26768 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 6:07am
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

Judge Napolitano on an

Judge Napolitano on an anarchist show introducing himself as a libertarian. 

Anarchast Ep. 207 Judge Napolitano: A Rothbardian Anarchist on Rand Paul and The Future of America!

Judge Napolitan Pro-Life LIbertarian combining libertarian views, his support for Ron Paul, with his Catholic Theology. AHHH, notice now he is taking an invisible law and combining it with a theology which than DOES become an objective social construct. Nobody is perfect. 

Judge Andrew Napolitano on Election 2016 and Being a Pro-Life Libertarian

Judge Napolitano supporting the scribbles on the parchment paper, the Founders, British Monarchy's total ignoring of natural rights and search and seizure, and NOTING that it was John Adams that twisted the words of the constitution attributing God endowed natural rights to the state giving you rights. NOT A LEGITIMATE POWER OF GOVERNMENT.

If the government no longer adhere's to it's constitutionally written role, than it is no longer a constitutional government. Therefore one can not argue the same points for two different types of entities. 

"The Constitution For Dummies" with Judge Andrew Napolitano

​​​​​​​Natural Law as a restraint against Tyranny

The Natural Law as a Restraint Against Tyranny | Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 9:30am
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10779
64311

Good morning

Thanks for the Judge Napolitano videos,

Yes, a constitutional government would be such a massive improvement over what we've got now, that it would probably get me through the rest of my life, as a happy camper.

The picture that you posted of the founding fathers just reaked of a Masonic Lodge meeting, and upon reading much of their history, I have good reason to question their ulterior motives, even if those who wanted to engage in a totalitarian two step as David Icke would put it, were not in the room at the time.

If the original 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) were established as the governing principles, I would signed onto that.

That would at least put an end to the criminal gangs that run our lives now.

It would also make the government virtually irrelevant.

That is as close to a stateless society as I will ever see.

It's too bad nobody is draining the Swamp. angry

Any suggestions?

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 11:20am
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

I have no evidence that the

I have no evidence that the freemasons were a nefarious organization trying to hide secrets to obtain control. What I see is alot of talk by individuals not versed in certain esoteric principles who interpret any invocation of symbols or numbers as acts of an evil force. 

The Mason organization today, seems to be only a brotherly fraternal organization. The only mason I know is not versed in deep mysteries. Whether the mason's have just dissolved as a mere shadow of it's former glory, or those in the know are few and far between, I don't know. I haven't investigated it but read alot of Mason texts where I found nothing that would give me concern.

having read some of their history, not all the way back to the Temple but how the Scottish Lodges came into being and interaction with Arab schools, there is some indication that the free masons were once a very active path that were taught many of these concepts we talk about including the fact that they held the idea of the "WORD" as important, not only to recognize but use. Maybe the light is no longer part of this organization and it no longer serves the purpose it once did.

But again, never saw anything that suggested that they didn't have the best interest of America in mind. 

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 11:25am (Reply to #17403)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

Mr. Fix wrote:It's too bad

Mr. Fix wrote:

It's too bad nobody is draining the Swamp. angry

Any suggestions?

Yes.

First for a critical mass to recognize that "The Swamp" was master level Ericksonian technique. That by invoking a picture and hyperbole, it taps into our emotions and that we all define the Swamp to mean, whatever it is that we don't like. Avoiding specifics and avoiding facts taps into our emotions and then you are able to lead people through control of their attention directionally in whatever way you need to them.

And to recognize that he publicly stated that he would no longer refer to government as a swamp once he was elected by saying, you were angry then, now you are cool, calm and collected. No longer refer to that which he is in charge of as a Swamp.

Adams made two assertions pre-election, that a consensus republic no longer exists. That is not how things get done anymore and that persuasion and linguistically mastery was the only way to succeed in public life. It assumes a very low cognition for factual dialogue among the American public and a purely emotional level conversation. He also noted that Trump will move your attention away from that which he can't speak to factually and on the topics which he has more expertise and therefore he owns your attention and the American dialogue which never includes these, apparently, decisive, uninteresting topics that we are discussing. Does our conversation have an effect on other DOTERS? 

While facts Do not matter in decision making, and consensus making in politics and among the electorate, it does in natural law. It does in attempting to decide the causality of problems.

We must involuntarily and by force outlaw the use of Post hoc ergo propter hoc logic. We can no longer spend our days dabbling in pretending that we understand causality and markets and events are a result of some linear process. And 2 dimensional thinking. 

The Swamp was never meant to be factually correct or refer to large and overreaching government. It was referring to his enemies. Until we can acknowledge this level of hypnosis on a more mass level, than we can never discuss how to fix the problem because you can't correct the problem state when it is ill defined. 

