slug.com slug.com
1
1 Like Show

Born in West Orange, New Jersey, 1958.
1 oldest sister
2 older brothers
2 younger brothers

My first experience with data that did not fit the Official Narrative (propaganda) was a book I read in School for a book report. The book described data concerning the sinking of the Ocean Liner (false flag) that was the casus belli (excuse: false flag) for Americans to be deceived into fighting the Central Banker War called World War One. The ship that was sunk (murdering people aboard) to move power to the criminals running the Central Bank Cabal was the Lusitania.

The next big event which caused me to fully reject the Official Narrative (propaganda) was the massacre at Waco misreported on National Television (Corporate Propaganda Organ of the Nation-State Aristocracy).

Full Bio

Comments

American politics has become such a freak show this is nothing surprising, a presidential candidate ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 30, 2020:
"Warren Says Her Education Secretary Must Meet Trans Child’s Approval" Self-evident pathology Nation Wide My response is for anyone with a working conscience to consider returning to actual rule of law, along with a federal agreement instead of this bogus Nation-State. Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy by William Watkins "Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right. Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government, the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely."
Politico: The Democrats' Bernie dilemma. [politico.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 30, 2020:
"We can’t know today whether Sanders could blaze a Trump-like path to the White House. We do know that the Republican acquiescence to Trump in 2016 changed the complexion of the GOP, perhaps for a generation. How Democrats react to the rise of Sanders today may similarly determine what kind of party they are going to be." Suppose there are people who merely vote as they are told by the "Party." How many are those in that group as a percentage of those who actually vote? More to the point, of those who follow orders without question how many of those votes are counted and applied to the actual decision to put an individual in the U.S. President position? For the life of me I can't see a confessed "Socialist" moved by any force into the office of U.S. President. It makes no sense at all to me. Bloomberg fits as a potential rival to Trump. If Trump is Deep State Light, or someone not yet completely lost to necrophilia, then it makes sense to me that The Deep State (trademark) would excrete a viable Anti-Trump candidate: a Killary II. Sanders is a self-evident joke. Bloomberg, at least to me, is potentially that Dark Horse, that proverbial "Anti-Christ" type model that fits the current narrative. I'm not intending to be "Biblical" with this comment. The powers at play are what they are, and they are powerFULL, not weak, stupid, and farcical. As to my use of the word "necrophilia," the meaning intended has nothing to do with fornicating with dead people. The word "necrophilia" was once employed by a man named Erich Fromm in his work that includes 2 books I have read: 1. Sane Society 2. The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. Necrophilia is a word that can describe a specific pathology by which people worship death. Not their own death, mind you, rather a necrophiliac worships the death of all other life other than their own sick one.
Entrenched oligarchy infiltrated by America’s enemies. How much division will we allow Media to ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 30, 2020:
History shows that free societies remain free when the people as a whole maintain their lawful jurisdiction to investigate and indict all enemies foreign and domestic. That is the message in both the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. Unfortunately the people as a whole are stupified into accepting servility. "It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States." Lysander Spooner, Essay on The Trial by Jury, 1852 Not until there is a general increase in lawful knowledge will the people regain their lawful power to hold the criminals in so-called government to an accurate accounting of the facts that matter. THE COURT: Let me ask you, do all of you agree with this verdict? THE JURY: Yes (In unison). THE COURT: In answer to the question did Loyd Jowers participate in a conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther King, your answer is yes. Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant? Your answer to that one is also yes. And the total amount of damages you find for the plaintiffs entitled to is one hundred dollars. Is that your verdict? THE JURY: Yes (In unison). https://thekingcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/King_Family_Trial_Transcript.pdf
Seems Legit
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 29, 2020:
They have nothing on the Federalist Party.
IDW. Jordan Peterson. "The Psychology Of Identity." [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 29, 2020:
"Perhaps the Play is not worth the Candle." If the cause for "arming to the teeth" is absolute power to do whatever the winnner wants to do to everyone else, then that is part of The Cult of Might Makes Right Dogma. Kill or be killed, and do unto others that which you would "arm to the teeth" to avoid having done to self. Hypocricy put effectively in place of (counterfeiting) the truth.
The state of West Virginia has passed a resolution reminding Virginia counties opposed to leftist ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 29, 2020:
That is very good news, thanks.
The Bosnian Pyramids: One of the Greatest Finds Ever? | Ancient Origins
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 29, 2020:
"Chambers and connecting passages were discovered and by the following spring of 2019 it was found that the raised floor within the open section was rich in archaeological material. Over the course of the 2019 summer season, over 3000 individual finds were recovered from the Ravne3 Tunnels. Pottery fragments, tiles, jewelry, coins, tools and lithic artifacts were excavated." Also: "Numerous websites and Wikipedia entries calling the Bosnian Pyramids a “pseudo-archaeological notion” were set up to misinform the curious public, sometimes through omission, other times through deceit, spin and outright lies. It seemed that while there were plenty of people ready to attack Dr Osmanagich on a personal level, no one was arguing directly against Dr Osmanagich’s raised proofs in an objective, scientific manor on a fair playing field." People state with authority that Jeffery Epstein committed suicide. Authority of lies is counterfeit authority of truth.
[pjmedia.com] Billionaires and Big Pharma Are Bankrolling the Transgender-Industrial Complex .... ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 28, 2020:
"This web of powerful donors helps explain how the transgender movement seemingly captured the commanding heights of American culture overnight. For instance, while endocrinologists (doctors who specialize in hormone glands) like Dr. Michael Laidlaw have warned that transgender "treatments" like so-called puberty-blockers and opposite-sex hormones actually introduce a disease into the bodies of healthy children, the medical establishment has rushed to embrace these "treatments" as "best practices." If it is a crime, why call it something other than a crime?
Libertarians Forged an Alliance With Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. Was It a Deal With the ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 27, 2020:
Liberarianism isn't another form of statism, so either it isn't libertarianism, or it isn't statism in this example. In other words: Libertarians advised the statists to stop stealing from everyone who still manages to produce anything worth stealing despite the statist malinvestments done with their stolen loot. Statists responded OK.
Still going on but cencored on Facebook [balkaninsight.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 26, 2020:
“Judging by this vocabulary and its intensity, Gruevski is launching a purge which should end in the banning of the Open Society Foundation – Macedonia, and if possible, of the Social Democrats, too,” Spasov wrote on Facebook." Good article, thanks. See also: https://idw.community/group/NewsFromAllViews/post/72336/https-youtu-be-ncdzqmgjym0-the-puppet-strings-are-more-and-more-obvious
Space Force and the Deep State ...There are many theories and possibilities for the true role of ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 26, 2020:
"We didn't want to lie to you for eighty years, but we had to so we could protect you." Good article, thanks. Perhaps also along the counter-coup lines: https://stevepieczenik.com/2020/01/14/opus-205-iran-now/
[youtu.be] The puppet strings are more and more obvious
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 26, 2020:
The veil is thinning, so the power of falsehood is evaporating. Will the rats grow ever more desperate?
While there is so much culture war and religious war going on (and many are even predicting the ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 26, 2020:
That is pure bullshit. The original federation was founded on adaptive free-market choices including a free market of governments, and a free market of religions. The Nation-State that replaced the original federation (1789) was the opposite in all cases. The religion enforced after 1789 was, and still is Statism also known as Nationalism, and it is the same religion as Communism, Fascism, and all the other isms. The Legal Fiction is sovereign, and you are not.
Jordan Peterson. "The Death and Resurrection Of Christ." [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 26, 2020:
I managed to get a third of the way through before investing my time and energy into the action of commenting. I am commenting for the cause described so far by this Story Line offered by Jordan Peterson. The cause being an individual effort of action intending to move individuals from lower quality and higher cost life to higher quality and lower cost life: the power rising the tide that lifts all boats. The Story Line apparently assumes a net total of value (things) that is scarce, meaning not enough good things for too many individuals wanting good things. I derive that conclusion from the choice by Jordan Peterson to use the word sacrifice, rather than to choose the word investment. If instead of a Story Line that assumes scarcity the Story Line assumes abundance (or a balance rather than the scale being tipped either way at the start of the story), then investment would clearly be the accurate word choice, more accurate (higher quality and lower cost) than the word sacrifice. People invest some of the current bounty so as to avoid spoilage of the current bounty, preserving and improving the current bounty, so as to ensure even greater bounty in the future. That is the Story Line adjusted from an assumption of "original sin" (or scarcity) to original bounty: abundance. Those who set the goal posts can be trusted to set the goal post in their favor? Power invested wisely results in more power, not less.
This says it all. [babylonbee.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 25, 2020:
“At publishing time, Paul had decided he would try democratic stepping on a rake, where his friends wall vote on whether he steps on the rake, and then he steps on it and smacks his face.” That is called stepping on a rake as a consequence of the results of a vote put to friends. That is not democracy, and it isn't socialism. If socialism is expressed as a power transfer - which it often is - then to each according to their needs goes the power that was produced by those who were able to produce anything worth stealing. If it is stealing, then it is stealing. Why call it democracy or socialism? How about the same rake analogy applied to people who call something by a name other than what actually happens? There goes a gang of socialists, says the anti-socialist pointing at a gang of thieves. The thieves point back and claim that there goes a gang of capitalists as they point back at the other gang of thieves. The idea, apparently, is to convince the members of one gang to abandon their gang and move to the other gang on the way to the pretend ballot box.
Two views of the interim trade agreement with China. [ft.com] [thefederalist.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 25, 2020:
Source A: "Become an FT subscriber to read:" A partial and defective US-China trade truce" Note that the above is a cost charged to those who want cost-less transfers of powerful stuff: Free Trade. I did not pay the cost, so I moved onto the competition Source B, which costs-less: The Phase One U.S. - China Trade Deal Is A Serious Win for The United States by Helen Raleigh, January 24, 2020 "The Trump administration stopped calling China a currency manipulator." And: "The two countries have such different economic and political systems and, more importantly, such different sets of values that we may have to settle our differences through other means, far beyond a trade agreement." And: "This Phase One deal leaves many U.S. strategic goals out, including addressing the Chinese government’s enormous subsidies to state-owned enterprises." That to me is all a bunch of bullshit. The Corporation called U.S. has a subsidiary called The FED. The FED is Subsidized Slavery of Everyone, and that is U.S. Corporate Policy, has been since 1789. So Trump goes to China as a Master of Slaves to “negotiate” with whoever is the Master of Slaves in that part of the world, and these 2 Masters of Slaves have a pissing contest? The contest can be measured like measuring the stream of piss, but the accurate measure isn’t which Master is more Free at Trading, the accurate measure is called Purchasing Power Parity, or Currency Exchange Rate, or even Trade Surplus. Who get’s to slice up the African Continent? How about South America; someone coined the term The Backyard for a reason. I’m the one on crack? Here is a measure of a “state-owned enterprise” receiving “enormous subsidies”: https://www.usdebtclock.org/ Liability Per Citizen 386,963.00 and counting Which form of "Free Trade" costs less, to who, and who is getting the benefits of that competitive form of "Free Trade"?
The DNC won't let you elect Bernie Sanders. The DNC won't let you choose your Democrat Party ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 25, 2020:
"A vote for Trump is a vote for a future of free democratic elections." I don't think that the above is true, and I don't think that a case can be made to prove that it is true. In the first place there is no way to prove something that is ambiguous. I'd like to see someone give it a try. Elections, for example, are not democratic, so there is that to contend with when proving this statement. The Athenian Constitution: Government by Jury and Referendum by Roderick T. Long "The practice of selecting government officials randomly (and the Athenians developed some fairly sophisticated mechanical gadgets to ensure that the selection really was random, and to make cheating extremely difficult) is one of the most distinctive features of the Athenian constitution. We think of electoral politics as the hallmark of democracy; but elections were almost unknown at Athens, because they were considered paradigmatically anti-democratic. Proposals to replace sortition with election were always condemned as moves in the direction of oligarchy. "Why? Well, as the Athenians saw it, under an electoral system no one can obtain political office unless he is already famous: this gives prominent politicians an unfair advantage over the average person. Elections, they thought, favor those wealthy enough to bribe the voters, powerful enough to intimidate the voters, flashy enough to impress the voters, or clever enough to deceive the voters. The most influential political leaders were usually Horsemen anyway, thanks to their social prominence and the political following they could obtain by dispensing largesse among the masses. (One politician, Kimon, won the loyalty of the poor by leaving his fields and orchards unfenced, inviting anyone who was hungry to take whatever he needed.) If seats on the Council had been filled by popular vote, the Horsemen would have disproportionately dominated it — just as, today, Congress is dominated by those who can afford expensive campaigns, either through their own resources or through wealthy cronies. Or, to take a similar example, in the United States women have had the vote for over half a century, and yet, despite being a majority of the population, they represent only a tiny minority of elected officials. Obviously, the persistence of male dominance in the economic and social sphere has translated into women mostly voting for male candidates. The Athenians guessed, probably rightly, that the analogous prestige of the upper classes would lead to commoners mostly voting for aristocrats. "That is why the Athenians saw elections as an oligarchical rather than a democratic phenomenon. Above all, the Athenians feared the prospect of government officials forming a privileged class with separate interests of their ...
There is a very simple solution to striking teachers. Make it illegal for government employees to ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 25, 2020:
I think that there is a fundamental problem at work that may not be obvious despite all the evidence that ought to expose this fundamental problem. Will disobedient people become obedient if they are given yet another order to be obeyed obediently?
Agorism = peacefully boycotting the government, refusing to pay tax wherever possible
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 25, 2020:
If it isn't voluntary, then don't pay it. If it isn't voluntary, then it is a crime scene. Why call it a tax if it isn't voluntary?>
Jordan Peterson. "Slaying the Dragon Within Us." [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 25, 2020:
There is no such thing as an industrial complex.
