Like
Haha
Sad
Wow
Hmmm
Grrr/Dislike
Send SmileNavigation
Comments
How are you doing under Covid lockdown?
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 8, 2020:
"It" is a well documented treasonous crime in progress, complete with confessions. "It" will last as long as the victims of "it" allow "it" to continue at will, without a proper, lawful, legal, constitutional, moral, defense against those who are perpetrating "it."
I'm not locked down, never was, so...
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 8, 2020:
"It" is a well documented treasonous crime in progress, complete with confessions. "It" will last as long as the victims of "it" allow "it" to continue at will, without a proper, lawful, legal, constitutional, moral, defense against those who are perpetrating "it."
I'm not locked down, never was, so...
CNN strikes again.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 7, 2020:
Conspiracy Theory
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 7, 2020:
Conspiracy Theory
Obviously having no police is insane.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
An enforced monopoly on "protection" is called extortion.
"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
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
An enforced monopoly on "protection" is called extortion.
"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
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly ...
Are you concerned that there will be a coup if Trump wins?
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
Not all coup d'état attempts are successful. In some cases the criminals have already overplayed their Con Game and each new deception, threat, or aggressive attack is a plainly, self-evident, confession of guilt traceable to the perpetrators in fact. They dig their own graves, they jump in, after a long pull on a bottle of cool-aid, and the ship they built sinks, dragging all their cult members down with them.
Bon voyage!
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
Not all coup d'état attempts are successful. In some cases the criminals have already overplayed their Con Game and each new deception, threat, or aggressive attack is a plainly, self-evident, confession of guilt traceable to the perpetrators in fact. They dig their own graves, they jump in, after a long pull on a bottle of cool-aid, and the ship they built sinks, dragging all their cult members down with them.
Bon voyage!
I think this is a good, drastic move.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
Statism is a Secular Religion complete with the required cult membership.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
Statism is a Secular Religion complete with the required cult membership.
Our efforts seem to be misplaced.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
Criminal Governments (those individuals who invest in them) kill the most by a long margin.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
Criminal Governments (those individuals who invest in them) kill the most by a long margin.
For all the conspiracy theorists.....
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
If an answer is offered, will the demand for an answer be supplied?
Exhibit A:
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
Exhibit B:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
Exhibit C:
WE ARE BEING PLAYED. PLEASE READ.
https://www.gracevanberkum.com/post/we-are-being-played-please-read?fbclid=IwAR20lvlx8xq2QRtQ4SlgagTS5VuMgk1Y8NYyTjbuPWO33pqCbT0wOkEw4bo
No, ONE MONOPOLY DICTATOR at ONE MONOPOLY TABLE during ONE MONOPOLY MEETING did not set in motion every single action by every single human being on Earth, if that is the STUPID and SERVILE question being asked.
Criminals, as a rule, do not obey rules. Criminals, as a rule, harm innocent people using deception, threat of aggressive violence, and aggressive violence. Criminals MUST do all that to be Criminals. Criminals don't have to all sit at the same table each day to cooperate when criminals organize. When criminals organize they make victims as their business. When criminals organize they often fight other criminal gangs over their EXCLUSIVE MONOPOLY access to their targeted criminal populations. When criminals make deals, it is called cartelization, as many criminal organizations will form a Cabal, which is a MONOPOLY of POWER and PROFIT.
Example:
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property."
Example 2:
"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 ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 6, 2020:
If an answer is offered, will the demand for an answer be supplied?
Exhibit A:
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
Exhibit B:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
Exhibit C:
WE ARE BEING PLAYED. PLEASE READ.
https://www.gracevanberkum.com/post/we-are-being-played-please-read?fbclid=IwAR20lvlx8xq2QRtQ4SlgagTS5VuMgk1Y8NYyTjbuPWO33pqCbT0wOkEw4bo
No, ONE MONOPOLY DICTATOR at ONE MONOPOLY TABLE during ONE MONOPOLY MEETING did not set in motion every single action by every single human being on Earth, if that is the STUPID and SERVILE question being asked.
Criminals, as a rule, do not obey rules. Criminals, as a rule, harm innocent people using deception, threat of aggressive violence, and aggressive violence. Criminals MUST do all that to be Criminals. Criminals don't have to all sit at the same table each day to cooperate when criminals organize. When criminals organize they make victims as their business. When criminals organize they often fight other criminal gangs over their EXCLUSIVE MONOPOLY access to their targeted criminal populations. When criminals make deals, it is called cartelization, as many criminal organizations will form a Cabal, which is a MONOPOLY of POWER and PROFIT.
Example:
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property."
Example 2:
"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 sense for the most
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 5, 2020:
Additional info
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 5, 2020:
Additional info
Common sense for the most
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 5, 2020:
Thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 5, 2020:
Thanks.
Joe takes a little time for reflection
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 4, 2020:
Thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 4, 2020:
Thanks.
Just ancient things.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 3, 2020:
Plato?
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 3, 2020:
Plato?
(From March 2020)
"Joe, why do you think this Virus is not the huge problem it's being promoted ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 3, 2020:
"It's my view that the panic is absolute stupidity."
I think that compared to attacking Iran and Afghanistan when triggered to do so by an obvious false flag perpetrated by easy to find perpetrators (follow the money), where those triggered are told that the "highjackers" were "terrorists" from a list that lists people from Saudi Arabia, people found to be alive after the list was published: the current panic is just another example of Mass Marketing.
Mass Marketing is the word that fits in the vernacular of those who are triggered, and those who are triggered will be triggered by words such as mind control, brainwashing, or false propaganda.
Those who are triggered (with many possible exceptions) follow orders without question. They have been programmed from birth to follow orders without question, and the indoctrination has worked.
To speak to them it may be possible to say to them that there is a Mass Marketing effort to sell Vaccines.
The problem with that message is that the people who are brainwashed to follow orders have been brainwashed to take vaccines when ordered to do so, doing so without question, therefore there is nothing wrong with Mass Marketing to sell Vaccines.
If those who are brainwashed hear words that may suggest to the brainwashed that vaccines harm people, those brainwashed people will be triggered, and you will become (in their eyes) an antivaxer conspiracy theorist, and nothing that you say from then on will be heard, and therefore nothing you say will be acted on by the brainwashed.
Zombie movies since the Night of the Living Dead now have current significance.
The movie They Live is also currently significant.
The book 1984 is our condition of life now.
The warnings of the Founding Fathers against the Constitution of 1789 were proven prophetic immediately after the dirty deal was signed, and their warnings continue to haunt those who are not brainwashed.
For those not brainwashed, for those who have yet to learn the facts that matter in our current situation, the following is a very good start:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 3, 2020:
"It's my view that the panic is absolute stupidity."
I think that compared to attacking Iran and Afghanistan when triggered to do so by an obvious false flag perpetrated by easy to find perpetrators (follow the money), where those triggered are told that the "highjackers" were "terrorists" from a list that lists people from Saudi Arabia, people found to be alive after the list was published: the current panic is just another example of Mass Marketing.
Mass Marketing is the word that fits in the vernacular of those who are triggered, and those who are triggered will be triggered by words such as mind control, brainwashing, or false propaganda.
