
in everyone and pointing fingers. That's what I'm thinking!!!

Tessy · 02-25-2008, 05:03 AM

Millhouse the maniacal finger pointer.

JasOn. I think one of us is confused about Chavez! I guess it could be me
but somehow I don't think it is. I have not really done much research but I
know whoever Fox calls a criminal (leader) is usually a good humanitarian.

What I know about Chavez is summarized in this film:

Google Video

I've lightly researched a few things in that film that I hadn't previously and
they checked out 100%. I think so far all the differences - or most of them
can be attributed to those who watch and believe the corporate controlled
news in the USA and those who think for themselves and do their own
research.

Please watch that short film and tell me what you think.

Jas0n · 02-25-2008, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by Tessy

Millhouse the maniacal finger pointer.

JasOn. I think one of us is confused about Chavez! I guess it could be me
but somehow I don't think it is. I have not really done much research but I
know whoever Fox calls a criminal (leader) is usually a good humanitarian.

What I know about Chavez is summarized in this film:

Google Video

I've lightly researched a few things in that film that I hadn't previously and
they checked out 100%. I think so far all the differences - or most of them
can be attributed to those who watch and believe the corporate controlled
news in the USA and those who think for themselves and do their own
research.

Please watch that short film and tell me what you think.

!!!! So let me get this straight. You're of the opinion that anyone that Fox news is against, is a good guy, categorically. (See the bolded/underlined text.) Then you say that the difference between those for Chavez and those against is that the ones who are against just listen to the corporate news, and the ones who like him are the ones who "think for themselves."

As if "thinking for themselves" means "liking whoever Fox News hates." Great game, Tessy! Great game!

Let's see. A good humanitarian? How about a military dictator whose "humanitarian" efforts consist of absolutely demolishing those few productive members of Venezuela in order to prop up his poor population? I suppose you're okay with his having appropriated huge tracts of land, factories, and even houses from wealthier Venezuelans? Favors for favors, right? When's the last time a nationalized economy worked, have you any idea? It seems that they can last for a little while, and then they crash, and when they do, it hurts.

That's okay though, right? 'Cause he's a humanitarian (?) which means that he's swapping alleged free stuff for votes, for the popularity to rule by decree. (See also: totalitarianism.)

I'm no fan of Fox News myself. But it seems to me that "thinking for myself" would entail more than just loving whoever they hate, and hating whoever they love. Maybe that's just me.

thewise1 · 02-25-2008, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by Tessy

Millhouse the maniacal finger pointer.

JasOn. I think one of us is confused about Chavez! I guess it could be me
but somehow I don't think it is. I have not really done much research but I
know whoever Fox calls a criminal (leader) is usually a good humanitarian.

What I know about Chavez is summarized in this film:

Google Video

I've lightly researched a few things in that film that I hadn't previously and
they checked out 100%. I think so far all the differences - or most of them
can be attributed to those who watch and believe the corporate controlled
news in the USA and those who think for themselves and do their own
research.

Please watch that short film and tell me what you think.

This is what the post looked like to me. Do research, then share.

kinggovernor · 02-25-2008, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by thewise1

This is what the post looked like to me. Do research, then share.

Tessy · 02-26-2008, 02:08 PM

Hey JasOn, where did you learn to read? How can you ignore the word
"leader" in that sentence just to fit your argument?

Thewise1, sorry but I've read your posts online here and I have done
more research on this that you do on about 99% of yours so where are
you coming from exactly? Nowhere I guess huh?

--
Man, you guys really love Fox huh? Or yall really hate video.

Jas0n · 02-27-2008, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Tessy

Hey JasOn, where did you learn to read? How can you ignore the word
"leader" in that sentence just to fit your argument?

Thewise1, sorry but I've read your posts online here and I have done
more research on this that you do on about 99% of yours so where are
you coming from exactly? Nowhere I guess huh?

--
Man, you guys really love Fox huh? Or yall really hate video.

The word "leader" isn't crucial to my argument at all. I would be more than happy to go back and edit my post to make sure it includes your little "leader" clause, and you'll still be responsible for explaining just how it is that you define "people who think for themselves" as - your words - people who "know whoever Fox calls a criminal (leader) is usually a good humanitarian."

Way to pick your spots, Tessy! Fox News says this particular leader is bad, so they must be a good humanitarian! FANTASTIC thinking for yourself.

If for no other reason than that the man was Russian, Fox News would've absolutely hated Josef Stalin. And as bigoted as they seem to be, I bet they'd hate Pol Pot too if they had the chance. Do these people strike you as good humanitarians?