Here's why libertarians are resistant to global outrage - [babylonbee.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 24, 2020:
The Wizard behind the curtain isn't outraged, at least not while the con works.
IntellectualTakeout: Bonhoeffer on the stupidity that led to Hitler's rise. ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 24, 2020:
From the Article: "“Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. … The power of the one needs the stupidity of the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with him as a person, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.”" The power to control the minds of many people, to make them choose external rather than internal judgement, involves more than internal stupidity. The often repeated saying "follow the money" applies when people shed their stupidity and people regain access to their own moral conscience: their own power to judge truth from fiction, right from wrong. A quick look (or a long long) into the work of Anthony Sutton and John Taylor Gatto can help anyone gather facts that matter in this specific case involving people led to believe a lie to the point at which people give up their own power of accurate discernment. Anthony Sutton: 1. Wall Street and the rise of Hitler 2. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution 3. Wall Street and FDR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi5R9WI6_w0
"Vices are those acts by which a man harms himself or his property. Crimes are those acts by which ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 24, 2020:
Reading through the work of Lysander Spooner is refreshing in a world were mountains of official government lies are routinely believed and enforced. Not only does the information offer that refreshing light of truth, it offers the lawful means to the lawful ends. "The question, then, between trial by jury, as thus described, and trial by the government, is simply a question between liberty and despotism. The authority to judge what are the powers of the government, and what the liberties of the people, must necessarily be vested in one or the other of the parties themselves - the government, or the people; because there is no third party to whom it can be entrusted. If the authority be vested in the government, the government is absolute, and the people have no liberties except such as the government sees fit to indulge them with. If, on the other hand, that authority be vested in the people, then the people have all liberties, (as against the government,) except such as substantially the whole people (through a jury) choose to disclaim; and the government can exercise no power except such as substantially the whole people (through a jury) consent that it may exercise." Essay on The Trial by Jury, Lysander Spooner, 1852
Lying Liars – Deceiving Psychopaths: I’ve been reading opinions about how the Trial of ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 23, 2020:
The Biggest Game in the Biggest Town. For those who have gone through at least some of the information offered by Walter Burien from his initial YouTube presentation titled The Biggest Game in Town, Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, there is in that a useful scale. Take any incorporated city in America (incorporating all the psychopaths into one power cell) and follow the money to find those cult members and evaluate that amount of Power by those Units of Power. 1 City - 1 Million Federal Reserve Notes on Account 1 State - 1 Billion Federal Reserve Notes on Account 1 Nation State Corporate Legal Fiction (falsely called a federation) - Unlimited Spending Power So... as pointed out in comments: [“Regular” people rarely win.] Regular people win or starve, or beg, or join the cult and get a piece of the action: incorporated into the fold, in that corporate structure. The point being that there is plenty of POWER available to swing as many votes as needed to get rid of anyone that is not wanted, anywhere, anytime. By hook, by crook, by Impeachment, by Lone Gunman soon be be suicided, or by anything other than simply ignoring the unwanted party crasher, the Elephant in the Room, or the Emperor who dares to actually wear clothes.
Ranking Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein Left Senate During Schiff Testimony – Said ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 23, 2020:
I don't think that it is true that the future is predictable by reason and logic in this case, or any case involving groups of mentally ill cult members. Psychopaths can be trusted to lie when a lie will work in favor of psychopaths and at the expense of the victims who are led to believe the lies told by psychopaths. I have to point out that the power of deception in Modern Times is like that Elephant in the room, and like the naked Emperor in the same room. These psychopaths have grown so powerful as to remain in power despite their routine lies, that everyone knows are lies, except for who knows what type of people afflicted with additional mental deficiencies added to psychopathy, during elections to gain power. "I will not raise taxes." "I will not go to war." "I will get us out of war." That is just 3 on a long list. "I will not vote to remove the president." Seriously, people are counting on these people to honor their published promises?
" I do solemnly swear to uphold and defend, the Constitution of the united States of America, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 23, 2020:
"At one time, Treason was met quickly with a trial and execution, like snakes in the hen house, the treasonous now hold our trusted positions of power and service, while most argue over which clown should win the Punch and Judy show, while sipping they're Kool-Aid." It was a published observation that the above was not true enough. The 6th President of the United States of America offered the following: "It is not merely the number of impeachments, that are to be expected to make public officers honest and attentive in their business. A general opinion must pervade the community, that the house, the body to impeach them for misconduct, is disinterested, and ever watchful for the public good; and that the judges who shall try impeachments, will not feel a shadow of biass. Under such circumstances, men will not dare transgress, who, not deterred by such accusers and judges, would repeatedly misbehave. We have already suffered many and extensive evils, owing to the defects of the confederation, in not providing against the misconduct of public officers. When we expect the law to be punctually executed, not one man in ten thousand will disobey it: it is the probable chance of escaping punishment that induces men to transgress. It is one important mean to make the government just and honest, rigidly and constantly to hold, before the eyes of those who execute it, punishment, and dismission from office, for misconduct. These are principles no candid man, who has just ideas of the essential features of a free government, will controvert. They are, to be sure, at this period, called visionary, speculative and anti-governmental—but in the true stile of courtiers, selfish politicians, and flatterers of despotism—discerning republican men of both parties see their value. They are said to be of no value, by empty boasting advocates for the constitution, who, by their weakness and conduct, in fact, injure its cause much more than most of its opponents. From their high sounding promises, men are led to expect a defence of it, and to have their doubts removed. When a number of long pieces appear, they, instead of the defence, &c. they expected, see nothing but a parade of names—volumes written without ever coming to the point—cases quoted between which and ours there is not the least similitude—and partial extracts made from histories and governments, merely to serve a purpose. Some of them, like the true admirers of royal and senatorial robes, would fain prove, that nations who have thought like freemen and philosophers about government, and endeavoured to be free, have often been the most miserable: if a single riot, in the course of five hundred years happened in a free country, if a salary, or the interest of a public or private debt was not ...
No one talks about this anymore. [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 21, 2020:
Q. Let me ask you finally -- this has been a long road -- how you regard -- what is your explanation for the fact that there has been such little national media coverage of these -- of this trial and this evidence and this event here in this Memphis courtroom, which is the first trial ever to be able to produce evidence on this assassination -- what has happened here that Mighty Wurlitzer is not sounding but is in fact totally silent -- almost totally silent? A. Oh, but -- as we know, silence can be deafening. Disinformation is not only getting certain things to appear in print, it's also getting certain things not to appear in print. I mean, the first -- the first thing I would say as a way of explanation is the incredibly powerful effect of disinformation over a long period of time that I mentioned before. For 30 years the official line has been that James Earl Ray killed Martin Luther King and he did it all by himself. That's 30 years, not -- nothing like the short period when the line was that the Cubans raped the Angolan women. But for 30 years it's James Earl Ray killed Dr. King, did it all by himself. And when that is imprinted in the minds of the general public for 30 years, if somebody stood up and confessed and said: I did it. Ray didn't do it, I did it. Here's a movie. Here's a video showing me do it. 99 percent of the people wouldn't believe him because it just -- it just wouldn't click in the mind. It would just go right to -- it couldn't be. It's just a powerful psychological effect over 30 years of disinformation that's been imprinted on the brains of the -- the public. Something to the country couldn't -- couldn't be. https://thekingcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/King_Family_Trial_Transcript.pdf
I stumbled on this question, today: What if we made it illegal for politicians to tell lies - ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 20, 2020:
I would work if law returned to America. This is a lawless country, has been since 1789. All the steps to do exactly as you suggest are within the Ancient Law, the law known as the common law, the law known as the law of the land. If someone speaks a damaging lie, even a treasonous lie, anyone in a grand jury (common law, not fake common law) has jurisdiction civil and criminal, including subpoena power, to investigate the crime on behalf of the victims, and to then publish a report, presentment, or indictment with a court date. The presumed to be innocent, but investigated as potentially guilty (clear and present danger, probable cause), defendant is then given an opportunity to defend against the accusations before The Country, which is before a common law trial jury. The reasons why it did work, does work, and can continue to work are elementary, reasonable, logical, and proven over time. "It is not merely the number of impeachments, that are to be expected to make public officers honest and attentive in their business. A general opinion must pervade the community, that the house, the body to impeach them for misconduct, is disinterested, and ever watchful for the public good; and that the judges who shall try impeachments, will not feel a shadow of biass. Under such circumstances, men will not dare transgress, who, not deterred by such accusers and judges, would repeatedly misbehave. We have already suffered many and extensive evils, owing to the defects of the confederation, in not providing against the misconduct of public officers. When we expect the law to be punctually executed, not one man in ten thousand will disobey it: it is the probable chance of escaping punishment that induces men to transgress. It is one important mean to make the government just and honest, rigidly and constantly to hold, before the eyes of those who execute it, punishment, and dismission from office, for misconduct. These are principles no candid man, who has just ideas of the essential features of a free government, will controvert. They are, to be sure, at this period, called visionary, speculative and anti-governmental—but in the true stile of courtiers, selfish politicians, and flatterers of despotism—discerning republican men of both parties see their value. They are said to be of no value, by empty boasting advocates for the constitution, who, by their weakness and conduct, in fact, injure its cause much more than most of its opponents. From their high sounding promises, men are led to expect a defence of it, and to have their doubts removed. When a number of long pieces appear, they, instead of the defence, &c. they expected, see nothing but a parade of names—volumes written without ever coming to the point—cases quoted between which ...
Nordic Socialist-Hellholes Dominate World's 10 Happiest Countries Yet Again. U.S. Libertarians ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 19, 2020:
Taken from a comment below: "Society tolerated stuff like slavery and Jim Crow." Babou That is a meaningless, or deceptive, statement. Society includes all individuals as in The People, The Public, etc., and slaves, religious slaves included, including indentured servants, suffered slavery at the hands of slavers. Claiming that Society did this or that is like claiming the gun, or the government, did this or that, meanwhile the slavers still enslave and the slaves "tolerate" it, or else. "Massachusetts, however, growing a bit cautious, did not take Arnold’s tempting advice. Instead, it went so far as to permit Williams and Clarke free passage to Boston, where they set sail for England in November 1651. With Williams gone, Samuell Gorton was the dominant force in the Providence-Warwick government. As president, and then as moderator of the Assembly the following year, Gorton was able to enact the outlawing of slavery in the colony, and also to limit the term of any indentured service to ten years. Unfortunately, the former law remained a dead letter, but it was the first act of abolition of slavery in the American history. Gorton also secured the elimination of imprisonment for debt. Samuell Gorton had successfully completed his odyssey of persecution to become one of the foremost leaders of the colony." Page 199, Conceived in Liberty, Murray Rothbard, 1979 Collective responsibility is a common enough lie used effectively upon those who have no conscience, or have abdicated in favor of blind obedience to falsehood without question. On the 20th day of October 1774, First Federal Congress of The United States (pural) of America "This agreement contained a clause to discontinue the slave trade, and a provision not to import East India tea from any part of the world. In the article respecting non-exportations, the sending of rice to Europe was excepted." On the 1st of April, 1775 "On this occasion, the importation of slaves was expressly prohibited." Thomas Jefferson Declaration of Independence (uncensored version) "he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise ...
I want to talk about the other elephant in the room. Here in Gotham City we are breathing a lot of ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 18, 2020:
I am going to get somewhat off-topic with my response so as to prove a point. The point I wish to prove is the point at which the victims point out by name those who are guilty of the crime that creates the victims. It is a crime to let criminals continue to create more victims when it is in the power of an individual to prevent yet another crime. In order to reach that goal a criminal has to be named as a criminal; not a thing. It does not reach the goal, instead it diverts from the goal, of instead of naming the name of the criminal, the charge of guilt is attached to a thing, such as a Legal Fiction. If we the people (everyone in any jurisdiction on earth) ever name one of the criminals causing harm to so many people (Global Warming if it is true, Climate Change if it is true, Chem Trails if it is true, fluoridation poisoning of the water if it is true, Debasing the currency if it is true, assassination if it is true, mass murder by aggressive war for profit if it is true, etc.), then the proverbial swamp will begin to drain by that first domino. If instead we blame Legal Fictions for the actions of actual criminals, then we miss the mark. If we are convinced by the criminals that the criminals are not doing anything wrong, because the criminals have taken over the lawful process by which criminals are found out and held to account as individuals, then we will never reach the goal while we move ourselves in the opposite direction, following the lies told to us by the criminals, obeying the orders issued to us by the criminals, doing so without question. A piece of the puzzle: Q. Let me ask you finally -- this has been a long road -- how you regard -- what is your explanation for the fact that there has been such little national media coverage of these -- of this trial and this evidence and this event here in this Memphis courtroom, which is the first trial ever to be able to produce evidence on this assassination -- what has happened here that Mighty Wurlitzer is not sounding but is in fact totally silent -- almost totally silent? A. Oh, but -- as we know, silence can be deafening. Disinformation is not only getting certain things to appear in print, it's also getting certain things not to appear in print. I mean, the first -- the first thing I would say as a way of explanation is the incredibly powerful effect of disinformation over a long period of time that I mentioned before. For 30 years the official line has been that James Earl Ray killed Martin Luther King and he did it all by himself. That's 30 years, not -- nothing like the short period when the line was that the Cubans raped the Angolan women. But for 30 years it's James Earl Ray killed Dr. King, did it all by himself. ...