Those who are triggered (with many possible exceptions) follow orders without question. They have been programmed from birth to follow orders without question, and the indoctrination has worked.
To speak to them it may be possible to say to them that there is a Mass Marketing effort to sell Vaccines.
The problem with that message is that the people who are brainwashed to follow orders have been brainwashed to take vaccines when ordered to do so, doing so without question, therefore there is nothing wrong with Mass Marketing to sell Vaccines.
If those who are brainwashed hear words that may suggest to the brainwashed that vaccines harm people, those brainwashed people will be triggered, and you will become (in their eyes) an antivaxer conspiracy theorist, and nothing that you say from then on will be heard, and therefore nothing you say will be acted on by the brainwashed.
Zombie movies since the Night of the Living Dead now have current significance.
The movie They Live is also currently significant.
The book 1984 is our condition of life now.
The warnings of the Founding Fathers against the Constitution of 1789 were proven prophetic immediately after the dirty deal was signed, and their warnings continue to haunt those who are not brainwashed.
For those not brainwashed, for those who have yet to learn the facts that matter in our current situation, the following is a very good start:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this ...
When does the freedom of speech go too far?
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 1, 2020:
First:
Crowded Theater Phenomenon
Data or fists, knives, bullets, bombs, poisons, and lies flowing from individual to individual is easily classified into 3 distinct, separate, and conflicting/opposing categories:
1. Offensive (I do to you what I won't allow you to do to me) = immoral
2. Defensive (I only do to you what I want you to do to me) = moral
3. Neutral (who cares, none of anyone's business, according to them) = amoral
The first so-called amendment (a.k.a. free speech) is a right to publish facts that matter in a case where criminals have taken over the defensive government.
That is 2 above.
That is defensive.
That is moral.
That is supported by evidence such as:
"Hallam says, “The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. If a vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by treaty, advantageous or otherwise, according to the fortune of war. * * There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long enduring forbearance. In modern times, a king, compelled by his subjects’ swords to abandon any pretension, would be supposed to have ceased to reign; and the express recognition of such a right as that of insurrection has been justly deemed inconsistent with the majesty of law. But ruder ages had ruder sentiments. Force was necessary to repel force; and men accustomed to see the king’s authority defied by a private riot, were not much shocked when it was resisted in defence of public freedom.” - 3 Middle Ages, 240-2." Lysander Spooner, Essay on The Trial by Jury, 1852
Exhibit A: "... if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to..."
Next is taken from The First Congress of the United States of America during the deliberation (what jurors do) considering the publication of a Declaration of Independence:
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 1, 2020:
First:
Crowded Theater Phenomenon
Data or fists, knives, bullets, bombs, poisons, and lies flowing from individual to individual is easily classified into 3 distinct, separate, and conflicting/opposing categories:
1. Offensive (I do to you what I won't allow you to do to me) = immoral
2. Defensive (I only do to you what I want you to do to me) = moral
3. Neutral (who cares, none of anyone's business, according to them) = amoral
The first so-called amendment (a.k.a. free speech) is a right to publish facts that matter in a case where criminals have taken over the defensive government.
That is 2 above.
That is defensive.
That is moral.
That is supported by evidence such as:
"Hallam says, “The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. If a vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by treaty, advantageous or otherwise, according to the fortune of war. * * There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long enduring forbearance. In modern times, a king, compelled by his subjects’ swords to abandon any pretension, would be supposed to have ceased to reign; and the express recognition of such a right as that of insurrection has been justly deemed inconsistent with the majesty of law. But ruder ages had ruder sentiments. Force was necessary to repel force; and men accustomed to see the king’s authority defied by a private riot, were not much shocked when it was resisted in defence of public freedom.” - 3 Middle Ages, 240-2." Lysander Spooner, Essay on The Trial by Jury, 1852
Exhibit A: "... if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to..."
Next is taken from The First Congress of the United States of America during the deliberation (what jurors do) considering the publication of a Declaration of Independence:
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our ...
[youtu.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 1, 2020:
"Do you think America will be safe under Trump?"
I did not watch the video. If people do not have their own bullshit detectors turned on, and they require external sources to "fact check," everything, then the word that seems appropriate to me is: obedient.
Take one subject such as the Cornholio Sickness (A.K.A. Covid:19) as an example. How many people never look deeply into the subject matter? They wear masks when told, they fear other people close to them when told, they wait for more orders when uncertain.
Here is a link to one of very many sources of information, often conflicting information, but one source of information that offers many links to support the effort to "fact check" the official narrative:
https://www.gracevanberkum.com/post/we-are-being-played-please-read?fbclid=IwAR20lvlx8xq2QRtQ4SlgagTS5VuMgk1Y8NYyTjbuPWO33pqCbT0wOkEw4bo
I've done my own research within my very limited boundaries, and to me the Cornholio Sickness is a Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud, not merely a hoax, and save yourself the effort if you are triggered into responding something along the lines of "you don't care for all those sick people," or whatever. Whatever is making people sick, with many different symptoms, ranging from an inability for the blood to carry oxygen, to a loss of the sense of smell, from mild cold symptoms, to death causing symptoms that baffle their care providers, that is separate from the campaign to use the emergence of novel symptoms to gain power and profit through destabilization, demoralization, deceit, threat, and aggressive violence upon the innocent, which are crimes, and from the levels the criminals are poised, it is treason.
"Do you think America will be safe under Trump?"
I could go on to much greater detail just on that one subject, to fact check, compare notes, with any other fact checker, including a host of information detailing the emergence of the "germ theory" (trade marked, limited liability) in direct competition with an alternative scientific conclusion based upon the same test results that spawned the "germ theory" see: http://www.medicinacomplementar.com.br/biblioteca/pdfs/Biomolecular/mb-0464.pdf Louis Pasteur Vs Antoine Béchamp and The Germ
Theory of Disease Causation - 1
"Do you think America will be safe under Trump?"
That is just one fact checkable subject on the road to either blind obedience to falsehood without question or the many adaptive, competitive, free market, prosperous, moral, loving, caring, peaceful, inventive, creative, useful, productive, sustainable, survivable, alternatives.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 1, 2020:
"Do you think America will be safe under Trump?"
I did not watch the video. If people do not have their own bullshit detectors turned on, and they require external sources to "fact check," everything, then the word that seems appropriate to me is: obedient.
Take one subject such as the Cornholio Sickness (A.K.A. Covid:19) as an example. How many people never look deeply into the subject matter? They wear masks when told, they fear other people close to them when told, they wait for more orders when uncertain.
Here is a link to one of very many sources of information, often conflicting information, but one source of information that offers many links to support the effort to "fact check" the official narrative:
https://www.gracevanberkum.com/post/we-are-being-played-please-read?fbclid=IwAR20lvlx8xq2QRtQ4SlgagTS5VuMgk1Y8NYyTjbuPWO33pqCbT0wOkEw4bo
I've done my own research within my very limited boundaries, and to me the Cornholio Sickness is a Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud, not merely a hoax, and save yourself the effort if you are triggered into responding something along the lines of "you don't care for all those sick people," or whatever. Whatever is making people sick, with many different symptoms, ranging from an inability for the blood to carry oxygen, to a loss of the sense of smell, from mild cold symptoms, to death causing symptoms that baffle their care providers, that is separate from the campaign to use the emergence of novel symptoms to gain power and profit through destabilization, demoralization, deceit, threat, and aggressive violence upon the innocent, which are crimes, and from the levels the criminals are poised, it is treason.
