Power Independence Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register
Power Independence > Study Group > Study Group > Unification Writing Project

 Moderated by: Joe Kelley
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
Unification Writing Project  Rate Topic 
 Posted: Thu May 26th, 2016 01:54 pm
  PM Quote Reply
1st Post
Joe Kelley

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6408
John Darash, Gerard Aprea, & Co,

[Specific to National Liberty Alliance, and this first draft is my personal letter to them, in an effort to communicate my individual position relative to my individual understanding of National Liberty Alliance, what those people agree on, and how that can agree with the people in Union States Assembly, at least as far as I know so far]

I don't know if you remember me, it has been more than a year since I was asked to "shut up" in National Liberty Alliance, since it was claimed that my communications were detrimental to the common cause shared by those at National Liberty Alliance.

Example viewpoint offered: http://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/monday-conference-11-3-2014

Returning now to continue the effort to communicate is a specific perceived need to help unify divided factions into one common cause.

The common cause, in a word, is the truth, and therefore the common enemy, again in one word, is falsehood, or deception.

It is vital to know the divisions of falsehood if we share the same common cause. All are victims of falsehood, some are willfully creating it: deceivers. That division inspired such things as the division between mens rea (guilty of mind) and actus reus (guilty in fact), as an individual may be captured into a lie, unknowingly, while they themselves spread it, and that is not the same thing as someone willfully creating, infecting, spreading, with malice aforethought, a specific deception.

If our common, shared, agreeable, bond, binding us, as moral people, is this elusive truth, and if our common, shared, disagreeable, enemy is this anti-truth stuff, then I think we need to understand one very destructive deception at this moment, as you read this attempt at an olive branch message.

Divided groups of people confess their malignancy when people in those divided groups inspire deceptive, aggressive, antagonistic, conflict, internally, and externally, as divided groups of people are then incapable of sharing a common goal: despite the divisions that divide those groups of people.

An example is useful in the effort to convince, so as to avoid confusion as to the true meaning of division among groups of people who manage to share common goals despite having divided, separate, interests.

Protestant and Catholic groups can certainly share a common bond, yet for demonstrable reasons the common enemy of all the people everywhere still manages to infiltrate and inspire destructive conflict between the divided groups of people.

Example 2 is the point at which it might be possible to unify a number of groups of people that include Oath Keepers, Cspoa, Fully Informed Jury Association, John Birch Society, Libertarian Party, National Liberty Alliance, Global Debt Facility (Karen Hudes), Prison Planet (Alex Jones), and many other groups internal to the United States of America (separate, divided, people in individual countries or states), or external to those people in those federated states.

The reason for people in states to unify, while remaining divided, is the reason why this olive branch must ring true with our military brethren.

The Army is divided from the Navy, the Marines, and the Air Force. If they do not cooperate, if instead they find reason to fight each other, then two concurrent, destructive, processes are at work. The combined power of their cooperation is gone, as they are no longer a force that can deter (which is the goal, not to destroy) the enemy, and that force which could have ended the enemies injury to anyone (deterrence) is destroying itself.

There can be no single military force of one, and this understanding must be understood by those who are suffering from the deception working in their minds known by many names such as Nationalism.

The nation, if there is one, is New York. The federation is not New York. The reason for that division is the same reason explained above, as One Nation, under God, may be Protestant, or Quaker, or Amish, or Mormon, or Baptist, or any division that is not antagonistic, under the sun.

What is the reason for the antagonism and is it a good idea, or a bad idea, to accurately account for it, and to defend against it?

With the help of Debra, another (former?) member of National Liberty Alliance, I have been exchanging information, cooperating with, a group of people who constitute the Union States Assembly, and this group offers, in part, a valuable contribution to the common cause of all free people in (what remains of) liberty.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sat May 28th, 2016 03:23 pm
  PM Quote Reply
2nd Post
Joe Kelley

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6408
Again I do not want to trouble anyone with a lot of irrelevant reading off topic, but I think the work I managed to accomplish this morning is on topic.

Along the lines of offering compelling, reasoning, words to any people in any county, or any group, the following is an olive branch type communication, link then quote:


The letter [first draft sent earlier] above is at least encompassing the concept of divided interests, for good reasons, combined with common interests that are also agreed upon, good, reasons.

The example provided by the American, organic, grass-roots, adaptive, natural, defensive, mutual, and voluntary defense association, known, and knowable as a federation of independent free people in states where liberty is the shared goal, serves to illustrate these two points concerning divided interests combined with common, agreed upon, mutual, cooperative interests.