Maybury suggests that this ideological and gang warfare between factions in government is the dynamic that will clean house out. In other words, stand back, get out of the way and watch.

Armstrong suggests we are moving from one end of pendulum, socialism to the other tyranny. If he is correct, that means we are seeing pieces of the chessboard, players, actions that in the end will lead us to the next step. It's difficult to see how it will all come to together to fulfill that cycle (if thats what happens) but it's a worthwhile process to see the end, and look at the possibilities of how everything can come together to bring us to that end. 

identifying the problem state requires individual and collective self-reflection which doesn't happen that much. It's easier to justify our actions then it is to look deep down and ask ourselves, why did I make that choice.

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 12:42pm
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5482
31520

Fix and Silver66

Lots of interesting pointers in Judge Anna's latest missives.

https://www.paulstramer.net/2017/11/communications-about-mess-for-milita...

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 12:52pm
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5482
31520

This seems...

to be a pretty cool website I stumbled upon.

https://www.revolutions2040.com/

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 1:15pm
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10779
64311

GL,

In the first interview with the judge, this one:

Anarchast Ep. 207 Judge Napolitano: A Rothbardian Anarchist on Rand Paul and The Future of America!

He seems to agree with Thomas Jefferson, in that according to Thomas Jefferson, the government would have to be overthrown every 20 years through armed revolution in order to clean out the corruption.

There's a lot of significant points for discussion in that Single statement, in that Thomas Jefferson obviously knew that a government would be inherently corrupt. I've said that on more than one occasion.

Then he assumes that somehow, someway, people would organize themselves in armed conflict to overthrow the government.

At least there, you've got in theory, people organizing without a government, to take out a large criminal gang of thugs.

Then the anarchist asks a rhetorical question, but I think it's highly pertinent. He asks,"Why bother in the first place"?

To establish any entity that needs to be removed and replaced every 20 years through violent armed conflict, doesn't exactly seems very consistent with "peaceful coexistence".

So I ask,

"Why bother in the first place?" Seriously, I am asking.

As for the corruption inherent in Freemasonry, since you can't point to any single individual hierarchical construct that doesn't have anything but a bunch of malevolent dirtbags intent on conquest and power at the top,

Why would you assume that the Freemasons were as pure and clean as the wind driven snow? 

I'm simply not making that assumption, and I am assigning them the same properties as every other hierarchy.

I do remember in grade school, the teacher telling us that "a benevolent dictatorship" would be the most efficient form of government. Since power corrupts, that's just a fantasy. As best as I can determine, if there was ever such a civilization, it was pre-flood. 

I do agree that we are now transitioning from socialism, to a hard-core technocratic tyranny.

What breaks that cycle?

When does it cycle back to individual liberty as even being a consideration?

The only answers I can see, involve a complete collapse, and a reboot.

This more likely than not involves one hell of a lot of death and destruction.

I post my question again:

Why bother?

In the video, both Ron Paul, and judge Napolitano were not arguing against anarchy, in fact to paraphrase Ron Paul,

"anarchy would be great, if people would just assume individual responsibility."

 Well, there you have it, until people learn to be responsible for themselves, we are stuck with a malevolent parasitical ruling class hellbent on nothing more than maintaining our enslavement.

Such is life. 

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 5:36pm (Reply to #17408)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

He seems to agree with Thomas

He seems to agree with Thomas Jefferson, in that according to Thomas Jefferson, the government would have to be overthrown every 20 years through armed revolution in order to clean out the corruption.

There's a lot of significant points for discussion in that Single statement, in that Thomas Jefferson obviously knew that a government would be inherently corrupt. I've said that on more than one occasion.

Abraham Lincoln said the same thing, more or less.. I'm sure others have to. And Jefferson said we need to throw out laws and revisit them every 19 years. I've mentioned this already and discussed it. Along with the idea that no society would progress linearly without decline despite the system you choose because of the human condition and cycles UNTIL there was some mass recognition of the natural rights and laws. And Armstrong mentions this concept about a government runs along fine, groups organize to defend their rights and then some authority comes in an screws it up. An authority that the people approve of. This AM's argument on the nature of authority and where it comes from.

Then he assumes that somehow, someway, people would organize themselves in armed conflict to overthrow the government.

At least there, you've got in theory, people organizing without a government, to take out a large criminal gang of thugs.

Any volunteers? What would Jefferson say now, not having imagined the size that government would grow to nor the amount of weaponry a population would have to go against? 

Then the anarchist asks a rhetorical question, but I think it's highly pertinent. He asks,"Why bother in the first place"?