"Do you think America will be safe under Trump?"
I could go on to much greater detail just on that one subject, to fact check, compare notes, with any other fact checker, including a host of information detailing the emergence of the "germ theory" (trade marked, limited liability) in direct competition with an alternative scientific conclusion based upon the same test results that spawned the "germ theory" see: http://www.medicinacomplementar.com.br/biblioteca/pdfs/Biomolecular/mb-0464.pdf Louis Pasteur Vs Antoine Béchamp and The Germ
Theory of Disease Causation - 1
"Do you think America will be safe under Trump?"
That is just one fact checkable subject on the road to either blind obedience to falsehood without question or the many adaptive, competitive, free market, prosperous, moral, loving, caring, peaceful, inventive, creative, useful, productive, sustainable, survivable, alternatives.
This is not humorous and the author would be suspended on Twitter for speaking out.
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 1, 2020:
If you are polarized to a point of violence, are you afforded an opportunity to state your case before The Country (The People) in a Court of Law? If those who are polarizing people to a point of violence are also running the Courts, then what?
Josf-Kelley comments on Sep 1, 2020:
If you are polarized to a point of violence, are you afforded an opportunity to state your case before The Country (The People) in a Court of Law? If those who are polarizing people to a point of violence are also running the Courts, then what?
The Rupublican Party
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 31, 2020:
Those who do so belong in the group of those who do so, those who don't belong don't. Conflating, commingling, confusing, binding, bonding, everyone into one group has many names, but the goal is always the same: deception.
A curious divide explained by example:
"In June of 1775, George Washington was appointed Major General and elected by Congress to be commander in chief of the American revolutionary forces. Although he took up his tasks energetically, Washington accomplished nothing militarily for the remainder of the year and more, nor did he try. His only campaign in 1775 was internal rather than external; it was directed against the American army as he found it, and was designed to extirpate the spirit of liberty pervading this unusually individualistic and democratic army of militiamen. In short, Washington set out to transform a people's army, uniquely suited for a libertarian revolution, into another orthodox and despotically ruled statist force after the familiar European model.
"His primary aim was to crush the individualistic and democratic spirit of the American forces. For one thing, the officers of the militia were elected by their own men, and the discipline of repeated elections kept the officers from forming an aristocratic ruling caste typical of European armies of the period. The officers often drew little more pay than their men, and there were no hierarchical distinctions of rank imposed between officers and men. As a consequence, officers could not enforce their wills coercively on the soldiery. This New England equality horrified Washington's conservative and highly aristocratic soul.
"To introduce a hierarchy of ruling caste, Washington insisted on distinctive decorations of dress in accordance with minute gradations of rank. As one observer phrased it: "New lords, new laws. … The strictest government is taking place, and great distinction is made between officers and soldier. Everyone is made to know his place and keep it." Despite the great expense involved, he also tried to stamp out individuality in the army by forcing uniforms upon them; but the scarcity of cloth made this plan unfeasible.
"At least as important as distinctions in decoration was the introduction of extensive inequality in pay. Led by Washington and the other aristocratic southern delegates, and over the objections of Massachusetts, the Congress insisted on fixing a pay scale for generals and other officers considerably higher than that of the rank and file.
"In addition to imposing a web of hierarchy on the Continental Army, Washington crushed liberty within by replacing individual responsibility by iron despotism and coercion. Severe and brutal punishments were imposed upon those soldiers whose sense of altruism failed to override ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 31, 2020:
Those who do so belong in the group of those who do so, those who don't belong don't. Conflating, commingling, confusing, binding, bonding, everyone into one group has many names, but the goal is always the same: deception.
A curious divide explained by example:
"In June of 1775, George Washington was appointed Major General and elected by Congress to be commander in chief of the American revolutionary forces. Although he took up his tasks energetically, Washington accomplished nothing militarily for the remainder of the year and more, nor did he try. His only campaign in 1775 was internal rather than external; it was directed against the American army as he found it, and was designed to extirpate the spirit of liberty pervading this unusually individualistic and democratic army of militiamen. In short, Washington set out to transform a people's army, uniquely suited for a libertarian revolution, into another orthodox and despotically ruled statist force after the familiar European model.
"His primary aim was to crush the individualistic and democratic spirit of the American forces. For one thing, the officers of the militia were elected by their own men, and the discipline of repeated elections kept the officers from forming an aristocratic ruling caste typical of European armies of the period. The officers often drew little more pay than their men, and there were no hierarchical distinctions of rank imposed between officers and men. As a consequence, officers could not enforce their wills coercively on the soldiery. This New England equality horrified Washington's conservative and highly aristocratic soul.
"To introduce a hierarchy of ruling caste, Washington insisted on distinctive decorations of dress in accordance with minute gradations of rank. As one observer phrased it: "New lords, new laws. … The strictest government is taking place, and great distinction is made between officers and soldier. Everyone is made to know his place and keep it." Despite the great expense involved, he also tried to stamp out individuality in the army by forcing uniforms upon them; but the scarcity of cloth made this plan unfeasible.
"At least as important as distinctions in decoration was the introduction of extensive inequality in pay. Led by Washington and the other aristocratic southern delegates, and over the objections of Massachusetts, the Congress insisted on fixing a pay scale for generals and other officers considerably higher than that of the rank and file.
"In addition to imposing a web of hierarchy on the Continental Army, Washington crushed liberty within by replacing individual responsibility by iron despotism and coercion. Severe and brutal punishments were imposed upon those soldiers whose sense of altruism failed to override ...
[youtube.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
I listened to the whole thing.
Chris says something along the lines of the Media not going past a line that would question the Establishment.
Juan says something along the lines of those in power delaying the persecution until after the American Presidential Election Psycho (a psychotic cycle, my words).
Susie says something along the lines of the Democrats in America not liking Wikileaks because the election was handed to Trump when people found out that the Democrats were Spirit Cooking Devil Worshiping Baby Mass Murderers (my words).
So...this group of Media personalities won't go past a line that would question the Establishment, and because they don't they lend those torturing mass murderers support thereby. They, by their ignorance, or by their willful failure to blow the whistle on the Establishment CORE (they are criminals, they are not the government) help in the torture of whistle-blowers like Julain Assange: in my opinon.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
I listened to the whole thing.
Chris says something along the lines of the Media not going past a line that would question the Establishment.
Juan says something along the lines of those in power delaying the persecution until after the American Presidential Election Psycho (a psychotic cycle, my words).
Susie says something along the lines of the Democrats in America not liking Wikileaks because the election was handed to Trump when people found out that the Democrats were Spirit Cooking Devil Worshiping Baby Mass Murderers (my words).
So...this group of Media personalities won't go past a line that would question the Establishment, and because they don't they lend those torturing mass murderers support thereby. They, by their ignorance, or by their willful failure to blow the whistle on the Establishment CORE (they are criminals, they are not the government) help in the torture of whistle-blowers like Julain Assange: in my opinon.