This is how it will happen. [youtube.com] the potential horrors the new American red flag law
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 18, 2020:
There is in that message a hidden Trojan Horse. The infectious (cancerous) lie is the foundation from which the entire fake government foundation is built, and the linchpin which maintains the structure of falsehood. A law is only a law by natural right and only consented to lawfully by the common law process of trial by jury. A Statue (such as Exterminate the Jews) is not a Law, it is a confession of criminality in fact. This was once known, then not known, then known, then not known, generally as the power struggle over facts that matter in any case at Law has been won by people acknowledging or failing to acknowledge the truth of this foundational fact that matters. Just because a Slave Master claims to be the law does not make the Slave Master the law. Just because an exterminator of human beings of a different religion, race, gender, or moral standing claims to be the law does not make that confessed criminal the law. Just because the most powerful gang of criminals within a given geographical area claim to be the law, and subject their victims to an oath of absolute obedience to that criminal gang, does not make that criminal gang the authorities of our human natural laws, the opposite is true in fact. It is not a law by a simple, easy to test, rule. The rule is simple and easy to communicate, to learn, and to be learned by anyone with a working mind capable of logic, reason, and awareness of facts that matter. If it is good for the goose, so the saying goes, it is good for the gander. That is the law. "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you: do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets" It is called the Ancient Law for factual reasons. In this country (America) it was called the common law. In England, in Latin (before English was a language) it was called Legem Terrae (The Law of the Land), which then became in English: the common law. This is documented as factual by those who cared enough to document these facts. When the facts become fictions, and when lies become the foundations which launch and build mountains of lies atop mountains of innocent bodies, the history of mankind becomes sordid, confusing, and filled with accounts of criminals claiming to be the law, and all those criminals throughout the history of mankind have one lie in common: Might Makes Right; because me and my gang insist. I just found in a book new to me (it is not new, it is not news) one more example of how the foundation of actual law is expressed in English. There is a lot of history leading up to this published response to aggressive attacks by criminals counterfeiting government (and religion) which I will not quote from the book, all you get from me now is the legal, lawful, ...
Government contracts for roading are, in my opinion, really just fronts for funnelling our stolen ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 17, 2020:
Many examples of "Government contracts for roading..." can be used to prove a point, all are not the same. A constant, or base principle, of all (fake) government action is detailed well on the official records as a fraud. That whistle was blown awhile ago by Walter Burien in his work on Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, which have evolved (become even more fraudulent) since the whistle was initially blown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frErQZMTe-M That was offered in 2001, it has been 19 (or so) years since. What is routine for those who routinely perpetrate treason?
In addition to my previous statement about opinions clashing in an ontological desert of today, I ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 17, 2020:
"Any opportunity to revolt and overthrow the government weak enough to be overthrown will do for a Bolshevik, providing the ultimate purpose is to apply the marxist theory to the proletarian state development afterwards, in order to arrive to a practical vision of communism." Criminals are motivated to injure weak people. Weak people can be weakened. Criminals can grow stronger. There is a lot of power in lies. Lies strengthen criminals at the expense of victims. Buying into the lies is done for at least two major motives: 1. If you can't beat them, join them. 2. Just following orders, nothing personal. Motive is an important factor. Power is also formed in units called money. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG7lG0ggHck
Progressive critics cannot ignore Peterson. Instead, they frequently insist that Peterson misleads ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 17, 2020:
"Stalinism went to extraordinary lengths to falsify..." What gets me is the simple truth that can be found like a needle in a haystack of lies. If it looks deceptively complicated, acts deceptively complicated, then a reasonable question is gotten. Is it deceptively complicated? Movements are describable as either despotic and top down, or the opposite. What is the opposite of despotic and top down movements? Does the answer require 10 volumes of text? Alexandr Solzhenitsyn Nobel Lecture in Literature 1970 "But let us not forget that violence does not live alone and is not capable of living alone: it is necessarily interwoven with falsehood. Between them lies the most intimate, the deepest of natural bonds. Violence finds its only refuge in falsehood, falsehood its only support in violence. Any man who has once acclaimed violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose falsehood as his PRINCIPLE. At its birth violence acts openly and even with pride. But no sooner does it become strong, firmly established, than it senses the rarefaction of the air around it and it cannot continue to exist without descending into a fog of lies, clothing them in sweet talk. It does not always, not necessarily, openly throttle the throat, more often it demands from its subjects only an oath of allegiance to falsehood, only complicity in falsehood." I think that Solzhenitsyn qualifies as a expert on the subject of despotic, top down, movements. I think also that there are many people all throughout history who have earned a place of authority concerning the opposite. "Responsibility must be individual, or there is no responsibility at all." Equitable Commerce by Josiah Warren, 1852 If it is simple enough for the average person to know internally, then it is in a word: lawful. "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." If it gets very complicated, and every effort to understand it uncovers greater complexity, then that could be seen for what it is in simple terms. A lie requires an exponential increase in lies to cover up the first one, the second one, the fourth one, on and on. Violence simply begets violence. "Any man who has once acclaimed violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose falsehood as his PRINCIPLE." Some people gain power during perfect storms created and maintained for the purpose of transferring power as quickly as possible from everyone who makes anything worth stealing to the creators of the perfect storm. When that happens those who live off falsehood and violence grow exponentially more powerful as their targets grow exponentially less powerful at making things worth stealing, and at defending themselves from Top ...
Is "Capitalism" Destroying the Planet? I have to agree with all the stuff about capitalism's ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 17, 2020:
"And no "free market" or "democratic" system that is NOT sustainable, will er---sustain-- us for long, since we're growing and growing. I cannot understand the morons who don't get this. This is a truth which is far deeper than political questions. It's down in physics and biology. If you foul your nest and destroy it, and that's all you have, you are headed on a path where you are gunna die. What don't you get about this?" In a world where people have been born into a cult for centuries few manage to liberate their minds, but some do, and those liberated minds capitalize on their liberty. Brain power is capitalized and employed to fix the serious problems created and maintained by the cult members whose cult is derived from a falsehood known euphemistically as Might Makes Right. There are many ways in which the cult members express the same basic destructiveness. An example is a group of cult members want riches in an area of their choosing, so these cult members burn out everything that may slow them down as they acquire precisely what they want in that area. Those born into the cult who have not yet liberated their minds, for whatever reason internal or external, cannot be expected to overpower the palpably onerous (ownerous?) falsehoods.
Liberal law professor says Nancy Pelosi destroyed her own case for impeachment... ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 16, 2020:
“RESOLUTION Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. “Resolved, That Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:” Moving to accusations: “Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage.” I read through that and found what I think is something everyone ought to do, which is to get to the truth of any matter involving criminals posing as the government. Example: “(1) President Trump – acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the United States Government – corruptly solicited the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into - “ I don’t usually comment on these topics because people with much more accurate information and insight than I have (such as for example Dr. Steve Pieczenik) give their much more authoritative (accurate accounting of the facts that matter in the case) viewpoint for the cost of perusing. However, the man on the hot seat (President of a Legal Fiction: Nation State) has no Law in America. There is none. If there were Law in America, then the Swamp would never have become one, and anyone afforded access to the Law in America (if it were true) could have put these psychopaths in their place, instead of allowing them to take their places in that Swamp of their malevolent creation. So...to me: Credit goes to Mr. Trump for seeking some semblance of accurate accountability (the actual law power) outside of the lawless Legal Fiction known as U.S.A. Inc. (LLC). Note in the document that no longer is the United States of America such. Now, rather than plural States United, it is singularly a Legal Fiction. That was warned about, the whistle was blown, over 200 years ago. You get what you pay for. https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/documents/articles%20of%20impeachment.pdf
END ALL FOREIGN AID. This represent the money spent the two first years of the traitor's ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 16, 2020:
I suggest a deeper look into the problem, so as to then be in a better position to find an agreeable solution. All National Tax is - by all evidence - foreign aid. This was known even before the Federation was turned into a Nation. Here are the numbers: https://www.usdebtclock.org/
How can you stop the flow of disinformation coming from the mainstream media? Suggestions?
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 16, 2020:
If Rule of Law did return to America there would then be no hush money paid to victims of libel, the perpetrators would face the judgment of The People through their representatives in a trial by jury according to the common law. On the other hand those "settlements" could conceivably break the banks of so-called Mainstream Media, but my guess is that their deep pockets run right through The FED and out of The Public Loot Fund.
Coup d'état: Pelosi says Trump 'will be held accountable' as she signs articles of impeachment...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 15, 2020:
"Wednesday's mostly partly-line House vote to deliver the charges was 228-193, reflecting the deeply divided nation at the start of this presidential election year." The traitors to all good things running the D.C. Legal Fiction have voted. So what? The people in the States (nations) are not divided as claimed. The criminals at Corporate U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) do not - as a RULE - reflect the general will of the people as a whole. The opposite is true, demonstrated routinely since at least 1789 with the Judiciary Act, the Nationalization Act, the Central Banking fraud euphemistically called The First "Bank" of the (corporate) United States (legal fiction), the Whiskey Excise Tax payable in gold (gold was driven out by Gresham's Law), the Whiskey Rebellion "Proclamation," The Alien and Sedition Acts, on, and on, and on, right up to todays routine FACT that matters, those in that criminal cabal do not represent the people in America, and they never have.
Where are your gods now?
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 15, 2020:
Power is scalable.
This looks extremely interesting... [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 15, 2020:
There are many viewpoints. Some are mostly accurate, some mostly false. If there was a way to weed out the mostly false, what would you call it?
Brainstorming:Policies of Goverment Fair negotiable pay gap act removes minimum wage, resets ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 14, 2020:
Labor wages are suppressed by the criminal powers claiming to be the government, so appealing to those powers for a fix to a problem created by them is - to coin a phrase - pissing in the wind. "First in the importance of its evil influence they considered the money monopoly, which consists of the privilege given by the government to certain individuals, or to individuals holding certain kinds of property, of issuing the circulating medium, a privilege which is now enforced in this country by a national tax of ten per cent., upon all other persons who attempt to furnish a circulating medium, and by State laws making it a criminal offense to issue notes as currency. "It is claimed that the holders of this privilege control the rate of interest, the rate of rent of houses and buildings, and the prices of goods, – the first directly, and the second and third indirectly. For, say Proudhon and Warren, if the business of banking were made free to all, more and more persons would enter into it until the competition should become sharp enough to reduce the price of lending money to the labor cost, which statistics show to be less than three-fourths of once per cent. In that case the thousands of people who are now deterred from going into business by the ruinously high rates which they must pay for capital with which to start and carry on business will find their difficulties removed. If they have property which they do not desire to convert into money by sale, a bank will take it as collateral for a loan of a certain proportion of its market value at less than one per cent. discount. "If they have no property, but are industrious, honest, and capable, they will generally be able to get their individual notes endorsed by a sufficient number of known and solvent parties; and on such business paper they will be able to get a loan at a bank on similarly favorable terms. Thus interest will fall at a blow. The banks will really not be lending capital at all, but will be doing business on the capital of their customers, the business consisting in an exchange of the known and widely available credits of the banks for the unknown and unavailable, but equality good, credits of the customers and a charge therefor of less than one per cent., not as interest for the use of capital, but as pay for the labor of running the banks. "This facility of acquiring capital will give an unheard of impetus to business, and consequently create an unprecedented demand for labor, – a demand which will always be in excess of the supply, directly to the contrary of the present condition of the labor market. Then will be seen an exemplification of the words of Richard Cobden that, when two laborers are after one employer, wages fall, but when two employers are after...
5 psychological forces that turn people into political hacks... [thelibertarianrepublic.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 14, 2020:
I found a serious problem early on in the article: "One of the most unique features of the American political experiment is that our founding documents explicitly lay out the belief that all people are created equal, each possessing intrinsic and inherent value, worth, and dignity. Political discourse over the last decade, however, has largely operated contrary to this ideal. Both sides of the aisle lament this loss of civility in politics, and they’re both right." That does not apply to the Constitution of 1789, certainly not compared to the polar opposites a Declaration of Independence, and those Bills of Rights. As to "Political discourse over the las decade..." involving "Both sides of the aisle" there is in that set a closed membership. In order to get in each member has to swear an oath to falsehood, or the member does not actually belong, a case in point is Ron Paul. If it is a requirement to gain membership to claim independence from arbitrary government while arbitrarily governing once in power, then those who actually work to maintain independence from arbitrary government don't belong one either side of that aisle.
The word "fair" has been tossed about much like the words equality, justice, and recompense. This ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 14, 2020:
I could not find cause to listen to the whole video. If someone wants to describe deception to someone else, then the goal is to convey intended meaning intact. A fair way to convey intended meaning intact is to use words that have the same meaning for everyone sharing the same goal: to convey intended meaning intact. A fair way to deceive, on the other hand, is to use words that mean the opposite of the previously agreeable meaning. It is fair for me to deceive you, while it is not fair for you to deceive me. It is right for me to deceive you, because I am exceptional, and it is unwise for you to deceive me because you may then be sent to the gulag for a tenner.
[areomagazine.com] In Praise of Proportionality: How the Courts Will Save Us From the Wackiest of ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 14, 2020:
After the first paragraph the article fell apart. It quickly became obvious that the writer assumes the dogma particular to a cult I call The Cult of Might Makes Right. The assumption is that the government (so-called) and only the government has jurisdiction over facts that matter in a case at law. That is false. That is false constitutionally, and that is false in practice. Take any controversy whatsoever and if the first paragraph to the article is true, then conflict resolution is either under the jurisdiction of the people themselves or jurisdiction is taken by a faction, or a cult, which is a segment of the population less than the whole: the so-called government. That assumption in which the government, and only the government, has the power over judgment - which is the assumption clearly made in the article - is proven wrong in cases that go by the name Revolution. When enough people (a power threshold) enslave everyone under this false assumption (absolute power in the hands of the so-called government) there is then an often (even routine) counter to that abuse of power, and the collective sum total of all the countering being done by all the individuals sharing that need to counter that abuse of power is again called (routinely called) Revolution. There are revolutionary forms of law, which go by such names as Legem Terrae (the law of the land in Latin), due process of law, the Ancient Law, Rule of Law, and recently the common law. If sovereign individuals voluntarily seek adjudication of their conflicting situations, any conflict whatsoever, the rule was established to take their arguments to the people as a whole, such as the early democracies. When the number of people constituting a society under law grow to a size too large for democracy, there is then representatives who represent portions of society, such as in the case of Trial by Jury, exemplified in the Ancient Law, also known as the common law. Rather than a cult, faction, minority, majority, party, group, segment, religion, corporation, or government afforded the power to decide what is a just remedy (adjudication of conflict) that power was afforded to representatives of the people as a whole: the trial jury according to the common law. Those jurors are picked by lot to reach the goal of an accurate representation of the whole people, to avoid cases where power to adjudicate is given to one faction to be abused as people in that faction consume, enslave, injure, or destroy people in an opposing faction: bias. Had the author of the article not failed to recognize the false assumption - the dogma - made by cult members, the article might have led to the actual constitutional employment of Rule of law: power of the people to judge for ...
