Gruff, I have thought about and gone far beyond the circle game you
interject that leaves out the principle of "by the people".

I have never said anything about doing away with 'rule', that is your
fabrication to avoid talking about what I do present.

Your faux concern for my well being is another tactic for avoiding
discussion.

The super rich are the puppeteers. Don't try to sell me your ignorant
ticket :-)

peace & Love

On Jul 4, 11:18 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote:
> If anyone is offended or put off by an all-in-one reply to a number of
> posts, please let me know.
>
> Don, I don't want to rain on your 4th but there is rejoicing to be had
> hiding in the midst of the slaughter.  What is the news is that it is
> received from hidden cell phone videos and twitter.  And that news
> celebrates freedom.  The freedom that happens when a government can no
> longer keep the voice of it's people locked up and shut away.  That is
> the freedom that moves me the most this 4th of July.  It's a new
> freedom that most people don't realize has emerged as yet.
>
> And yeah.  It was an apology.  Gee, George, we're real sorry but we're
> taking our leave of you and shake the dust off our sleeves in the
> process.  The iconic phrase 'dear john' should really be a 'dear
> george'. However, I do think the signers went a little overboard with
> the details.  A few cursory acknowledgments should have been
> sufficient given that we merely did what we could as soon as it became
> financially feasible.   We were lucky we didn't have to face off all
> of Europe with what we were trying to pull off.  A fully elected
> government?  My god, man.  What were we thinking?
>
> iam, we are completely and securely sheltered under the rule of law.
> It never went anywhere.  It just got stronger.  And eliminate the
> corporations?  Because that's what would happen if you took away their
> status as persons.  That would be as bad a jolt as the elimination of
> all the banks.  Everything would come to a screeching halt.  Riots
> would erupt like instant cancers across the land.  Why would you wish
> something like that?  I don't think you really meant that, did you?
>
> And Jackson?  I was just beginning to think we as a species may be
> behaving rationally when along comes this circus with half the world
> drooling over the center ring and who's that in the box office
> twirling his mustache and counting the lucre?  That and letting some
> sports event preempt the Nightly World News.  They both ring of
> idiocy.
>
> Tinker, think about it.  The rule of law is not supposed to be in the
> hands of the people.  It's supposed to be in the hands of government.
> That is one of the reasons people create governments.  Otherwise we'd
> have pretty much ad hoc chaos.  Rules are necessary on several levels,
> but I find a general rule of law in civil torts that's we are all held
> to.  Civil law in most developed nation is based on the concept of
> fair dealing and the behavior of a prudent person.  The standard is
> laid out in four elements.  There must be a duty to behave in a
> certain manner.  That duty must have been violated.  That violation
> must have caused damages for which people then turn to the courts for
> reparation.  We can't just whip out our swords and chase down the bad
> guy ourselves anymore.  Oh, and just who is it that  are pulling the
> puppet strings of our leaders?  I'd like to have their names.  Your
> rant seems to be winding up and becoming somewhat frenetic.  Are you
> all right?
>
> Don, it may not be up to just the people of the United States to
> decide whether to go after past administrations for anything like war
> crimes.  We've done it and other nations do it all the time and it's
> possible one of our allies or even a neutral middle-east nation might
> be able to investigate and prosecute perceived war crimes.  We
> certainly did it after WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and probably every other
> war.
>
> As a for real right now for instance, the U.N. recently launched an
> investigation into Arizona's wild west Sheriff Joe Arpaio for human
> rights violations.  I mean, everything is still quiet down here, but I
> think the reality and shock of it may have not yet worn off.  The U.N.
> aimed right for the jaws of the beast tackling the most popular
> sheriff in Arizona.  Joe's already told the press he's not afraid of a
> U.N. investigation.  He's trying to go down in hisory with the other
> Arizona greats.  Earp, Holliday, Dillon, Cartwright and Little Joe.
> Arpaio was recently elected to his third term as Sheriff of Maricopa
> County.
>
> Rigsy, I'm sorry, but at one time or another about half the country
> felt like you do now, and about half feels the other way.  Actually,
> slightly more than half.  That's what it's like astride a democracy in
> action.  Imagine what it's like in a nation where rebels overnight
> take over the government where you live?
>
> The Force is copyrighted?  How can that be?  It's ... its ... The
> Force?
>
> Nixon was real dirty but I still liked the guy.  I think he did a lot
> of good.  But he got caught with his hand in the pot wrapped around
> the smoking gun with a shit-eating grin on his face.  He had to fall.
> Either that or shoot it out with the people.  And in the instant
> issue, I don't think you can prosecute someone for being stupid.  Now
> Cheney, he may be a feather off a different horse along with a few
> other second round hitters.  I wouldn't mind seeing Ashcroft go to
> prison for a few years.  He's so soft and tender and such a fascist.
>
> And with you, Francis.  And may the breath of Allah caress your
> forehead as an evening breeze.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to