Pentagon Releases Terrifying Video Of Russian Su-27 Turning Directly In Front Of A B-52
...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
Show off.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
Show off.
[youtube.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
Time 12:53 or so…
Assange
“...it is up to a court to decide, clearly, whether something is in the end a crime...”
No.
A crime is defined by the criminal perpetrating the crime, the criminal creates the crime and executes the crime and the victim or victims of the criminal or criminals CONSTITUTE a cause to act in defense of those victims, because failure to do so enriches, empowers, aids, abets, lends support to, emboldens, allows, affords, encourages, and gives more opportunity for more crimes for all criminals, including moral people who are not yet deciding to take what can be taken because no one stops them.
A Court of Law places a presumed to be innocent accused before The People for adjudication as to the facts that matter in the DISPUTED case, and The People through their juries can offer convicted criminals a means by which the convicted criminals can return under the umbrella of security maintained by THE PEOPLE through rule of law: deterrence.
Turn this:
“...it is up to a court to decide, clearly, whether something is in the end a crime...”
Turn that back to this:
“...it is up to the people as a whole, represented by private prosecutors, defendants, grand jurors, and trial jurors, who decide, clearly, whether something is in the end a crime...”
The criminals clearly took over in 1789 in America, they confessed doing so, on the public record, and they have been perpetrating crimes, clearly, since then, and JUST because there are no Courts of Law to hold them to account, PROVES, does not disprove, that the criminals have, clearly, taken over, and they have clearly taken over in America in 1789.
What are the Alien and Sedition Acts?
What do the following words mean?
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property. It is, therefore, no wonder that the "Rights of Man" was attacked by that faction, and its author continually abused. But let them go on; give them rope enough and they will put an end to their own insignificance. There is too much common sense and independence in America to be long the dupe of any faction, foreign or domestic.
"But, in the midst of the freedom we enjoy, the licentiousness of the papers called Federal (and I know not why they are called so, for they are in their principles anti-federal and despotic), is a dishonor to the character of the country, and an injury to its reputation and importance abroad. They represent the whole people of America as destitute of public principle and private manners.
"As to any injury they ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
Time 12:53 or so…
Assange
“...it is up to a court to decide, clearly, whether something is in the end a crime...”
No.
A crime is defined by the criminal perpetrating the crime, the criminal creates the crime and executes the crime and the victim or victims of the criminal or criminals CONSTITUTE a cause to act in defense of those victims, because failure to do so enriches, empowers, aids, abets, lends support to, emboldens, allows, affords, encourages, and gives more opportunity for more crimes for all criminals, including moral people who are not yet deciding to take what can be taken because no one stops them.
A Court of Law places a presumed to be innocent accused before The People for adjudication as to the facts that matter in the DISPUTED case, and The People through their juries can offer convicted criminals a means by which the convicted criminals can return under the umbrella of security maintained by THE PEOPLE through rule of law: deterrence.
Turn this:
“...it is up to a court to decide, clearly, whether something is in the end a crime...”
Turn that back to this:
“...it is up to the people as a whole, represented by private prosecutors, defendants, grand jurors, and trial jurors, who decide, clearly, whether something is in the end a crime...”
The criminals clearly took over in 1789 in America, they confessed doing so, on the public record, and they have been perpetrating crimes, clearly, since then, and JUST because there are no Courts of Law to hold them to account, PROVES, does not disprove, that the criminals have, clearly, taken over, and they have clearly taken over in America in 1789.
What are the Alien and Sedition Acts?
What do the following words mean?
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property. It is, therefore, no wonder that the "Rights of Man" was attacked by that faction, and its author continually abused. But let them go on; give them rope enough and they will put an end to their own insignificance. There is too much common sense and independence in America to be long the dupe of any faction, foreign or domestic.
"But, in the midst of the freedom we enjoy, the licentiousness of the papers called Federal (and I know not why they are called so, for they are in their principles anti-federal and despotic), is a dishonor to the character of the country, and an injury to its reputation and importance abroad. They represent the whole people of America as destitute of public principle and private manners.
"As to any injury they ...
[youtube.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
Time: 4:40 or so...
Julian Assange claims:
"...it’s all bankrupt, and the reason it’s all bankrupt, in all current political theories are bankrupt, in particular lines of political thought, is because actually we don’t know what the hell is going on, and until we know the basic structures of our institutions how they operate in practice, these titanic organizations, how they behave inside, not just through stories but through vast amounts of internal documentation, until we know that, how can we possibly make a diagnosis, how can we set the direction to go, until we know where we are, we don’t even have a map of where we are, so our first task is to build up the intellectual heritage that describes where we are, and once we know where we are, then we have a hope of setting a course for a different direction, until then I think all political theories to greater and lesser extents of course are bankrupt.”
So...Assange is lost in the wilderness of bankrupt political theories. Is everyone?
No.
The non-bankrupt political theory is expressed in a Declaration of Independence. What intellectual heritage does a Declaration of Independence come from?
It comes from the Ancient Law, the common law, which predates Magna Carta, and therefore it predates each American State Constitution, the common law predates the first and ONLY Federal Constitution called The Articles of Confederation, and the common law (the intellectual heritage that describes where we were) predates the National (it is not federal) Constitution of 1789.
The common law PREDATES the Bill of Rights which FAILED to amend the Constitution of 1789.
How about a short trip into “vast amounts of internal documentation,” to prove beyond any doubt to a thinking mind that our “intellectual heritage” from which we were is the common law?
(MAGNA CARTA.) Care, Henry, ed. English Liberties, Or The Free-Born Subject’s Inheritance: Containing Magna Charta . . . The Habeas Corpus Act, And Several Other Statutes
Boston: Printed by J. Franklin, for N. Buttolph, B. Eliot, and D. Henchman, 1721
Notes on Magna Carta
"Farther, though it be said here, that the king hath given and granted these liberties, yet it must not be understood that they were meer emanations of Royal favour, or new bounties granted, which the people could not justly challenge, or had not a right unto before; for as lord Coke in divers places asserts, and as is well known to every gentleman professing the law, this charter is, for the most part, only declaratory of the principal grounds of the fundamental laws and liberties of England. Not any new freedom is hereby granted, but a restitution of such as the subject lawfully had before, and to free them from the usurpations and ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
Time: 4:40 or so...
Julian Assange claims:
"...it’s all bankrupt, and the reason it’s all bankrupt, in all current political theories are bankrupt, in particular lines of political thought, is because actually we don’t know what the hell is going on, and until we know the basic structures of our institutions how they operate in practice, these titanic organizations, how they behave inside, not just through stories but through vast amounts of internal documentation, until we know that, how can we possibly make a diagnosis, how can we set the direction to go, until we know where we are, we don’t even have a map of where we are, so our first task is to build up the intellectual heritage that describes where we are, and once we know where we are, then we have a hope of setting a course for a different direction, until then I think all political theories to greater and lesser extents of course are bankrupt.”
So...Assange is lost in the wilderness of bankrupt political theories. Is everyone?
No.
The non-bankrupt political theory is expressed in a Declaration of Independence. What intellectual heritage does a Declaration of Independence come from?
