Unjustifiable Criminal Opportunities I
by Joe Kelley
6-25-2022

Vladimir Putin's St. Petersburg Speech
June 17, 2022
The speech covered sanctions, inflation, war, currency, populism, fertilizer, grain, and the changing world order.
[kanekoa.substack.com]

“This era has ended despite all the attempts to maintain and preserve it at all costs. Change is a natural process of history, as it is difficult to reconcile the diversity of civilizations and the richness of cultures on the planet with political, economic or other stereotypes – these do not work here, they are imposed by one centre in a rough and no-compromise manner.”
Vlad

Bait placed in the baited net, or entrapment, is unjustifiable criminal opportunities. Why would anyone do something that turns another human into an inhuman predator?

The net catches prey that is preyed upon by inhuman predators. At the root of the net is the bait and that bait at the root of that net proclaims freedom from responsibility through avoidance of accurate accountability.

There is no law governing human beings, you are free to do as you please to whomever you please with impunity and immunity from prosecution.

Once each preyed upon victim of this predation consumes the bait, the net closes in and rapidly removes all moral-driven thoughts as the victim turns into a predatory inhuman beast of burden.

pre·da·tion
noun

1. the preying of one animal on others.
   "an effective defense against predation"

2. the action of attacking or plundering.
   "the old story of male predation and female vulnerability"

Enslaved by a life-long effort to avoid inevitable accountability, the victim rapidly turns toward reverse psychotic psychology as each discovery of each bit of data exposing the predator for predation causes the predator to project outwards, rather than inwards, each new bit of data exposing the predator for the predators predation drives the predator to transfer blame outward.

How does a predator respond when a predator has the light of truth closing upon the predator from all directions threatening to bring the predator into that light of truth, the same light that will offer the predator a way out of self-consuming predation?

OK, you caught me, I did it, I confess?

Blame the victim!

English Liberties, Or The Free-Born Subject’s Inheritance: Containing Magna Charta,
The Habeas Corpus Act, And Several Other Statutes, Henry Care
Boston: Printed by J. Franklin, for N. Buttolph, B. Eliot, and D. Henchman, 1721
“Generally all monopolies are against this Great Charter, because they are against the liberty and freedom of the subject, and against the law of the land; and it is hoped that the publication of this opinion of lord Coke’s will induce some person of property and spirit, to try the validity of it, by commencing and carrying on with vigour, a prosecution against some of the many monopolizers that now exist in this kingdom, to the great distress of the poor, and band of industrious merit, and the total subversion of all order and good government.”

How dare you!

WHO in their right mind would ever expose the Treasonous Fraud Predators among us?

How much would that cost in USD or Rubles?

To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"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. It is, therefore, no wonder that the "Rights of Man" was attacked by that faction, and its author continually abused. But let them go on; give them rope enough and they will put an end to their own insignificance. There is too much common sense and independence in America to be long the dupe of any faction, foreign or domestic.

"But, in the midst of the freedom we enjoy, the licentiousness of the papers called Federal (and I know not why they are called so, for they are in their principles anti-federal and despotic), is a dishonor to the character of the country, and an injury to its reputation and importance abroad. They represent the whole people of America as destitute of public principle and private manners.

"As to any injury they can do at home to those whom they abuse, or service they can render to those who employ them, it is to be set down to the account of noisy nothingness. It is on themselves the disgrace recoils, for the reflection easily presents itself to every thinking mind, that those who abuse liberty when they possess it would abuse power could they obtain it; and, therefore, they may as well take as a general motto, for all such papers, we and our patrons are not fit to be trusted with power.

"There is in America, more than in any other country, a large body of people who attend quietly to their farms, or follow their several occupations; who pay no regard to the clamors of anonymous scribblers, who think for themselves, and judge of government, not by the fury of newspaper writers, but by the prudent frugality of its measures, and the encouragement it gives to the improvement and prosperity of the country; and who, acting on their own judgment, never come forward in an election but on some important occasion.

"When this body moves, all the little barkings of scribbling and witless curs pass for nothing. To say to this independent description of men, "You must turn out such and such persons at the next election, for they have taken off a great many taxes, and lessened the expenses of government, they have dismissed my son, or my brother, or myself, from a lucrative office, in which there was nothing to do"-is to show the cloven foot of faction, and preach the language of ill-disguised mortification.