To establish any entity that needs to be removed and replaced every 20 years through violent armed conflict, doesn't exactly seems very consistent with "peaceful coexistence".

So I ask,

"Why bother in the first place?" Seriously, I am asking.

It's like why bother being born if you are going to die. Why bother getting married when one is going to die and leave you all alone. Why bother having kids when they are going to grow up and send you a card miles away for your birthday. Why bother experiencing any cycle of birth, life, death/rise, sustain, die. This might get back to Ag's question of why are we here. You'll have to answer that for yourself. I'm not giving my answer. I've already declared no perfect system, because there are no perfect humans' all under the vices of the mind. Christians call it sin. 

As for the corruption inherent in Freemasonry, since you can't point to any single individual hierarchical construct that doesn't have anything but a bunch of malevolent dirtbags intent on conquest and power at the top,

Why would you assume that the Freemasons were as pure and clean as the wind driven snow? 

Because I am familiar with so called mystery schools or spiritual societies that served their time on earth that brought tremendous change. I'm familiar with spiritual societies on earth that have been around since what we might call ancient times and there society hasn't declined, and I'm familar with the common thread that runs through them. But I'm also saying that Free Masons might have run it's course and it's no longer relevant. Religions and spiritual teachings do not circumvent the law of cycles. Just like the Essences and Gnostics. They existed and they are gone but they morph into something else. 

I do remember in grade school, the teacher telling us that "a benevolent dictatorship" would be the most efficient form of government. Since power corrupts, that's just a fantasy. As best as I can determine, if there was ever such a civilization, it was pre-flood. 

Pre-flood society declined too. Very badly. Isn't a "benevolent dictatorship" how Turd has described, or been described. Ownere of the business. Makes all final decisions. Might even listen to your suggestions but he is the last word. . Isn't Plato's Wise Elders a form of beneveloent dictator? 

I do agree that we are now transitioning from socialism, to a hard-core technocratic tyranny.

What breaks that cycle?

The end of that cycle. 

When does it cycle back to individual liberty as even being a consideration?

I don't remember the lenght of cycle. The Anacyclosis cycle which many writers of natural law have described, Greeks, Cicero etc...

The only answers I can see, involve a complete collapse, and a reboot.

I guess so. 

This more likely than not involves one hell of a lot of death and destruction.

Eventually

In the video, both Ron Paul, and judge Napolitano were not arguing against anarchy, in fact to paraphrase Ron Paul,

"anarchy would be great, if people would just assume individual responsibility."

Yup, IF. And IF people would assume individual responsibility that includes politicians and voters, than we wouldn't be having this conversation, and you wouldn't be worrying about Jefferson's 20 year revolt. And you wouldn't be worrying about government taking shit from you because now they assume individual responsibility and individual responsibility implies you don't hurt another because you recognize you are hurting yourself.

That is the biggest IF in history. A Herculean IF. My arguement is predicated on the falicious notion that IF can ever happen. You start every arguement assuming the IF. 

 Well, there you have it, until people learn to be responsible for themselves, we are stuck with a malevolent parasitical ruling class hellbent on nothing more than maintaining our enslavement.

No argument. 

Would you prefer an lager or a pilsner? 

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 5:52pm
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

Fix, You know the great

Mr. Fix wrote:

Why bother?

Probably the most profound, deeply spiritual question you can ask and brings us to AG1969's list of questions. 

You know the great tribulation, end times, and all that jazz right. God puts an end ot the world and freezes all souls and then starts the experiment again.

The Hindu's talk about the Yuga's has cycles in human history. Christian talk about a garden of eden when all was good. Hindu's call it the golden age.

So there are no dirth of worldy scriptures that talk about life forms making a complete cycle, a big destruction and than it starts all over again. Any reader of the bible doesn't think that's so weird because it's simply part of their theology.

What happened if this entire cycle of millions and millions of years already happened and Adam and Eve was just the birth of a new cycle and now we have progressed to the Iron age, the 4th age in the cycle.

What if that previous cycle was really really bad and it all got scraped?

What if it all didn't start out as good as you think it might have? And things are actually better now than before? 

What if most of the religious doctrines only talk about future cycles, but most have left out the previous cycles? 

What if from the perspective of eternity, 200 years, a thousand years is just a blink of an eye? 

What if there is actually a benevolent God these cycles of good and dark, happiness and pain, rise and decline are all just part of a bigger picture that people can't see?

Just some what if's.

So in a sense Ag1969 is correct. Our conversation takes us into a very deeply spiritual place of asking some basic questions. I don't think TFMetals was desinged to pierce that question. These are questions I'm not going to debate. Musings I'm not sharing. That's way beyond the glass ceiling of this place. A private conversation amongst like minded individuals maybe. 