It comes from the Ancient Law, the common law, which predates Magna Carta, and therefore it predates each American State Constitution, the common law predates the first and ONLY Federal Constitution called The Articles of Confederation, and the common law (the intellectual heritage that describes where we were) predates the National (it is not federal) Constitution of 1789.
The common law PREDATES the Bill of Rights which FAILED to amend the Constitution of 1789.
How about a short trip into “vast amounts of internal documentation,” to prove beyond any doubt to a thinking mind that our “intellectual heritage” from which we were is the common law?
(MAGNA CARTA.) Care, Henry, ed. English Liberties, Or The Free-Born Subject’s Inheritance: Containing Magna Charta . . . The Habeas Corpus Act, And Several Other Statutes
Boston: Printed by J. Franklin, for N. Buttolph, B. Eliot, and D. Henchman, 1721
Notes on Magna Carta
"Farther, though it be said here, that the king hath given and granted these liberties, yet it must not be understood that they were meer emanations of Royal favour, or new bounties granted, which the people could not justly challenge, or had not a right unto before; for as lord Coke in divers places asserts, and as is well known to every gentleman professing the law, this charter is, for the most part, only declaratory of the principal grounds of the fundamental laws and liberties of England. Not any new freedom is hereby granted, but a restitution of such as the subject lawfully had before, and to free them from the usurpations and ...
[youtube.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
I am going to attempt to encourage people to shed their bias on this subject (if they have bias) and upload instead a common law principle known as free speech.
You are guilty of a crime if your willful actions harm someone.
That is free speech.
Who decides if you have stepped outside the law, and who decides if your speech is your weapon?
When the criminals take-over, they seize the power to decide any question of any kind in any place any time: and they decide that they are the government: Government run by Criminals.
What can clue people in on this fact that matters?
How about a court case?
Witch Court?
Previous to 1789 the following observation concerning the facts that matter at Law were published:
"It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue."
M'Kean, Chief Justice
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236, 1788
Person A yells Fire in a crowded Theater.
People are injured.
That is not Free Speech.
Person A documents the crimes perpetrated by criminals in government, including a list of infringements of natural rights that clearly step outside the law as the law is clearly (or not clearly enough for some) documented in a Declaration of Independence, and in a (or many) Bills of rights. Person A then attempts to move the documents into the machine known as Due Process of Law.
Person A is clearly murdered by people on the list of the accused perpetrators in the documents compiled and attempted to be delivered into the machine known as Due Process of law.
Is that free speech?
How about the current situation?
Group A (Globalists) pay propagandists to abuse natural rights by propagating false information which is designed to destabilize a country of people whose core values began with the vital requirement of defending natural rights with a process known as the common law, which includes independent grand juries (of, by, and for the people, not of, by, and for the government, not of, by, and for a foreign government, not of, by, and for a church, not of, by, and for a corporation), and independent trial juries, in Courts of Law (not Courts of Admiralty, not Courts of Equity, Family, etc.), and Group A manages to turn the hearts and minds of the target population sufficiently away from their core values to cause the target population to adopt instead a counterfeit version of those core values.
Example:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
I am going to attempt to encourage people to shed their bias on this subject (if they have bias) and upload instead a common law principle known as free speech.
You are guilty of a crime if your willful actions harm someone.
That is free speech.
Who decides if you have stepped outside the law, and who decides if your speech is your weapon?
When the criminals take-over, they seize the power to decide any question of any kind in any place any time: and they decide that they are the government: Government run by Criminals.
What can clue people in on this fact that matters?
How about a court case?
Witch Court?
Previous to 1789 the following observation concerning the facts that matter at Law were published:
"It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue."
M'Kean, Chief Justice
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236, 1788
Person A yells Fire in a crowded Theater.
People are injured.
That is not Free Speech.
Person A documents the crimes perpetrated by criminals in government, including a list of infringements of natural rights that clearly step outside the law as the law is clearly (or not clearly enough for some) documented in a Declaration of Independence, and in a (or many) Bills of rights. Person A then attempts to move the documents into the machine known as Due Process of Law.
Person A is clearly murdered by people on the list of the accused perpetrators in the documents compiled and attempted to be delivered into the machine known as Due Process of law.
Is that free speech?
How about the current situation?
Group A (Globalists) pay propagandists to abuse natural rights by propagating false information which is designed to destabilize a country of people whose core values began with the vital requirement of defending natural rights with a process known as the common law, which includes independent grand juries (of, by, and for the people, not of, by, and for the government, not of, by, and for a foreign government, not of, by, and for a church, not of, by, and for a corporation), and independent trial juries, in Courts of Law (not Courts of Admiralty, not Courts of Equity, Family, etc.), and Group A manages to turn the hearts and minds of the target population sufficiently away from their core values to cause the target population to adopt instead a counterfeit version of those core values.
Example:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from ...
[youtube.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
And...people can trace said Zionist control back to Russia and do so with a low budget. Trillions of UNITS of Power (Power to Purchase) flow into each Central Bank Fraud which FUNDS each Government from the largest most powerful one to the smallest least powerful one, and NO ONE can figure this Conspiracy Out and do something about it?
Do you see a problem with that?
"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
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZNjUiP0p6I
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 30, 2020:
And...people can trace said Zionist control back to Russia and do so with a low budget. Trillions of UNITS of Power (Power to Purchase) flow into each Central Bank Fraud which FUNDS each Government from the largest most powerful one to the smallest least powerful one, and NO ONE can figure this Conspiracy Out and do something about it?
Do you see a problem with that?
"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
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZNjUiP0p6I
Breaking Truth Educate Yourselves [lewrockwell.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Fantastic post, thanks.
"Officially there is no treatment for COVID-19, and that is why they can get away with saying salvation hinges on a vaccine. If there are treatments that work, which there are, there is no need for a vaccine. What kind of people would deny treatments that would help millions?"
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Fantastic post, thanks.
"Officially there is no treatment for COVID-19, and that is why they can get away with saying salvation hinges on a vaccine. If there are treatments that work, which there are, there is no need for a vaccine. What kind of people would deny treatments that would help millions?"
Waste isn't worthless.
[outdoorrevival.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
https://www.plastic2oil.com/site/home
Where can I find a lot of waste plastic? Hmmmm
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
https://www.plastic2oil.com/site/home
Where can I find a lot of waste plastic? Hmmmm
How exactly did we get here?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Englishman’s Right
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A BARRISTER at LAW AND A JURYMAN
Printed in the Year MDCCLXIII. (1762)
"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."
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Englishman’s Right
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A BARRISTER at LAW AND A JURYMAN
Printed in the Year MDCCLXIII. (1762)
"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."
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and ...
TimCast: More information about the Kenosha shootings. The first reports were false.
[youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Time: 18:25 or so...
"...they are scared of the riots..."
I think this guy is superficial, or an agent provocateur.
They include the people paying rioters to riot. If they (those who pay the rioters to riot) were scared of the riots, then stop paying the rioters to riot, and there is no more fear of riots that you no longer finance, create, foment, incite, reward, credit, aid, abet, lend moral and material support to happen on your schedule.
It makes no sense to claim that those in power to stop riots, by stopping the people causing them, to be attacking a defender with malicious PERSECUTION (abuse of the law power, a treasonous crime) because "they" are scared of the riots.