"In every part of the Union, this faction is in the agonies of death, and in proportion as its fate approaches, gnashes its teeth and struggles. My arrival has struck it as with an hydrophobia, it is like the sight of water to canine madness."

"When the plan of the Federal Government, formed by this convention, was proposed and submitted to the consideration of the several States, it was strongly objected to in each of them. But the objections were not on anti-Federal grounds, but on constitutional points. Many were shocked at the idea of placing what is called executive power in the hands of a single individual. To them it had too much the form and appearance of a military government, or a despotic one.

"Others objected that the powers given to a President were too great, and that in the hands of an ambitious and designing man it might grow into tyranny as it did in England under Oliver Cromwell, and as it has since done in France. A republic must not only be so in its principles, but in its forms.

"The executive part of the Federal Government was made for a man, and those who consented, against their judgment, to place executive power in the hands of a single individual, reposed more on the supposed moderation of the person they had in view, than on the wisdom of the measure itself.

"Two considerations, however, overcame all objections. The one was the absolute necessity of a Federal Government.

"The other, the rational reflections, that as government in America is founded on the representative system any error in the first essay could be reformed by the same quiet and rational process by which the Constitution was formed, and that either by the generation then living, or by those who were to succeed.

"If ever America lose sight of this principle, she will no longer be the land of liberty. The father will become the assassin of the rights of the son, and his descendants be a race of slaves.

"As many thousands who were minors are grown up to manhood since the name of Federalist began, it became necessary, for their information, to go back and show the origin of the name, which is now no longer what it originally was; but it was the more necessary to do this, in order to bring forward, in the open face of day, the apostasy of those who first called themselves Federalists.

"To them it served as a cloak for treason, a mask for tyranny. Scarcely were they placed in the seat of power and office, than federalism was to be destroyed, and the representative system of government, the pride and glory of America, and the palladium of her liberties, was to be over- thrown and abolished. The next generation was not to be free. The son was to bend his neck beneath the father's foot, and live, deprived of his rights, under hereditary control.

"Among the men of this apostate description, is to be ranked the ex-President John Adams. It has been the political career of this man to begin with hypocrisy, proceed with arrogance, and finish in contempt. May such be the fate of all such characters.”

The Treasonous Fraud Predators, as a rule, will blame their victims for weaknesses as the Treasonous Fraud Predators provide their victims with much-needed burdens, which are burdens that just so happen to make their victims weaker while the Treasonous Fraud Predators gain power by consuming their victims that they catch in their baited nets.

One must eat one’s prey before a bigger predator eats oneself.

Civil Law, so-called, is a monopoly of inhuman cannibals. No competition is allowed to exist whatsoever, each weak victim discovered must be caught in the net with the established bait. There is no other option at all. Treasonous Fraud Inhuman Predators must kill all human competition, or kidnap and project the Treasonous Fraud Predatory virus into each one willing to take the bait. Each new victim must be bribed, made to pay the ransom, extorted, tortured for false confessions, or murdered if a victim is unwilling to shed their human responsibilities and their human demands for accurate accountability.

The Cambridge History of Law in America
Volume 1 Early America (1580-1815)
Edited by Michael Grossberg, Christopher Tomlins
"...The Indians were infidels, "barbarians," and English Protestants no less than Spanish Catholics had a duty before God to bring them into the fold and, in the process, to "civilize" them. The first Charter of the Virginia Company (1606) proclaimed that its purpose was to serve in "propagating of Christian religion to such people, [who] as yet live in darkness and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God, and may in time bring the infidels and savages living in these parts to humane civility and to a settle and quiet government." In performing this valuable and godly service, the English colonists were replicating what their Roman ancestors had once done for the ancient Britons. The American settlers, argued William Strachey in 1612, were like Roman generals in that they, too, had "reduced the conquered parts of or barbarous Island into provinces and established in them colonies of old soldiers building castles and towns in every corner, teaching us even to know the powerful discourse of divine reason."

"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."