[areomagazine.com] In Praise of Proportionality: How the Courts Will Save Us From the Wackiest of ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 14, 2020:
From the link: "Human rights have, for many decades now, been a central concept in cultures that embrace the idea of the sovereign individual. When the individual is understood as ensconced within a sphere of liberty, there are necessarily hard limits upon the power of the state to make incursions into that sphere. What a person believes, says, wears or does is prima facie no business of the state. That means that it is no business of a person’s fellow citizens either because, while the state appears in a multitude of guises, there are always fellow citizens under the hood." I just read that much from the link, and from that, I am on the edge of my seat wanting to read the rest of it.
I am arguing only against those Randroid freemarketers for whom the market has replaced both god and...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 14, 2020:
"The bad guys can always outspend you in the courts, and failing that, can warp the laws the laws the courts follow." If you have not heard a coherent answer to your questions, then it may be true that you ought to keep doing what you are obviously doing, which is asking, seeking, and hopefully discovering answers that may work for you in due time. I would like to point out a clear fact that matters and it has to do with that which is originally designed to reach an intended, stated, goal, such as "find the truth" in matters involving conflict between individual people and people in groups. The fact that matters is the fact that these original processes are routinely counterfeited. So people have and share the answers you seek, and people employ those processes that reach the intended goal, such as finding the truth. Then step by step the process moves from the original process with the original goal to the opposite process reaching the opposite goal. 1. Original process routinely reaches (with few and then fewer exceptions step by step in this direction) the intended gaol such as finding the truth. 2. Counterfeiting the original process moves one step, then another step, on and on, away from the intended goal of finding the truth, and therefore each step is, in fact (the truth), a deceptive step: counterfeiting. Example: "It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States." Lysander Spooner, an Essay on The Trial by Jury, 1852 That proves (or discovers the facts that matter in the case: the truth) that market economies work as they ought to, so long as people follow those steps in that direction. You can see it, or you can ignore it, as you decide according to your command of your power of will, free from internal and external deception. Steps made against the truth finding courts (the goal is to find the truth) and steps made to obfuscate the truth are documented very well, such as the step to create a Top Down Court System of Plunder to place that Court System above what was called the Ancient Law, Legem Terrae (Latin for the law of the land), and also called the common law. Admiralty (Summary JUST-US) Courts ...
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 13, 2020:
"In the 1920s, Joseph Goebbels became an avid admirer of Bernays and his writings – despite the fact that Bernays was a Jew. When Goebbels became the minister of propaganda for the Third Reich, he sought to exploit Bernays’ ideas to the fullest extent possible. For example, he created a “Fuhrer cult” around Adolph Hitler." The manipulation of the American mind: Edward Bernays and the birth of public relations
Tax collectors have never been highly regarded in society. Even in biblical times, they were ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 13, 2020:
When the word "tax" is believed to be a synonym for the words "extortion payment," then there are at least 3 groups, two having opposing viewpoints generally. 1. Taxes are good, they fund the system (extortion with badges or otherwise), we love taxes. 2. Taxes are at best a necessary evil, if we don't pay them, then worse evil will take over. 3. Taxes are theft (call it taxes if you wish to invest in it) "Tax collectors have never been highly regarded in society." Look deeper, please. "It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States." Lysander Spooner, Essay on the Trial by Jury, 1852
I am curious to know people’s feelings concerning the state of education in America. As a college...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 12, 2020:
Public School (so-called) started out as corporate, religious, government, subsidy, paid for by ill-gotten gains and used to secure power by criminals over victims, and that has not changed much over the centuries. At times the criminals in power took effective steps to maintain the ignorance of their corporate, religious, and government slaves. Then a new age of propaganda arose, with notable figures along the way, including advancements by Prussians, and more recently the work of Edward Bernays. For a well-researched look at American National Public School see John Taylor Gatto, example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi5R9WI6_w0
[youtu.be] I believe what she is saying
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 9, 2020:
That looks like witness testimony. What is the cost of spreading false propaganda? In a world of lawlessness the cost is endured by the powerless victims.
Who is the world’s no. 1 bad guy? | The Outline
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 9, 2020:
Good question. Does anyone remember the Essay that earned the author a stint in the U.S. Corporate National Gulag? http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/AP.pdf That is a form of Majority Rules if someone were to attempt to explain Majority Rules by example. How does one actually know who is the world's number one bad guy without actually doing something to find out? Most claims these days are fake news.
I f folks would get past party fanaticism they could see how republicans, and democrats really are ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 9, 2020:
The term RINO applies to fake republicans like fake news. There ought to be similar terms like DINO for Democrats In Name Only, and GINO for Government In Name Only. If it lies like a treasonous criminal, and threatens like a treasonous criminal, and routinely resorts to aggressive violence against innocent people including children, then it probably aids and abets them to call them Republicans, Democrats, or members of the Government.
An eye opening video by an American of Iranian descent about what’s really going on in the Middle ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 8, 2020:
"Sorry, this content isn't available right now" Is there another link?
I’ve been asking one question for years and have NEVER heard an answer. How do we get criminals, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 4, 2020:
I can attempt to offer at least one example of an answer to your question. If you don't hear the answer as a result of my failure to explain it, then you can ask questions. If you refuse to hear an answer, you can achieve that goal. Rule of Law is Voluntary Association for Mutual Defense, has been, is, and always will be the answer you are asking about. One individual alone can make your answer true on his own if he is powerful enough to do so. "How do we get criminals, and other people who don’t obey laws, to give up their guns?" An example is provided recently when the Lone-Gunman was shooting up a church in Texas, and one individual ensured that the criminal gave up his gun. Expecting a bunch of liars, thieves, torturers, slavers, consumers of all that is good, to protect you, and provide you with the answer to your question, is unwise. When the people in Waco Texas called 911 their tormentors answered the phone. Rule of Law can be explained in other words: The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots Page 40 Private Prosecutors "For decades before and after the Revolution, the adjudication of criminals in America was governed primarily by the rule of private prosecution: (1) victims of serious crimes approached a community grand jury, (2) the grand jury investigated the matter and issued an indictment only if it concluded that a crime should be charged, and (3) the victim himself or his representative (generally an attorney but sometimes a state attorney general) prosecuted the defendant before a petit jury of twelve men. Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions - the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim. Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state - but for their own vindication. The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person. A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding. When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name - even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action. Private prosecution meant that criminal cases were for the most part limited by the need of crime victims for vindication. Crime victims held the keys to a potential defendant's fate and often negotiated the settlement of criminal cases. After a case was initiated in the name of the people, however, private prosecutors were prohibited from withdrawing the action pursuant to private agreement with the defendant. ...
Have you ever come across this expression? Democracy is the tyranny of the uninformed. ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 4, 2020:
The often repeated false meaning for democracy is that democracy is Mob Rule. I'd like to address that falsehood before addressing the topic question, because the topic question does not have the same meaning when dealing with the original, organic, meaning for democracy compared to the altered, counterfeited, false meaning for the word democracy. The original meaning for the word democracy is government by the people, which is expressly not government by a segment of the people, such as "The Elite," or "The Mob," or a faction, or a minority, or majority. The whole people was, is, and constitutes the government in a democracy, leaving no one out, no one is disenfranchised, except for those who do not volunteer to be a member of the democracy, such as criminals. Those who repeat (parrot) the false meaning could (but won't) explain how that false meaning is supposed to make sense. They can't because it makes no sense. The false meaning arrives on the scene from the Aristocrats when faced with slaves that refuse to continue to obey dictatorial orders without question, so the Aristocrats claim that the Angry Mob is now Democracy. The Aristocrats run arbitrary, despotic, tyrannical, criminal, "governments," and so the idea that they are the authorities concerning what is or is not government fades in this light. Moving onto the question: "Democracy is the tyranny of the uninformed." From the Mob Rule (false) explanation for the above statement, it is self-evident. If Democracy is Mob Rule (tyranny), then it is tyranny of the Mob, and whether or not they are informed is another matter. From the non-false meaning of the word democracy (the people as a whole rule themselves) it could turn into tyranny if those members of a democracy use their power to subjugate other people in other governments, then it is merely a crime that is accurately accountable as one, and a crime that would then be traced back to the individual perpetrators who hatched that criminal plan, and the perpetrators who followed up on that criminal plan to perpetrate crimes upon the people outside of the democracy in question. Why would the tyrants be uniformed? If they choose to be tyrants then that is not an accident, it is an informed decision. It could be claimed that the tyrants who are tyrants are uninformed about the true consequences of their tyrannical actions, but how would that be known, when tyrants, as a rule, lie, and can't be trusted. If someone is going to attempt to argue that Democracy, no matter what it started out as, is now Mob Rule, and Tyrannical, then my point is to point out that Tyranny is what it is, and the reason for calling it something other than Tyranny is either obfuscation, to help cover-up the facts that make Tyranny what it is...
Part One As I have talked with folks about Lincoln's War I have often stated I think things would...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 4, 2020:
Point 1 "People have suggested we would all be speaking German had the U. S. remained divided." We were divided into Masters and Slaves in 1789, so that point is moot. Also, if you look into the work of Anthony Sutton then you can find out who financed all sides in World War II, creating it, doing so for profit. Therefore it was the usurpation in 1789 that enabled the criminals to take over America, to then profit on aggressive wars ever since, also rendering Point 1 moot. See also: New Constitution Creates A National Government; Will Not Abate Foreign Influence; Dangers Of Civil War And Despotism Maryland Gazette and Baltimore Advertiser, March 7, 1788. "There are but two modes by which men are connected in society, the one which operates on individuals, this always has been, and ought still to be called, national government; the other which binds States and governments together (not corporations, for there is no considerable nation on earth, despotic, monarchical, or republican, that does not contain many subordinate corporations with various constitutions) this last has heretofore been denominated a league or confederacy. The term federalists is therefore improperly applied to themselves, by the friends and supporters of the proposed constitution. This abuse of language does not help the cause; every degree of imposition serves only to irritate, but can never convince. They are national men, and their opponents, or at least a great majority of them, are federal, in the only true and strict sense of the word. "Whether any form of national government is preferable for the Americans, to a league or confederacy, is a previous question we must first make up our minds upon. . . . "That a national government will add to the dignity and increase the splendor of the United States abroad, can admit of no doubt: it is essentially requisite for both. That it will render government, and officers of government, more dignified at home is equally certain. That these objects are more suited to the manners, if not [the] genius and disposition of our people is, I fear, also true. That it is requisite in order to keep us at peace among ourselves, is doubtful. That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively; and, after all, I have strong doubts whether all its advantages are not more specious than solid. We are vain, like other nations. We wish to make a noise in the world; and feel hurt that Europeans are not so attentive to America in peace, as they were to America in war. We are also, no doubt, desirous of cutting a figure in history. Should we not reflect, that quiet is happiness? That content and pomp are incompatible? I have either read or heard this truth, which the ...
Disturbing Audio Of Trump Not Knowing Who Drone Target Is Emerges - YouTube
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 4, 2020:
I think that this too falls into the category of The Psychotic Narrative. In order to gain power over people, enslaving them, there must be effective deception, otherwise people would see through the lies being told by the criminals who seek power over people. Not news by the way: "8 Hear, my son, your father's instruction And do not forsake your mother's teaching ; 9 Indeed, they are a graceful wreath to your head And ornaments about your neck. 10 My son, if sinners entice you, Do not consent. 11 If they say, "Come with us, Let us lie in wait for blood, Let us ambush the innocent without cause ; 12 Let us swallow them alive like Sheol, Even whole, as those who go down to the pit ; 13 We will find all kinds of precious wealth, We will fill our houses with spoil ; 14 Throw in your lot with us, We shall all have one purse," 15 My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your feet from their path, 16 For their feet run to evil And they hasten to shed blood. 17 Indeed, it is useless to spread the baited net In the sight of any bird ; 18 But they lie in wait for their own blood ; They ambush their own lives. 19 So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence ; It takes away the life of its possessors."
The Libertarian movement needs a kick in the pants... [reason.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 3, 2020:
"I'd argue that the libertarian movement is far more effective and appealing when it is cast in pre-political and certainly pre-partisan terms." Me too.