Sure, the reasons for this superficial reasoning could play out but only if you give (aid and abet) the malicious persecutors the benefit of doubt concerning their motives, and that is a very tenuous, shallow, superficial, and powerless, baseless, defenseless, ASSUMPTION.
That ASSUMPTION goes like this:
They (those in power to stop the riots) are too stupid to stop the riots that they fear, so instead of stopping the riots that they fear, they resort to treasonous fraud by maliciously persecuting one of the people who did stop the riots.
Why is that baseless?
If they are too stupid to see something as basic as the need to stop the people inciting and funding the rioters, if they are really that stupid, how is it that they are smart enough to be able to keep their con game going, making a fortune persecuting innocent people, and protecting and serving the people who incite and fund rioters, by not prosecuting them?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Time: 18:25 or so...
"...they are scared of the riots..."
I think this guy is superficial, or an agent provocateur.
They include the people paying rioters to riot. If they (those who pay the rioters to riot) were scared of the riots, then stop paying the rioters to riot, and there is no more fear of riots that you no longer finance, create, foment, incite, reward, credit, aid, abet, lend moral and material support to happen on your schedule.
It makes no sense to claim that those in power to stop riots, by stopping the people causing them, to be attacking a defender with malicious PERSECUTION (abuse of the law power, a treasonous crime) because "they" are scared of the riots.
Sure, the reasons for this superficial reasoning could play out but only if you give (aid and abet) the malicious persecutors the benefit of doubt concerning their motives, and that is a very tenuous, shallow, superficial, and powerless, baseless, defenseless, ASSUMPTION.
That ASSUMPTION goes like this:
They (those in power to stop the riots) are too stupid to stop the riots that they fear, so instead of stopping the riots that they fear, they resort to treasonous fraud by maliciously persecuting one of the people who did stop the riots.
Why is that baseless?
If they are too stupid to see something as basic as the need to stop the people inciting and funding the rioters, if they are really that stupid, how is it that they are smart enough to be able to keep their con game going, making a fortune persecuting innocent people, and protecting and serving the people who incite and fund rioters, by not prosecuting them?
TimCast: More information about the Kenosha shootings. The first reports were false.
[youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Time: 12:44 or so...
"...it may be malicious prosecution, now, maybe not, it is hard to prove..."
In other words, what?
Since it is hard to prove, don't go there, because it is hard to prove, so hands off, because it is hard to prove, so forget about it, because it is hard to prove, leave it alone, etc.
What?
The injustice system by its mandate brings us (the people as a whole: everyone, no exceptions) here.
We were warned:
"The judiciary of the United States is so constructed and extended, as to absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several states; thereby rendering laws as tedious, intricate, and expensive, and justice as unattainable by a great part of the community, as in England; and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor."
George Mason, 1787
Not good enough of a warning, he is just some founding father troll posting a blog on the internet?
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property."
Did they not teach you about Thomas Paine, Common Sense, Crisis, the man behind the Revolutionary War, to defend natural rights against aggressive criminal governments? Did they not teach you about George Mason, the founding father against the Slave Trading Constitution of 1789, the man who refused to sign that Constitution, the man behind the Bill of Rights Amendments to that criminal Constitution?
June 17, 1788
George Mason:
"Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union."
They all knew Slavery was on the way out, a precedent was set according to the law of the land, the common law:
“A jury of twelve local farmers, all men and all white according to ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Time: 12:44 or so...
"...it may be malicious prosecution, now, maybe not, it is hard to prove..."
In other words, what?
Since it is hard to prove, don't go there, because it is hard to prove, so hands off, because it is hard to prove, so forget about it, because it is hard to prove, leave it alone, etc.
What?
The injustice system by its mandate brings us (the people as a whole: everyone, no exceptions) here.
We were warned:
"The judiciary of the United States is so constructed and extended, as to absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several states; thereby rendering laws as tedious, intricate, and expensive, and justice as unattainable by a great part of the community, as in England; and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor."
George Mason, 1787
Not good enough of a warning, he is just some founding father troll posting a blog on the internet?
To the citizens of the United States by Thomas Paine
November 15, 1802
"But a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property."
Did they not teach you about Thomas Paine, Common Sense, Crisis, the man behind the Revolutionary War, to defend natural rights against aggressive criminal governments? Did they not teach you about George Mason, the founding father against the Slave Trading Constitution of 1789, the man who refused to sign that Constitution, the man behind the Bill of Rights Amendments to that criminal Constitution?
June 17, 1788
George Mason:
"Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union."
They all knew Slavery was on the way out, a precedent was set according to the law of the land, the common law:
“A jury of twelve local farmers, all men and all white according to ...
[youtu.be] modern leftist rationale and counter , worth the watch for the enlightenment
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Thanks, this is a very well produced message.
I was thinking something similar as I watched the "mob" going after people, as is more and more common these days, including a "mob" verbally assaulting people at outdoor dining tables, demanding that people raise their fists.
What I thought, like a sudden realization (epiphany), was that the "mob" has a striking resemblance to all the Zombie movies and video games since the original Night of the Living Dead, which is a movie our Dad took us to in a Drive-in when we were knee-high to a duck.
No...if you are one of the Zombie Mob brainwashed by the Marxist/Communist/Satanist Cabal, I do not go around shooting people randomly for any claimed "social justice," and I will not because that would be morally wrong according to my own authority to authorize right from wrong.
1.
Hyenas attacking someone warrants defensive violence sufficient to deter further aggressive violence, each and every mad dog attacker seeking to eat the life out of their target.
2.
Demons attacking someone warrants defensive violence sufficient to deter further aggressive violence, each and every demonic attacker seeking to climb over the pile of dead demons to get to their target with their obvious, confessed, blood lust.
3.
Zombie Apocalypse Zombies attacking someone warrants defensive violence sufficient to kill every single Zombie before that Zombie can turn another human being into a Zombie like them, hell bent on consuming life everywhere life may still emerge in the face of a Zombie Apocalypse man-made VIRUS.
Missing, of course, is the power of law to deter any aggressive violence from erupting in the first place: nip it in the bud.
Any of those in public office who have acted to infringe upon any natural right constitutes the need for (warrants) an official acknowledgment of that treasonous crime the moment the treasonous criminal perpetrates that crime, setting in motion the wheels of justice known as due process of law, moving from discovery, moving to independent grand jury investigation (tampering with an independent grand jury is a felony, treasonous, crime, infringing upon natural right, such as the right to due process of law) and then moving to presenting the accused with their court date in a Court of Law before an independent trial jury (staking a jury, tampering with a jury, claiming false claims concerning jury duty, such as claiming that the jury does not have the lawful power to question an immoral STATUTE, such as any immoral STATUTE that inspires the infringement of natural rights, is a felony crime, a treasonous crime, a crime only perpetrated by demons, mad dogs, and zombies whose brains have been washed to the point of immorality) and in so doing - due process - the people ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Thanks, this is a very well produced message.
I was thinking something similar as I watched the "mob" going after people, as is more and more common these days, including a "mob" verbally assaulting people at outdoor dining tables, demanding that people raise their fists.