When the enemy invaded one county, in one state, all the other counties in the same state were not invaded, and all the other counties in every other state, in the federation, were also not invaded. All the counties, states, and federations around the world were also not invaded by those invaders invading the one county in America at the time those invaders trampled, criminally, on the free people, in their former liberty, in that local county, at that local time.

All crimes are local in time and place. There are victims in each case of injury done to each victim in each place at each time.

While one county is invaded by military members bound to the interests of one criminal organization, then known as The British, all those cooperating people in those cooperating counties that were not invaded were free, in liberty, to choose to organize, grow stronger in defense, and contemplate military action against the invaders who invaded the one county in the one state in the one federation.

Did any of the people in any of the other counties need an official permission slip from any of the people in the county where the invaders were "rioting in the blood of the innocent" in that county, in order to aid, lend moral support to, and lend material support to those defenders who were, by necessity, either defending their freedom of movement, their freedom of conscience, their freedom to employ the local resources as stewards of earth, to prosper as free people in Liberty, or suffer torture, and murder, or enslavement, by the invading criminals?

1. Defend: a common cause of defensive action caused by the criminal invaders whose crimes were repeated later by the notorious Nazi criminal organization, at which time said crime was determined in trials against the aggressors as the most serious crimes against mankind: aggressive war for the profit, power, of a few, at the expense of everyone, including the criminals themselves.

2. Suffer enslavement, torture, or murder, including the enslavement, torture, and murder of everyone cared for by everyone who cares for other people.

Does anyone need permission from the defenders who are forced into that decision enumerated above, to lend moral, or material support, to aid those defenders? Does anyone need permission when that county is a county in the state where you live, breath, trade, work, love, and grow spiritually? Does anyone need permission when that county is a county in another state that is a part of a voluntary mutual defense association?

The answer is no, and the answer is no because the cause of action causing people to form a voluntary mutual defense association, or federation, is the goal reached for by those actions caused by those aggressors who are perpetrating the most serious of crimes possible that organized (conspiratorial) criminals can perpetrate upon mankind. The goal is to afford each of us the vehicle from which we give ourselves permission to defend each other in time and place.

So the question before you has to do with the points of order discovered, reasoned out, understood, and communicated to you, by the people in Union States Assembly.

The criminals have invaded, the criminals counterfeited the meaning of the word federation, the criminals stole the identity of the United States of America, which was a voluntary, mutual, defense association, caused to be formed by the same type of, if not the same exact, criminals who perpetrated the crimes the caused the actions that formed the federation. The British certainly aided, abetted, lent moral support, and material support to the enemies of free people in Liberty in American during the Revolutionary War, and certainly afterword in various forms.

The criminals stole the identity of the United States of America in the very paperwork that remains on the official books, where said evidence inculpates, beyond reasonable doubt, the conspirators as they perpetrated the crime of usurpation, treason, fraud, malfeasance, disturbing the peace, state captures, federation capture, and much worse.

It is much worse that a few conspirators managing to perpetrate an obvious fraud upon too many otherwise good people at that time, the actions caused by this one crime include, but are not limited to, the criminal financing of the slave trade (debt slave, Irish slavery, African slavery, and more) through the common legal fiction known as central banking.

How can the seriousness of that part of that crime be understood in a context where people today can realize the affect of that crime upon their otherwise free lives in what remains of liberty today?

Someone on a family farm, working the land to improve the land, to make something worth defending, is placed in competition with subsidized slave labor. In other words, and actually part of the flow of paper work, there is power in the form of taxes taken from the family farmers, and that power is used to enslave otherwise free people in liberty, taken by force from Africa, or taken by force from anywhere innocent people are not defended, and then those slaves are forced to work at producing marketable products in competition with the family farmers. The analogy is not simply digging your own grave. The power created by all the family farmers in the former federation is thereby a central power that is a criminal power used to enslave, torture, and murder millions upon millions of innocent people WHILE impoverishing all the family farmers who would otherwise create prosperity for posterity. That same power is the necessary power needed in defense of everyone everywhere. Voluntary mutual defense of all by all is stolen and replaced with the enslavement of all, including the criminals themselves, in abject, blind belief, in falsehood, without question.

Moving on to divided interests and the need to afford each other that local jurisdiction whereby the locals themselves determine the right or wrong of divided interest.

Three examples are now offered as, moral objection to violence by spiritual, or religious, agreement with moral conscience, including capital punishment, and various forms of slavery. There are at least 3 examples of slavery and 2 are without doubt unreasonable, while the third has had many examples where people have offered arguments in favor of this form of slavery.