But others are welcome to. I think our conversation clearly has taken us to a place or very basic spiritual questions need to be asked. For yourself. How do we come to grips on the human condition, the failings of mankind, the imperfect nature of man????

It seems to me that underneath our conversation this is the invisible threat. A worthy exercise? And maybe the exercise is so that we each can find an answer within ourselves. I've acknowledged multiple times, no perfect system. No paradise on earth. But it seems to me that you might be trying to bypass the human condition. I'm starting from a real assumption, not theoretical, the human consciousness wasn't designed to build a paradise on earth or civilizations that last forever. Maybe reality was designed in such a way that you were forced to go within to find that middle force for yourself, Inner peace or whatever you want to call it and it is only through the cycles of good/bad, happiness/pain that we are able to find it. Hey, guess what? That's what most of the spiritual teachings teach. Everything is in it's rightful place and you'll never annihilate evil. It's part of the plan. 

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 6:36pm
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10779
64311

What if____________ ...

What if the natural laws weren't occulted information,

What if such concepts and principles were taught to children from the start?

I've got a living example of such a person, my daughter, and I know that the results are spectacular.

What if religions didn't seek out and kill those that lived by natural laws?

What if people were presented options that didn't involve Government indoctrination for their children, or theological indoctrination for their children, all carefully avoiding any mention of natural laws, nature, consciousness, or all of the things that we discuss here? 

What if individual liberty was actually held in high esteem, instead of being condemned as selfishness?

What if "the greater good" was in fact perceived as synonymous with the true liberty of every individual?

What if the Freemasons who founded this country, and clearly knew the inherent danger of governments, had left well enough alone after they had fought for their freedom, and achieved it?

What if the success of the original settlers, the ones we tribute Thanksgiving to had actually been used as a model for how to build a strong society?

What if those principles had never been abandoned?

I started waking up when Baby Bush announced "We must suspend free market principles in order to save the free market".

That's when it occurred to me that our government was pure evil.

Principles come first, in a time of crisis, they are more fundamentally important than at any other time.

When you abandon them, it spotlights ulterior motives.

Creating a government, and using the cover story "It's to protect individual liberty" abandons the principle of individual liberty. At that point in time, most individuals already new exactly how to protect their own liberty.

The fact that they didn't revolt upon Washington DC the day it was established, tells me, most people weren't all that involved with the liberation from England in the first place. 

Just like religions all have exoteric, and an esoteric version, in which most people exposed to the exoteric are never even informed of the esoteric, governments can keep their secrets long enough from the population, supplying them with an abundance of misdirection and false promises, to ensure that by the time people become aware of the games that they are playing, they are far, far too powerful to do anything about.

What if societies weren't based on hierarchical structures? Hierarchies always compartmentalize knowledge.

Our entire government was originally modeled after a secret society, by those who were members of a secret society.

Every secret society, Government, religion, or any other hierarchical construct shows a big fat happy face to the public from the lower levels, while the baby fucking perverts pull the strings from the top, working only to increase their own power.

It is the purpose of a hierarchy. 

Thomas Jefferson suggested governments needed to be removed by revolution every 20 years.

What if he had suggested that the masses simply ignored them after 20 years?

What if he had suggested that the governed stop paying tribute to the governors?

Nobody even suggests the obvious solutions, for the exactly the same reason that whistleblowers are considered treasonous,

And people that point out the blatant inconsistencies between religious dogma, and natural law, are declared blasphemous heretics, and sentenced to death.

Fixing anything will either get you branded either treasonous, or heretical.

This might be the first time in humanities recorded history that a conversation like ours, in public, would even be allowed to exist.

It's a really good conversation to have.

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 7:20pm
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

Yes, what if it was a perfect

Yes, what if it was a perfect world? And if were all the dark things were done by nefarious people? Might as well pick the masons

You know Fix, you sound like a Pisces. Ever seeking the dissolution of created structures. And trying to project that onto a imperfect world.. Trying to find the Philosophers Stone under every rock and attempting to find a way to make the world fair and just. And it is, it's just very hard for people to see it. They call this a perfect picture in spiritual psychology. I can't "blow" a perfect picture for somebody else but I've blown quite a few of mine own along the way.

I've spoken about the high ground maneuver alot. A conversation like this might have a similar effect on the viewers. We're going to need to lower the vibration for the good of whole soon. Some raunchy sex scandals, manipulation stories, geopolitical interference, a false flag, will help balance it out. 

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 7:35pm
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5482
31520

You guys

are going to find this video pretty cool. Watch to the end GL to see the act of polarity. 18 mins.