What I thought, like a sudden realization (epiphany), was that the "mob" has a striking resemblance to all the Zombie movies and video games since the original Night of the Living Dead, which is a movie our Dad took us to in a Drive-in when we were knee-high to a duck.
No...if you are one of the Zombie Mob brainwashed by the Marxist/Communist/Satanist Cabal, I do not go around shooting people randomly for any claimed "social justice," and I will not because that would be morally wrong according to my own authority to authorize right from wrong.
1.
Hyenas attacking someone warrants defensive violence sufficient to deter further aggressive violence, each and every mad dog attacker seeking to eat the life out of their target.
2.
Demons attacking someone warrants defensive violence sufficient to deter further aggressive violence, each and every demonic attacker seeking to climb over the pile of dead demons to get to their target with their obvious, confessed, blood lust.
3.
Zombie Apocalypse Zombies attacking someone warrants defensive violence sufficient to kill every single Zombie before that Zombie can turn another human being into a Zombie like them, hell bent on consuming life everywhere life may still emerge in the face of a Zombie Apocalypse man-made VIRUS.
Missing, of course, is the power of law to deter any aggressive violence from erupting in the first place: nip it in the bud.
Any of those in public office who have acted to infringe upon any natural right constitutes the need for (warrants) an official acknowledgment of that treasonous crime the moment the treasonous criminal perpetrates that crime, setting in motion the wheels of justice known as due process of law, moving from discovery, moving to independent grand jury investigation (tampering with an independent grand jury is a felony, treasonous, crime, infringing upon natural right, such as the right to due process of law) and then moving to presenting the accused with their court date in a Court of Law before an independent trial jury (staking a jury, tampering with a jury, claiming false claims concerning jury duty, such as claiming that the jury does not have the lawful power to question an immoral STATUTE, such as any immoral STATUTE that inspires the infringement of natural rights, is a felony crime, a treasonous crime, a crime only perpetrated by demons, mad dogs, and zombies whose brains have been washed to the point of immorality) and in so doing - due process - the people ...
Can Kamala pass the brown paper bag test?
[en.wikipedia.org]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
I can! I'm Irish, German, English, etc., and I've been working a lot in the sun.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
I can! I'm Irish, German, English, etc., and I've been working a lot in the sun.
Debate on universal health care. Go
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Competition in this free market (care of the sick by those best able to do so) is the same as competition in the free market of government providers (care of those who are targeted by criminals by those best able to do so):
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."
An open source Interactive Internet Activity Network of health care providers offering access to those in need of health care providers could be tried in one county, in one state, in one federation of states.
If it works to link together the best able to provide health care to those who need it, working better than the next county and the next, then it could spread like a virus to other ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 29, 2020:
Competition in this free market (care of the sick by those best able to do so) is the same as competition in the free market of government providers (care of those who are targeted by criminals by those best able to do so):
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."
An open source Interactive Internet Activity Network of health care providers offering access to those in need of health care providers could be tried in one county, in one state, in one federation of states.
If it works to link together the best able to provide health care to those who need it, working better than the next county and the next, then it could spread like a virus to other ...
Nancy Pelosi, is.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
No matter how a debate would play out, even if Biden started drooling, or ran into the audience humping little girls, the media would spin it and blame Trump.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
No matter how a debate would play out, even if Biden started drooling, or ran into the audience humping little girls, the media would spin it and blame Trump.
Time: 26:00 or so.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
I listened to the whole discussion in the link above and it appears to me that Sachastone runs into a familiar brick wall.
The message is:
The Law is not a Statute (I don't agree with Sachastone as to what the law is, but The Law is not a Statute)
Private Prosecution of specified treasonous criminals perpetrating many crimes including fraud MUST commence, and actual people have to actually start due process of law rolling on a first case.
Restating the Law:
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
I listened to the whole discussion in the link above and it appears to me that Sachastone runs into a familiar brick wall.
The message is:
The Law is not a Statute (I don't agree with Sachastone as to what the law is, but The Law is not a Statute)
Private Prosecution of specified treasonous criminals perpetrating many crimes including fraud MUST commence, and actual people have to actually start due process of law rolling on a first case.
Restating the Law:
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond ...
[youtu.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
The "reporters" conclude that it is the police that keeps people from dividing into groups that kill each other?
What about the army of people hired (with tax funds) to cause division and conflict?
The police, routinely, attempt to police themselves, and as they go up the chain of command they (whistle blowers) are DEMONized.
So...rather than group A (the monopoly police singular entity) being innocent and guilty at the same time (cognitive dissonance, confusion, misinformation, internal division, internal conflict), why not return to rule of law where actual individuals are actually afforded a court date in a Court of Law to defend their actions if they are accused, but presumed innocent, of a crime?
Who, exactly, is fomenting Race War? Where is their discovery, accusation, and court date in a Court of Law?
What will The Country hear during the trial, as the PRIVATE prosecutor and the defendant state their cases before the representatives of The Country: the jury?
What was the motive behind fomenting Race War? How many incidence of misguided violence is accountable to which propagandists whose goal is to profit from Race War?
Instead, and not even likely, a trial of a misguided individual with blood on his hands, is adjudicated in a Court of Law where The People are represented as One Country Unified under Law, as randomly selected jurors (not stacked by interested parties with bias) adjudicate the facts in the case, adjudicate the law in the case, and adjudicate sentence in the case?
The real source of the violence goes free, those who profit from fomenting, inciting, Race War, and those victimized by the false propaganda are blamed for following that power of deception?
Do you people know the difference between guilt of mind and guilt in fact?
Mens rea (guilty mind): someone at war with society, a felon, a mad dog, sociopath, psychopath, intent with malice aforethought, to cause torturous, horrible, terrifying injury to innocent people with the power of lies in the form of "NEWS."
Actus reus (guilty in fact): someone pulling the trigger that sends the projectile into the body of the living being whose life is thereby ended, including someone who is led to a point in time and place where the act of pulling the trigger is an instinctual act of self-preservation.
Who is the law?
I think that one must look in the mirror to find any trojan horses, viruses, whereby false information has replaced the actual law with a very destructive counterfeit copy.
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 ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
The "reporters" conclude that it is the police that keeps people from dividing into groups that kill each other?
What about the army of people hired (with tax funds) to cause division and conflict?
The police, routinely, attempt to police themselves, and as they go up the chain of command they (whistle blowers) are DEMONized.
So...rather than group A (the monopoly police singular entity) being innocent and guilty at the same time (cognitive dissonance, confusion, misinformation, internal division, internal conflict), why not return to rule of law where actual individuals are actually afforded a court date in a Court of Law to defend their actions if they are accused, but presumed innocent, of a crime?
Who, exactly, is fomenting Race War? Where is their discovery, accusation, and court date in a Court of Law?
What will The Country hear during the trial, as the PRIVATE prosecutor and the defendant state their cases before the representatives of The Country: the jury?
What was the motive behind fomenting Race War? How many incidence of misguided violence is accountable to which propagandists whose goal is to profit from Race War?
Instead, and not even likely, a trial of a misguided individual with blood on his hands, is adjudicated in a Court of Law where The People are represented as One Country Unified under Law, as randomly selected jurors (not stacked by interested parties with bias) adjudicate the facts in the case, adjudicate the law in the case, and adjudicate sentence in the case?
