One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: AHO-C
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15 next>>
Sep 11, 2019 10:55:02   #
Tug484 wrote:
Yet you can see on here how the left wants people that want to own us then destroy us .

When do we start to try perpetrators of these actions that violate existing US Codes???? When Government fails to/or selectively enforces the laws that it has created ..eventually the people will feel the need to enforce the law themselves ...it has happened before...vis-a-vis Bernhard Goetz the 'Subway Vigilante' of 1980's NYC...the 'Wild West'...etc.
Virtually all people in high places have the appearance of immunity....the avg. Joe/Jane are tried/convicted on a regular basis...I*****l A***ns are protected and offered privileges beyond those of the citizen...A warped Justice system is a broken Justice system...a broken Justice system leads to chaos...chaos leads to fighting....fighting involves those who support the Law opposing those who break the Law...The winner makes the new rules...Is this really where the Left wants to take this fight if the Right continues to capitulate ???
9/11 means nothing to the 4 members who [ain't]'Squat'....therefore they mean nothing to me..."Somebody did something"....Yeah!!! They did something alright....and I'll never forget what they did and the d********g vermin that are still left and are infiltrating our Country to 9/11 the USA again from within !!!



18 U.S. Code § 2381. Treason
U.S. Code
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

18 U.S. Code § 2385. Advocating o*******w of Government

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of o*******wing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the o*******w or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of o*******wing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the o*******w or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 2, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 87–486, June 19, 1962, 76 Stat. 103; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
U.S. Code Toolbox
Go to
Aug 29, 2019 22:01:19   #
crazylibertarian wrote:
What Tom Mullen doesn't address is the entire issue of Supreme OCurt urview. Nowhere does The Constitutiion authorize court review of constitutionality of any laws. That was a power insisted upon by First Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay. Unfortunately, Pres. George Was and Congress acquiesced establishing the precedent.

That power was further expanded in Marbury vs. Madison & other cases by The Supreme Court of imperious John Marshall, who was a party to the case. Marshall today would be disbarred.
What Tom Mullen doesn't address is the entire issu... (show quote)


Correctamundo!!! I'm 99% sure that you are 100% correct......I'm only 99% sure because Article III, Section 2 begins with the phrase :"The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made", so it could be possible that the 'Supremes' could hear a case that was originally thought to 'arise under this Constitution ', but after hearing all the facts , they determined it didn't. However, that determination would have to only mean that the Supremes cannot rule on the case, NOT that the case was 'Un-Constitutional' ( ie it could be a case that involves a State Law that is not enumerated in Article III OR the Laws of the United States OR involving a Treaty).


Go to
Aug 29, 2019 16:11:29   #
The Critical Critic wrote:
Lol. You have a way with words, AHO-C.


Go to
Aug 29, 2019 16:10:32   #
Rose42 wrote:


Go to
Aug 29, 2019 10:58:17   #
The Critical Critic wrote:
Thank you, Rose. I agree.


That was GREAT!!! Informative and undisputable in what it states. Amazing how the Critical Critic posted criticism that is uncriticizable at this critical point in time !!! ( my last sentence was almost Sponge Bobesque in its childlike eloquence and yet AOCish in its confused immature presentation )


Go to
Aug 29, 2019 10:36:00   #
debeda wrote:
https://youtu.be/HVEeQ44ggFU

This councilman is on FIRE!!


Go to
Aug 28, 2019 14:43:47   #
Elmer Werth wrote:
I should quit making comments. I'm 98 and with tremors so the computer does weird things when I hit the wrong keys. If I fail to notice a mistake before I hit "send" there is no way to correct it.
Elmer Werth


You are 98....you have historical knowledge...never be afraid to share it with us.
Go to
Aug 28, 2019 10:50:55   #
Kevyn wrote:
The home on the vineyard is well above sea level and on bedrock, the areas threatened are not places like that they are low lying barrier islands and pacific atolls Florida Keys and low lying cities ranging from places such as Miami, New Orleans, and New York. Obama can be drinking Mai Tais on his patio in a few years laughing as Mar A Lago is flushed into the gulf. There is a king hell hurricane building in the gulf and expected to land on the southern east coast as soon as Sunday I hope the eye of the thing gos right over the first tee.
The home on the vineyard is well above sea level a... (show quote)


Actually...it's a Mini-me Tropical Storm in the Atlantic at this time, with an undetermined track !! Also, not all places at 'approximately' the same low elevation are experiencing 'high water' elevations. It appears that many areas are sinking ( vs. water rising) vis-a-vis Jakarta !! New Orleans was constructed below sea level from the start.
Martha's Vineyard was formed by glaciers and is about 23,000 years old. It has eroded significantly and will continue to erode. FYI the entire Earth is constantly changing ....sometimes slowly...sometimes quickly ( earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.). So no !!.. Obutthole's home is not necessarily any less likely to sink than Mar-a-Lago !!