Why is this story significant? Because it shows how a body of government can be influenced by any ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 3, 2020:
It is not government in the context of free people maintaining their freedom: liberty. It is government in the context of what criminals do when they organized under a false flag. This whistle has been blown all throughout the history of America. Look up the work of Walter Burien Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, or the work of Anthony Sutton earlier. "But this is just a part of the game that has been rigged. So good luck fixing this system. We've allowed to many to slide." If it cannot police itself, if it cannot keep the criminals from infiltrating it, and if it instead is a sanctuary for aiding and abetting criminals who steal, torture, and murder anyone it wants from The Public, then it is organized crime under a false flag: a thinning facade. The whistle was blown a long time ago: "It is not merely the number of impeachments, that are to be expected to make public officers honest and attentive in their business. A general opinion must pervade the community, that the house, the body to impeach them for misconduct, is disinterested, and ever watchful for the public good; and that the judges who shall try impeachments, will not feel a shadow of biass. Under such circumstances, men will not dare transgress, who, not deterred by such accusers and judges, would repeatedly misbehave. We have already suffered many and extensive evils, owing to the defects of the confederation, in not providing against the misconduct of public officers. When we expect the law to be punctually executed, not one man in ten thousand will disobey it: it is the probable chance of escaping punishment that induces men to transgress. It is one important mean to make the government just and honest, rigidly and constantly to hold, before the eyes of those who execute it, punishment, and dismission from office, for misconduct. These are principles no candid man, who has just ideas of the essential features of a free government, will controvert. They are, to be sure, at this period, called visionary, speculative and anti-governmental—but in the true stile of courtiers, selfish politicians, and flatterers of despotism—discerning republican men of both parties see their value. They are said to be of no value, by empty boasting advocates for the constitution, who, by their weakness and conduct, in fact, injure its cause much more than most of its opponents. From their high sounding promises, men are led to expect a defence of it, and to have their doubts removed. When a number of long pieces appear, they, instead of the defence, &c. they expected, see nothing but a parade of names—volumes written without ever coming to the point—cases quoted between which and ours there is not the least similitude—and partial extracts made from histories and ...
Here’s a reminder of the kind of foundational thinking that we need to keep alive: “I have ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 2, 2020:
Ignore the common law (check that balances government corruption) and it will go away? Does that fall into the category of failure to acknowledge history ensures a cycle of corruption which leads to violent revolution (also corruption) which leads to corruption? Any so-called government that enforces arbitrary rules (such as subsidizing the African Slave Trade) is not a government, it is counterfeit, a fact of the matter, self-evident, inarguable, and routinely demonstrated by the criminal usurpers. To make the counterfeit government smaller is to remove the arbitrary nature of it, such as would be the case if the law was in force in America. Where is such an example, other than a white wash, or a desperate attempt by the criminals in office to throw the public a bone, a patsy, a useful idiot, thrown under the bus? People will claim, falsely, that an example is the Civil War, whereby finally the African Slave Trade, an obviously criminal enterprise, was no longer The Law of the Land. People may also claim that finally the First Bank of the United States (a private corporation under a false federal flag) was finally done away with and also no longer supposedly The Law of the Land. Or the obviously unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts, were finally, once and for all, placed back into the genie bottle, also no longer The Law of the Land. A private corporation was created in 1789 and placed in charge of the former free people, the former free and independent states, and the former Federal (voluntary) government, and it was called a single Nation from then on. The Law of the Land actual was removed and replaced with a Profitable Monopoly run by criminals, and just ask them if you The People, you The Public, can accuse one of them, have an independent grand jury investigate them with all the legal jurisdiction afforded a common law grand jury, have them presented with a trial date, and have them face The People, you The Public, in a trial by jury which is a trial by the country, and see what they say to you in an official, arbitrary, response. No, not since 1789, you can't help save the slaves from the slave masters, instead they will force you at gunpoint to return runaway slaves for capital punishment or worse: a life of slavery. No, not since 1789, you can't take the Central Banking Frauds to court, win the common-law suit, and put in motion a reduction of government, an end to the Federal Reserve Central Banking Fraud, no, they will say, that is not allowed. Only we the government can police our own, they will say, and they will say that with the same authority afforded to any other criminal Mob running an extortion racket. Offer up arbitrary power and there will never be a shortage of criminals at each other's throats ...
Top 20 Cause of Deaths Worldwide (1990-2018) [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 2, 2020:
Where are the numbers on Democide? https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM Also look into the work of Anthony Sutton such as: 1. Wall Street and the Bolshevik revolution 2. Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler 3. Wall Street and FDR There is a list these days concerning Jeffery Epstein style "suicides," that somehow make it onto those types of reports concerning Deaths Worldwide. 20 million Russian Suicides during the Wall Street funded Bolshevik pogrom: Suicide by Counterfeit Government. 6 million German Suicides during the Wall Street funded Nazi pogrom: Suicide by Counterfeit Government. Who funded the Aggressive Wars for Profit between 1990 and 2018, are those deaths also counted as suicides? https://www.usdebtclock.org/
Who creates money? [youtube.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Jan 1, 2020:
"Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of there interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire 14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Anheuser-Bush Brewing co. V. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318. The Jury found there was no lawful consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing." STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF SCOTT First National Bank of Montgomery, Plaintiff vs Jerome Daly, Defendant. December 9, 1968
Next are 3 example explanations of misfeasance, misprision, treason, or whatever wording works to ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 31, 2019:
In the previous effort to convey the facts that matter in the case against counterfeit governments a statement was made concerning a fork in the road for the English and the Irish people as a whole, as in The Public Thing. It may be difficult to grasp at first but the law, if it is genuine, is for everyone: for The Public as a whole, and that applies no matter the individual, family, church, corporation, town, city, county, state, or federation of states, or even federation of federations on Earth. If it is the law it is as good for English as it is for Irish, Indians, Africans, Slaves, or so-called Barbarians. If is the law it is as good for one as it is for the other one, even if one was once a criminal. The law is not good for a criminal planning a crime with the certain force of will, and malice aforethought, to perpetrate a crime, IN THE MIND OF THE CRIMINAL. In actual reality (outside the mind of a criminal in the process of being a criminal) crime is not good for the criminal any more than it is good for the victims targeted by a criminal, for the same criminal could have chosen the right fork in the road traveled by the individual before the individual ran into that fork in the road where the individual decided, by power of will, to take a bad turn down a bad road. In this effort I will move from the obvious confession of malice, malevolence, malfeasance, misfeasance, nonfeasance, and treason, concerning the English counterfeit government attempts to exterminate and enslave the Irish. I will move from the obvious turn down the wrong path by all the English who could have used English common law (actual not counterfeit) to completely remove any further consumption of Irish lives, so as to line the pockets and fill the bank accounts of English Empire Investors. I will turn also from the same failure of the Americans to do right by the Indians native to America when Europeans arrived, a failure to use actual law to avoid any further consumption of Indian lives, so as to line the pockets and fill the bank accounts of English Empire Investors. I will turn to the case against the consumers of African lives. Many people fought the good fight in America, a revolutionary fight against counterfeit governments, and among those many people were many people (certainly not enough people) fighting against African Slavery, very few (only 2 I could find so far) used the actual law power. Cases in point: Hold on, after searching again, I found a very good example from a Web Page that just now crossed my path: Case 1: "The celebrated Somerset ruling of 1772 concerned a slave's liberty and status as property. The slave James Somerset (or Sommersett) was the property of a Boston customs official, Charles Stewart. Somerset was brought to ...
What are your thoughts on immigration/illegal immigration?
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 31, 2019:
I just started reading "Conceived in Liberty" by Murray Rothbard and found this: "But how was the ownership of this great new land mass to be allocated? Basically, new and previously unowned land can come into ownership in two different ways: either the settler – the pioneer who, in the later phrase of John Locke, “mixes his labor with the soil” and brings the previously unused and fallow natural resources into productive use – is conceded ownership of the land he has in this way “created”; or his is not." Footnote: “If it be objected that the pioneer has not really created the land, it is also true that no producer “creates” matter. The builder of a factory has not in the ultimate sense “created” the matter in the factory; he has rather transformed by the use of his labor the previously nature-given matter. He has shifted this original matter into other forms more useful to himself and to his fellow men: this shifting is the meaning of “production.” And this is precisely what the pioneer has done in transforming the land." Page 37 The book (so far) details how people settled empty lands while escaping the ruinous despotism perpetrated by criminal governments all throughout Europe: runaway slaves running to sanctuary in America. And to those who appear to claim that Indians (Native people in America since migrating themselves from the area now known as Russia) owned the land and Americans stole it from them, there is clear evidence that this narrative ignores many competing powers and forces which work against despotic governments stealing ownership of land from anyone, including Indians. In the time frame of the French and Indian Wars there were 6 Indian Nations that formed a confederacy. Had the criminal Federalist Party failed the coup to turn the American Confederacy into a Profitable Monopoly Nation-State in 1789, it is possible that Indian Nations could have joined the American Confederacy, as well as Canada. The so-called "immigration policy" could have moved decidedly towards the libertarian option rather than the despotic one created by the criminal Federalist Party in 1789: see for example the Naturalization Acts of 1790. For a clear look into the despotic mentality that creates and maintains counterfeit governments (criminals posing as the government), and their "immigration policies" check this out from The Cambridge History of Law in America, Volume 1 Early America (1580-1815) Edited by Michael Grossberg, Christopher Tomlins "In all previous cases, and in the protracted English attempts to seize parts of norther France, conquest had been justified on the grounds of dynastic inheritance: a claim, that is, based on civil law. In America, however, this claim obviously could not be used. There ...
Preventing "The Tyranny of the Majority" As the saying goes, a democracy is two wolves and a ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 29, 2019:
Modern falsehoods (used to deceive the sheep) include this redefining job done on the word democracy. For those who prefer to know better: Thomas Paine Rights of Man Chapter III Page 176 "Mr. Burke is so little acquainted with constituent principles of government, that he confounds democracy and representation together. Representation was a thing unknown in the ancient democracies. In those the mass of the people met and enacted laws (grammatically speaking) in the first person. Simple democracy was no other than the common hall of the ancients. It signifies the form, as well as the public principle of the government. As those democracies increased in population, and the territory extended, the simple democratical form became unwieldy and impracticable; and as the system of representation was not known, the consequence was, they either degenerated convulsively into monarchies, or became absorbed into such as then existed. Had the system of representation been then understood, as it now is, there is no reason to believe that those forms of government, now called monarchical or aristocratical, would ever have taken place. It was the want of some method to consolidate the parts of society, after it became too populous, and too extensive for the simple democratical form, and also the lax and solitary condition of shepherds and herdsmen in other parts of the world, that afforded opportunities to those unnatural modes of government to begin. "As it is necessary to clear away the rubbish of errors, into which the subject of government has been thrown, I will proceed to remark on some others. "It has always been the political craft of courtiers and courtgovernments, to abuse something which they called republicanism; but what republicanism was, or is, they never attempt to explain. let us examine a little into this case. "The only forms of government are the democratical, the aristocratical, the monarchical, and what is now called the representative. "What is called a republic is not any particular form of government. It is wholly characteristical of the purport, matter or object for which government ought to be instituted, and on which it is to be employed, Res-Publica, the public affairs, or the public good; or, literally translated, the public thing. It is a word of a good original, referring to what ought to be the character and business of government; and in this sense it is naturally opposed to the word monarchy, which has a base original signification. It means arbitrary power in an individual person; in the exercise of which, himself, and not the res-publica, is the object. "Every government that does not act on the principle of a Republic, or in other words, that does not make the res-publica its whole and sole object, ...
I am convinced that the left wing cult is an insane plague on society that we need a vaccination ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 29, 2019:
You may find agreement in the work of Eric Fromm, such as "The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness," and "Sane Society." I agree, but the Cult is not exclusively populated by people claiming to be on some nebulous Left. It is The Cult of Might Makes Right, and membership is exclusive to those who propagate the lie the inspires aggressive violence as a means to gain power over people. "But let us not forget that violence does not live alone and is not capable of living alone: it is necessarily interwoven with falsehood. Between them lies the most intimate, the deepest of natural bonds. Violence finds its only refuge in falsehood, falsehood its only support in violence. Any man who has once acclaimed violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose falsehood as his PRINCIPLE. At its birth violence acts openly and even with pride. But no sooner does it become strong, firmly established, than it senses the rarefaction of the air around it and it cannot continue to exist without descending into a fog of lies, clothing them in sweet talk. It does not always, not necessarily, openly throttle the throat, more often it demands from its subjects only an oath of allegiance to falsehood, only complicity in falsehood." Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Lecture in Literature, 1970
Wanted to get your feedback on a possible text change on the main page for new visitors. It ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 29, 2019:
Oppose censorship, speak your mind. Fight back against deception, compare notes, compete to discover the truth.
Fight back! Support state level organizations- [ammoland.com] Please note the above linked-to ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 28, 2019:
I'm calling bullshit here. If there was law in America, which there is not, then those who perpetrate treason would do so knowing that they would face almost certain death by the laws enforced by this country, the people, employing their common laws. The author of this bullshit writes: "These billionaire politicians, with the help of the mainstream media, push a false narrative that we are safer if we are unarmed." Anyone in so-called "mainstream media" could be up on charges (facing the country, which is facing a common law jury) for sedition, or at least libel, having clear evidence published and propagated to the public at large. Someone aiding and abetting criminals who work to take from us our rights is someone aiding and abetting criminals who work to take from us our rights: a matter of fact. The problem is disuse of the process that determines a fact from fiction according to law actual: not according to criminal rules created and enforced by criminals: statutes. So the more destructive false narrative is this narrative whereby only people in the government can tell us plebes what a fact is or what a fact is not. Example: "According to Murdock v. Pennsylvania, you cannot directly tax a right." Anyone claiming to be a judge is not JUST someone publishing lies claimed to be facts in a Newspaper, not JUST someone facing sedition or libel charges brought to the people for the judgment of the people in their common law jury trials. A judge perpetrating bad behavior, such as refusing to acknowledge our rights, or dictating orders to be obeyed without question, where the consequence is cruel and unusual punishment for failure to blindly obey such orders, especially concerning number one our free speech, or number two our right to defend ourselves with arms other than words. A judge perpetrating bad behavior is a treasonous judge facing the death penalty as an actual law in fact. One of the Presidents of The United States of America while America was employing actual rule of law understood the nature of this false narrative that so many people accept as gospel. The false narrative is false, we as individuals are the government, and if we command our power lawfully, we ensure that these criminals have no power over us, in fact. The devil is not so much in the details as it is in the falsehoods. Why is that not simple? Moving on in the article, looking for any mention of actual employment of rule of law, I find: "National groups are great to support." There are 50 or so Nations in a Federation of Nations. If someone claims that the Nation is not all the people in each State, and instead the Nation is ONE thing, not many things, then clearly that individual is infected with the false narrative. How clearly? ...
