Discussion:
To hell with the reg's
(too old to reply)
RiverMan
2005-12-28 01:02:17 UTC
Permalink
I am all about a class action lawsuit against the forest dis-service. I
have a law firm in Birmingham (SouthLaw.. the largest firm in Alabama)
that is willing to take the case. I have given the lead attorney a copy
of the reg's and he said it may be winnable if we can show
discrimination. Email me your horror stories about being harrassed,
roadbloacked, or whatever by the forest service at rainbow gatherings.
We might just have a huge case on our hands if you have backbone enough
to stand up and be counted.

Me... I am willing to fight to the death... (actually I am dying of
liver disease from Hepatitis and probably wont be around much longer
anyway)


-=] River [=-
Tha Billdozer
2005-12-28 01:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
I am all about a class action lawsuit against the forest dis-service.
The only problem that I see with "class actions" is that pholks would
then have to agree that the "group" exists and there are members of
it... and I can not agree to that... I am not a member of any group... I
am an individual.

Individual law suits are fine.
Post by RiverMan
I
have a law firm in Birmingham (SouthLaw.. the largest firm in Alabama)
that is willing to take the case.
If you can get several people together that would not mind saying that
they are part of a group then a class action might work.
Post by RiverMan
I have given the lead attorney a copy
of the reg's and he said it may be winnable if we can show
discrimination.
And the key to this sentence is the one of the smallest words in it...
"WE"... an individual is not a "WE"... unless they are suffering from D.I.D.
Post by RiverMan
Email me your horror stories about being harrassed,
roadbloacked, or whatever by the forest service at rainbow gatherings.
There are plenty... I think there is even video.
Post by RiverMan
We might just have a huge case on our hands if you have backbone enough
to stand up and be counted.
Personally, I would much rather keep my fight against the regulations a
personal one... as a individual.
Post by RiverMan
Me... I am willing to fight to the death...
Amen to that.
Post by RiverMan
(actually I am dying of
liver disease from Hepatitis and probably wont be around much longer
anyway)
Welcome to the club... people are born to die... some are doing it
faster than others... but the great thing about that is that permits
have no effect on dead people.
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete.


R. Buckminster Fuller
RiverMan
2005-12-28 01:26:02 UTC
Permalink
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.

I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....

-=] River [=-
woodstock
2005-12-28 02:08:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
-=] River [=-
But the "we" or "us" is universal. As in people on Earth- here "we" are
on the planet- do we need a permit to be here? -woodstock-
Sanity RE
2005-12-28 03:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by woodstock
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
-=] River [=-
But the "we" or "us" is universal.
It sure ought to be, in the context of rainbow being the full spectrum
of hue-manity; but lots of folks want to think of it as special, an
"us" that can be compaired to a "them" so as to be somehow superior
[denoting the inferiority of outsiders]. Too, language is a
convention, and some people will disagree just to be disagreeable.
Post by woodstock
As in people on Earth- here "we" are
on the planet- do we need a permit to be here? -woodstock-
The deer and the antelope would need a Permit if they could be made to
pay for the damage the porcupine did to the handle of that splitting
maul. %~]

Sanity RE
Sanity RE
2005-12-28 02:43:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html

Sanity RE

Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 02:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Connie
2005-12-28 02:56:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Connie
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
spiritrising
2005-12-28 03:41:40 UTC
Permalink
oh yes i do, infact i was one of the focalizers for this years gathering.
lol spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Connie
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Sanity RE
2005-12-28 03:19:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Connie
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
I went to the peaceable assembly in the Ozarks last July. Connie
doesn't know me or my movements.
Connie said she works reading contracts and would be happy to analyse
the Permit Regulation. Then she couldn't find a copy, and missed all
the ones that were posted to AGR, and all the Links that were posted
for her convienence, and she was busy and didn't have the time, etc.

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

Still busy and no time Connie? Oh, what is it now????????????????

Hypocrites, ya gotta love 'em, cuz liking or respecting them is out of
the question.

Sanity RE
Connie
2005-12-28 20:41:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sanity RE
I went to the peaceable assembly in the Ozarks last July. Connie
doesn't know me or my movements.
I know you don't go to Nationals. I've been reading you rants about them
for years now and even used to argue with you before realizing that you
don't engage in rational argument.
Post by Sanity RE
Connie said she works reading contracts and would be happy to analyse
the Permit Regulation. Then she couldn't find a copy, and missed all
the ones that were posted to AGR, and all the Links that were posted
for her convienence, and she was busy and didn't have the time, etc.
I did have trouble finding them initially (I don't have to research for the
contracts I read and write). However, once links were posted, I read and
commented. You lie, too, apparently.
Post by Sanity RE
Still busy and no time Connie? Oh, what is it now????????????????
Hypocrites, ya gotta love 'em, cuz liking or respecting them is out of
the question.
How typical of you Sanity. I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually), and you respond with fictitious character
assassination in the form of lies and innuendo. How pathetic.
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity RE
spiritrising
2005-12-28 03:40:59 UTC
Permalink
yes he does, i have seen him there! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Connie
2005-12-28 20:46:53 UTC
Permalink
I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense. He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring to
Nationals (as this post is about).
Post by spiritrising
yes he does, i have seen him there! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
spiritrising
2005-12-28 21:29:54 UTC
Permalink
well being clear could stop confusion, i think all "groups" of people in a
forest setting or even in an apt, is a gathering. where two gather, it is a
gathering. spiritrising
Post by Connie
I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense. He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating them
and anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs
(as per usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was
referring to
Nationals (as this post is about).
Post by spiritrising
yes he does, i have seen him there! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Connie
2005-12-28 22:34:48 UTC
Permalink
True enough - except this string was around River's topic of THE national
Gathering (as you well know). I recognize this banter for what it is... the
annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering. Some op the
"others" promoted on here, such as the Ozark thing, are what they are:
gatherings of folks who can't bear of thought of being more than a few feet
from their beloved cold alcoholic beverages.
Post by spiritrising
well being clear could stop confusion, i think all "groups" of people in a
forest setting or even in an apt, is a gathering. where two gather, it is
a gathering. spiritrising
Post by Connie
I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating them
and anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs
(as per usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was
referring to
Nationals (as this post is about).
Post by spiritrising
yes he does, i have seen him there! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Connie
2005-12-28 02:49:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
-=] River [=-
I don't agree that a class-action lawsuit means you have to concede that a
"group" exists and "there are members of it". Check with your atty, River,
I'm sure he'll agree. I've been involved in a number of these type actions.
"dozer's" not called Bullshit Bill for nothing; he doesn't even attend
Gatherings.
Tha Billdozer
2005-12-28 04:45:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Connie
I don't agree that a class-action lawsuit means you have to concede that a
"group" exists and "there are members of it".
Boy, you make a great parrot... I said that in the second message of
this thread... try thinking for yourself next time.
Post by Connie
Check with your atty, River, I'm sure he'll agree.
Hey River, I pointed that out on this forum 4 years ago when it was
first posted here... Connie is behind the times.
Post by Connie
I've been involved in a number of these type actions.
Right, which ones ?? or is this your attempt at bullshit to make
yourself seem important ??
Post by Connie
"dozer's" not called Bullshit Bill for nothing; he doesn't even attend
Gatherings.
Hmmm, I've been attending "gatherings" since 1979... I refuse to attend
another permitted event becuz I do not wnat to be associated with a cult
of sell outs.

I did attend the AGOTT in the Ozarks for 5 days last summer... just
becuz someone does not attend your cult parties does not mean they do
not gather.

But, then again I have been to court over getting ticket for being in
violation of the regulations and walked away without jail time or fines.
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete.


R. Buckminster Fuller
spiritrising
2005-12-28 14:24:38 UTC
Permalink
what did bus village look like? spiritrising
Post by Connie
I don't agree that a class-action lawsuit means you have to concede that
a "group" exists and "there are members of it".
Boy, you make a great parrot... I said that in the second message of this
thread... try thinking for yourself next time.
Post by Connie
Check with your atty, River, I'm sure he'll agree.
Hey River, I pointed that out on this forum 4 years ago when it was first
posted here... Connie is behind the times.
Post by Connie
I've been involved in a number of these type actions.
Right, which ones ?? or is this your attempt at bullshit to make yourself
seem important ??
Post by Connie
"dozer's" not called Bullshit Bill for nothing; he doesn't even attend
Gatherings.
Hmmm, I've been attending "gatherings" since 1979... I refuse to attend
another permitted event becuz I do not wnat to be associated with a cult
of sell outs.
I did attend the AGOTT in the Ozarks for 5 days last summer... just becuz
someone does not attend your cult parties does not mean they do not
gather.
But, then again I have been to court over getting ticket for being in
violation of the regulations and walked away without jail time or fines.
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller
Connie
2005-12-28 20:51:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Connie
I don't agree that a class-action lawsuit means you have to concede that
a "group" exists and "there are members of it".
Boy, you make a great parrot... I said that in the second message of this
thread... try thinking for yourself next time.
What are you babbling about? This (copied/pasted below) is what you said in
the 2nd msg of this thread:

"The only problem that I see with "class actions" is that pholks would
then have to agree that the "group" exists and there are members of
it... and I can not agree to that... I am not a member of any group... I
am an individual."
spiritrising
2005-12-28 21:33:26 UTC
Permalink
and not a rainbow to boot! you got your own tribe! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Connie
I don't agree that a class-action lawsuit means you have to concede that
a "group" exists and "there are members of it".
Boy, you make a great parrot... I said that in the second message of this
thread... try thinking for yourself next time.
What are you babbling about? This (copied/pasted below) is what you said
"The only problem that I see with "class actions" is that pholks would
then have to agree that the "group" exists and there are members of
it... and I can not agree to that... I am not a member of any group... I
am an individual."
spiritrising
2005-12-28 03:40:07 UTC
Permalink
if all were rainbow, then why haven't they applied for a membership, sure
hasn't crossed my desk, and i have not approved any members that i know of.
spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 20:52:29 UTC
Permalink
Maybe you approved them while you experiencing a blackout, and just don't
remember!
Post by spiritrising
if all were rainbow, then why haven't they applied for a membership, sure
hasn't crossed my desk, and i have not approved any members that i know
of. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-28 21:34:17 UTC
Permalink
i would have a copy of the application, look in the file cabinet, and nope
no apps. lol spiritrising
Post by Connie
Maybe you approved them while you experiencing a blackout, and just don't
remember!
Post by spiritrising
if all were rainbow, then why haven't they applied for a membership, sure
hasn't crossed my desk, and i have not approved any members that i know
of. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law. And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
-=] River [=-
Tha Billdozer
2005-12-28 04:23:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.
If I attend a Grateful Dead ocncert that does not necessarily make me a
"Deadhead"... or part of the Grateful Dead... it just means that I as an
individual am in attendance... just one face in a crowd.
Post by RiverMan
you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not these reg's are law.
As Wood pointed out in the grand scheme of things I am part of
humanity... if one is talking about humanity then yes I am part of that.

AND, as I am sure many will point out to you that the regulations are
not law... laws are passed by a 2/3 vote of Congress... the USFS has no
legislative authority to make laws.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or take the consequenses.
Again, the regulations are not law... and I have alrady beaten them in
court... I got a ticket in Idaho... never saw a minute in jail and never
had to pay a dime.
Post by RiverMan
Until enough people stand up, shoulder to shoulder, and say we have had enough...
There used to be people like that... then they got scared.
Post by RiverMan
then this kind of oppression will continue.
Actually, when people learn the truth then this will stop.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
They didn't... they have been to circuit court and that is it... hell,
mine never made it out of district court... as is the case with most of
the violations.
Post by RiverMan
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used.
One of the things that has been made clear over the many years of people
getting together in the woods is that those that do usually leave the
place in better shape than when they entered.
Post by RiverMan
but to hassle people at a gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Yup, and it is illegal.
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete.