Video unavailable
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 7:47pm
NW VIEW
Offline
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
4022
19281

My Turn!

What if: There are and have been cycles or dispensations from the beginning?

The Creator, from the beginning, wanted a freeman, able to choose good over evil, and gave him plenty of rope to explore life.

The Creator allowed mankind to become "treasonous" to the point of total wickedness, having to enter the scene and clean up the mess.

The Creator, seeing the great need of His Children, entered into the world, showing the Way,Truth and Life, making a way for Peace.

After 2000 years, the mess is still here, treason has settled in, and a new cycle must come. A removal of wickedness being around the corner again, and the Family finally being gathered together, the retirement of the blessed nation, for eternity.

NW VIEW >>>1 Cor. 1:18
Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 7:55pm
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

Gonna watch the Pizza

Gonna watch the Pizza Polarity right after dinner. We're finishing the last of our Elephant meat for the year and will have to wait until Trump decides the fate Elephant product in the United States.

There is nothing better for a man's virility than an Elephants..........(hint: that's not it's trunk)

and Elephant ham

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 7:58pm (Reply to #17414)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

NW VIEW wrote: What if: 

NW VIEW wrote:

What if: There are and have been cycles or dispensations from the beginning?

The Creator, from the beginning, wanted a freeman, able to choose good over evil, and gave him plenty of rope to explore life.

The Creator allowed mankind to become "treasonous" to the point of total wickedness, having to enter the scene and clean up the mess.

The Creator, seeing the great need of His Children, entered into the world, showing the Way,Truth and Life, making a way for Peace.

After 2000 years, the mess is still here, treason has settled in, and a new cycle must come. A removal of wickedness being around the corner again, and the Family finally being gathered together, the retirement of the blessed nation, for eternity.

Yup, Yup, Yup, we'll see. 

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 8:12pm
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5482
31520

LOL

Sat, Nov 18, 2017 - 8:59pm
Magpie
Offline
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
2388
12156

BHO, HRC and Kerry, with some McCain tossed in for good measure

https://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/11/participants-2014-ukrainian-cup-...

All of this is kept secret, from the American public, by the U.S. regime’s ‘news’media. This is important for them to do, because when Obama in 2014 imposed economic sanctions against Russia, and when the U.S. regime’s NATO military alliance against Russia, began sending missiles, troops, and bombers, to and near Russia’s borders in order to ‘defend’ NATO against ‘the Russian threat’ and ‘Russia’s aggression against Ukraine’, it was all ‘justified’ on the basis of that coup’s having been not a coup at all that the U.S. had perpetrated right on Russia’s border, but instead a ‘revolution’ that brought ‘democracy’ to Ukraine by (unconstitutionally) overthrowing Ukraine’s democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych.

ancaro imparo.
Sun, Nov 19, 2017 - 2:44am
Magpie
Offline
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
2388
12156

#Elsagate, #digitaldrugs

Please, if you know anyone with small children:

https://www.inquisitr.com/opinion/4619073/youtube-promises-crackdown-on-disturbing-and-sexually-violent-gore-videos-targeted-at-children/

Many of these disturbing videos have millions of views. Logically and judging by the comments, they have been reported and flagged hundreds, if not thousands of times. Yet, they are still up on YouTube. In fact, not only are they still on YouTube, they show up in the “related” section, autoplay if autoplay is on, and can even be accessed via the YouTube Kids mobile app.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/elsagate?src=hash

https://twitter.com/hashtag/digitaldrugs?src=hash

ancaro imparo.
Sun, Nov 19, 2017 - 5:38am
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

That didn't take long.  From

That didn't take long.

From Natural Law to Nature with a snap of the finger. 

Now that's how polarities work. Right Plato? 

“Let us see whether in general everything that admits of generation is generated in this way and no other — opposites from opposites, wherever there is an opposite ...Let us consider whether it is a necessary law that everything which has an opposite is generated from that opposite and no other source. For example, when a thing becomes bigger, it must, I suppose, have been smaller first before it became bigger?”

Well, I suppose. WhAAT Ever!@#

Sun, Nov 19, 2017 - 5:41am
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8213
47974

How to figure out if you got the right answer

For any question, either you know the answer or you don’t. If you know the answer, then inquiry is unnecessary. If you don’t know the answer, you’ll have no way of recognizing the correct answer when it presents itself — for if you don’t know what the correct answer is, how will you distinguish it from false answers? So if you don’t know the answer, inquiry is impossible.

Socrates

99% of people can't read this, will not understand it, and will stop reading after the first sentence.

American Citizen, and Registered Voter

randomness