Chicago Cop Indicted For 1st Degree Murder......

No. I have NEVER posted that government is supposed to give us freedoms. That's more of your fabrication. What the hell is wrong with you? You're sounding like BigChins and WPF's bastard child. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1057497083

"Of course government should protect people. Where did I say it should not? But the primary purpose is to keep the country free."

The Constitution and the Amendments are for the purpose of structuring our government in a manner that protects citizens from government action outside the boundaries set within the Constitution and to prevent Government from violating specified (and now implied) inalienable rights based upon ethics of Christianity brought to this country by the "framers"!

In fact it wasn't until the 1900's that it was determined that the "protections" of the Amendments applied to the State governments, as well, and until then the Bill of Rights did not apply to state action.

That pushes back against your "assumption" ... of the "primary purpose is to keep the country free." We can't even rely on our government today to keep us safe .... much less "free" ... because of prejudice, bias, "agendas," and racism.

If one want's less government intrusion then one must rely more on themselves.

Did you say the exact words I posted? .... No!.... But you obviously believe the role of government is "to give you freedom" by protecting the people and keeping them free! If you want to interpret what you said differently, then, of course, that is your "right" .... but don't call me a liar and claim I am distorting what you posted.

Just like you and woomby do when deciding who' s " top " or " bottom", hey EKIM ! And like YOU and YOUR hero will in the DOTY 2017 election against each other and assup and Lil Cotex ! Swing for the fences, EKIM ! Just like YOU swing from those vines ! Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Nothing new here just gay rey advertising for a pal to pack his fudge.

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1057497083

"Of course government should protect people. Where did I say it should not? But the primary purpose is to keep the country free."

The Constitution and the Amendments are for the purpose of structuring our government in a manner that protects citizens from government action outside the boundaries set within the Constitution and to prevent Government from violating specified (and now implied) inalienable rights based upon ethics of Christianity brought to this country by the "framers"!

In fact it wasn't until the 1900's that it was determined that the "protections" of the Amendments applied to the State governments, as well, and until then the Bill of Rights did not apply to state action.

That pushes back against your "assumption" ... of the "primary purpose is to keep the country free." We can't even rely on our government today to keep us safe .... much less "free" ... because of prejudice, bias, "agendas," and racism.

If one want's less government intrusion then one must rely more on themselves.

Did you say the exact words I posted? .... No!.... But you obviously believe the role of government is "to give you freedom" by protecting the people and keeping them free! If you want to interpret what you said differently, then, of course, that is your "right" .... but don't call me a liar and claim I am distorting what you posted. Originally Posted by LexusLover

The Constitution was based on the idea that freedom is the natural state of humankind. That freedom emanates from a source higher than human government. The purpose of government is to preserve freedom. Not grant freedom. Safety is important. If someone wants to exercise their freedom in a manner which interferes with another person's tight to freedom, then it is appropriate for government to step in. I define freedom as the ability to do whatever I want so long as I am not depriving another of their life, liberty or property by force or fraud. I do not want the government to take away my rights in order to protect me.


A police force which apprehends bank robbers, murderers, etc. does not violate my freedom. Abusive laws and cops do. National defense protecting us from imminent, credible and identifiable enemies does not violate my freedom, but proxy wars and wars for profit do. Getting a warrant to look at my phone does not violate my freedom. Random, warrant less searches do.


I hope this clears things up, but I doubt it will. You seem to enjoy distorting what I say. Knock yourself out, pal!

The Constitution was based on the idea that freedom is the natural state of humankind. That freedom emanates from a source higher than human government. The purpose of government is to preserve freedom. Not grant freedom.

I hope this clears things up, but I doubt it will. You seem to enjoy distorting what I say. Knock yourself out, pal! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It merely clarifies your opinion.

There is only one provision of the Constitution that had anything to do with the "freedom" of citizens when the Constitution was ratified by the States. That was the Writ of Habeas Corpus. The design of the Constitution was to "control" government by rules so that government would not subject its will down on the citizens. The Bill of Rights enumerated specific "rights" in citizens (and others in the country) that were not to be trampled on by government.