Capitalism vs. Socialism Decades after capitalism seemed to have triumphed over socialism, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 28, 2019:
This capitalist explains a false narrative and that may be due to this crony capitalists experiences while operating in a fascist (criminal) government, where corporations are legal fictions afforded Special Treatment. An example would be food made with any currently "legal" poisons, food advertised as food, when in reality it is categorically not food, unless of course there is no common meaning for the word food, or for the word government, or for the word is. In this example someone who is paying taxes to the (criminal) government for equal protection from frauds (false advertisers) finds a (criminal) injustice system heavily favoring corporate beings over actual human beings. Some corporations pay no taxes, such as one of the major military contractors. Other corporations are paid any amount of money they want to spend, such as the so-called Central Bank, falsely called (false advertising) The Federal Reserve Bank. So a fascist who makes a killing in a fascist regime (criminal government exemplified by the Nazi's who were funded into being by Wall Street: see the work done by Anthony Sutton) will parrot the lie that "we" operate in a "free market," but no such thing is true. It is demonstrably false in fact. So a fascist parroting the lie concerning how "we" operate in a "free market" will also claim that the major opposing faction are exclusively the criminal faction whereby those in the opposing faction are the only ones aiding, abetting, supporting, and employing a criminal "socialist" government. In reality socialism was, is, and can continue to be a simple voluntary agreement made by people in society, that has no connection whatsoever with government at all. That is the original meaning of the word socialism: a social concept, not a government concept. Those who exemplified the move from socialism (a social concept) to a government concept were calling themselves Communists, as exemplified by the Bolsheviks under Stalin, who were also funding into power by Wall Street. The Communists, in their Communist Manifesto reject Socialism in fact. So there are the simple facts. Fascist claim to support free markets from their advantage in criminal governments, and they call the Communists by the name Socialists. Communists, by any name other than a true name (criminals), call the opposition Conservatives, Republicans, anything but a true name: Criminals. Meanwhile all the targets, who are those who still dare to produce anything worth stealing, are blinded by the mired pile of stinking falsehoods; divided and conquered.
If Trump built a Mar-a-Lago in your state and gave you membership, would you support making the ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 27, 2019:
Thomas Paine Rights of Man Chapter III Page 176 "Mr. Burke is so little acquainted with constituent principles of government, that he confounds democracy and representation together. Representation was a thing unknown in the ancient democracies. In those the mass of the people met and enacted laws (grammatically speaking) in the first person. Simple democracy was no other than the common hall of the ancients. It signifies the form, as well as the public principle of the government. As those democracies increased in population, and the territory extended, the simple democratical form became unwieldy and impracticable; and as the system of representation was not known, the consequence was, they either degenerated convulsively into monarchies, or became absorbed into such as then existed. Had the system of representation been then understood, as it now is, there is no reason to believe that those forms of government, now called monarchical or aristocratical, would ever have taken place. It was the want of some method to consolidate the parts of society, after it became too populous, and too extensive for the simple democratical form, and also the lax and solitary condition of shepherds and herdsmen in other parts of the world, that afforded opportunities to those unnatural modes of government to begin. "As it is necessary to clear away the rubbish of errors, into which the subject of government has been thrown, I will proceed to remark on some others. "It has always been the political craft of courtiers and courtgovernments, to abuse something which they called republicanism; but what republicanism was, or is, they never attempt to explain. let us examine a little into this case. "The only forms of government are the democratical, the aristocratical, the monarchical, and what is now called the representative. "What is called a republic is not any particular form of government. It is wholly characteristical of the purport, matter or object for which government ought to be instituted, and on which it is to be employed, Res-Publica, the public affairs, or the public good; or, literally translated, the public thing. It is a word of a good original, referring to what ought to be the character and business of government; and in this sense it is naturally opposed to the word monarchy, which has a base original signification. It means arbitrary power in an individual person; in the exercise of which, himself, and not the res-publica, is the object. "Every government that does not act on the principle of a Republic, or in other words, that does not make the res-publica its whole and sole object, is not a good government. Republican government is no other than government established and conducted for the interest of the public, as well ...
Individual rights are the most important rights. You protect individual rights and you protect ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 27, 2019:
Special interests - or factions - be them super minority, minority, almost half, half, slightly more than half, majority, or super majority are either collective interests (each individual interest being the same as each other individual interest in the group collected as one faction), or individual on their own interests, having no connection to anyone else's interest, and in the collective interest case, no individual can have any more rights (or wrongs) than any other individual in each group all the time, every time, every place. The deception works when the deceivers deceive each individual who is then part of a group of deceived individuals whereby those deceived individuals in the deceived individual group share the same false projection of rights (or wrongs) onto things, or ideas such as Legal Fictions, such as corporations, or factions, or governments. "The gun did it," is an example of the same deception. No gun ever thought about murdering someone, and no gun ever loaded itself (possessive misuse of grammar?), and then pull the part of the gun called the trigger, intending to murder someone. If the fiction were true, then gun's could have rights, such as the right to defend itself against liars, thieves, and murderers. It isn't a far stretch of the deception that places rights, or wrongs, on things, to a deception that places rights, wrongs, thoughts, actions, responsibility, and accountability on Legal Fictions, Corporations, or any group of individuals who belong in a group because all the people in the group think, or act, in specified ways which places them in those groups accurately. Criminals belong in the criminal group, and they have no rights, they have wrongs that can be remedied, redeemed, or in some way forgiven; certainly not forgotten. Criminals in corporations are criminals because they perpetrate crimes, and the whole corporation only becomes a criminal organization if one has to perpetrate a crime to belong in that criminal corporation, such as a despotic, arbitrary, government. A despotic, arbitrary, criminal cabal, or government, or cartel, is easily identified as one when those in the faction claim immunity from the criminal rules they enforce on their victims: a confession if you will. Edit: the comment above was edited in the first paragraph due to an incomplete sentence invovling the word "either." I finished the either/or part of the message intended.
Government creates a black market of drugs and blood money through prohibition, then under the War ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 24, 2019:
If it is an organization that routinely perpetrates crimes upon innocent victims, then it is organized crime. Calling it "the government" is a transfer of power from innocent victims to guilty criminals, and the victims are rendered powerless in their defense, while the criminals grow stronger as each parrot parrots the same demonstrably false lie.
Antonio Gramsci. "What Is Hegemony?" Italian Marxist Gramsci Asks One Basic Question: Why Do the ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 24, 2019:
Classic blame transfered from guilty people to innocent people. A con man will do the same thing. After effective deception perpetrated by the con man that criminal will then claim that the victim consented to the transfer of power from victim to criminal. Deception is thereby swept under the rug, another form of deception, and those who believe that after all the brainwashing done to them is their free will, prove the point, as people can be molded into compliant slaves, Uncle Toms, and mercenaries willing to give their lives in defense of their collective slavery.
How Do Civil Wars Happen Shared from a friend.. This is a fascinating (and scary) read. One ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 23, 2019:
"Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that's not the system that runs this country. The Democrat's system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country." That is a fraudulent claim. The system of government today (since 1789) in America is based upon the arbitrary judgments of those in power. If it were a constitutional government, under the rule of law, then the countries (each state) would still be following the original constitution: The Articles of Confederation. Criminals broke the law when they stepped outside (outlaws) the Articles of Confederation in order to create a Profitable Monopoly Nation-State in place of the constitutional federation of independent states. Why is there Civil War? In the first place war is not civil, and there are always aggressors in wars, it is a criminal act, it is not civil. That was explained well enough here: "No. 3 - New Constitution Creates A National Government; Will Not Abate Foreign Influence; Dangers Of Civil War And Despotism" Published in the Maryland Gazette and Baltimore Advertiser, March 7, 1788 "There are but two modes by which men are connected in society, the one which operates on individuals, this always has been, and ought still to be called, national government; the other which binds States and governments together (not corporations, for there is no considerable nation on earth, despotic, monarchical, or republican, that does not contain many subordinate corporations with various constitutions) this last has heretofore been denominated a league or confederacy. The term federalists is therefore improperly applied to themselves, by the friends and supporters of the proposed constitution. This abuse of language does not help the cause; every degree of imposition serves only to irritate, but can never convince. They are national men, and their opponents, or at least a great majority of them, are federal, in the only true and strict sense of the word. "Whether any form of national government is preferable for the Americans, to a league or confederacy, is a previous question we must first make up our minds upon. . . . "That a national government will add to the dignity and increase the splendor of the United States abroad, can admit of no doubt: it is essentially requisite for both. That it will render government, and officers of government, more dignified at home is equally certain. That these objects are more suited to the manners, if not [the] genius and disposition of our people is, I fear, also true. That it is requisite in order to keep us at peace among ourselves, is doubtful. That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively; and, after all, I...
So I recently read that a member feels that this forum is an echo chamber of conservative thinking. ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 23, 2019:
I dispute both. The modern left is a mirror image of the modern right as far as the base ideology that is contained within the deceptive words Might Makes Right. As soon as someone challenges that base deception the right and the left are either silent or they go into attack mode, shooting the messenger, or diverting the topic by other means, as a rule. The left and right argue over what the mightiest ought to do to the lesser might once in power. Any discussions on competitive alternatives to the Might Makes Right dogma are uniformly dismissed, and once out of sight, competition in law forms is out of mind.
I don’t spend much time on this page and I’ve been trying to figure out why it doesn’t appeal ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 22, 2019:
"... love intellectual debate..." Perhaps the chap is very busy making ends meet, and has little time for those things that he loves.
Hi all, I'm a right leaning centrist, I'm currently struggling with formulating my opinion on a ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 22, 2019:
The libertarian (not a political party, rather a reasoned approach to rule of law) concept is basically the golden rule applied in all cases: voluntary association. So this concept can be applied to anything including people moving nearby: immigration. If no one is currently occupying land, then who is to say that the first person wandering onto the vacant land is not just as eligible for ownership as is anyone else, so long as ownership is also defined with the same golden rule? An example is provided during the Revolutionary War when German mercenaries (Hessians) were aiding and abetting the criminal British during the perpetration of War of Aggression by the British: "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." Extrapolating that information if you will, the immigration policy at the start of America is thereby defined. If you do not make war upon us, you are as welcome as anyone else to the gifts of nature, so long as you take care of those gifts, and you become as independent as the rest of us, and therefore you are also able to defend your property individually, and then we all constitute a collective force of defense against those who make war upon us. If a gang of Marxists criminals, or a gang of Fascist criminals, or both, gain control of a National government, then those criminals may allow criminals to own property, which aids, and abets, supports, crime against society. That is what the Marxist "Democrats" (Democrat in name only), and the Fascist "Republicans" (Republican in name only) craft as their "immigration policy." They ...
I don’t spend much time on this page and I’ve been trying to figure out why it doesn’t appeal ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 22, 2019:
The wool does not fall easily from the eyes of so-called conservatives as they refuse to see that they have been lied to for their entire lives, on the subject of the Nation-State. As far as I can tell (assuming of course) the general consensus among so-called conservatives is that the criminal Constitution of 1789 is a gift from God, and therefore it is on par with the Bible: sacrosanct. When faced with the facts that matter in the case these so-called conservatives routinely resort to typical political censorship tactics if they engage the facts that matter in the case at all. So the shoe is clearly on the other foot as so-called conservatives claim that the Marxists (so-called liberals) have been lied to, and it is those people who face the facts as if the facts were as Kriptonite is to Super Man, but not us conservatives, our foundations are sacrosanct.
"The Roosevelt administration, too, embraced the notion that writers and artists should immerse ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 21, 2019:
It may be worth the time and effort to look into the work done by Anthony Sutton concerning the power behind Roosevelt. Sutton's work is extensive and the same group of people (under the heading Wall Street) financed Roosevelt into power, Nazi Germany into power, and those same criminals (linked in a common cause) financed all the "revolutionary" groups in Russia, including the "winners" those infamous Bolsheviks.
Winning the fight beyond elections and legislation... [ammoland.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 20, 2019:
If people are fed a constant diet of the same regurgitated lies then the people are going to excrete the same bullshit. If the people are going to be told that only employees of the government are in power to decide what is a fact that matters, or what is the law of the land, then the people are going to end up believing these lies, as a matter of demonstrable fact. Take this current article for example: "Winning the fight beyond elections and legislation..." Nowhere in that article did I find any mention of the lawful power commanded by the people as a whole, people who are not employees of any government. If words mean anything to the people who are at risk when arbitrary government rears its demonic head, then the law of the land is spelled out generally in the Bill of Rights, and absolute power was not ever given to people in black robes on a so-called Supreme Court. Arbitrary, absolute, criminal, power is always taken by fraud, by threat of aggressive violence, and by torturous, monstrous, terrifying, mass murderous displays of aggressive violence: as a rule. I read in that article a blurb about this absolute power stolen by a nebulous elite: "While Second Amendment supporters have done well in those arenas, including making the Supreme Court reasonably pro-Second Amendment, the new arenas threaten to outflank the gains in the political and legislative arenas." And: "The right ruling would strike down anti-Second Amendment legislation and secure the legal rights we seek, but those rights could very well be a dead letter." Why not go after the criminals because they are criminals, and because their crimes harm so many innocent people? Every single act done by every single individual (in or out of office) that infringes upon natural rights, such as those natural rights spelled out in the Bill of Rights, is a criminal in fact. If people are led to believe, over, and over, and over, and over, again, and again, and again, the their rights are defended by the government, a government that is separate from the whole body of people, and an elite, a special interest group, then there will come a time when the people believe such a demonstrable lie, a lie that renders the people defenseless, powerless, and disenfranchised outside their own common laws. The check that balances any power wielded by anyone in or out of government has been, is, and will be the process that is due to everyone, the process that determines the facts that matter in any case, the process that determines the meaning of the law in each and every case, and the process that determines what is or is not a just remedy, restitution, redemption, or in cases of felony (not what the word means today), where the convict is convicted of making war on ...