Go to
Aug 28, 2019 10:25:21   #
JohnCorrespondent wrote:
Yes, Seth, what you say is literally true, and I did not say otherwise.

So, point to a different list of science organizations that have an opposing view (if you can). Get it from "Encyclopedia Brittanica" or wherever you like (even another Wikipedia article that caters to _your_ predetermined conclusion -- you could even write one yourself), but state your source.

If something I got from the Wikipedia article is _wrong_, then point to _that_ thing. I notice you haven't yet disputed a single thing in my post.

One of the reasons I chose that Wikipedia article is that it does list exactly what organizations it's talking about; so, anyone who wants to dispute it can track down any organization it lists and find out directly whether what the article says is true about them or not. If you can find a false reference or false attribution in it, then point to it and tell what you know about it (referencing _your_ source of information, if any).

That Wikipedia article is wide open, vulnerable to your, or anyone's, checking up on what it _says_. Go ahead. That's for the article. As for my post, check up on what _I_ said and trace through my source to wherever a fact got wrong (if you can find any wrong fact in it). It shouldn't be too hard to find a few flaws in what I wrote; I don't expect it to be perfect.
Yes, Seth, what you say is literally true, and I d... (show quote)


JC, Bladerunners post in synopsis says this :




Go to
Jul 28, 2019 12:11:22   #
debeda wrote:
Lolololhahahaha very good!! I'd be glad to work as the bouncer for you


You got the job!!
Go to
Jul 28, 2019 09:36:16   #
eagleye13 wrote:
"Debeda.....the primary reason that you cannot model the Climate is that ....believe it or not ....Climate is affected by anything and everything from the microbes ( numbers and types) in the soil/water/air to the intensity of the Sun activity ...and everything and anything in between, including the wobble in the earth ..there is no way to tabulate the given intensity of any/all of the various combinations and permutations that can and do occur in an 'orderly chaotic' paradigm.
The C****es never learn that printing a lot of fiat money makes you poorer...not richer...and that taking from the 'worker' and giving to 'da bum' leads to everyone being a bum ...and once everyone is a 'bum' you print the fiat money...which results in a wrecked economy...which leads to revolt...which brings in a new innovative Government , hopefully with an excellent founding Document...let's call it a 'Constitution'...Wait we already 'been there...done that'...let's skip all the stupid stuff !!
Well back to tending bar !!" - AHO-C

Fine summary;
Now back to trying to educate liberal socialists.
"Debeda.....the primary reason that you canno... (show quote)


Go to
Jul 28, 2019 09:27:52   #
debeda wrote:
He said 1965, NOT 1989


Actually debeda...the 30 years /Pelosi thing ran in 2016 as an anti-Pelosi add. In 1986 Congressman were paid $75,100....in 2016 they were paid $174,000....the pay increased by a factor of 2.31691078562 ( rounded off to the the nearest 10th place ) or 2.32...which is 232% .....alas poor Kevyn is obviously not from New York...because he certainly 'talks s#it'...but he never can back it up !!
The bar has been very busy lately with 'trash' talkin' nonsense....gonna have to get the Bouncer a little more involved....Yoo! Hoo! Mr. Whistler...little more intensity please!!


Go to
Jul 28, 2019 08:40:42   #
debeda wrote:


Debeda.....the primary reason that you cannot model the Climate is that ....believe it or not ....Climate is affected by anything and everything from the microbes ( numbers and types) in the soil/water/air to the intensity of the Sun activity ...and everything and anything in between, including the wobble in the earth ..there is no way to tabulate the given intensity of any/all of the various combinations and permutations that can and do occur in an 'orderly chaotic' paradigm.
The C****es never learn that printing a lot of fiat money makes you poorer...not richer...and that taking from the 'worker' and giving to 'da bum' leads to everyone being a bum ...and once everyone is a 'bum' you print the fiat money...which results in a wrecked economy...which leads to revolt...which brings in a new innovative Government , hopefully with an excellent founding Document...let's call it a 'Constitution'...Wait we already 'been there...done that'...let's skip all the stupid stuff !!
Well back to tending bar !!