R. Buckminster Fuller
Sanity RE
2005-12-28 02:22:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tha Billdozer
Post by RiverMan
I am all about a class action lawsuit against the forest dis-service.
The only problem that I see with "class actions" is that pholks would
then have to agree that the "group" exists and there are members of
it... and I can not agree to that... I am not a member of any group... I
am an individual.
Individual law suits are fine.
"-and other individuals similarly situated." covers that.
Post by Tha Billdozer
Post by RiverMan
I
have a law firm in Birmingham (SouthLaw.. the largest firm in Alabama)
that is willing to take the case.
If you can get several people together that would not mind saying that
they are part of a group then a class action might work.
In theory at least "the general public" is a group that could sue.
Post by Tha Billdozer
Post by RiverMan
I have given the lead attorney a copy
of the reg's and he said it may be winnable if we can show
discrimination.
And the key to this sentence is the one of the smallest words in it...
"WE"... an individual is not a "WE"... unless they are suffering from D.I.D.
Reworded: "-if discrimination can be shown." suit you better?

Sanity RE
Post by Tha Billdozer
Post by RiverMan
Email me your horror stories about being harrassed,
roadbloacked, or whatever by the forest service at rainbow gatherings.
There are plenty... I think there is even video.
Post by RiverMan
We might just have a huge case on our hands if you have backbone enough
to stand up and be counted.
Personally, I would much rather keep my fight against the regulations a
personal one... as a individual.
Post by RiverMan
Me... I am willing to fight to the death...
Amen to that.
Post by RiverMan
(actually I am dying of
liver disease from Hepatitis and probably wont be around much longer
anyway)
Welcome to the club... people are born to die... some are doing it
faster than others... but the great thing about that is that permits
have no effect on dead people.
spiritrising
2005-12-28 01:22:40 UTC
Permalink
if ya got the time and money to waste, go ahead, get the same answer they
did the last time, group! time,place,manner,permit,required! spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
I am all about a class action lawsuit against the forest dis-service. I
have a law firm in Birmingham (SouthLaw.. the largest firm in Alabama)
that is willing to take the case. I have given the lead attorney a copy
of the reg's and he said it may be winnable if we can show
discrimination. Email me your horror stories about being harrassed,
roadbloacked, or whatever by the forest service at rainbow gatherings.
We might just have a huge case on our hands if you have backbone enough
to stand up and be counted.
Me... I am willing to fight to the death... (actually I am dying of
liver disease from Hepatitis and probably wont be around much longer
anyway)
-=] River [=-
Sanity RE
2005-12-28 02:13:41 UTC
Permalink
The public that wants peace is descriminated against. People, such as
myself, that want to go to gatherings are descriminated against and
made liable for the acts of total straingers, by Permit contracts
entered into by total strangers without election of any kind, for if
'we' dare to show up our appearance is seen as acquesience to the
Permit ex post facto.

I don't want a nickle. I want the felonious perpetrators of this
manifest con's-piracy against rights prosecuted; but that's criminal
not civil.

Sanity RE
Carla
2005-12-28 03:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
I am all about a class action lawsuit against the forest dis-service. I
have a law firm in Birmingham (SouthLaw.. the largest firm in Alabama)
that is willing to take the case. I have given the lead attorney a copy
of the reg's and he said it may be winnable if we can show
discrimination. Email me your horror stories about being harrassed,
roadbloacked, or whatever by the forest service at rainbow gatherings.
We might just have a huge case on our hands if you have backbone enough
to stand up and be counted.
Me... I am willing to fight to the death... (actually I am dying of
liver disease from Hepatitis and probably wont be around much longer
anyway)
-=] River [=-
Better print out all the "rainbow" cases, too. You can find them at

welcomehome.org

or

PROP1.org
Marty
2005-12-28 04:42:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carla
Better print out all the "rainbow" cases, too. You can find them at
welcomehome.org
or
PROP1.org
Unfortunately all you get are the opinions, and a few briefs and
motions (mostly from Plunker's postings to a.g.r). No transcripts
(except Strider's case), no notes or evidence that I'm aware of, nor
any post facto analysis of the opinions. This is a serious problem
for anyone who wants to understand these cases. For instance, it's
hard to guess what the defendant(s) argued on a certain point, when
the opinion dismisses entire defense arguments in a few words or
sentences. In addition, most of the opinions are not self-consistent,
but go through all kinds of logical contortions to explain away the
constitutional issues. Further complicating the matter are the
contradictions between the various appeals court opinions (E.g. the
Ninth Circuit v. the PA case), including contradictions in their
application of case law. Finally, some of the cases indicate
prejudice against the defendants even in the wording of the opinions
(e.g. the use if a proper name "Rainbow Family" in the opinion, when
the existence of such a group is a disputed material fact of the case.

Alas, these issues are not enough to dissuade some from falling back
on "the courts have ruled" justification for permits at rainbow
gatherings.
RiverMan
2005-12-28 04:48:18 UTC
Permalink
Ho!

And I say again... we have a basis for a class action suit if people
would stand up for what they believe in instead of hiding behind some
bullshit of anonymity. This is how the government wins... because we
are a non-localised group with no leaders it's easy for them to
overcome us....

-=] River [=-
Tha Billdozer
2005-12-28 04:53:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
Ho!
And I say again... we have a basis for a class action suit if people
would stand up for what they believe in instead of hiding behind some
bullshit of anonymity. This is how the government wins... because we
are a non-localised group with no leaders it's easy for them to
overcome us....
Then they win... becuz I for one *DO NOT* want to be part of a group...
I have fought the regs as an individual and won... it is possible.
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete.


R. Buckminster Fuller
Lookingheart
2005-12-28 05:13:17 UTC
Permalink
Hey Now!,

To launch a suit would depend on the reason. I can see no reason to sue
the Boy Scouts for signing a permit to use the National Forest nor
would I guess that anyone could sue those who sign for the Annual
Rainbow Gathering for signing a permit, it is after all their event
once they are authorized to host such an event.

There are alternatives.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by RiverMan
Ho!
And I say again... we have a basis for a class action suit if people
would stand up for what they believe in instead of hiding behind some
bullshit of anonymity. This is how the government wins... because we
are a non-localised group with no leaders it's easy for them to
overcome us....
-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-28 14:26:25 UTC
Permalink
so...... what group of people do you know that are rainbow? lol
spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
Ho!
And I say again... we have a basis for a class action suit if people
would stand up for what they believe in instead of hiding behind some
bullshit of anonymity. This is how the government wins... because we
are a non-localised group with no leaders it's easy for them to
overcome us....
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 20:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
Ho!
And I say again... we have a basis for a class action suit if people
would stand up for what they believe in instead of hiding behind some
bullshit of anonymity. This is how the government wins... because we
are a non-localised group with no leaders it's easy for them to
overcome us....
I would certainly not argue that we should become a group with leaders!!!!
I do say a class action suit can be filed without doing that.
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
woodstock
2005-12-31 01:59:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Connie
Post by RiverMan
Ho!
And I say again... we have a basis for a class action suit if people
would stand up for what they believe in instead of hiding behind some
bullshit of anonymity. This is how the government wins... because we
are a non-localised group with no leaders it's easy for them to
overcome us....
I would certainly not argue that we should become a group with leaders!!!!
I do say a class action suit can be filed without doing that.
Anyone can "file" anything at any time- doesn't mean it will go
anywhere. It's a stale mate at this point IMHO- a mexican stand off
with ourselves. =woodstock-
Post by Connie
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
RiverMan
2005-12-28 04:56:36 UTC
Permalink
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.

I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?

-=] River [=-
m***@hotmail.com
2005-12-28 05:09:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
No one's a coward, RiverMan, there's plenty of people willing to stand
up. That type of talk has been the crux of the problem here on AGR.
People have stood up, lost and ended up in jail. Before I believe you
can win you need to explain why they lost and what you will do
differently.
Tha Billdozer
2005-12-28 05:13:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS... I have known
Rob since 1985 and he is not the same person I met.
Post by RiverMan
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap.
As one that has gotten a ticket for being in violation of the regs and
won I refuse to belong to your cult... it's as simple as that... and if
you want to elect yourself as a leader now and speak for others then you
will face what others have for doing such.
Post by RiverMan
You want to be a closet rainbow?
Nope, I do not want to belong to a cult... "I" AM ME... WHEN "I" LOOK IN
THE MIRROR THERE IS NO "WE".

AND, if your solution is to form an offical group and elect yourself
leader then please leave ME out of it.
--
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete.


R. Buckminster Fuller
r***@yahoo.com
2005-12-28 06:44:10 UTC
Permalink
your full of shit ...Ive had long talks with rob and I know for
certain of his oppostion tothe feddies and the permit .... your out
of the loop bill WAY OUT OF THE LOOP and yuo udont have a clue
spiritrising
2005-12-28 14:30:21 UTC
Permalink
please do not give bill any info, remember that info was sacred! lopl
spiritrising
Post by r***@yahoo.com
your full of shit ...Ive had long talks with rob and I know for
certain of his oppostion tothe feddies and the permit .... your out
of the loop bill WAY OUT OF THE LOOP and yuo udont have a clue
Connie
2005-12-28 21:03:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tha Billdozer
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
spiritrising
2005-12-28 21:36:00 UTC
Permalink
while there are some who would like np0thing more than have power over the
gathering, they only recently got together while before they were at odds at
who will be on top. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Tha Billdozer
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks
made up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
spiritrising
2005-12-28 14:28:44 UTC
Permalink
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of the white
house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will not act on the
supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a gathering and do a
protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
RiverMan
2005-12-28 14:36:41 UTC
Permalink
I agree..... people don't have it in them anymore... such a shame


-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-28 14:40:42 UTC
Permalink
it was never intended nor ever was a political event, even the first one was
not a political event, it may have ended up that way, but thats because a
few overtalked a few others. sometimes group mentality is easy to sway in
the right setting. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
I agree..... people don't have it in them anymore... such a shame
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 21:05:06 UTC
Permalink
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of the
white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will not act
on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a gathering and do
a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-28 21:59:14 UTC
Permalink
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all talk,
they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of the
white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will not act
on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a gathering and
do a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 22:39:47 UTC
Permalink
Just who is this "they" of whom you speak? (Never mind; rhetorical
question.)
Post by spiritrising
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all talk,
they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of the
white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will not
act on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a gathering
and do a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-28 23:13:41 UTC
Permalink
political side=they

and by the way the rushing river is living its name!!! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Just who is this "they" of whom you speak? (Never mind; rhetorical
question.)
Post by spiritrising
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all
talk, they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of the
white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will not
act on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a gathering
and do a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 23:37:59 UTC
Permalink
What with all the footage of the tsunami, hurricanes, floods, etc. all over
this year - I'm kinda glad my local rivers are what they are!