Jordan Peterson Article. "Equity. When the Left Goes Too Far." Jordan says that the 3 most ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 18, 2019:
"Some definitions: equality before the law means that each citizen will be treated fairly by the criminal justice and judicial systems regardless of their status—and, as well, that the state recognizes that each individual has an intrinsic value which the polity must respect, and treat as a limiting factor to state power." I confess before going on with my comments, that I did not read the whole article. If I read every depressing indictment of the so-called (Marxist) LEFT (tm: trademark?), I'd probably shoot myself before too much of that flows through my being. There is a competitive viewpoint unknown to the majority of people living today having to do with being "...treated fairly by the criminal justice and judicial systems..." If the only viewpoint is the one projected, described, and propagated in the example above, then we are all doomed to suffer as we move incrementally into criminally made (man-made) hell on earth, as exemplified in at least 2 shinning examples: Russia under the so-called Marxist regime, which was actually Bolshevik Russia under Stalin, and that lesser known, but certainly more aggressive in reaching the ultimate goal of consuming itself, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge; again supposedly Marxist Communist (depending upon the opinion claiming the ideological origins). If instead of this Monopoly view of the one and only "...criminal justice and judicial..." system, there is one, two, four, or as many competitive systems on the market, forcing by natural forces higher quality and lower cost, then in that Free Market of Judicial (equitable) systems of Justice, what is in that case the prognosis? Well, which is it? Where is a competitive system, and what is it in fact? Enter Stage Left, or Right, bottom up, not top down: Example A: "It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States. "If the trial by jury were reëstablished, the Common Law principle of taxation would be reëstablished with it; for it is not to be supposed that juries would enforce a tax upon an individual which he had never agreed to pay. Taxation without consent is as plainly robbery, when enforced against one man, as when ...
Another cut and paste from another Topic, words belonging here: I did not attack you. I did ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 18, 2019:
Good sources for this usurpation by criminals posing as representatives of The People (they represented their faction as is done today by Rinos and Dinos), are the notes taken during the Con Con. Example 1: Secret proceedings and debates of the convention assembled at Philadelphia, in the year 1787 6Page 13 Luther Martin "One party, whose object and wish it was to abolish and annihilate all State governments, and to bring forward one general government, over this extensive continent, of monarchical nature, under certain restrictions and limitations. Those who openly avowed this sentiment were, it is true, but few; yet it is equally true, Sir, that there were a considerable number, who did not openly avow it, who were by myself, and many others of the convention, considered as being in reality favorers of that sentiment; and, acting upon those principles, covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished." Example 2: Papers of Dr. James McHenry on the Federal Convention of 1787 "Mr. E. Gerry. Does not rise to speak to the merits of the question before the Committee but to the mode. A distinction has been made between a federal and national government. We ought not to determine that there is this distinction for if we do, it is questionable not only whether this convention can propose an government totally different or whether Congress itself would have a right to pass such a resolution as that before the house. The commission from Massachusets empowers the deputies to proceed agreeably to the recommendation of Congress. This the foundation of the convention. If we have a right to pass this resolution we have a right to annihilate the confederation." That above is (if words mean anything common to those sharing the common interest known as liberty) the confession on the official record during the usurpation. As to: "George Mason? In my view, he was assigning responsibilities to congress as opposed to one man, such as a President, a division of power, a power that could not be given to one man lest he make himself King." You may want to look here: [mises.org] And here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkwZDRB3tZo As to an explanation of why a federation (voluntary association for mutual defense, in fact) is an adaptive, free market, form of government (in Paine's words: "government in a state of constant maturity" ) see the following example: Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy by William Watkins "Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for ...
[fee.org] I think this an important topic. Democracy is only a collective means of decision ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 17, 2019:
"The role of government as [America’s founders] saw it, was to protect the rights of individuals, and the biggest threat to individual liberty was the government itself. So they designed a government with constitutionally limited powers, constrained to carry out only those activities specifically allowed by the Constitution. This book describes how the fundamental principle underlying American government has been transformed from protecting individual liberty to carrying out the will of the people, as revealed by a democratic decision-making process. (p. xxii)" Which founders? There were federalists creating a conFEDERATION in 1774. Then a faction splintered off in response to "levelers" who rebelled against centralization and abuse of government power as exemplified in Shays's Rebellion in 1786 through 1787. The "levelers" wanted justice, the response was to abuse government power to enforce bogus debt. The splintered faction was constituted out of Monarchists, Central Banking Frauds, Slave Traders, Slave Consumers, Slave Carriers, and Warmongers. These criminals called themselves the Federalist Party, and that was a fraud, they were Nationalists, and their aim was to centralize, monopolize, cartelize, and enslave people under arbitrary government: despotism. The Nationalists hiding behind a false front of "Federalism" were out to enforce bogus debt. The actual, original, federalists, the ones combining forces to defend against the British Criminal War of Aggression for Profit (bogus debt enforcement) were then called Anti-Federalists once those true federalists blew the whistle on the fraud perpetrated by the Nationalist Party. It was the Nationalist Party that coined the fraudulent (straw-man) name Anti-Federalists, and to this day people are still parroting that lie. Why is it confusing? Amid the confusion the slaves fight amongst themselves. The Nationalists were not Federalists, but they called themselves Federalists, and they called their opposition Anti-Federalists. The people called Anti-Federalists were uniformly for a Federation of Independent States. I suppose if enough people (so-called Majority Rules) were fooled then, it is somewhat reasonable to expect that a number of people would be fooled by the lie today. If these so-called "Federalist Party" members were against so-called Mob Rule (so-called democracy), then why did they RATify their National Constitution with Majority Rules? "The role of government as [America’s founders] saw it, was to protect the rights of individuals, and the biggest threat to individual liberty was the government itself. So they designed a government with constitutionally limited powers, constrained to carry out only those activities specifically allowed by the ...
Individuals are unique living beings capable of individual thought and action in fact, or we are ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 16, 2019:
I tried to poll feature but it failed after numerous attempts. 1. True, we are individuals, and we are living beings alive and real. 2. We are one. 3. None of the above. 4. We are not what we think we are, and once we are dead we no longer exist. 5. We are not what we think we are, and once we are dead we know better.
I cannot comprehend how anyone today can justify hatred of another ethnicity. Isn't the civil war ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 16, 2019:
"I cannot comprehend how anyone today can justify hatred..." I think that there are obvious reasons for hatred, as to justice there are many false versions propagated by those who make a living out of convincing Group A to hate Group B, and even Group C. Thomas Jefferson, A Summary View of the Rights of British America, August 1745 "For the most trifling reasons, and sometimes for no conceivable reason at all, his majesty has rejected laws of the most salutary tendency. The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those colonies, where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state. But previous to the enfranchisement of the slaves we have, it is necessary to exclude all further importations from Africa; yet our repeated attempts to effect this by prohibitions, and by imposing duties which might amount to a prohibition, have been hitherto defeated by his majesty’s negative: Thus preferring the immediate advantages of a few African corsairs to the lasting interests of the American states, and to the rights of human nature, deeply wounded by this infamous practice. Nay, the single interposition of an interested individual against a law was scarcely ever known to fail of success, though in the opposite scale were placed the interests of a whole country. That this is so shameful an abuse of a power trusted with his majesty for other purposes, as if not reformed, would call for some legal restrictions. . . " Notes on the State of Virginia by Thomas Jefferson, 1781 "To emancipate all slaves born after passing the act. The bill reported by the revisors does not itself contain this proposition; but an amendment containing it was prepared, to be offered to the legislature whenever the bill should be taken up, and further directing, that they should continue with their parents to a certain age, then be brought up, at the public expence, to tillage, arts or sciences, according to their geniusses, till the females should be eighteen, and the males twenty-one years of age, when they should be colonized to such place as the circumstances of the time should render most proper, sending them out with arms, implements of houshold and of the handicraft arts, feeds, pairs of the useful domestic animals, &c. to declare them a free and independant people, and extend to them our alliance and protection, till they shall have acquired strength; and to send vessels at the same time to other parts of the world for an equal number of white inhabitants; to induce whom to migrate hither, proper encouragements were to be proposed. It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expence of supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices...
Our Republic Is In Crisis: Reap the Wild Wind by Justin O Smith The United States Republic has ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 16, 2019:
This sounds like more partisan cherry picking. Factions fighting over control of a dictatorship is not new, and it is not a republic, not since 1789. "if this nation is to continue as a true Republic…" These States (Nations) were republican, democratic, and lawful between 1774 and 1789, and they were formed into a federation of independent states under the common law during that time when America was a federated number of republican, and democratic, states. Factions fighting over a dictatorship are typically legal fictions created as puppets by puppet masters so as to keep the slaves at each other's throats internally, rather than having the whole people polarized against the puppet masters. When the first Political Party formed in America it was called many names by many people on the British side (Loyalists for dictatorship) and the Revolutionary Side (against dictatorship for liberty). The British called those against dictatorship: 1. insurgents 2. criminals 3. terrorists 4. rebels 5. rabble 6. levelers 7. The Angry Mob (tm) 8. any negative, accusatory, indictable, label that would work to sway "Public Opinion" The people against dictatorship, the people for liberty called themselves: 1. regulators 2. law abiding citizens 3. common law sheriffs 4. common law judges 5. common law prosecutors 6. common law constables 7. common law jurists 8. common law magistrates 9. common law justices of the peace 10. patriots, or any label designating what the people actually did in fact When the mountain of lies grows so immense as to hide the facts that matter in any case, people will actually fight to keep their chains (lies) firmly attached. "Time and time again, the Democratic Party has exhibited it is willing to use any means necessary to gain a momentary advantage to achieve their agenda and goals, no matter the systemic implications and the unintended or intended collateral consequences." The same is said by Democrats indicting Republicans. Rinos (Republican in Name Only) are despots loyal to dictatorship. Democrats (Democratic in Name Only) are less likely (as a general rule) to coin such terms internally, or there would be a commonly used term: Dinos. Rinos and Dinos abhor the facts that matter in any case involving Rinos and Dinos using "any means necessary to gain a momentary advantage to achieve their agenda and goals." That is a fact that matters to people who are republican and democratic in fact. "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." To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine November 15, 1802 "I know without any ...
All government grows and gets worse over time. America showed that even the best most moral ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 9, 2019:
"All government grows and gets worse over time." If I can, open mind's willing, point out an obvious con game here, there is a form of government that does the opposite of the claim above, as a matter of fact. The obvious problem with authority over facts is central to this battle over power between people who want to live and let live, and people who want to enslave people: and make the slaves pay for their own enslavement: Subsidized Slavery, a.k.a. Arbitrary Government, Oligarchy, Corporatism, Nationalism, Socialism, National Socialism, Fascism, Nazism, Communism, Tyranny, Despotism, Aristocracy, Majority Rules, or just plain old Organized Crime (a government power). So, there are 2 opposing sides in this power war as already stated, so let's look at both sides as listed above in a sentence, but instead list the 2 sides in numerical order: 1. Subsidized Slavery (the slaves pay for their enslavement, the masters work to keep the slaves in line) 2. Arbitrary Government (those in power have monopoly control over whatever pleases them to do to anyone) 3. Oligarchy (the oligarchs keep the plebs in line, the plebs pay for their own enslavement) 4. Corporatism (Legal fictions, or corporations, do whatever they want to anyone with impunity) 5. Nationalism (the government is a monopoly power lording over everything and everyone in the Nation) 6. Socialism (originally a social, not government, power, now a synonym for communism) 7. National Socialism (another word for fascism, corporatism, nationalism, as exemplified by the Nazi Party) 8. Fascism (see 7) 9. Nazism (see 7) 10. Communism (organized crime infesting government power as exemplified by the Bolshevik Party) The list is much longer, but the same things happen the same way in each case. A group of people employ deception, threat of violence (real or lies), and routine demonstrations of horrific, terrifying, torturous, and mass murderous violence upon anyone failing to obey without question. Now, if anyone is going to listen to some of the anarchists (not all of them, certainly not the original ones), there is no government power other than those listed above, and there is only one alternative to government: a single, monopoly, solution: no government. The failure of these types of anarchists (not all of them, certainly not the original ones) is to put legs under anarchism: a method of moving from government to anarchy given the fact that there are a lot of opportunities for "governments" (criminal organizations) to form, and then to run amok in the anarchist playground. So enter state Right (or Left) are actual governments that work to adapt, improve, raise the standard of living, while reducing the cost of living for all (the rising tide that lifts all boats). ...
Could our next president be a Libertarian? As they look ahead to the 2020 election, few political...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 8, 2019:
That is an excellent message as far as I am concerned, and I'd like to add to the message. Ross Perot was threatened with who knows what precise threat having to do with his daughter. Before that event Ross Perot was gaining power (political currency if you will), then he backed out, then he returned, but upon the return, the momentum was lost. Not many people today, especially the current generation, remember "The Giant Sucking Sound," and actual debates with the criminals Clinton and Bush. The writing was on the wall, as far as I was concerned, and it was the end of the Deep State Corporatocracy, perhaps not the end of the Corporatocracy, just as is the situation today. Trump ended the Deep State Corporatocracy, and if Ross Perot had done that in 1992 a host of events may have not happened including Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, 911, Gulf War 1, Gulf War II, War in Afghanistan, Patriot Act, a number of so-called “lone gunman school shootings,” the recent Las Vegas “lone gunman massacre,” and all the usurpation by Deep State operatives exemplified in the Hammond and Bundy cases. There may not have been a modern-day militia movement, and the National Debt may not have gone past the point of no return. Tensions with China, Russia, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela (richest oil and mineral area on earth perhaps), may not have proceeded to the point where today the FED is facing actual competition for World Reserve Currency Status (power). Crypto-Currencies may not have organically grown to the point they are now, as Ross Perot may have been able to remove the Deep State Corruption from the National Central Bank. I don’t mean to suggest that the Corporatocracy started in 1789 would have been replaced by an actual Federal Government Voluntary Mutual Defense Association bonding 50 (or so) Independent States, but it is very possible that the Deep State Criminals, as it is now with Trump, would have been opposed in a meaningful way with Perot sitting in the hot seat reserved for Puppets of the Deep State. How much more powerful did the Deep State become (and how much more corrupt) since 1992? The answer to me is clear that the Deep State has become so corrupt since 1992 that they can no longer hide at all. Every step they take now is a shovel full of bullshit that digs them ever deeper into the living hell they have created. That is in-your-face right now, exemplified with the Major Media disaster working to place Deep State Puppet Killary into office, claiming victory, and suffering debilitating, power-robbing, and truth shining light in their collective Deep State Defeat. I don’t think it is at all far fetched to consider the real possibility of yet another non-Deep State President in the near and far future....