It is a matter of philosophy not any misunderstanding. And the philosophical differences are the role of government vis-a-vi the citizens. The government does not exist in the absence of the citizens, nor does it function by itself.

So the government can't do shit!

It merely clarifies your opinion.

There is only one provision of the Constitution that had anything to do with the "freedom" of citizens when the Constitution was ratified by the States. That was the Writ of Habeas Corpus. The design of the Constitution was to "control" government by rules so that government would not subject its will down on the citizens. The Bill of Rights enumerated specific "rights" in citizens (and others in the country) that were not to be trampled on by government.

It is a matter of philosophy not any misunderstanding. And the philosophical differences are the role of government vis-a-vi the citizens. The government does not exist in the absence of the citizens, nor does it function by itself.

So the government can't do shit! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Okay. Whatever you say.

Okay. Whatever you say. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I didn't, it was said "in the beginning of this country" ...

..."IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776," by "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,...."

...a government by the people, of the people, and at the privilege of the people.

"So the government can't do shit. "

Strange, I looked for that wording in the constitution last evening and couldn't find it. Where exactly is that?

If you believe that vuewpoint then we should save a whole lot of money and just jump right into anarchy.

"So the government can't do shit. "

Strange, I looked for that wording in the constitution last evening and couldn't find it. Where exactly is that? Originally Posted by Old-T

You are kind of simple minded aren't you? Weren't you the one talking to camera crews for your political insights?

While you "looked" for "wording in the constitution last evening" ... did you happen by chance to run across these words?

"We the People of the United States,...." Just asking. Don't expect you to understand.

Why don't you ask one of those camera crew members what the fuck that means ...

..................... next time you are knobhobbing up in "D.C."?

See ya round, light weight.

Back to the original topic....

Seems that the incriminating video wasn't released until a judge forced the issue. Rahm wouldn't let it. Also appears that the DOJ wasn't called in until 6 months after the shooting, not like the other police shootings when Obama/Holder sent the DOJ and FBI down the next day.

It's apparent there was a cover up. So it is time to ask, what did Obama/Holder know and when did they know it?

Edit: Subpoena their emails.

Back to the original topic....

Seems that the incriminating video wasn't released .....

Edit: Subpoena their emails. Originally Posted by gnadfly

This wrecking crew "in charge" seem to have trouble with ...

...... videos and emails!

The "book" on Rahmacita is he didn't want to "rogue police" issue crap up his bid for re-election ... because he was presiding over a "dirty PD"!

.... I suspect his Boss in the White House didn't want to release the DOJ dogs for the same reason.

It just depends on whose depends need changing and what's in them.

And with all due respect it is ......on topic ... "So the government can't do shit. "

People have to do it~! That's why it starts out ... "We the People of the United States,...."

Aren't you guys supposed to be blaming the liberal media, that finally got the dashboard footage, and exposed the cover up?

Aren't you guys supposed to be blaming the liberal media, that finally got the dashboard footage, and exposed the cover up? Originally Posted by i'va biggen

I'm glad you finally identified the media as "liberal" .... now if they'll just cough up the emails from Emanuel to and from Barry acknowledging the cover up we'll be fine. I'm sure they are to be found on a government server, what do you "think" (using that term loosely with regard to you)?

You might want to inquire with the deceased's family as to why they didn't release the video back in April when they got paid $5 million. The CITY! That would be "Emanuel" et al.

But keep trying for some diversion and deflection to avoid the obvious.

Obaminable and Emanuel from the same "cookie cutter"! Their "re-elections" and "legacy" come FIRST!

If you think that you are so much smarter than I am how come you are always asking me questions, and wanting links, because you can;t find it?

If you think that you are so much smarter than I am how come you are always asking me questions, and wanting links, because you can;t find it? Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Are you talking to yourself again? It's a struggle with multiple personalities?

Are you talking to yourself again? It's a struggle with multiple personalities? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Might as well, replying to you is a waste of time. Don't bother to answer and make a fool of yourself.