Although it would be kinda nice to have the Santa Cruz, Rillito, etc.
contain actual water sometime...
Post by spiritrising
political side=they
and by the way the rushing river is living its name!!! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Just who is this "they" of whom you speak? (Never mind; rhetorical
question.)
Post by spiritrising
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all
talk, they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of the
white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will not
act on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a
gathering and do a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-28 23:52:22 UTC
Permalink
well last winter in qaurtzsite, i wished that the river beds did not contain
water, was pretty wet out on the desert for a change, when i left the grass
was three ft tall. wonder half of arizona didn't burn down! seems now the
newer threat is perma frost up north being thawed. how do the res where
you teach get most of their water? spiritrising
Post by Connie
What with all the footage of the tsunami, hurricanes, floods, etc. all
over this year - I'm kinda glad my local rivers are what they are!
Although it would be kinda nice to have the Santa Cruz, Rillito, etc.
contain actual water sometime...
Post by spiritrising
political side=they
and by the way the rushing river is living its name!!! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Just who is this "they" of whom you speak? (Never mind; rhetorical
question.)
Post by spiritrising
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all
talk, they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of
the white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and will
not act on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to a
gathering and do a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-29 00:53:41 UTC
Permalink
I don't teach on a rez; however, the one rural nation here has wells (pretty
common here). The other rez in smack in the middle of Tucson!
Post by spiritrising
well last winter in qaurtzsite, i wished that the river beds did not
contain water, was pretty wet out on the desert for a change, when i left
the grass was three ft tall. wonder half of arizona didn't burn down!
seems now the newer threat is perma frost up north being thawed. how do
the res where you teach get most of their water? spiritrising
Post by Connie
What with all the footage of the tsunami, hurricanes, floods, etc. all
over this year - I'm kinda glad my local rivers are what they are!
Although it would be kinda nice to have the Santa Cruz, Rillito, etc.
contain actual water sometime...
Post by spiritrising
political side=they
and by the way the rushing river is living its name!!! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Just who is this "they" of whom you speak? (Never mind; rhetorical
question.)
Post by spiritrising
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all
talk, they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of
the white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and
will not act on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go to
a gathering and do a protest if any at all. spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
spiritrising
2005-12-29 12:37:16 UTC
Permalink
seems to me there were small res.'s all over the place, one north of
qaurtzsite at the nearest town. they must get their water from the river.
seems wells are a risky try in that part of az. i remember when they tried
to put a new well in the ltva, it ended up being a dry hole 1000 ft deep.
simply amazing. and here i have one at 185ft spiritrising
Post by Connie
I don't teach on a rez; however, the one rural nation here has wells
(pretty common here). The other rez in smack in the middle of Tucson!
Post by spiritrising
well last winter in qaurtzsite, i wished that the river beds did not
contain water, was pretty wet out on the desert for a change, when i left
the grass was three ft tall. wonder half of arizona didn't burn down!
seems now the newer threat is perma frost up north being thawed. how
do the res where you teach get most of their water? spiritrising
Post by Connie
What with all the footage of the tsunami, hurricanes, floods, etc. all
over this year - I'm kinda glad my local rivers are what they are!
Although it would be kinda nice to have the Santa Cruz, Rillito, etc.
contain actual water sometime...
Post by spiritrising
political side=they
and by the way the rushing river is living its name!!! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Just who is this "they" of whom you speak? (Never mind; rhetorical
question.)
Post by spiritrising
another good reason the political side of rainbow will always be all
talk, they couldn't act even if they wanted to. spiritrising
Post by Connie
Good luck getting a protest that close to the WH these days!!
Post by spiritrising
and the way to do it is a peacefull assembly on the front steps of
the white house, protesting the regs, trees will not listen, and
will not act on the supposed protest.and even at that very few go
to a gathering and do a protest if any at all.
spiritrising
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
Connie
2005-12-28 20:57:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by RiverMan
You are absolutely right Marty... That is what I have found. Rob is a
personal friend of mine and he says thats all he's got so.... the only
way to get that info is legal research.
I say there is a way to beat this but it takes people standing up and
not being cowards and hiding behind some bullshit annonomous crap....
You want to be a closet rainbow?
-=] River [=-
Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as is
Lookingheart. He just steadily increases his attacks on it as the time
nears, ramping up to shrill fever pitch in the weeks before.
Lookingheart
2005-12-29 00:28:50 UTC
Permalink
Thank you for speaking for me Connie, I do appreciate governmental type
preachy folks such as you who come to my aid and project my thoughts,
rational and ideologies as if they had any validity diatribing on my
behest. Get real Sis, you dont know me, you dont attend the Rainbow
Gatherings in these woods and as far as I know you dont attend the
Peace Conspiracy Gatherings. I dont see you doing anything productive
here on AGR and that is the pathetic part. You claim some sense of
value and then walk on the backs of others to ramp up your jollies.
When confronted with factual information you skew to the left and
refuse to acknowledge reality. Everyone could use some growth in their
life and right now you appear to need a little more then others. As for
"nat'l Gatherings" as you call them, I get plenty of hugs at Rainbow
Gatherings, Peace Conspiracy Gatherings and other family focused
events. I do not need to suffer my liberties and sensibilities to
attend any type of gathering that would put such at risk. I attend the
Gatherings that I choose to attend with folks that I enjoy gathering
with under terms that are beneficial to all who would come to circle in
peace. If that aint your bag-o-worms then whatever cause I cant say
that I ever felt like I missed you at any of those gatherings anyway.
You keep pretending that you know folks' movements and what circles
they attend, I have seen you post at least three lies concerning three
brothers here on AGR in the last couple of days and I am sure other
folks caught it too. Be a dim beacon for justice while supporting
permitted events in the guise of peaceful assembly. One day you will
figure out that the world dont revolve around your petty snips and no
matter how much bitch keying you do here on AGR you still havent
changed a thing in the real world. Why not use your energy, time and
talent to speak for those who can not speak for themselves, I am
autonymous, strong and well able to support myself.
Connie
2005-12-29 02:12:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lookingheart
Thank you for speaking for me Connie,
What are you babbling about? I wasn't speaking for you, but about you. And
only that you don't attend nat'l Gatherings, which is true. If you don't
know the one to which I'm referring, it's the one this string is about - the
real one - the descendent of 1972 - the, oh, never mind. You'll just play
your tired old semantics game again.
Post by Lookingheart
I do appreciate governmental type
preachy folks such as you who come to my aid and project my thoughts,
rational and ideologies as if they had any validity diatribing on my
behest.
How is saying you don't attend projecting your thoughts, rationale, and
ideology? Helllloooooooooooo?????????
Post by Lookingheart
Get real Sis, you dont know me, you dont attend the Rainbow
Gatherings in these woods
Where are "these" woods?
Post by Lookingheart
and as far as I know you dont attend the
Peace Conspiracy Gatherings. I dont see you doing anything productive
here on AGR and that is the pathetic part. You claim some sense of
value and then walk on the backs of others to ramp up your jollies.
When confronted with factual information you skew to the left and
refuse to acknowledge reality. Everyone could use some growth in their
life and right now you appear to need a little more then others.
Here you have it folks... the true lookingheart!
Post by Lookingheart
As for
"nat'l Gatherings" as you call them, I get plenty of hugs at Rainbow
Gatherings, Peace Conspiracy Gatherings and other family focused
events. I do not need to suffer my liberties and sensibilities to
attend any type of gathering that would put such at risk. I attend the
Gatherings that I choose to attend with folks that I enjoy gathering
with under terms that are beneficial to all who would come to circle in
peace. If that aint your bag-o-worms then whatever cause I cant say
that I ever felt like I missed you at any of those gatherings anyway.
You keep pretending that you know folks' movements and what circles
they attend,
I have seen you post at least three lies concerning three
brothers here on AGR in the last couple of days and I am sure other
folks caught it too.
Care to point to them? The so-called "lies concerning three brothers", that
is?
Post by Lookingheart
Be a dim beacon for justice while supporting
permitted events in the guise of peaceful assembly. One day you will
figure out that the world dont revolve around your petty snips and no
matter how much bitch keying you do here on AGR you still havent
changed a thing in the real world. Why not use your energy, time and
talent to speak for those who can not speak for themselves, I am
autonymous, strong and well able to support myself.
Again, I did not speak for you, but about you. Learn to read?
spiritrising
2005-12-29 12:39:50 UTC
Permalink
i'm still waiting for bill to answer my question about bus village in
missouri! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Lookingheart
Thank you for speaking for me Connie,
What are you babbling about? I wasn't speaking for you, but about you.
And only that you don't attend nat'l Gatherings, which is true. If you
don't know the one to which I'm referring, it's the one this string is
about - the real one - the descendent of 1972 - the, oh, never mind.
You'll just play your tired old semantics game again.
Post by Lookingheart
I do appreciate governmental type
preachy folks such as you who come to my aid and project my thoughts,
rational and ideologies as if they had any validity diatribing on my
behest.
How is saying you don't attend projecting your thoughts, rationale, and
ideology? Helllloooooooooooo?????????
Post by Lookingheart
Get real Sis, you dont know me, you dont attend the Rainbow
Gatherings in these woods
Where are "these" woods?
Post by Lookingheart
and as far as I know you dont attend the
Peace Conspiracy Gatherings. I dont see you doing anything productive
here on AGR and that is the pathetic part. You claim some sense of
value and then walk on the backs of others to ramp up your jollies.
When confronted with factual information you skew to the left and
refuse to acknowledge reality. Everyone could use some growth in their
life and right now you appear to need a little more then others.
Here you have it folks... the true lookingheart!
Post by Lookingheart
As for
"nat'l Gatherings" as you call them, I get plenty of hugs at Rainbow
Gatherings, Peace Conspiracy Gatherings and other family focused
events. I do not need to suffer my liberties and sensibilities to
attend any type of gathering that would put such at risk. I attend the
Gatherings that I choose to attend with folks that I enjoy gathering
with under terms that are beneficial to all who would come to circle in
peace. If that aint your bag-o-worms then whatever cause I cant say
that I ever felt like I missed you at any of those gatherings anyway.
You keep pretending that you know folks' movements and what circles
they attend,
I have seen you post at least three lies concerning three
brothers here on AGR in the last couple of days and I am sure other
folks caught it too.
Care to point to them? The so-called "lies concerning three brothers",
that is?
Post by Lookingheart
Be a dim beacon for justice while supporting
permitted events in the guise of peaceful assembly. One day you will
figure out that the world dont revolve around your petty snips and no
matter how much bitch keying you do here on AGR you still havent
changed a thing in the real world. Why not use your energy, time and
talent to speak for those who can not speak for themselves, I am
autonymous, strong and well able to support myself.
Again, I did not speak for you, but about you. Learn to read?
o***@hotmail.com
2005-12-29 14:24:40 UTC
Permalink
He avoids questions he can't answer, which is most of the time.
Post by spiritrising
i'm still waiting for bill to answer my question about bus village in
missouri! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Lookingheart
Thank you for speaking for me Connie,
What are you babbling about? I wasn't speaking for you, but about you.
And only that you don't attend nat'l Gatherings, which is true. If you
don't know the one to which I'm referring, it's the one this string is
about - the real one - the descendent of 1972 - the, oh, never mind.
You'll just play your tired old semantics game again.
Post by Lookingheart
I do appreciate governmental type
preachy folks such as you who come to my aid and project my thoughts,
rational and ideologies as if they had any validity diatribing on my
behest.
How is saying you don't attend projecting your thoughts, rationale, and
ideology? Helllloooooooooooo?????????
Post by Lookingheart
Get real Sis, you dont know me, you dont attend the Rainbow
Gatherings in these woods
Where are "these" woods?
Post by Lookingheart
and as far as I know you dont attend the
Peace Conspiracy Gatherings. I dont see you doing anything productive
here on AGR and that is the pathetic part. You claim some sense of
value and then walk on the backs of others to ramp up your jollies.
When confronted with factual information you skew to the left and
refuse to acknowledge reality. Everyone could use some growth in their
life and right now you appear to need a little more then others.
Here you have it folks... the true lookingheart!
Post by Lookingheart
As for
"nat'l Gatherings" as you call them, I get plenty of hugs at Rainbow
Gatherings, Peace Conspiracy Gatherings and other family focused
events. I do not need to suffer my liberties and sensibilities to
attend any type of gathering that would put such at risk. I attend the
Gatherings that I choose to attend with folks that I enjoy gathering
with under terms that are beneficial to all who would come to circle in
peace. If that aint your bag-o-worms then whatever cause I cant say
that I ever felt like I missed you at any of those gatherings anyway.
You keep pretending that you know folks' movements and what circles
they attend,
I have seen you post at least three lies concerning three
brothers here on AGR in the last couple of days and I am sure other
folks caught it too.
Care to point to them? The so-called "lies concerning three brothers",
that is?
Post by Lookingheart
Be a dim beacon for justice while supporting
permitted events in the guise of peaceful assembly. One day you will
figure out that the world dont revolve around your petty snips and no
matter how much bitch keying you do here on AGR you still havent
changed a thing in the real world. Why not use your energy, time and
talent to speak for those who can not speak for themselves, I am
autonymous, strong and well able to support myself.
Again, I did not speak for you, but about you. Learn to read?
Lookingheart
2005-12-30 01:54:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Connie
Care to point to them? The so-called "lies concerning three brothers", that
is?
Connie
Dec 27, 8:56 pm show options

Newsgroups: alt.gathering.rainbow
From: "Connie" <***@cox.net> - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:56:26 -0700
Local: Tues, Dec 27 2005 8:56 pm
Subject: Re: To hell with the reg's
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
Post by Connie
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Connie
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know of two here in your list that I have personally seen at
gatherings, including myself that makes 3. I assume that Marty also
attends gatherings though I do not know for sure.
Care to recant?