"Like all Calvinists, Coke adhered to the view that as infidels the Native Americans could have no share in God's grace, and because authority and rights derived from grace, not nature, they could have no standing under the law. Their properties and even their persons were therefore forfeit to the first "godly" person with the capacity to subdue them. "if a Christian King," he wrote, "should conquer a kingdom of an infidel, and bring them [sic] under his subjection, there ipso facto the laws of the infidel are abrogated, for that they be not only against Christianity, but against the law of God and nature contained in the Decalogue." Grounded as this idea was not only in the writings of Calvin himself but also in those of the fourteenth-century English theologian John Wycliffe, it enjoyed considerable support among the early colonists. As the dissenting dean of Gloucester, Josiah Tucker, wrote indignantly to Edmund Burke in 1775, "Our Emigrants to North-America, were mostly Enthusiasts of a particular Stamp. They were that set of Republicans, who believed, or pretended to believe, that Dominion was founded in Grace. Hence they conceived, that they had the best Right in the World, both to tax and to persecute the Ungoldy. And they did both, a soon as they got power in their Hands, in the most open and atrocious Manner."

“By the end of the seventeenth century, however, this essentially eschatological argument had generally been dropped. If anything it was now the "papists" (because the canon lawyers shared much the same views as the Calvinists on the binding nature of grace) who were thought to derive rights of conquest from the supposed ungodliness of non-Christians. The colonists themselves, particularly when they came in the second half of the eighteenth century to raid the older discussions over the legitimacy of the colonies in search of arguments for cessation, had no wish to be associated with an argument that depended upon their standing before God. For this reason, if for no other, it was as James Otis noted in 1764, a "madness" which, at least by his day, had been "pretty generally exploded and hissed off the stage."

"Otis, however, had another more immediate reason for dismissing this account of the sources of sovereign authority. For in America had been conquered, it followed that the colonies, like all other lands of conquest, were a part not of the King's realm but of the royal demesne. This would have made them the personal territory of the monarch, to be governed at the King's "pleasure," instead of being subject to English law and to the English Parliament. It was this claim that sustained the fiction that "New England lies within England, " which would govern the Crowns' legal association with its colonies until the very end of the empire itself. As late as 1913, for instance, Justice Isaac Isaacs of the Australian High Court could be found declaring that, at the time Governor Arthur Phillip received his commission in 1786, Australia had, rightfully or wrongly, been conquered, and that "the whole of the lands of Australia were already in law the property of the King of England," a fact that made any dispute over its legality a matter of civil rather than international law."

Out with the good air, in with the bad air, Cycle Empires Rising with inhuman BOOMS and Empires Falling with inhuman BUSTS, for as long as humans exist as beasts of the burdens they are ordered to bear for their National-Debt without question.

The worst evil monsters know better than to eat their harmonic Nation-State psychosis, booming and busting at least 3 demonic Nations constantly at war, for if they were ever to Consolidate all Nations into ONE, New World Order, that Nationalist goose would eat its own egg making power, turning all humans into inhuman beasts, and then the rats would be too busy eating weaker rats and avoiding stronger rats, a rat feeding frenzy too busy to have a moments time to contemplate making anything of any value whatsoever.

The monopoly must maintain a demonic form of competition, otherwise, it eats itself rapidly at an exponentially accelerating rate of self-consumption now called omnicide.

The diametrically opposite scenario opposing involuntary association of all by all, is for all individuals constituting self-aware republics unto themselves, and each is duty-bound to preserve a federal, which is a voluntary defensive association, ensuring the greatest free time to create better things individually, and the time to produce those better things, offered to humanity when humanity agrees with the next best thing at the least cost to humanity.

The Statute of Quo Warranto,
made Anno 18 Edw. I Stat. 2 and Anno Dom. 1290.
"These statutes are codifications of existing common law practices, albeit practices that had been used little if at all for a long time."

"This was essentially a move to put all feudal lords on the defense, so that the King could remove any that opposed him or his policies, and confirm the obeisance of the rest."

"Once established as a tool that could be used by a monarch, it also establishes it as a tool for use by the people when they become the sovereign, as happened upon adoption of the U.S. Declaration of Independence."

"It should also be noted that the original common law writs of quo warranto were demands on the party claiming authority, the respondent, who had the burden of proof, not petitions for relief from the court, other than declaratory, with the burden of proof on the petitioner."

Each individual republic is duty-bound to hold the worst threats to humanity to account for their Treasonous Fraud Predations expediently and accurately by due process of law.

“The flaw is in the concept itself, as the concept says there is one, albeit strong, power with a limited circle of close allies, or, as they say, countries with granted access, and all business practices and international relations, when it is convenient, are interpreted solely in the interests of this power. They essentially work in one direction in a zero-sum game. A world built on a doctrine of this kind is definitely unstable.”
Vladimir Putin's St. Petersburg Speech
June 17, 2022

Perpetui Inimici

Caveat Emptor