|
Post by christopherabrown on Jun 22, 2012 10:31:53 GMT -5
Mike said he wasn't going to waste his time on a meta feedback loop and natural law is not the issue. That is what the infiltrators of the US government want people to think because the Constitution is natural law and the infiltrators are trying to get rid of it. If you think you are going to build momentum for this by going about it the way you are going about it, I am afraid you are going to find you're sorely mistaken. That is what the infiltrators of the US government want people to think. Time to let this thread die. That is what the infiltrators of the US government want. You've never addressed the evidence of congressional violation of the constitution and their oaths beginng 100 years ago. You've never addressed the functionality of preparatory amendment. Let Mike answer from his knowledge base about natural law because natural law protects life with free speech. That is the greater meaning of free speech and I have a full understanding of the natural law, or exactly how it works related to free speech. Mike also needs to recognize the facts about the 100 year deprivation of right that he questioned. Bill Walker explains the record of congress and the facts are at foavc.org.
|
|
|
Post by christopherabrown on Jun 24, 2012 9:42:49 GMT -5
It appears at least 2 more unaccontables have voted no without stating their reasons.
So far I've shown what is used as reasoning to be against Article V is not solid and logical reasoning
When Mike won't show that his education does not include enough about natural law to conduct discussion and Frank relays the desires of those that have infiltrated our government, their reasoning is inadequate to enforce that our grievances should be unmet with a petititon not having priorities of legal process for meeting these vital needs.
|
|