LH
Sanity RE
2005-12-30 03:37:11 UTC
Permalink
I don't care if she recants. I want her professional opinion of the
financial responsibility clause of the Permit. She bragged about being
a professional contract reader and offered to openly discuss the
Permits, and then came up with months of excuses and sidestepping ad
hominum attacks.

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."

Small little paragraph for a professional contract reader to analyse,
ain't it? "The holder shall be liable-" sure looks to me like whoever
is the holder admits liability [guilt] ab initio [from the start] of
the contract. Connie has lots of time to spend calling me names, but
none to do what she bragged she is qualified for and said she'd do.
Too much.

Sanity RE
spiritrising
2005-12-30 16:32:32 UTC
Permalink
permit signer has alot more to think about than just liability, maybe i
should read up on the powers of the permit signer, and what backing the fs
gives to them whole new game end if ya ask me. and i found a place that is
not open right now in the middle of a forest, is not on conservation lists,
but signs all over the place saying it is thiers or ours anyway you want to
put it. spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
I don't care if she recants. I want her professional opinion of the
financial responsibility clause of the Permit. She bragged about being
a professional contract reader and offered to openly discuss the
Permits, and then came up with months of excuses and sidestepping ad
hominum attacks.
http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."
Small little paragraph for a professional contract reader to analyse,
ain't it? "The holder shall be liable-" sure looks to me like whoever
is the holder admits liability [guilt] ab initio [from the start] of
the contract. Connie has lots of time to spend calling me names, but
none to do what she bragged she is qualified for and said she'd do.
Too much.
Sanity RE
Lookingheart
2005-12-30 19:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Hey Now!,

Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on. I have noticed that some of the permit
folks generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license. I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.

I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!

LH
o***@hotmail.com
2005-12-30 19:20:32 UTC
Permalink
So who are all these pro-permit people on here that you are referring
to? There are those who don't believe it, those who tolerate it, and
those who believe it doesn't represent them. I want to know who is for
it, LH. Care to say?

I ran a poll for months and not one person said they were for a permit.
Just more spin from you.

Starting early with the division tactics, eh LH?
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on. I have noticed that some of the permit
folks generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license. I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
r***@yahoo.com
2005-12-30 20:21:23 UTC
Permalink
Ive yet to meet anyone whos "pro permit".....maybe you can name
names... . what hunis refering to yourself as pro freedom ...alluding
that anyone who disagreeswith you as anitifreedom.... what a crook of
sit you ar lookingheart.... do yo ualso assumethat those who are pro
choice are therefore pro death..... but I frogot that looking heart
is second opnly to bullshit bill in his intention use of logical
fallicy's ...
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 01:45:17 UTC
Permalink
Stubbie said he'd sign on himself a while back. If threatening to sign
one isn't pro Permit....

Sanity RE
Dia
2005-12-31 02:10:56 UTC
Permalink
it was a joke, duh.
To illustrate the point that even someone who isn't there can seem to
adhere to such ludricous rules as the FS regs on group use permits.
But you knew that. Why intentionally mislead?
Pah.
Tired of all this nonesense again
Dia
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 02:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Didn't read like a joke to me.
Lookingheart
2005-12-31 02:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Then there is Bodhi's "friend" who threatened (via Bodhi) to sign for
the A Gathering of the Tribes in the Ozarks. As a war tool it has
better uses then just mearly signing one to piss of the pro freedom
folks and cheat them out of their rights. Let's not forget them true
traitors of the America's, the ficticiuos, none excistent, no see em'
NRMT and their team of fence sitting lackies who refuse to admit they
want control of the precious.
m***@hotmail.com
2005-12-30 21:10:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on.
I've noticed that too. I've noticed that even though you've been caught
spinning bull and out right lieing I have never once seen you admit you
were wrong. In this case connie made it absolutely clear she was
talking about the nationals.

connie posted
"I know you don't go to Nationals."

"I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually"

"I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating
them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as
per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring
to
Nationals (as this post is about)."

"up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings."

"annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering."

"Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart."




Would you care to recant? Did you misunderstand or were you purposely
spinning to launch an attack? Now I don't agree with connie's
characterization of agott as, "gatherings of folks who can't bear of
thought of being more than a few feet from their beloved cold alcoholic
beverages." My guess is that statement pissed you off and that's why
you chose to spin what Connie was clearly saying about the National
gathering. Again, care to recant and admit you were mistaken?

You really don't understand freedom do you? Freedom includes the right
of people to do stuff you think is unwise, like going to permitted
gatherings. Your so called "pro freedom folks" have so little repect
for it. What I always find so amusing about the rabid anti permit group
is that they seem to have no connention to the concept of honesty, as
if winning is all that matters. If a lie suits their purpose they'll
use the lie. I have caught you red handed lieing a couple of times on
this group and you have never admitted it. Not even to say "whoops, I
forgot." It seems so clear but so many don't seem to get it. If you are
scrupulously honest you will earn people's respect, if you spin or lie,
someone will notice it, point it out, and you will lose credibilty and
respect.
Post by Lookingheart
I have noticed that some of the permit
folks
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Post by Lookingheart
generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license.
This is a crock of bull. I know of no one who doesn't agree with the
fact that liberty is not license. Most people have moved way beyond
that point into the rhelm of how does a person deal with an oppressive
government when the courts collude with it. I support your way of
dealing with it. But it isn't the only way. So please don't give me
this "pro freedom folks" crap when you attack those who chose a
different path. It appears to me the only freedom you believe in is the
freedom to do it your way.
Post by Lookingheart
I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
Now exactly who is that, who blindly accepts the government tit and
pretends all is well? Certainly not Connie. I've seen numerous posts
about her political activism as well as her veiws on the government.
While I don't agree with all her veiws she clearly is concerned about
what is bad about the government, not blindly accepting it, but trying
to change it. What exactly are you doing to change the bad that gives
you the right to call into question other's path and integrity? So
again, who exactly is it here that you have decided is blindly
accepting the government's tit? Name them, back up your claim, but
don't be surprised if people find this insulting and insult you in
return.
Post by Lookingheart
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
spiritrising
2005-12-30 21:23:51 UTC
Permalink
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up that they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance. beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need to read
better. spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
m***@hotmail.com
2005-12-30 22:32:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by spiritrising
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up that they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance.
Yes she immediately clarified and in all subsequent posts used the
words nat'l gathering, which lookingheart choose to ignore so he could
spin her words as a lie. It certainly appears to be a deliberate act, a
deliberate lie of omission for the purpose of slandering someone. Are
you claiming she only clarified to protect herself? Do you claim she
lacks integrity in that manner? I have never caught her in a lie so
while I sometimes disagree with her veiws I respect her integrity.
Post by spiritrising
beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need to read
better. spiritrising
The problem is I read too well and remember what I read. Connie has
posted time and time again that the only gathering she considers is the
national gathering. She doesn't consider agott a real gathering. I
disagree but I understand her and that's why it was obvious what she
was refering to. Perhaps you don't recall the many times she posted it

connie posted may 7
Now, this was not a national, correct? It gets confusing to me the
multiple
ways "gathering" is used. To me - in my mind - admittedly an old fart
-
there's only one gathering, the national. What I mean is that when I
use
the word, that's what I'm referring to. I understand there are
regionals
and internationals, etc. But in my mind and heart, the words goes to
only
one.


This is another reason I believed her clarification was a reflection of
her honest intent. So I ask you again, do you believe her clarification
was an obsfucation meant to protect herself when she got caught or do
you believe it was honest? Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
spiritrising
2005-12-30 22:48:18 UTC
Permalink
i wonder why connie evens posts she could just let you do it for her. lol
now lookingheart may have been responding to one of the posts before she
clarified it. but whats it to you the agenda is clearn and now lets see you
spoke of may 7, am i supposed to have a perfect memory ? i can't even
remember what i had for breakfast, wife says baked cinimum rolls, but oh
well. you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time. thanks spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up that they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance.
Yes she immediately clarified and in all subsequent posts used the
words nat'l gathering, which lookingheart choose to ignore so he could
spin her words as a lie. It certainly appears to be a deliberate act, a
deliberate lie of omission for the purpose of slandering someone. Are
you claiming she only clarified to protect herself? Do you claim she
lacks integrity in that manner? I have never caught her in a lie so
while I sometimes disagree with her veiws I respect her integrity.
Post by spiritrising
beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need to read
better. spiritrising
The problem is I read too well and remember what I read. Connie has
posted time and time again that the only gathering she considers is the
national gathering. She doesn't consider agott a real gathering. I
disagree but I understand her and that's why it was obvious what she
was refering to. Perhaps you don't recall the many times she posted it
connie posted may 7
Now, this was not a national, correct? It gets confusing to me the
multiple
ways "gathering" is used. To me - in my mind - admittedly an old fart
-
there's only one gathering, the national. What I mean is that when I
use
the word, that's what I'm referring to. I understand there are
regionals
and internationals, etc. But in my mind and heart, the words goes to
only
one.
This is another reason I believed her clarification was a reflection of
her honest intent. So I ask you again, do you believe her clarification
was an obsfucation meant to protect herself when she got caught or do
you believe it was honest? Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
hj st
2005-12-30 23:11:20 UTC
Permalink
"you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time. thanks spiritrising "

LEMMING! hahaha.

i need to get away from this computer,..

HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL !!!


peace,
quiet,..
spiritrising
2005-12-30 23:17:53 UTC
Permalink
more like happy birthday, i am getting younger and i can feel it, mama.
spiritrising
Post by hj st
"you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time. thanks spiritrising "
LEMMING! hahaha.
i need to get away from this computer,..
HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL !!!
peace,
quiet,..
m***@hotmail.com
2005-12-30 23:56:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by spiritrising
i wonder why connie evens posts she could just let you do it for her. lol
now lookingheart may have been responding to one of the posts before she
clarified it.
this is the post lookingheart was replying to

connie posted
Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart. He just steadily increases his attacks on it as the time

nears, ramping up to shrill fever pitch in the weeks before.


So clearly he knew she was refering to the National gathering. I mean
if one assumes he read the post he was responding to. Obviously you
cannot answer any of my questions, especially these questions.

Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
but whats it to you the agenda is clearn
Yes it should be clear but you don't get it do you? The agenda is tell
the truth as best as you can see it.
Post by spiritrising
and now lets see you
spoke of may 7, am i supposed to have a perfect memory ? i can't even
remember what i had for breakfast, wife says baked cinimum rolls, but oh
well. you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time.
Well yes and it would help you free up time so you can talk for
lookingheart. Explain the difference between your defense of
lookingheart and mine of connie? Who was it who was talking for who?
Post by spiritrising
thanks spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up that they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance.
Yes she immediately clarified and in all subsequent posts used the
words nat'l gathering, which lookingheart choose to ignore so he could
spin her words as a lie. It certainly appears to be a deliberate act, a
deliberate lie of omission for the purpose of slandering someone. Are
you claiming she only clarified to protect herself? Do you claim she
lacks integrity in that manner? I have never caught her in a lie so
while I sometimes disagree with her veiws I respect her integrity.
Post by spiritrising
beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need to read
better. spiritrising
The problem is I read too well and remember what I read. Connie has
posted time and time again that the only gathering she considers is the
national gathering. She doesn't consider agott a real gathering. I
disagree but I understand her and that's why it was obvious what she
was refering to. Perhaps you don't recall the many times she posted it
connie posted may 7
Now, this was not a national, correct? It gets confusing to me the
multiple
ways "gathering" is used. To me - in my mind - admittedly an old fart
-
there's only one gathering, the national. What I mean is that when I
use
the word, that's what I'm referring to. I understand there are
regionals
and internationals, etc. But in my mind and heart, the words goes to
only
one.
This is another reason I believed her clarification was a reflection of
her honest intent. So I ask you again, do you believe her clarification
was an obsfucation meant to protect herself when she got caught or do
you believe it was honest? Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
spiritrising
2005-12-31 00:28:48 UTC
Permalink
really? and you know this how? he didn't put the persons post under his, so
again you don't have a clue, now if you allow him to speak for himself, and
he says it, then maybe i can beleive it, but show me his personal response
with the subpost under his... if i use the order they came into my reader
its a different post. lol try again spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
i wonder why connie evens posts she could just let you do it for her.
lol
now lookingheart may have been responding to one of the posts before she
clarified it.
this is the post lookingheart was replying to
connie posted
Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as is
Lookingheart. He just steadily increases his attacks on it as the time
nears, ramping up to shrill fever pitch in the weeks before.
So clearly he knew she was refering to the National gathering. I mean
if one assumes he read the post he was responding to. Obviously you
cannot answer any of my questions, especially these questions.
Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
but whats it to you the agenda is clearn
Yes it should be clear but you don't get it do you? The agenda is tell
the truth as best as you can see it.
Post by spiritrising
and now lets see you
spoke of may 7, am i supposed to have a perfect memory ? i can't even
remember what i had for breakfast, wife says baked cinimum rolls, but oh
well. you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time.
Well yes and it would help you free up time so you can talk for
lookingheart. Explain the difference between your defense of
lookingheart and mine of connie? Who was it who was talking for who?
Post by spiritrising
thanks spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up that they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance.
Yes she immediately clarified and in all subsequent posts used the
words nat'l gathering, which lookingheart choose to ignore so he could
spin her words as a lie. It certainly appears to be a deliberate act, a
deliberate lie of omission for the purpose of slandering someone. Are
you claiming she only clarified to protect herself? Do you claim she
lacks integrity in that manner? I have never caught her in a lie so
while I sometimes disagree with her veiws I respect her integrity.
Post by spiritrising
beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need
to
read
better. spiritrising
The problem is I read too well and remember what I read. Connie has
posted time and time again that the only gathering she considers is the
national gathering. She doesn't consider agott a real gathering. I
disagree but I understand her and that's why it was obvious what she
was refering to. Perhaps you don't recall the many times she posted it
connie posted may 7
Now, this was not a national, correct? It gets confusing to me the
multiple
ways "gathering" is used. To me - in my mind - admittedly an old fart
-
there's only one gathering, the national. What I mean is that when I
use
the word, that's what I'm referring to. I understand there are
regionals
and internationals, etc. But in my mind and heart, the words goes to
only
one.
This is another reason I believed her clarification was a reflection of
her honest intent. So I ask you again, do you believe her clarification
was an obsfucation meant to protect herself when she got caught or do
you believe it was honest? Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
m***@hotmail.com
2005-12-31 02:27:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by spiritrising
really? and you know this how?
Go to the top of the google page and you will find a link "view as a
tree" Click it. This will reorder the messages not by date but by posts
and responses. On the side of the page there will be box with all the
poster's names in the form of a response "tree" Connie's post is
presently no. 53 and lookingheart's no.54. Those numbers could change
though if new posts are inserted into the tree.
Post by spiritrising
he didn't put the persons post under his, so
again you don't have a clue,
If you follow the instructions I've outlined you will see that not only
do I have a clue but the information is available and unmistakeably
clear. I'm very careful to obtain evidence to back up my claims. It can
easily be verified.
Post by spiritrising
now if you allow him to speak for himself,
Me? I can neither allow or disallow. Neither can I allow or disallow
you from defending him. Free world, free will.
Post by spiritrising
and
he says it, then maybe i can beleive it, but show me his personal response
with the subpost under his... if i use the order they came into my reader
its a different post.
That's because you most likely have your options set up to order
messages by the time they are posted rather than as a post/reply tree.
If you are willing to learn something new and you reset your options
you will see that I am correct, the info is available, you simply
didn't know how to find it. No shame in that there are so many things I
don't know. I can't even begin to participate in the computer related
threads, its greek to me. The shame is if you refused to admit error
and placed winning above the truth.
Post by spiritrising
lol try again spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
i wonder why connie evens posts she could just let you do it for her.
lol
now lookingheart may have been responding to one of the posts before she
clarified it.
this is the post lookingheart was replying to
connie posted
Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as is
Lookingheart. He just steadily increases his attacks on it as the time
nears, ramping up to shrill fever pitch in the weeks before.
So clearly he knew she was refering to the National gathering. I mean
if one assumes he read the post he was responding to. Obviously you
cannot answer any of my questions, especially these questions.
Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
but whats it to you the agenda is clearn
Yes it should be clear but you don't get it do you? The agenda is tell
the truth as best as you can see it.
Post by spiritrising
and now lets see you
spoke of may 7, am i supposed to have a perfect memory ? i can't even
remember what i had for breakfast, wife says baked cinimum rolls, but oh
well. you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time.
Well yes and it would help you free up time so you can talk for
lookingheart. Explain the difference between your defense of
lookingheart and mine of connie? Who was it who was talking for who?
Post by spiritrising
thanks spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up that they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance.
Yes she immediately clarified and in all subsequent posts used the
words nat'l gathering, which lookingheart choose to ignore so he could
spin her words as a lie. It certainly appears to be a deliberate act, a
deliberate lie of omission for the purpose of slandering someone. Are
you claiming she only clarified to protect herself? Do you claim she
lacks integrity in that manner? I have never caught her in a lie so
while I sometimes disagree with her veiws I respect her integrity.
Post by spiritrising
beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need
to
read
better. spiritrising
The problem is I read too well and remember what I read. Connie has
posted time and time again that the only gathering she considers is the
national gathering. She doesn't consider agott a real gathering. I
disagree but I understand her and that's why it was obvious what she
was refering to. Perhaps you don't recall the many times she posted it
connie posted may 7
Now, this was not a national, correct? It gets confusing to me the
multiple
ways "gathering" is used. To me - in my mind - admittedly an old fart
-
there's only one gathering, the national. What I mean is that when I
use
the word, that's what I'm referring to. I understand there are
regionals
and internationals, etc. But in my mind and heart, the words goes to
only
one.
This is another reason I believed her clarification was a reflection of
her honest intent. So I ask you again, do you believe her clarification
was an obsfucation meant to protect herself when she got caught or do
you believe it was honest? Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that make us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is no "we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering you are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it or not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping with the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people at a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these folks made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
Lookingheart
2005-12-31 03:08:36 UTC
Permalink
And????? I wrote on the 28th? about her post on the 27th? I dont follow
that change the date angle, all I know is she said those things, they
are untrue and I pointed that fact out as liable. The lie named so
because of the back handed nature of the post and other abstract dialog
intended as a tort. If the tort is not obvious to you in the
aforementioned post then possibly you may be better able to decern them
in subsiquent posts under same thread. Simple. Now, she recanted the
statement in part. The tort remains and the fact that those individuals
do indeed attend gatherings has not been clarified as a misinformed
ejaculation of unsubstantiated facts that were not well documented by
the writer.

There are other transgressions as well, no apologies or healing offered
and there was a time in Rainbow when names where sacred and people
didnt talk so much about family in some public circles. That love is
still alive and respected in more intimate circles well removed from
the everyday banter of disengaged lookenpeepers. ever notice how
scatching a sore will keep it from healing and pretty soon you have
rough hide or even worse a scar .................?????
o***@hotmail.com
2005-12-31 03:17:10 UTC
Permalink
Spare the schtick, LH... it's all too obvious what your game is.. same
for your co-conspirators who go into a frenzy defending you. Amazing.
Post by Lookingheart
And????? I wrote on the 28th? about her post on the 27th? I dont follow
that change the date angle, all I know is she said those things, they
are untrue and I pointed that fact out as liable. The lie named so
because of the back handed nature of the post and other abstract dialog
intended as a tort. If the tort is not obvious to you in the
aforementioned post then possibly you may be better able to decern them
in subsiquent posts under same thread. Simple. Now, she recanted the
statement in part. The tort remains and the fact that those individuals
do indeed attend gatherings has not been clarified as a misinformed
ejaculation of unsubstantiated facts that were not well documented by
the writer.
There are other transgressions as well, no apologies or healing offered
and there was a time in Rainbow when names where sacred and people
didnt talk so much about family in some public circles. That love is
still alive and respected in more intimate circles well removed from
the everyday banter of disengaged lookenpeepers. ever notice how
scatching a sore will keep it from healing and pretty soon you have
rough hide or even worse a scar .................?????
Lookingheart
2005-12-31 03:46:15 UTC
Permalink
RRRRRRRRRR, it's AGR's favorite fun time anonymous troll boy back once
again to harang his online nimissssss Lookingheart.
I love you troll boy! Have a Happy New Year! and get momma her
slippers, she looks cool there in the corner of the basement.
spiritrising
2005-12-31 14:18:46 UTC
Permalink
why would i want to go to a google page when i have a reader? it could be
just as different than the two i have now which in turn has the post listed
two different ways, so like i said until he says it is the one he posted to,
nothing will convince me. like missourians say showme . spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
really? and you know this how?
Go to the top of the google page and you will find a link "view as a
tree" Click it. This will reorder the messages not by date but by posts
and responses. On the side of the page there will be box with all the
poster's names in the form of a response "tree" Connie's post is
presently no. 53 and lookingheart's no.54. Those numbers could change
though if new posts are inserted into the tree.
Post by spiritrising
he didn't put the persons post under his, so
again you don't have a clue,
If you follow the instructions I've outlined you will see that not only
do I have a clue but the information is available and unmistakeably
clear. I'm very careful to obtain evidence to back up my claims. It can
easily be verified.
Post by spiritrising
now if you allow him to speak for himself,
Me? I can neither allow or disallow. Neither can I allow or disallow
you from defending him. Free world, free will.
Post by spiritrising
and
he says it, then maybe i can beleive it, but show me his personal response
with the subpost under his... if i use the order they came into my reader
its a different post.
That's because you most likely have your options set up to order
messages by the time they are posted rather than as a post/reply tree.
If you are willing to learn something new and you reset your options
you will see that I am correct, the info is available, you simply
didn't know how to find it. No shame in that there are so many things I
don't know. I can't even begin to participate in the computer related
threads, its greek to me. The shame is if you refused to admit error
and placed winning above the truth.
Post by spiritrising
lol try again spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
i wonder why connie evens posts she could just let you do it for her.
lol
now lookingheart may have been responding to one of the posts before she
clarified it.
this is the post lookingheart was replying to
connie posted
Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as is
Lookingheart. He just steadily increases his attacks on it as the time
nears, ramping up to shrill fever pitch in the weeks before.
So clearly he knew she was refering to the National gathering. I mean
if one assumes he read the post he was responding to. Obviously you
cannot answer any of my questions, especially these questions.
Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
but whats it to you the agenda is clearn
Yes it should be clear but you don't get it do you? The agenda is tell
the truth as best as you can see it.
Post by spiritrising
and now lets see you
spoke of may 7, am i supposed to have a perfect memory ? i can't even
remember what i had for breakfast, wife says baked cinimum rolls, but oh
well. you just go ahead and talk for others and while your at it do a few
for me, it will save me the time.
Well yes and it would help you free up time so you can talk for
lookingheart. Explain the difference between your defense of
lookingheart and mine of connie? Who was it who was talking for who?
Post by spiritrising
thanks spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by spiritrising
not till towards the end of the thread did she start talking about national
gatherings and the people not attending, after it was brought up
that
they
do attend gatherings then she finally clarified he stance.
Yes she immediately clarified and in all subsequent posts used the
words nat'l gathering, which lookingheart choose to ignore so he could
spin her words as a lie. It certainly appears to be a deliberate act, a
deliberate lie of omission for the purpose of slandering someone. Are
you claiming she only clarified to protect herself? Do you claim she
lacks integrity in that manner? I have never caught her in a lie so
while I sometimes disagree with her veiws I respect her integrity.
Post by spiritrising
beofre that it
was just gatherings, and the fact that some slam nationals. you need
to
read
better. spiritrising
The problem is I read too well and remember what I read. Connie has
posted time and time again that the only gathering she considers is the
national gathering. She doesn't consider agott a real gathering. I
disagree but I understand her and that's why it was obvious what she
was refering to. Perhaps you don't recall the many times she posted it
connie posted may 7
Now, this was not a national, correct? It gets confusing to me the
multiple
ways "gathering" is used. To me - in my mind - admittedly an old fart
-
there's only one gathering, the national. What I mean is that when I
use
the word, that's what I'm referring to. I understand there are
regionals
and internationals, etc. But in my mind and heart, the words goes to
only
one.
This is another reason I believed her clarification was a reflection of
her honest intent. So I ask you again, do you believe her clarification
was an obsfucation meant to protect herself when she got caught or do
you believe it was honest? Can you explain why lookingheart decided to
leave that clarification out for any other reason than to spin her
words more appropiately for an attack? Can you explain to me why this
shouldn't be considered a lie of omission?
Post by spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
well... you are absolutley right dozer.... The one thing that
make
us
unique is the one thing tht fucks us up... and that is there is
no
"we"
or "us" everyone in rainbow likes to believe they are just
individuals... but let's face it... when you go to a gathering
you
are
part of a happening.. you are the "we" and the "us" and like it
or
not
these reg's are law.
Color of law.
Post by RiverMan
And we have to follow the letter of the law or
take the consequenses. Until enough people stand up, shoulder to
shoulder, and say we have had enough... then this kind of oppression
will continue.
When you stand on land that is under a Permit you are sleeping
with
the
enemy. You cannot accept the Permit and regect it at the same time.
Post by RiverMan
I, for one, am suprised that these reg's ever passed the supreme court.
I do agree with the need for some sort of goverment overseeing about
how our natural resources are being used... but to hassle people
at
a
gathering simply for attending is bullshit....
Indeed. Rights are not privileges, and conspiring against rights is
felonious bullshit, even when the (quasi) Judicial Supreme Court
Justices are Parties......
http://www.sanityclause.com/Whichsupremecourtizzat.html
Sanity RE
Sanity RE
Post by RiverMan
-=] River [=-
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Sanity RE
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
Post by Sanity RE
Rob is also in the hip pocket of the NRMT and the USFS...
Keep in mind that the "NRMT" is a fictitious group some of these
folks
made
up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings.
Lookingheart
2005-12-31 02:01:42 UTC
Permalink
Heya Thistle, to answer your question ...... she said "doesn't attend
Gatherings." 10th & 11th post of this very thread. I know that to be a
lie and as far as her retort that she intended Nationals then whatever,
it was after the fact much the way this conversation is and the truth
remains that those individuals do indeed attend gatherings, she has
still failed to recant the fact that those individuals do attend
gatherings. You call it an attack when I say she is lying about these
folks. I say your attacking me merely because you have deemed that I
attacked her when it clearly wasn't intended as an attack. Connie does
not likely know the people she is talking about nor does she attend any
gatherings in these woods that I aware of. For her to say such wrongful
words with intent to cause harm is the wrong. The Rainbow Gatherings
here nor the AGOTT are havens for folks to stay close to their cold
alcoholic beverages so ............... Her intent appears to be to
spread lies about people, places and events that she knows nothing
about. Additionally she re-enforces those actions by attempting to
denounce sound conversation as articulated by Sanity Clause as if to be
on attack and to what purpose. You figure it out Thistle. You profess
to be fair, keen eyed and well thought out yet when you post to me or
about me you occasionally appear to be some what on attack or at least
looking for an opportunity to pounce. I could be wrong but I do get
that vibe. As for any lies you say you have caught me in, post them
here and lets have a look see at the proof too otherwise I denounce
your accusations. Lets expose these lies here in the beautiful
nurturing light of AGR so that some healing and grace can come about.
As for "One Rainbow Only", I reject that and look forward to many sky's
of Rainbow. The International Gatherings and others are just as valid
as any other heartsong and it really isn't for us to decide who's
circle is real, learn to share. If you want to get to know me or the
other folks here in the Ozarks then come visit, it's not like we don't
send out the invite. If you think there is something going on in the
background then come to counsel, scouting, seed camp, clean-up,
potlucks, drum circles and socials and find out personally, don't let
negative people and their deceitful words keep you from meeting some
really fine folks.