Begin at the county level, but note that the same reasoning can apply at the family level, the town level, and even on the level of a religious community or church level: smaller numbers of people bond by common interests are the people that then constitute the larger collective groups of people bound by common interests while retaining separate, divided, interest, without conflict.

Can one county in one state in one federation get away with Irish, African, or any type of enslavement of people just because the people in that individual county allow it, subsidize it, and do nothing to aid, lend moral support, and lend material support in defense of the slaves against those who enslave them? Can the criminals get away with that anywhere? Can the criminals get away with that in the original federation as it was working at that time? Can the criminals get away with that after the usurpers counterfeited the meaning of federation and stole the indemnity of the United States of America?

The answer is clearly no in the case of the actual, original, federation, and that answer was provided by the actual records in the first congress of the forming federation known as The United States of America.

If someone claims now that they did get away with it, then someone is arguing from a position whereby they are deceived into thinking that the federation was not usurped in 1787 trough 1789. No one knows what Americans could have done, precisely, in a true federation after 1789 because the true federation was usurped. The point pointed out here is that the true federation is a part of our common interests, a part of our common law, so we can find out what people can do in a true federation now.

Those guilty of those African slavery crimes then, as anyone guilty of those types of crimes now, are subject to the actual law, which is the common law, which remains right there in the Bill of Rights, which amended the fraudulent Constitution of 1787/89, in an attempt to help people see the true law that perpetuates for as long as people care to use it. The true law perpetuates always, people have to see it, and use it, or it is powerless in defense of people, slaves or otherwise.

Another reason for a no answer to the question concerning weather or not the criminals who enslaved people in counties of America got away with it are reasons provided in religious writings, which can be quoted, concerning how crimes of this nature cause injury to the perpetrators as a matter of demonstrable fact. The deception that captures criminals is the deception that they can get away with their crimes; which is demonstrably false. Criminals so able to deceive themselves are able to ignore the true cost of their criminal acts as those criminal acts also injure their souls, their beings, their spirits, their lives.

The point here is to point out that the actual federal government of America is on the record in many instances against the crime known as slavery. Those people in those counties in those states in the actual federation when the federation was still genuine, not counterfeited, were guilty, will always remain guilty, of crimes against innocent people, end of that story. They were not prosecuted, and that is the point. The criminals remove from their victims the power to defend themselves.

Moving next, as examples of divisions among cooperating people in counties, where some people in some counties allow some things, and other people in other counties do not allow those same things, while all these people in all these counties share the common goal of finding the truth so as to defend freedom of people in liberty, moving next, moving to capital punishment.

Place 2 counties next to each other. In one county there is no capital punishment of any kind whatsoever; the people do not tolerate it at all. In the next county the only form of capital punishment is a ban against prosecuting people who murder someone already convicted of murder or any crime that places the guilty outside the sanctuary of natural, and common, law. In one county the murderer of an outlaw, convicted as such, may have to pay a fine for that murder, if the people in that county, employing trial by the country, which is a court of conscience, decide that the murder of an outlaw deserves, at least, a fine paid, and awarded to the family of the murderer. The law of the land is the law found by the people during their employment of the common law, with trial by the country, in courts of conscience. So in one county, in this illustrative example, there is in this way capital punishment as the outlaw is murdered and the murderer pays a fine. In the next county there is no tolerance for murder at all, in any way, and not in any form. So two counties are illustrated in this way for your consideration.

With that situation above the reader, or readers, are asked to consider where the murderers are most likely to find more victims to murder. Are the murderers, who can't stop murdering for their life, going to migrate from one county to the other county? Who is held responsible for a murder in one county when the murderer in the other county was tried, convicted, and escaped that county where that murderer was tried and convicted? If it was your loved ones murdered, who then do you hold responsible, and is it likely that you might be inspired to move to the county where it is not a crime to murder the one who murdered your loved ones? This is too the point if you do not see it yet. In one county no one does anything against murderers, because they are powerless by their own decision, by their own power of will, they do not defend people in any way, perhaps the murderers took over the county government, and there is no longer any common law, and there is no longer any trial by the country, and there is no longer any courts of conscience in that county. In the other county there is a possible fine to be paid by someone who murders a convicted outlaw, whereby the whole country of people in that county, in a court of conscience, have identified an outlaw, and that outlaw refuses a remedy offered to the outlaw, and the outlaw is then running amok in their county, doing whatever the outlaw pleases, whenever the outlaw is pleased to do whatever the outlaw wants to do to innocent people anytime, anywhere. Perhaps the murderer is a member of the government in the neighboring county where he enforces his immunity in that county.

