No Quarter Given
by Joe Kelley
1-10-2022

A penny for your thoughts.

The arrival on the scene of Treasonous Fraud can be traced back as far as mankind has attempted to record both mistakes and successes along the way from birth to death.

Early examples include this Jesus dude throwing the money changers out of the bar.

Sure, my thoughts are given, it does not cost anyone a penny transferred to me, by them, for them to borrow my viewpoint for cause.

I do this for a living, by the way, and for your information, as a volunteer volunteering to do my part in our common defense against the worst threats to mankind that warrant by probable cause an effective accounting of those threats so as to proceed to the next step in effecting an expedient defense of mankind from those clear and present dangers made unclear by the constant injections of fraudulent transfers of falsehoods flowing from Treasonous Frauds into the MINDS of the victims.

Case in point:

“That the fundamental linkage between the pathology of the state and the individual was the individual’s propensity to deceive him or herself and to fail to act in an authentic manner, in a genuine and authentic manner, and to become as a consequence either nihilistic, let’s say, because of the incremental weakening of character that’s part and parcel of adopting an inauthentic mode of being or to turn to ideological and totalitarian solutions as an alternative to living appropriately and with responsibility as an individual.”
Jordan Peterson, Lecture, Existentialism via Solzhenitsyn

One might fit that message in a place for future use during an effort to defend mankind from forces working to destroy everything under the sun soonest. One might, on the other hand, choose to ignore the ongoing evidence leading people onto that path of misery and inescapable self-destruction.

The purpose of Treasonous Fraud is to replace internal judgment of individual entities called people, and replace that internal judgment with a control, such as a toggle switch, to then make the individual act when told to act, or not act when told not to act, including the act of thinking.

Do not think, those in control command, and the target of the controlling order does not think, on command.

No?

You were told not to think. You are being told not to think right now. You prefer to obey.

Or not.

“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
John Taylor Gatto, The Six Purposes of Schooling

No?

The effort to bribe slaves follows the effort to enslave slaves by turning off their internal power of reason, judgment, moral compass, bullshit detector, defensive awareness self-evident self-preservation instinct. Once enslaved with the virus that turns off the internal bullshit detector, the slave is then ripe for bribery, also known as the song of that siren.

“Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.”
Patrick Henry, Fuck the British Empire Builders and their Counterfeit Money Scam.

Did someone make the effort to turn off Patrick Henry’s internal bullshit detector?

No?

"A number of characters, of the greatest eminence in this country, object to this government for its consolidating tendency. This is not imaginary. It is a formidable reality. If consolidation proves to be as mischievous to this country as it has been to other countries, what will the poor inhabitants of this country do? This government will operate like an ambuscade. It will destroy the state governments, and swallow the liberties of the people, without giving previous notice. If gentlemen are willing to run the hazard, let them run it; but I shall exculpate myself by my opposition and monitory warnings within these walls. But then comes paper money. We are at peace on this subject. Though this is a thing which that mighty federal Convention had no business with, yet I acknowledge that paper money would be the bane of this country. I detest it. Nothing can justify a people in resorting to it but extreme necessity. It is at rest, however, in this commonwealth. It is no longer solicited or advocated."
Patrick Henry, Monday, June 9, 1788

Behind the scenes “they” were working to deceive Patrick Henry, to fool Patrick Henry into thinking that “they” were not going to restore Central Banking Treasonous Fraud, a.k.a. “paper money.”

Who were they?

They were Loyalists Loyal to Empire Building, as copied from the Roman Empire, as copied from the British Empire, as now exemplified by the United States Empire. If you think that your bullshit detector is still working, but you think United States means “We the People,” then you may want to consider the idea that your bullshit detector missed something worth knowing.

"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.

"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins

If “they” can pull a fast one on Patrick Henry, are you still confident in your ability to defend against Treasonous Fraud?

“They” claim to own you, and “they” claim to own your children, and “they” claim that you owe them for existing, and “they” claim to have the right to consume your children as they please, and “they” claim to charge your for the work “they” do during the process of owning you and your children, and their children’s children.

The point that may be worth pondering here is that “they” include you, when you do the work they tell you to do, so as to enslave you, such as your work that you do to ignore these facts shown to you, and the work you do to actively suppress any of this information flowing to any other people who may actually use this information for the defense of the people by the people against “they” which is you, expressly you, you are the enemy, as the evidence shows clearly and presently.

XIV - Citizen rights not to be abridged
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868
“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

You pay the bill charged to you, you aid and abet, you are they.

No?