Wishing you a Happy New Year and the best of clarity always.

LH
..................................................................................................
Get tribal, for survival!
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 02:48:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on.
I've noticed that too. I've noticed that even though you've been caught
spinning bull and out right lieing I have never once seen you admit you
were wrong. In this case connie made it absolutely clear she was
talking about the nationals.
connie posted
"I know you don't go to Nationals."
I've never thought of the Annual Gathering of the Tribes of Hue--manity
as having the name "Nationals." The Gatherings I went to had folks
from all over the Globe not merely this here nation.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually"
I stay away from Plunker's Permit Party, by whatever name, because of
the group liability clause in the Permit Contract:
http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."
I am not attacking the Nationals, just warning people what's up. If
having read my warning, or not, people choose to go to the party in the
woods? I have no say in the matter.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating
them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as
per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring
to
Nationals (as this post is about)."
"up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings."
"annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering."
"Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart."
Would you care to recant? Did you misunderstand or were you purposely
spinning to launch an attack? Now I don't agree with connie's
characterization of agott as, "gatherings of folks who can't bear of
thought of being more than a few feet from their beloved cold alcoholic
beverages." My guess is that statement pissed you off and that's why
you chose to spin what Connie was clearly saying about the National
gathering. Again, care to recant and admit you were mistaken?
You really don't understand freedom do you? Freedom includes the right
of people to do stuff you think is unwise, like going to permitted
gatherings. Your so called "pro freedom folks" have so little repect
for it. What I always find so amusing about the rabid anti permit group
is that they seem to have no connention to the concept of honesty, as
if winning is all that matters. If a lie suits their purpose they'll
use the lie. I have caught you red handed lieing a couple of times on
this group and you have never admitted it. Not even to say "whoops, I
forgot." It seems so clear but so many don't seem to get it. If you are
scrupulously honest you will earn people's respect, if you spin or lie,
someone will notice it, point it out, and you will lose credibilty and
respect.
Post by Lookingheart
I have noticed that some of the permit
folks
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander. By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders). Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license.
This is a crock of bull. I know of no one who doesn't agree with the
fact that liberty is not license. Most people have moved way beyond
that point into the rhelm of how does a person deal with an oppressive
government when the courts collude with it. I support your way of
dealing with it. But it isn't the only way.
The options I know are: a) go to the Permt event and be subject
thereto; and , b) stay away. You say there are other paths? I'm from
Missouri, "show me."
Post by m***@hotmail.com
So please don't give me
this "pro freedom folks" crap when you attack those who chose a
different path. It appears to me the only freedom you believe in is the
freedom to do it your way.
Post by Lookingheart
I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
Now exactly who is that, who blindly accepts the government tit and
pretends all is well? Certainly not Connie. I've seen numerous posts
about her political activism as well as her veiws on the government.
While I don't agree with all her veiws she clearly is concerned about
what is bad about the government, not blindly accepting it, but trying
to change it. What exactly are you doing to change the bad that gives
you the right to call into question other's path and integrity? So
again, who exactly is it here that you have decided is blindly
accepting the government's tit? Name them, back up your claim, but
don't be surprised if people find this insulting and insult you in
return.
Post by Lookingheart
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
Pro Golfer's Association Tour? The PGA iz goin' hillbilly? WOW! %~]

Lovin' Light,
Sanity
Lookingheart
2005-12-31 03:38:57 UTC
Permalink
Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour 2006
Ozark Back Woods /// Ozarks National Forest Greenways
Tour start March 17th - 20th, 2006 and will be teeing off at the Ozark
Rainbow Family Spring Counsel in North Central Missouri at Fiery Forks
State Park. All participants should come somewhat self sufficient and
willing to share in the Spirit of the PGA Tour in as much as possible.
The 2006 Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour of the Ozarks National Forest Greenways
will consist of several courses as consensed by an open counsel of
participants. These courses along with touring dates will be announced
at each Tour Rally near the end of rounds. Karma Points as well as
participation is of an individual nature as are choices of apparel and
instruments of play.

The Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour starts next Spring, get your cubs ready,
Four!


This PGA Tour brought to you by the Ozark Rainbow Businessmen
Association
(An adhoc non entity without any proper authority to authorize any
authorizations)




















































PGA = People Gathering Autonomously
spiritrising
2005-12-31 14:26:13 UTC
Permalink
anyone want to know where it is? check this=
http://www.stateparks.com/fiery_fork.html
Post by Lookingheart
Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour 2006
Ozark Back Woods /// Ozarks National Forest Greenways
Tour start March 17th - 20th, 2006 and will be teeing off at the Ozark
Rainbow Family Spring Counsel in North Central Missouri at Fiery Forks
State Park. All participants should come somewhat self sufficient and
willing to share in the Spirit of the PGA Tour in as much as possible.
The 2006 Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour of the Ozarks National Forest Greenways
will consist of several courses as consensed by an open counsel of
participants. These courses along with touring dates will be announced
at each Tour Rally near the end of rounds. Karma Points as well as
participation is of an individual nature as are choices of apparel and
instruments of play.
The Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour starts next Spring, get your cubs ready,
Four!
This PGA Tour brought to you by the Ozark Rainbow Businessmen
Association
(An adhoc non entity without any proper authority to authorize any
authorizations)
PGA = People Gathering Autonomously
o***@hotmail.com
2005-12-31 16:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Yep. that's the "alternative" gathering's response to the permit -
running away from any chance of needing one, but berating people at the
Annual not fighting for their rights. How about the alternative
gathering having it on FS land with excess of 5000 people and not
signing a permit? Show us how it is done, since all you anti-permit
people are full of ideas. Teach us!

How can you claim to be pro-freedom when you work within the system to
avoid getting ticketed?

Like most, I couldn't care less if it were FS land, state land, or
private. However, as long as you folks are going to trumpet your
rights and berate permits how can you claim any moral ground when you
obviously flee the issue?
Post by spiritrising
anyone want to know where it is? check this=
http://www.stateparks.com/fiery_fork.html
Post by Lookingheart
Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour 2006
Ozark Back Woods /// Ozarks National Forest Greenways
Tour start March 17th - 20th, 2006 and will be teeing off at the Ozark
Rainbow Family Spring Counsel in North Central Missouri at Fiery Forks
State Park. All participants should come somewhat self sufficient and
willing to share in the Spirit of the PGA Tour in as much as possible.
The 2006 Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour of the Ozarks National Forest Greenways
will consist of several courses as consensed by an open counsel of
participants. These courses along with touring dates will be announced
at each Tour Rally near the end of rounds. Karma Points as well as
participation is of an individual nature as are choices of apparel and
instruments of play.
The Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour starts next Spring, get your cubs ready,
Four!
This PGA Tour brought to you by the Ozark Rainbow Businessmen
Association
(An adhoc non entity without any proper authority to authorize any
authorizations)
PGA = People Gathering Autonomously
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 15:52:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lookingheart
Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour 2006
Ozark Back Woods /// Ozarks National Forest Greenways
Tour start March 17th - 20th, 2006 and will be teeing off at the Ozark
Rainbow Family Spring Counsel in North Central Missouri at Fiery Forks
State Park. All participants should come somewhat self sufficient and
willing to share in the Spirit of the PGA Tour in as much as possible.
The 2006 Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour of the Ozarks National Forest Greenways
will consist of several courses as consensed by an open counsel of
participants. These courses along with touring dates will be announced
at each Tour Rally near the end of rounds. Karma Points as well as
participation is of an individual nature as are choices of apparel and
instruments of play.
The Ozark Rainbow PGA Tour starts next Spring, get your cubs ready,
Four!
This PGA Tour brought to you by the Ozark Rainbow Businessmen
Association
(An adhoc non entity without any proper authority to authorize any
authorizations)
I had a hunch yew wuz up t' sump-thing redickldockle. %~4