Do not accuse me of having one or the other side in this specific example of divisions that separate people in one county, one lawful area, next to people in another county where the lawful area is divided by this capital punishment problem. Murderers murder, and calling it capital punishment is a method by which people blame other people for murder. If a county does it, or a state does it, then who is to blame? Blaming a legal fiction is a deception on par with blaming a gun for murder, or blaming a pointed stick for murder. My vote that counts on capital punishment will be a vote I make during a trial by the country, and all I get is one 12th part of any punishment of any kind, and I have the power to set anyone free from any punishment of any kind by a lawful government, defensive, power.

Division 3, as examples are offered to help illustrate local differences where people are demonstrably divided in interests, customs, and what they will collectively defend against, or what they will collectively tolerate, accept, agree to, suffer under, etc. Division 3 is called debt slavery. Groups of people agree to pay into a fund and those who run that fund spend, or invest, that power to purchase at their pleasure alone, while those who pay into the fund are themselves shut out from any decision making concerning what is done with the power that they, as individuals produce, acquire, earn, or steal, or otherwise command, own, before they send it to the collective fund.

There are 3 examples of debt slavery that can help illustrate how this works for Americans as in illustration of the facts on the ground. The first case is the debt slavery enforced by The British. That first case was, by a large measure, the cause of the Revolutionary War, which in turn was the cause inspiring the formation of the actual defensive federation that worked as a federation from 1775 to 1789. To a large extent the Revolutionary War was fought in defense or offense concerning debt slavery. The British demanded payments of debt from British debt slaves, the former slaves had enough of it.

The second example of debt slavery in America, and toleration of it, or rejection of it, was exemplified in Massachusetts in 1787. The events that became known as Shays's Rebellion clearly inspired the usurpers, in their own words on the official record. Those usurpers, inspired by Shays's Rebellion, counterfeited the meaning of the term federation, stole the identity of the United States of America, and reestablished debt slavery in the Nation, with National Debt, that the usurpers formed out of the ashes of the former federation. The people in Massachusetts, a free people in liberty, in an independent state joined into a working federation, took up arms against the debt slavery enforced by the criminals who took over, by state capture, the former republic of Massachusetts, turning that former republic into a criminal debt collection agency, and it was the people themselves determining that debt slavery was, in fact, a crime according to them, and they were willing to defend against debt slavery perpetrated by criminals who took over their former republic. That case of debt slavery in the federation serves to illustrate how divisions of people in independent states, sharing common interests, are isolated from, insulated from, the other states when usurpers endeavor to take over all the states, one at a time, and the usurpers are thereby presented with a very serious problem, as the defenders, divided as such, are stronger because they are independent, divided, and sharing a common, defensive, interest: a common understanding of moral duty.

The point here is to point out that the reason why the usurpers had to take over the federation, at that point, was the fact that the people who lost the battle in Massachusetts were able to runaway, flee, and find freedom, liberty, in other republics that had not, at least not yet, been capture by the debt slaving central banker criminals. Divided into separate, independent, republics, each group of people in each state could offer sanctuary, defense, and freedom in liberty, when one of the states is taken over by criminals. Not only were African slaves running from enslavement in criminal states in the original federation, finding sanctuary in states not captured, and run by, criminal slave traders, not only African slaves, but debt slaves were also fighting, losing the battle, and running to sanctuary that existed where rule of law, the common law, was in force to some degree by the people themselves.

The third example of America dealing with debt slavery is called The Whiskey Rebellion. At this point in time the usurpers had already counterfeited the meaning of the word federation, and the usurpers had already stolen the identity of The United States of America, and the usurpers were now in a dictatorial position to demand blind obedience from anyone in any former republic, to be conscripted into a standing army, to then use that army in order to enforce debt slavery in any former republic where, and again, the people decide for themselves that debt slavery is a crime, and people have a duty to defend against said debt slavery crime, and that happened in 1794 in Pennsylvania.

In the former federation it was possible for people in a county to reject, and defend against, debt slavery, African slavery, and even Irish slavery, on their own moral conscience, and as they maintained command of their rule of law, which was, is, and can be the common law.

In the former federation it was against the federal orders, the federal law, to perpetrate the crime of African slavery. The former federal record includes the clear acknowledgement of the law of the land as the common law.

In the usurped federation, where the criminal usurpers counterfeited the meaning of the word federation, and the usurpers stole the identity of the United States of America, slavery was subsidized in every single county where any fraudulent debt slavery tax was collected and used to subsidize slavery: including debt slavery, African slavery, and Irish slavery.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 01:18 am  
Power Independence > Study Group > Study Group > Unification Writing Project Top

UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems