View single post by Joe Kelley
 Posted: Tue Jan 2nd, 2018 02:26 am
PM Quote Reply Full Topic
Joe Kelley

 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6409
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=31&v=nqWeqLqR2TM

I am immediately aware of a problem concerning the following statement:

"The Confederation Party was formed for one purpose...to fulfill the failed mandate for the political convention of 1787."

The problem with that statement is the assumption that there was ONE, and only 1, polticial "mandate," or reason, cause, purpose, for assembling reprentatives from all the United States, except Rhode Island, into a "political convention," whereupon the doors were locked, dirty deals were made, threats were perpetrated to extort compliance, and gag orders were enforced upon the attendees.


The problem shows up again with the following statement:

"As short sighted and unrealistic as their thinking was at the time..."

Who is "they," and what evidence is being referenced to arrive at that judgment, conclusion, statement, concerning someone's lack of foresight?

Those against the Constitution of 1787/89 wrote extensively on precisely why the Constitution of 1787/89 was criminal in nature, bound to cause Civil War, division, disunion, conflict, and the destruction of our common, moral, due process of law.

The next problem arises in the assertion that the people known what is or is not a National Government, and then there is a basely assertion that the people want a National Government; which is baseless when the people don't even know (today) what is, or is not, a National Government.

People in the past knew.

George Mason Speech Virginia Ratifying Convention

June 04, 1788

"Mr. Chairman—Whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers, that it is a National Government, and no longer a confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the General Government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes, does of itself, entirely change the confederation of the States into one consolidated Government. This power being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of controul, must carry every thing before it. The very idea of converting what was formerly confederation, to a consolidated Government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the State Governments. Will the people of this great community submit to be individually taxed by two different and distinct powers? Will they suffer themselves to be doubly harrassed? These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the one will destroy the other: The General Government being paramount to, and in every respect more powerful than, the State governments, the latter must give way to the former."

Next is a redefining (counterfeiting) of the term republic. A republic is very simple. The word republic is traced back to Latin, and the intended meaning of the original word (before counterfeiting) was The Public Thing: res (thing) publica (public). If "it" (the public thing) is for one section (division) of the population at the expense of (slaves) another division of the population, then it - by definition - is not a republic. The 1787/89 Constitution Crime Scene is where the Northern Criminal Industrialists (central banking frauds, slave carriers, merchants, war mongers) made a deal with the Southern Criminal Corporate Agriculture Industrialists whose "farms" were crime scenes where innocent African Slaves were consumed for love of power and profits, and who knows what else was done to those innocent victims of African Slavery. So, put on your thinking caps, how is the systematic extortion of productive wealth taken from "tax payers" to fund (subsidize) the enforcement of the African Slave Trade a republic? How is the taking of productive wealth from all Americans except the political class of criminals, so as to enforce the taking of lives from African Slaves a PUBLIC THING? It is precisely the opposite of a PUBLIC THING. It is a private enterprise that is assembled and maintained for criminal purposes, and it operates under the color of law: the exact, precise, opposite of The Public Thing.


The report from the Confederation Party goes stumbling on to define the meaning of a republic and the following statement is offered (as if the definition is in some way useful, official, true, accurate, meaningful, etc.):

"a form of government in which the sovereign power is widely vested in the people directly or trough elected representatives"

The problem there is a complete lack of understanding the nature of the power that is hereby claimed to be "sovereign power," as if everyone (each individual who constituted one part of the Public Thing) knows the intended meaning of the term "sovereign power."

To understand this problem better it may help to realize, to acknowledge, to know, the real purpose of due process of law, known as the law of the land, which is also known as the common law, and a significant part of that process that is due everyone, without exception, (actually THE PUBLIC THING not counterfeit), is Trial by Jury.

Trial by jury is where each individual who stands on earth as part of the Public Thing has the sovereign power to acquit another sovereign individual. The whole country (the public thing) is represented in each juror (1/12th part of the whole country) and any judgment of guilt, of anything worthy of the use (or abuse) of political power (such as asking someone to pay a fine, or hanging someone by the neck from a tree and a rope), requires unanimous agreement: not one group (a majority, or a minority) taking the power to injure someone in another group.

Then the report from the Confederate Party offers more words intending to define the meaning of a republic with the following statement: "This remains the primary definition of republic in most contexts." What does that mean? If the majority of fools operates with the counterfeited meaning of republic, then that is good enough for criminals running fake government? How many people are fooled by the word magic? How many people share a false meaning for the word citizen? How comforting is it to know that those innocent people are only suffering enhanced interrogation techniques, and therefore there is no cause to worry about someone you love being next in line?

I'm going to stop at: "A true republic form of government is never in conflict with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights." I'm going to eat dinner before continuing with this report on information from The Confederation Party. Leaving first with a note on RIGHTS. Those against the Slave Trading Constitution of 1787/89 worked to get that Slave Trading Constitution amended with The Bill of Rights. The Slave Traders delayed the Amending of The Bill of Rights until after The Judiciary Act of 1789 was in place. People, not forms of associations of people (governments, corporations, church groups, farms, parties, families), either acknowledge "human rights" or they are criminals in fact. Blame the thing (government) and the criminals go on and on with what they do best: under the color of law.