Sanity RE
Post by Lookingheart
PGA = People Gathering Autonomously
m***@hotmail.com
2005-12-31 07:23:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander.
I'm sorry sanity I don't have a lot of time to waste innumerating the
many ways you are an ass. I thinking about my response to lookingheart
who actuall reads what I write and thinks about it before he respones.
You know a dialog, what am I saying, you'll never comprehend that.
Post by Sanity RE
By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders).
Its so sad, you actually think you have a good vocabulary since you
have a general knowledge of one definition of words. Slander is not
necessarily a false statement, one that is only abusive or malicious
could also be considered slander. do you need me to post that from a
dictionary or can you look it up yourself? And as usual you lie. I have
not admitted to slander. If you had any proof I lied you would post it
rather than attempting to twist my own statements. Clearly I have been
very honest on AGR since you are unable to find a single false
statement and you sure would like to. Thanks for the validation.
Post by Sanity RE
Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
If I was as big an ass as you I would point out that you have just
admitted to not being a cogent thinker since you are obviously
listening. I could also claim you have cast aspersions on spiritrising
and lookingheart's capacity for congent thought since they also are
clearly listening and posting to me, more than once. But that would be
as rediculous as your claim that I have admitted I lied. What a poor
pathetic bitter old fool you are.
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 11:16:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander.
I'm sorry sanity I don't have a lot of time to waste innumerating the
many ways you are an ass. I thinking about my response to lookingheart
who actuall reads what I write and thinks about it before he respones.
You know a dialog, what am I saying, you'll never comprehend that.
Post by Sanity RE
By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders).
Its so sad, you actually think you have a good vocabulary since you
have a general knowledge of one definition of words. Slander is not
necessarily a false statement, one that is only abusive or malicious
could also be considered slander.
LOL! So you are here to be "abusive or malicious" towards people?
Incredible, and sad.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
do you need me to post that from a
dictionary or can you look it up yourself? And as usual you lie. I have
not admitted to slander.
Nov 15, 9:37 pm Thistle posted: "You have earned all the calumny I
send -" so yes, michael_thistle, you have admitted slander. "Slander"
and "calumny" are synonyms and it is a barefaced lie to deny doing
such. Those were your words, not mine.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
If you had any proof I lied you would post it
rather than attempting to twist my own statements.
No twist. You said yourself that you send slander/calumny Nov 15, 9:37
pm. It's in the Archives, expressly stated by YOU, not me. You are
hoist by your own petard not because of something I said. Saying: "I
have not admitted to slander." is a lie.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Clearly I have been
very honest on AGR since you are unable to find a single false
statement and you sure would like to. Thanks for the validation.
LOL! Saying: "I have not admitted to slander." is a lie. Archives:
Nov 15, 9:37 pm.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Sanity RE
Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
If I was as big an ass as you I would point out that you have just
admitted to not being a cogent thinker since you are obviously
listening.
? Try proof reading.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
I could also claim <snip>
Since you lie and openly admit to slander, who cares what you "could -
claim"?

Sanity RE
spiritrising
2005-12-31 14:29:19 UTC
Permalink
me thinks you are vilify, and asperse, that you calumniate things your own
way, which is concidered libel, and defaming, so keep on maligning folks.
spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander.
I'm sorry sanity I don't have a lot of time to waste innumerating the
many ways you are an ass. I thinking about my response to lookingheart
who actuall reads what I write and thinks about it before he respones.
You know a dialog, what am I saying, you'll never comprehend that.
Post by Sanity RE
By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders).
Its so sad, you actually think you have a good vocabulary since you
have a general knowledge of one definition of words. Slander is not
necessarily a false statement, one that is only abusive or malicious
could also be considered slander. do you need me to post that from a
dictionary or can you look it up yourself? And as usual you lie. I have
not admitted to slander. If you had any proof I lied you would post it
rather than attempting to twist my own statements. Clearly I have been
very honest on AGR since you are unable to find a single false
statement and you sure would like to. Thanks for the validation.
Post by Sanity RE
Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
If I was as big an ass as you I would point out that you have just
admitted to not being a cogent thinker since you are obviously
listening. I could also claim you have cast aspersions on spiritrising
and lookingheart's capacity for congent thought since they also are
clearly listening and posting to me, more than once. But that would be
as rediculous as your claim that I have admitted I lied. What a poor
pathetic bitter old fool you are.
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 15:24:47 UTC
Permalink
Uh, amen to that! I think...... %~] LOL!

Sanity RE
Post by spiritrising
me thinks you are vilify, and asperse, that you calumniate things your own
way, which is concidered libel, and defaming, so keep on maligning folks.
spiritrising
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander.
I'm sorry sanity I don't have a lot of time to waste innumerating the
many ways you are an ass. I thinking about my response to lookingheart
who actuall reads what I write and thinks about it before he respones.
You know a dialog, what am I saying, you'll never comprehend that.
Post by Sanity RE
By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders).
Its so sad, you actually think you have a good vocabulary since you
have a general knowledge of one definition of words. Slander is not
necessarily a false statement, one that is only abusive or malicious
could also be considered slander. do you need me to post that from a
dictionary or can you look it up yourself? And as usual you lie. I have
not admitted to slander. If you had any proof I lied you would post it
rather than attempting to twist my own statements. Clearly I have been
very honest on AGR since you are unable to find a single false
statement and you sure would like to. Thanks for the validation.
Post by Sanity RE
Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
If I was as big an ass as you I would point out that you have just
admitted to not being a cogent thinker since you are obviously
listening. I could also claim you have cast aspersions on spiritrising
and lookingheart's capacity for congent thought since they also are
clearly listening and posting to me, more than once. But that would be
as rediculous as your claim that I have admitted I lied. What a poor
pathetic bitter old fool you are.
spiritrising
2005-12-31 14:24:22 UTC
Permalink
there is some of the finest courses over here on the lake. spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on.
I've noticed that too. I've noticed that even though you've been caught
spinning bull and out right lieing I have never once seen you admit you
were wrong. In this case connie made it absolutely clear she was
talking about the nationals.
connie posted
"I know you don't go to Nationals."
I've never thought of the Annual Gathering of the Tribes of Hue--manity
as having the name "Nationals." The Gatherings I went to had folks
from all over the Globe not merely this here nation.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually"
I stay away from Plunker's Permit Party, by whatever name, because of
http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."
I am not attacking the Nationals, just warning people what's up. If
having read my warning, or not, people choose to go to the party in the
woods? I have no say in the matter.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating
them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as
per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring
to
Nationals (as this post is about)."
"up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings."
"annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering."
"Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart."
Would you care to recant? Did you misunderstand or were you purposely
spinning to launch an attack? Now I don't agree with connie's
characterization of agott as, "gatherings of folks who can't bear of
thought of being more than a few feet from their beloved cold alcoholic
beverages." My guess is that statement pissed you off and that's why
you chose to spin what Connie was clearly saying about the National
gathering. Again, care to recant and admit you were mistaken?
You really don't understand freedom do you? Freedom includes the right
of people to do stuff you think is unwise, like going to permitted
gatherings. Your so called "pro freedom folks" have so little repect
for it. What I always find so amusing about the rabid anti permit group
is that they seem to have no connention to the concept of honesty, as
if winning is all that matters. If a lie suits their purpose they'll
use the lie. I have caught you red handed lieing a couple of times on
this group and you have never admitted it. Not even to say "whoops, I
forgot." It seems so clear but so many don't seem to get it. If you are
scrupulously honest you will earn people's respect, if you spin or lie,
someone will notice it, point it out, and you will lose credibilty and
respect.
Post by Lookingheart
I have noticed that some of the permit
folks
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander. By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders). Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license.
This is a crock of bull. I know of no one who doesn't agree with the
fact that liberty is not license. Most people have moved way beyond
that point into the rhelm of how does a person deal with an oppressive
government when the courts collude with it. I support your way of
dealing with it. But it isn't the only way.
The options I know are: a) go to the Permt event and be subject
thereto; and , b) stay away. You say there are other paths? I'm from
Missouri, "show me."
Post by m***@hotmail.com
So please don't give me
this "pro freedom folks" crap when you attack those who chose a
different path. It appears to me the only freedom you believe in is the
freedom to do it your way.
Post by Lookingheart
I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
Now exactly who is that, who blindly accepts the government tit and
pretends all is well? Certainly not Connie. I've seen numerous posts
about her political activism as well as her veiws on the government.
While I don't agree with all her veiws she clearly is concerned about
what is bad about the government, not blindly accepting it, but trying
to change it. What exactly are you doing to change the bad that gives
you the right to call into question other's path and integrity? So
again, who exactly is it here that you have decided is blindly
accepting the government's tit? Name them, back up your claim, but
don't be surprised if people find this insulting and insult you in
return.
Post by Lookingheart
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
Pro Golfer's Association Tour? The PGA iz goin' hillbilly? WOW! %~]
Lovin' Light,
Sanity
Sanity RE
2005-12-31 15:37:50 UTC
Permalink
Neat. I got a mini set of clubs a couple of years ago: spoon, wedge,
niblick, mashee, putter, and a super lightweight nylon golfbag, and I
need the walking as therapy after my stroke last April. Only thing
that completely puzzels me about the game is, after centuries
developing the high tech equipment, you'd think someone would come up
with a more comfortable looking ball-washer.... %~\

Ah spring. I can hardly wait!

Loving LIGHT, (daytime's getting longer already!)
Sanity RE
Post by spiritrising
there is some of the finest courses over here on the lake. spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on.
I've noticed that too. I've noticed that even though you've been caught
spinning bull and out right lieing I have never once seen you admit you
were wrong. In this case connie made it absolutely clear she was
talking about the nationals.
connie posted
"I know you don't go to Nationals."
I've never thought of the Annual Gathering of the Tribes of Hue--manity
as having the name "Nationals." The Gatherings I went to had folks
from all over the Globe not merely this here nation.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually"
I stay away from Plunker's Permit Party, by whatever name, because of
http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."
I am not attacking the Nationals, just warning people what's up. If
having read my warning, or not, people choose to go to the party in the
woods? I have no say in the matter.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating
them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as
per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring
to
Nationals (as this post is about)."
"up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings."
"annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering."
"Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart."
Would you care to recant? Did you misunderstand or were you purposely
spinning to launch an attack? Now I don't agree with connie's
characterization of agott as, "gatherings of folks who can't bear of
thought of being more than a few feet from their beloved cold alcoholic
beverages." My guess is that statement pissed you off and that's why
you chose to spin what Connie was clearly saying about the National
gathering. Again, care to recant and admit you were mistaken?
You really don't understand freedom do you? Freedom includes the right
of people to do stuff you think is unwise, like going to permitted
gatherings. Your so called "pro freedom folks" have so little repect
for it. What I always find so amusing about the rabid anti permit group
is that they seem to have no connention to the concept of honesty, as
if winning is all that matters. If a lie suits their purpose they'll
use the lie. I have caught you red handed lieing a couple of times on
this group and you have never admitted it. Not even to say "whoops, I
forgot." It seems so clear but so many don't seem to get it. If you are
scrupulously honest you will earn people's respect, if you spin or lie,
someone will notice it, point it out, and you will lose credibilty and
respect.
Post by Lookingheart
I have noticed that some of the permit
folks
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander. By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders). Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license.
This is a crock of bull. I know of no one who doesn't agree with the
fact that liberty is not license. Most people have moved way beyond
that point into the rhelm of how does a person deal with an oppressive
government when the courts collude with it. I support your way of
dealing with it. But it isn't the only way.
The options I know are: a) go to the Permt event and be subject
thereto; and , b) stay away. You say there are other paths? I'm from
Missouri, "show me."
Post by m***@hotmail.com
So please don't give me
this "pro freedom folks" crap when you attack those who chose a
different path. It appears to me the only freedom you believe in is the
freedom to do it your way.
Post by Lookingheart
I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
Now exactly who is that, who blindly accepts the government tit and
pretends all is well? Certainly not Connie. I've seen numerous posts
about her political activism as well as her veiws on the government.
While I don't agree with all her veiws she clearly is concerned about
what is bad about the government, not blindly accepting it, but trying
to change it. What exactly are you doing to change the bad that gives
you the right to call into question other's path and integrity? So
again, who exactly is it here that you have decided is blindly
accepting the government's tit? Name them, back up your claim, but
don't be surprised if people find this insulting and insult you in
return.
Post by Lookingheart
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
Pro Golfer's Association Tour? The PGA iz goin' hillbilly? WOW! %~]
Lovin' Light,
Sanity
spiritrising
2005-12-31 16:58:18 UTC
Permalink
i would rather be a spectator, as the only balls i want to handle is the
ones i carry on me all the time. so sipping tea, and eating cakes, will be
my way of entertainment. spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Neat. I got a mini set of clubs a couple of years ago: spoon, wedge,
niblick, mashee, putter, and a super lightweight nylon golfbag, and I
need the walking as therapy after my stroke last April. Only thing
that completely puzzels me about the game is, after centuries
developing the high tech equipment, you'd think someone would come up
with a more comfortable looking ball-washer.... %~\
Ah spring. I can hardly wait!
Loving LIGHT, (daytime's getting longer already!)
Sanity RE
Post by spiritrising
there is some of the finest courses over here on the lake.
spiritrising
Post by Sanity RE
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on.
I've noticed that too. I've noticed that even though you've been caught
spinning bull and out right lieing I have never once seen you admit you
were wrong. In this case connie made it absolutely clear she was
talking about the nationals.
connie posted
"I know you don't go to Nationals."
I've never thought of the Annual Gathering of the Tribes of Hue--manity
as having the name "Nationals." The Gatherings I went to had folks
from all over the Globe not merely this here nation.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually"
I stay away from Plunker's Permit Party, by whatever name, because of
http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/permits/forms.htm "9. The holder shall
be liable for any injury, loss, damage, including fire suppression
costs and environmental harm or injury to natural resources, that
arises in connection with the use and occupancy authorized by this
permit."
I am not attacking the Nationals, just warning people what's up. If
having read my warning, or not, people choose to go to the party in the
woods? I have no say in the matter.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
"I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating
them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as
per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring
to
Nationals (as this post is about)."
"up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings."
"annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering."
"Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart."
Would you care to recant? Did you misunderstand or were you purposely
spinning to launch an attack? Now I don't agree with connie's
characterization of agott as, "gatherings of folks who can't bear of
thought of being more than a few feet from their beloved cold alcoholic
beverages." My guess is that statement pissed you off and that's why
you chose to spin what Connie was clearly saying about the National
gathering. Again, care to recant and admit you were mistaken?
You really don't understand freedom do you? Freedom includes the right
of people to do stuff you think is unwise, like going to permitted
gatherings. Your so called "pro freedom folks" have so little repect
for it. What I always find so amusing about the rabid anti permit group
is that they seem to have no connention to the concept of honesty, as
if winning is all that matters. If a lie suits their purpose they'll
use the lie. I have caught you red handed lieing a couple of times on
this group and you have never admitted it. Not even to say "whoops, I
forgot." It seems so clear but so many don't seem to get it. If you are
scrupulously honest you will earn people's respect, if you spin or lie,
someone will notice it, point it out, and you will lose credibilty and
respect.
Post by Lookingheart
I have noticed that some of the permit
folks
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Connie is intellectually dishonest, as are you Thistle. In Thistle's
last sentence (supra) he admits to slander. By his own admission he
lies about people (slanders). Connie said she would address the Permit
Contract, and won't. Since Thistle's version of "total war" amounts to
making a bigger fool of himself (he already admitted above to slander)
and dancing around bombastically in the realm of metaphor, he can knock
himself out, cuz I doubt any of the cogent thinkers hereabouts are
listening.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license.
This is a crock of bull. I know of no one who doesn't agree with the
fact that liberty is not license. Most people have moved way beyond
that point into the rhelm of how does a person deal with an oppressive
government when the courts collude with it. I support your way of
dealing with it. But it isn't the only way.
The options I know are: a) go to the Permt event and be subject
thereto; and , b) stay away. You say there are other paths? I'm from
Missouri, "show me."
Post by m***@hotmail.com
So please don't give me
this "pro freedom folks" crap when you attack those who chose a
different path. It appears to me the only freedom you believe in is the
freedom to do it your way.
Post by Lookingheart
I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
Now exactly who is that, who blindly accepts the government tit and
pretends all is well? Certainly not Connie. I've seen numerous posts
about her political activism as well as her veiws on the government.
While I don't agree with all her veiws she clearly is concerned about
what is bad about the government, not blindly accepting it, but trying
to change it. What exactly are you doing to change the bad that gives
you the right to call into question other's path and integrity? So
again, who exactly is it here that you have decided is blindly
accepting the government's tit? Name them, back up your claim, but
don't be surprised if people find this insulting and insult you in
return.
Post by Lookingheart
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
Pro Golfer's Association Tour? The PGA iz goin' hillbilly? WOW! %~]
Lovin' Light,
Sanity
Lookingheart
2005-12-31 17:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Cool ...... toast, marmalade and tea.



-----------------------------------------------
A Gathering of the Tribes
Vision Counsel March 17th - 20th, 2006
Peaceful Freedom Assembly July 1st ~ 7th, 2006
Central United States in the Ozarks Region
This is not the Annual / National Rainbow Gathering for Peace and
Healing

http://www.welcomehere.org/gathering_of_the_tribes/
spiritrising
2005-12-31 17:43:07 UTC
Permalink
i had in mind marionberry jam and cakes, brought a whole lot back and as
soon as the field is stripped of weeds, maybe getting the vines in for a
harvest this next fall! alot of work tho. spiritrising
Post by Lookingheart
Cool ...... toast, marmalade and tea.
-----------------------------------------------
A Gathering of the Tribes
Vision Counsel March 17th - 20th, 2006
Peaceful Freedom Assembly July 1st ~ 7th, 2006
Central United States in the Ozarks Region
This is not the Annual / National Rainbow Gathering for Peace and
Healing
http://www.welcomehere.org/gathering_of_the_tribes/
Connie
2005-12-31 19:50:21 UTC
Permalink
What he said! These (many of them anyway) have been my thoughts about lh's
post but I couldn't get the brain fog to clear enuf to articulate them.
Post by m***@hotmail.com
Post by Lookingheart
Hey Now!,
Well she may well never recant nor will she likely get around to
addressing the permit issues, it is hard for some folks to admit they
were wrong and just move on.
I've noticed that too. I've noticed that even though you've been caught
spinning bull and out right lieing I have never once seen you admit you
were wrong. In this case connie made it absolutely clear she was
talking about the nationals.
connie posted
"I know you don't go to Nationals."
"I post a truth (you don't go to Nationals, yet
attack them annually"
"I'm not talking ancient history here; notice I used the present tense.
He
hasn't for the few years I've been on this agr. He was denigrating
them and
anyone who attended them. Oh! In the event you're splitting hairs (as
per
usual, it just occurred to me), I'm sure you're aware I was referring
to
Nationals (as this post is about)."
"up to justify why they don't go to the nat'l Gatherings."
"annual obfuscation on the topic of the nat'l Gathering."
"Marty is another on here who does not attend the nat'l Gatherings, as
is
Lookingheart."
Would you care to recant? Did you misunderstand or were you purposely
spinning to launch an attack? Now I don't agree with connie's
characterization of agott as, "gatherings of folks who can't bear of
thought of being more than a few feet from their beloved cold alcoholic
beverages." My guess is that statement pissed you off and that's why
you chose to spin what Connie was clearly saying about the National
gathering. Again, care to recant and admit you were mistaken?
You really don't understand freedom do you? Freedom includes the right
of people to do stuff you think is unwise, like going to permitted
gatherings. Your so called "pro freedom folks" have so little repect
for it. What I always find so amusing about the rabid anti permit group
is that they seem to have no connention to the concept of honesty, as
if winning is all that matters. If a lie suits their purpose they'll
use the lie. I have caught you red handed lieing a couple of times on
this group and you have never admitted it. Not even to say "whoops, I
forgot." It seems so clear but so many don't seem to get it. If you are
scrupulously honest you will earn people's respect, if you spin or lie,
someone will notice it, point it out, and you will lose credibilty and
respect.
Post by Lookingheart
I have noticed that some of the permit
folks
I have noticed that the 4 or 5 rabid anti permit people here always
fall back on that tired attack. Connie is not pro permit as anyone with
an ninth grade reading level would see. Personally I think you know it
too, though I can't prove it. More spin! But it suits your purpose to
slander people and create this straw man. Than you act aggrieved when
people slander you back.
Post by Lookingheart
generally like to give the Pro-Freedom folks a load of shit on
AGR and never really address the fact that liberty is not license.
This is a crock of bull. I know of no one who doesn't agree with the
fact that liberty is not license. Most people have moved way beyond
that point into the rhelm of how does a person deal with an oppressive
government when the courts collude with it. I support your way of
dealing with it. But it isn't the only way. So please don't give me
this "pro freedom folks" crap when you attack those who chose a
different path. It appears to me the only freedom you believe in is the
freedom to do it your way.
Post by Lookingheart
I
have a feeling that there are some control freaks out there that just
blindly accept the teet of the Government and pretend that all is well
and good.
Now exactly who is that, who blindly accepts the government tit and
pretends all is well? Certainly not Connie. I've seen numerous posts
about her political activism as well as her veiws on the government.
While I don't agree with all her veiws she clearly is concerned about
what is bad about the government, not blindly accepting it, but trying
to change it. What exactly are you doing to change the bad that gives
you the right to call into question other's path and integrity? So
again, who exactly is it here that you have decided is blindly
accepting the government's tit? Name them, back up your claim, but
don't be surprised if people find this insulting and insult you in
return.
Post by Lookingheart
I have always thought your take on the permit was spot on, thanks for
extending your efforts to educate the public however hard that may seem
sometimes. Looking forward to 2006 - Hopefully you can attend the PGA
Tour of the Ozarks next spring, shine!
LH
Connie
2005-12-30 19:23:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sanity RE
Post by Connie
Care to point to them? The so-called "lies concerning three brothers", that
is?
Connie
Dec 27, 8:56 pm show options
Newsgroups: alt.gathering.rainbow
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:56:26 -0700
Local: Tues, Dec 27 2005 8:56 pm
Subject: Re: To hell with the reg's
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
Post by Connie
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Connie
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know of two here in your list that I have personally seen at
gatherings, including myself that makes 3. I assume that Marty also
attends gatherings though I do not know for sure.
Care to recant?
LH
No, thanks. This because again, 1) I was referring to THE National
Gathering, as was the one who started this thread, and 2) in that light,
it's true!
spiritrising
2005-12-30 19:39:37 UTC
Permalink
but only for 2005, i might be on a blockade of the national in 2006 if
people don't get their heads out of their ass. there are a few to work mash
in missouri without my help. and even if i didn't go to the national this
year, doesn't mean i didn't have my finger stuck in the pie, so to speak,
same as the next one. you sure don't know what i do behind the scenes, just
like a whole bunch here don't. i actually know more than i should, and like
carla said a long time ago, i am the most dangerous person to post on this
group.and she may have something there! spiritrising
Post by Connie
Post by Sanity RE
Post by Connie
Care to point to them? The so-called "lies concerning three brothers", that
is?
Connie
Dec 27, 8:56 pm show options
Newsgroups: alt.gathering.rainbow
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:56:26 -0700
Local: Tues, Dec 27 2005 8:56 pm
Subject: Re: To hell with the reg's
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
Post by Connie
Sanity doesn't attend Gatherings, either (permit or no).
Post by Connie
Neither does spiritrising, Marty, and a bunch of others you'll get to
identify as the time draws nearer. You'll know them by their shrill
negativity about the nat'l Gathering ('cause they can't go, for varying
reasons).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know of two here in your list that I have personally seen at
gatherings, including myself that makes 3. I assume that Marty also
attends gatherings though I do not know for sure.
Care to recant?
LH
No, thanks. This because again, 1) I was referring to THE National
Gathering, as was the one who started this thread, and 2) in that light,
it's true!
o***@hotmail.com
2005-12-30 19:52:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by spiritrising
but only for 2005, i might be on a blockade of the national in 2006 if
people don't get their heads out of their ass. there are a few to work mash
in missouri without my help. and even if i didn't go to the national this
year, doesn't mean i didn't have my finger stuck in the pie, so to speak,
same as the next one. you sure don't know what i do behind the scenes, just
like a whole bunch here don't. i actually know more than i should, and like
carla said a long time ago, i am the most dangerous person to post on this
group.and she may have something there! spiritrising
She was probably referring to your fondness of watching white people
thru the scope of your rifle... Frankly, I don't believe you are
dangerous at all. Someone just need to toss you a steak now and then
to stop the barking.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...