"In exchange for these acts of civility, the conqueror acquired some measure of sovereignty over the conquered peoples and, by way of compensation for the trouble to which he had been put in conquering them, was also entitled to a substantial share of the infidels' goods. Empire was always conceived to be a matter of reciprocity at some level, and as Edward Winslow nicely phrased it in 1624, America was clearly a place where "religion and profit jump together." For the more extreme Calvinists, such as Sir Edward Coke who seems to have believed that all infidels, together presumably with all Catholics, lay so far from God's grace that no amount of civilizing would be sufficient to save them, such peoples might legitimately be conquered; in Coke's dramatic phrasing, because "A perpetual enemy (though there be no wars by fire and sword between them) cannot maintain any action or get any thing within this Realm, All infidels are in law perpetui inimici, perpetual enemies, (for the law presumes not that they will be converted, that being remota potential, a remote possibility) for between them, as with devils, whose subjects they be, and the Christians, there is perpetual hostility and can be no peace."
The Cambridge History of Law in America
Volume 1 Early America (1580-1815)
Edited by Michael Grossberg, Christopher Tomlins

Acts of Civility according to Civil Rules (not laws) are confessed by Empire Builders following the Rules governing Empire Builders.

No?

“To the officers and soldiers in the service of the king of Great Britain, not subjects of the said king:

“The citizens of the United States of America are engaged in a just and necessary war—a war in which they are not the only persons interested. They contend for the rights of human nature, and therefore merit the patronage and assistance of all mankind. Their success will secure a refuge from persecution and tyranny to those who wish to pursue the dictates of their own consciences, and to reap the fruits of their own industry.

“That kind Providence, who from seeming evil often produces real good, in permitting us to be involved in this cruel war, and you to be compelled to aid our enemies in their vain attempts to enslave us, doubtless hath in view to establish perfect freedom in the new world, for those who are borne down by the oppression and tyranny of the old.

“Considering, therefore, that you are reluctantly compelled to be instruments of avarice and ambition, we not only forgive the injuries which you have been constrained to offer us, but we hold out to your acceptance a participation of the privileges of free and independent states. Large and fertile tracts of country invite and will amply reward your industry.

“Distain, then, to continue the instruments of frantick ambition and lawless power. Feel the dignity and importance of your nature. Rise to the rank of free citizens of free states. Desist from the vain attempt to ravage and depopulate a country you cannot subdue, and accept from our munificence what can never be obtained from our fears. We are willing to receive you with open arms into the bosom of our country. Come, then, and partake of the blessings we tender to you in sincerity of heart.

“In the name of these sovereign, free, and independent states we promise and engage to you that great privilege of man, the free and uninterrupted exercise of your religion, complete protection of your persons from injury, the peaceable possessions of the fruits of your honest industry, the absolute property in the soil granted to you to defend, unless you shall otherwise dispose of it, to your children and your children's children for ever.”

“Resolved, That it be recommended to the several states, who have vacant lands, to lay off with as much expedition as possible, a sufficient quantity of lands to answer the purposes expressed in the forgoing address; for which lands no charge is to be made against the United States.”

United States - singular - defined by Treasonous Frauds means One Monopoly of Power and Profit, and all The People are enslaved under that Rule that Rules Empire Building according to that plan.

United States - plural - as defined by the people themselves, is placed in place to oppose the opposite process, the process in place in opposition to Treasonous Fraud, a.k.a. Empire Building.

No?

"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property.”
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802

A Treasonous Fraud System of Rules is made to Rule from Top to Bottom as dictated by those rulers ruling with those rules. Is there anything working in opposition to those rules?

Nothing from the crickets?

"I conclude with this observation, that in all pleas of this kind, where the law is doubtful, the leaning of the court will be in favour of its own jurisdiction. Not from a desire -of extending the admiralty cognizance, but for this important-consideration, that if the decision in favour of the jurisdiction should be erroneous, the doors of the common law are open for redress, and a prohibition may be obtained; but there is no remedy for the erroneous exclusion of parties who apply for the process of the admiralty, the benefit of the laws by which it is governed, and the summary justice it affords."
Dean v. Angus, 7 F. Cas. 294 (1785)
1785 · Pennsylvania Admiralty Court

"Did slavery have an adequate foundation in the indigenous law of England? If not, had it been interjected into the English legal order through colony slave laws? What were the status and rights of West Indian slaves and masters coming to the metropolis? Could the slave claim any rights under English law? Was a contract for the sale of a slave enforceable in English courts?"
Somerset: Lord Mansfield and the
Legitimacy of Slavery in the
Anglo-American World
William M. Wiecekt

No?

“A jury of twelve local farmers, all men and all white according to Levinson, rule in favor of Freeman in 1781, giving her freedom and awarding her 30 shillings in damages.”

No.

"There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments" (United States v. Throckmorton, 98 US 61(1878).

Caveat Emptor