Go to
Jul 28, 2019 00:34:26   #
Singularity wrote:
Aren't you an unpleasant piece of work!?

And to the rest of you as well, . .

I believe you totally understand my argument and my work is done. I chide you for your inconsistant assertions, but if you don't want to meet the discussion honestly, I have no quarrel and we can talk music or something else or move on each as we wish. It is the god who condemns. Bearing false witness of me by implying I or other people who don't agree with you actually somehow do, is one of its big ten.

If you don't feel your dishonest in wanting to assert a lie of unity of trusting opinion and it isnt a problem, I will leave it between you and your God and its hellfire condemnation. You could repent, I suppose, but doesn't seem likely.

Blade, you admit you know I don't believe. I don't trust in God either; that would be logically absurd, now wouldn't it, Blade?

So, logically, you would know the person, like you, Blade, who asserts the positive belief that WE trust in God, if that group contains individuals they definitely know, like me, who do not believe, therefore cannot possibly trust in God, bears false witness.

Right Blade?

The fact that I believe you know I'm right will give me pleasure every time I imagine you wince inwardly and think of me. Every single time you see that motto for the rest of your born days. You will think of me, and wince inwardly at your dishonesty or scratch your head and reassure yourself that you believe I'm wrong. But you will think of me. Every time. For the rest of your born days.

Try not to.

I'm done.
Aren't you an unpleasant piece of work!? br br A... (show quote)


Actually, I'm AHO-C ....not Blade.....but for what it's worth,I'm perfectly fine with you being an Atheist....I have enough 'fun' just trying to be a decent person without thinking I can change your mind about anything.....Heck!! I can't even change my own mind before I get in trouble !!
But I'll tell you one thing ....I will think about you quite a bit for at least the next 24 hours and hope you relax a little ....think about the Cosmos and Carl Sagan/ Stephen Hawkings/ other atheists and stay in your 'true conviction ' zone.....Relax a little, you take life and anonymous criticism too seriously.
If it makes you feel better and release some steam you can lash out at me anytime ...feel free to call me anything you want....please do not let anything on this site bother you as much as I seem to have ticked you off. It was not my intent to have you go 'Full Hulk' with anything I said.
Look at my picture talk about pathetic !!

This is my good smile !!

Go to
Jul 28, 2019 00:10:28   #
Radiance3 wrote:
=============
Well done AHO. I hope Sing will have the opportunity to explain her side concerning her lack of faith and confidence in Our God We Trust. Does that indicate she does not want to be part of our independence? With whom is she going to associate?

"The Declaration of our Independence" stated in most paragraph that the Founders relied in God's blessings as they separated from the mother-land.

Here is an excerpt.
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds 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 t***hs 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. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and t***sient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. "
============= br Well done AHO. I hope Sing will h... (show quote)


Exactly, belief in a deity is one of the tenets essential to the success and propagation of the Human Race...prior to modern medicine and even well before the birth of Jesus it was the norm for tribes to have codes governing behavior,sanitation, respect for people, their deity, and morals.
God is not a new concept that was developed by and is exclusive to the USA...Although the USA is unique in its allowance for Freedom of Religion ....which also includes having no religion at all !!
The Government cannot prevent you from practicing your religion nor does it tell you that you cannot be an atheist....However, being a Judeo-Christian Country it is to be expected that there will be open displays of Judeo-Christian ideals.
I never hear atheists complain about Islam which by definition encompasses ALL countries where Muslims are the dominant 'Religion'...in fact where the Roman Catholic Church and the various Protestant denominations are Religions and may try to convert people...they are not referred to as the Nation of ( Name your denomination)....the Nation of Islam on the other hand is an actual Political entity...where obedience by everyone to Sharia Law is required....and Sharia Law is as strict or loose as each individual judge determines it to be.
Atheists always seem to focus on Christians because they know that Christianity requires a voluntary compliance and at most Christians will actually love and forgive those that belittle their beliefs the most ....At the least a Christian will tolerate those that mock them ....In both instances a Christian will pray for those who are non-believers.
Me, on the other hand, fail in both of those requisites far too often and I will fall into the sin of benign neglect...feeling that neither enlightenment nor an epiphany can be gleaned from any of my words and I only hope that just before their final moment of 'Human' life they experience the intense love and peace that awaits them...if they only give Him the chance...for God is all loving and will accept you if you will just allow yourself to love Him....it is not a 'P***e' thing with God, it is more a mutual experience of Creator and created experiencing the pinnacle of the existence he had always planned for you and Him to share with all the others that were saved.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.