Alex Jones was right...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 7, 2019:
2011 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZqIccHAkeg
Jordan Peterson. "On the Vital Necessity of Free Speech." [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 6, 2019:
I want to watch this, but before doing so I think that Free Speech is a term that merely reacts (defense) to those efforts by criminals who perpetrate counterfeit government. As exemplified in the Emperor's New Clothes fable (parable?), the necessity of free speech is a power to expose damaging falsehoods. Another example of the necessity of free speech is the documented known as a Declaration of Independence. When people are free to indict (accurately account for the facts that matter in a criminal case against a criminal government), people are the government, a check and balance against those forces that move governments from a good investment for all to a Profitable Monopoly for the few at the expense of the many. Free speech in this light is the first defense against movements by criminals in government, to deter such moves, to let the criminals know that they cannot hide in the darkness of their falsehoods. I think that is why it is the 1st Amendment, before the 2nd one.
“Through giving up on the exercise of reason in conversations focused on the governance of the ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 5, 2019:
We the people started out as 13 INDEPENDENT Nations. There were also Indian Nations which may have been more than willing to join a Federation of INDEPENDENT Nations, so long as the connection remained voluntary. The Nations were Federated up until 1789 when criminals took over and created (and enforced) a Profitable Monopoly or Nation-State. If you must invest in a Profitable Monopoly Nation-State (involuntary association), then I'm wondering why. Why do you invest in a Profitable Monopoly Nation-State Fraud? What is the rate of return on investment? Can you be accurate in response?
If they wanted to modify the Constitution I would support an amendment that would force government ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 5, 2019:
If anyone in power had a conscience, or some other reason to remain lawful, then they might use your idea, or they might use a better idea, or they might just decide to enforce the actual law. They don't. So your idea, or any employment of human conscience, or any competitive application of reason towards holding criminals to an accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case, or just any idea that is honest, is an idea that is absent in the so-called government. "... they want to force on the citizens..." That confesses a useful fact. They, as a rule, consume their victims because they can. They are immune from the laws they enforce on their victims because they say so, and they say so in writing no less. "...they should have to live by that edict..." That should alert anyone with a need to know better from worse that those in power issued, and enforce, edicts. Edicts, if I am not mistaken, are behaviors that must be acted out without question, and those who do not follow the order - to be followed without question - will suffer punishment not limited to fine, imprisonment, torture in or out of prison, rape in or out of prison, death, and death of everyone you care about, if that is what it takes to get you in line. "...these idiotic ideas..." That confesses ignorance, in my opinion, because those in power know very well how to gain power, and how to keep power, which requires at least some intelligence above and beyond the intelligence of idiots. Who is the idiot? 1. Those who believe that the criminals are the government; here to protect and serve. 2. Those who use the lie to steal everything that can be stolen within the limits of natural human laws. You can call those criminal idiots while you pay them handsomely for the "protection" they provide. School Tax (indoctrination of each successive generation into subsidized slavery) Property Tax (A fee for using the criminals turf) Inflation (A fee for allowing the "official" counterfeiters to increase the supply of counterfeit money) City Taxes (The local arm of the false Federal - National - Extortion Racket) County Taxes (The expanded local arm of the false Federal - National - Extortion Racket: "protection fee") State Taxes (yet again expanding up the pyramid toward the criminal top) Income Taxes (National "protection money" extortion fees required to create a demand for the counterfeit money) Sales Taxes (Efforts to control the creation of employers so as to maintain the imbalance in the Labor Markets) That may be the short list. "Heck I would support such a law for public officials even if they were not making decisions to spy on citizens even more than they do in violation of Constitution and anything decent already." ...
It’s not a white people problem, it’s a RICH PEOPLE PROBLEM. The world, as we know it, is run ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 5, 2019:
"Government is too lucrative a business, to allow anyone to kills the golden goose." Fake (counterfeit) government is organized crime with a false flag, and if it is this Golden Goose, then it consumes itself. The actual golden goose is freedom in liberty, the capacity for people to interact in peace, and the byproduct of that capacity is a steady, rapid, exponential, increase in the standard of living while the cost of living reduces proportionately. A counterfeit government inevitably consumes itself due to the nature of mankind: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Examples abound, such as The Roman Empire, Nazi Germany, Bolshevik Russia, and The Khmer Rouge. "Try running for office. If you aren’t from the ruling, monied class, you can’t play." There are exceptions to that rule concerning dubious positions within counterfeit government. "This was, and should be, the greatest nation on earth" This was, and still is, two opposing organizations in a power struggle since 1775: 1. Actual Law, under the common law, a number of Independent States federated into a voluntary association for mutual defense, and 2. A Profitable Monopoly or Nation-State, Organized Crime under a false flag of Nationalism. "Replace the SocioPaths with REAL leaders, who care about real solutions to REAL problems." The actual law is in place to reach that goal, to hold the criminals in (or out of) government to an accurate accounting, and remedy that situation expediently and effectively. "Government is the problem, NOT the solution. Vote accordingly." Fake (counterfeit) government is a problem, and the solution to that problem is accurate accountability of the facts that matter in that case: real government. Voting was known, and is known to be a process that leads to counterfeit government in the absence of real law power. I hope that helps to clear things up.
Hillary and Bill Clinton were Jeffrey Epstein’s closest ‘celebrity mates’ and frequent guests ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 5, 2019:
There is a contradiction that can be explained factually or by assumption. The contradiction is that these people are supposed to be protecting people, particularly people who are defenseless, such as children, orphans in particular. These people are not protecting people when the worst criminals who injure children are allowed to run amok in the playground. Trump is claiming to be doing something about the Modern Slave Trade, which includes (as it has always included) Child Sex Slavery, yet the news does not include any trials, where those in charge of protecting children follow the hierarchy within the "Trade" back to the source: those at the top of the "Trade." Case in point Jeffery Epstein. If "The Leader of the Free World," Mr. President of U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) can't apply The Law (accurate accountability) to the worst Culprits of the worst crimes imaginable, then how can that Power be accounted for as our so called protection? There is the contradiction, the power that is supposed to be for our mutual defense is incapable of doing the job in fact. "Pilate was not innocent because he washed his hands, and said, He would have nothing to do with the blood of that just one. There are faults of omission as well as commission. When you are legally called to try such a cause, if you shall shuffle out yourself, and thereby persons perhaps less conscientious happen to be made use of, and so a villain escapes justice, or an innocent man is ruined, by a prepossessed or negligent verdict; can you think yourself in such a case wholly blameless? Qui non prohibet cum potest, jubet: That man abets an evil, who prevents it not, when it is in his power. Nec caret scrupulo sosietatis occultae qui evidenter facinori definit obviare: nor can he escape the suspicion of being a secret accomplice, who evidently declines the prevention of an atrocious crime." Englishman’s Right: A Dialogue between a Barrister at Law and a Juryman, John Hawles, 1763
"A society that robs an individual of the product of his effort, or enslaves him, or attempts to ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 5, 2019:
"We also know that, by Magna Carta, amercements, or fines, could not be imposed to the ruin of the criminal; that, in the case of a freeman, his contenement, or means of subsisting in the condition of a freeman, must be saved to him; that, in the case of a merchant, his merchandise must be spared; and in the case of a villein, his waynage, or plough-tackle and carts. This also is likely to have been a princple of the common law, inasmuch as, in that rude age, when the means of getting employment as laborers was not what they are now, the man and his family would probably have been liable to starvation, if these means of subsistence had been taken from him. We also know, generally, that, at the time of Magna Carta, all acts intrinsically criminal, all trespasses against persons and property, were crimes, according to lex terrae, or the common law." That and the following is from Lysander Spooner's Essay on The Trial by Jury: "It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States." That is for those who marry the word government with the process also known as organized crime. The "governments" that go by the names Fascist, Communist, Socialist, Empire, Oligarchy, Corporatocracy, Aristocracy, etc., may lead people to believe that all forms of so-called government are mere labels used to hide the fact that the Criminals enforce Criminal Rules. Failing to know that government has been and is voluntary association for mutual defense is a failure, not a success, depending upon one's position in criminal organizations: masters or slaves.
Speech is simply a communication tool, no? You utter by articulating sounds and using grammar ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 4, 2019:
"Responsibility must be individual, or there is no responsibility at all." Equitable Commerce by Josiah Warren, 1852 If someone injures someone else there is a tendency to twist the truth so as to avoid accountability, but the one doing the injury is responsible for doing the injury to the one injured: a fact that matters. In the span of human history it has been discovered that accountability is one thing and responsibility is another thing, and people confuse, and conflate, the two separate - independent - processes. Someone can be accurately accounted for unknowingly injuring someone else, an injury done by someone to someone else in fact, but there was no intent on the part of the ones responsible for initiating the actions that caused the injury. Someone's actions led to an accident where someone was injured. Free speech: A worker putting up a sign on a road that is on the back side of a blind hill that leads to a bridge. The worker was told to put up sign number 7 by his boss. The worker puts up sign number 7, not sign 4. Sign 4 says (free speech): "Bridge is Out." Sing 7 says: "Free Money Ahead: Hurry!" The term Actus Reus is used to convey accountability of "guilt in fact," the perpetrator was perhaps careless. The term Mens Rea is used to convey accountability of "guilt of mind," the perpetrator intended to injure people.
I've been trying to figure out what education would look like if it were more socially and ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 4, 2019:
If you have not heard of John Taylor Gatto, then you may be in for a good experience learning from his words describing his experience teaching. I think that his method is to ask the children what they want to learn and then challenge them to take their own path to reach that goal, with suggestions from the teacher. The reason this type of learning process works is self-evident in my opinion, but Gatto explains the process well enough to convey the truth about it. No need to trust an old guy who was once Teacher of the Year in NY City. Another thing to consider as people seek higher quality and lower cost (advancements) in learning is the new technologies that move people away from old processes and people eventually move to new processes. Ubiquitous Interconnectivity (so-called Internet) affords everyone a cost saving whenever anyone cares to know something they do not yet know. How can that not end up improving the way children learn? Will it take a (counterfeit) government Internet Schooling Program to move the school of fish in the direction of independent students learning precisely what they want to learn effectively, rapidly, and then moving onto the next goal? I don't think so, but people teach me how wrong I am all the time.
“Ideologies aren't all that important. What's important is psychology. The Democratic constituency...
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 3, 2019:
"Truth is relative. Truth is what you can make the voter believe is the truth." "That depends upon what the word is, is..." Infamous quote from a known criminal.
Does this make sense to you?
Josf-Kelley comments on Dec 3, 2019:
In the first place the author would have to explain what he means by "nation," as in "...the end of any nation." Take America for example. America started out as a place where people ran (many runaway slaves running away from Religious, Economic, and other forms of slavery) to this place. Here many people began to reestablish true law, which is accurate accountability of the facts that matter in any case. Here many people formed independent areas of voluntary mutual defense, under the common law system of voluntary mutual defense; which includes trial by jury, also known as trial by the country and the law of the land. If there were so-called Nations, then there were 13 Nations, or Nation-States, at the time American States formed into a Federation of (Nation) States. There was no all-powerful Profitable Monopoly or single Nation at the start of the American Revolutionary government (voluntary association). Then, in 1789, the criminals took over and monopolized, cartelized, incorporated, and otherwise usurped the Federation of Independent States under the common law system of law. The criminals turned actual government into organized crime in 1789. Therefore, in the second place, the author must explain what he means when he uses the term government, as in "anything the government does." Government is a verb, and real government involves people who associate voluntarily for their mutual defense, and they have tried and true methods by which the law is enforced, whereby the law must be an accurate accounting of the facts that matter in any case of controversy, and "the decider" of what is or is not a fact is a power commanded by common law juries IN FACT. Fake governments arrive in may forms, often counterfeiting the voluntary forms such as a Republic (the public thing literally), or Democracy (rule by the people themselves, not so-called "Majority Rules"), and Federation. Real federation is voluntary. True federation is voluntary. Real government is voluntary. True government is voluntary. If people are led, or made, to believe that government is involuntary, then they are dupes, and certainly the worst criminals know this FACT that matters. This is not news. Debate in Virginia Ratifying Convention 1788 Elliot 3:89, 430--36, 439--42 [6 June] George Mason: "Among the enumerated powers, Congress are to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, and to pay the debts, and to provide for the general welfare and common defence; and by that clause (so often called the sweeping clause) they are to make all laws necessary to execute those laws. Now, suppose oppressions should arise under this government, and any writer should dare to stand forth, and expose to the community at large the abuses of those ...

Give Love

Left to give: 0 Coins
Click here to get coins.

  • Level7 (36,154pts)
  • Posts201
  • Comments
      Replies
    1,019
    699
  • Followers 11
  • Fans 0
  • Referrals1
  • Joined Oct 29th, 2019
  • Last Visit Very recently
Josf-Kelley's Groups