The real source of the violence goes free, those who profit from fomenting, inciting, Race War, and those victimized by the false propaganda are blamed for following that power of deception?
Do you people know the difference between guilt of mind and guilt in fact?
Mens rea (guilty mind): someone at war with society, a felon, a mad dog, sociopath, psychopath, intent with malice aforethought, to cause torturous, horrible, terrifying injury to innocent people with the power of lies in the form of "NEWS."
Actus reus (guilty in fact): someone pulling the trigger that sends the projectile into the body of the living being whose life is thereby ended, including someone who is led to a point in time and place where the act of pulling the trigger is an instinctual act of self-preservation.
Who is the law?
I think that one must look in the mirror to find any trojan horses, viruses, whereby false information has replaced the actual law with a very destructive counterfeit copy.
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 ...
Is there any truth in Qanon or the "deep state"?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
While looking further into this narrative that exists under the heading Qanon I found a few relevant facts, such as the facts reported on a government document:
"Epinephrine solution deteriorates rapidly on exposure to air or light, turning pink from oxidation
to adrenochrome and brown from the formation of melanin. Replace EpiPen and EpiPen Jr if the
epinephrine solution appears discolored (pinkish or brown color), cloudy, or contains particles."
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/019430s059lbl.pdf
An alleged "government" document, perhaps.
I looked for that information after listening to this:
"The pedo Cover-Upperers in the Deep State Media have gone crazy. Legislators have gone crazy! Everyone in the child-trafficking business are in full blown panic over the fact that people on the left and right are coming together on common ground: we want an end to Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=xfF3uCcrbO8=emb_logo
In that video there was a report on the shortage of EpiPens, and how an EpiPen deteriorates (or improves to some?) going from epinephrine to adrenochrome.
Then I found this:
"Witch Hunt: The Storm is Upon Us"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=pTP4bZgMmp4=emb_logo
So..."Is there any truth in Qanon or the "deep state"?"
The assumption here is that someone asking the question is someone who wants an accurate answer.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 28, 2020:
While looking further into this narrative that exists under the heading Qanon I found a few relevant facts, such as the facts reported on a government document:
"Epinephrine solution deteriorates rapidly on exposure to air or light, turning pink from oxidation
to adrenochrome and brown from the formation of melanin. Replace EpiPen and EpiPen Jr if the
epinephrine solution appears discolored (pinkish or brown color), cloudy, or contains particles."
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/019430s059lbl.pdf
An alleged "government" document, perhaps.
I looked for that information after listening to this:
"The pedo Cover-Upperers in the Deep State Media have gone crazy. Legislators have gone crazy! Everyone in the child-trafficking business are in full blown panic over the fact that people on the left and right are coming together on common ground: we want an end to Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=xfF3uCcrbO8=emb_logo
In that video there was a report on the shortage of EpiPens, and how an EpiPen deteriorates (or improves to some?) going from epinephrine to adrenochrome.
Then I found this:
"Witch Hunt: The Storm is Upon Us"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=pTP4bZgMmp4=emb_logo
So..."Is there any truth in Qanon or the "deep state"?"
The assumption here is that someone asking the question is someone who wants an accurate answer.
Deep State Pedos trying to stop "Save the Children".
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Thanks, this one will be News Worthy, good source, I'm on the edge of my seat starting the Broadcast.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Thanks, this one will be News Worthy, good source, I'm on the edge of my seat starting the Broadcast.
Democrats are freaking out, and they should be-
[thefederalist.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
"Vigilantism is bad."
Really? Who says so? Give me some examples, please.
Here are some:
A CASE STUDY OF THE 1778-1779
PHILADELPHIA TREASON TRIALS
Carlton F.W. Larson
"The British occupation of Philadelphia was the seminal event of the War for Independence in Pennsylvania. Following Washington's defeat at Brandywine Creek, the British army entered Philadelphia on September 26, 1777. The Continental Congress and the Pennsylvania state government had already fled the city, and Washington would eventually withdraw his army to Valley Forge for the winter. Historians estimate that about one-third of Philadelphia's population, some 12,000 people, had fled the city in advance of the invasion.
The state government, in exile in Lancaster, soon began hearing reports of Pennsylvanians who were actively aiding or joining the British army. In March 1778, the Assembly, with assistance from Chief Justice McKean, passed a law entitled "An Act for the attainder of divers traitors." The law named twelve prominent individuals who had sided with the British and required them to appear for trial by April 20, 1778. If they failed to appear, they would be deemed "convicted and attainted of high treason, to all intents and purposes whatsoever." The Act also authorized the Supreme Executive Council to issue additional proclamations naming persons who had joined the British army. Any such persons who failed to appear for trial would also be attainted of high treason. Although such conditional bills of attainder would soon be prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, Pennsylvania did not seek primarily to hang people without trials, but to seize promptly the abandoned estates of loyalists who had fled to the British. The law accordingly set forth various procedures for seizing the estates of those persons who failed to report for trial."
Revolutionary American Jury: A Case Study of the
1778-1779 Philadelphia Treason Trials
Carlton F. W. Larson
"In late eighteenth-century England, most felony cases were prosecuted by private parties, generally the victims."
Englishman’s Right
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A BARRISTER at LAW AND A JURYMAN
Printed in the Year MDCCLXIII. (1762)
"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."
There are more examples of vigilantism (individual lawful thoughts and actions in time and place) in practice in reality.
More:
Lysander Spooner, Essay on the Trial by Jury, 1852
"That this right of resistance was recognized as a common law right, when the ancient and genuine ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
"Vigilantism is bad."
Really? Who says so? Give me some examples, please.
Here are some:
A CASE STUDY OF THE 1778-1779
PHILADELPHIA TREASON TRIALS
Carlton F.W. Larson
"The British occupation of Philadelphia was the seminal event of the War for Independence in Pennsylvania. Following Washington's defeat at Brandywine Creek, the British army entered Philadelphia on September 26, 1777. The Continental Congress and the Pennsylvania state government had already fled the city, and Washington would eventually withdraw his army to Valley Forge for the winter. Historians estimate that about one-third of Philadelphia's population, some 12,000 people, had fled the city in advance of the invasion.
The state government, in exile in Lancaster, soon began hearing reports of Pennsylvanians who were actively aiding or joining the British army. In March 1778, the Assembly, with assistance from Chief Justice McKean, passed a law entitled "An Act for the attainder of divers traitors." The law named twelve prominent individuals who had sided with the British and required them to appear for trial by April 20, 1778. If they failed to appear, they would be deemed "convicted and attainted of high treason, to all intents and purposes whatsoever." The Act also authorized the Supreme Executive Council to issue additional proclamations naming persons who had joined the British army. Any such persons who failed to appear for trial would also be attainted of high treason. Although such conditional bills of attainder would soon be prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, Pennsylvania did not seek primarily to hang people without trials, but to seize promptly the abandoned estates of loyalists who had fled to the British. The law accordingly set forth various procedures for seizing the estates of those persons who failed to report for trial."
Revolutionary American Jury: A Case Study of the
1778-1779 Philadelphia Treason Trials
Carlton F. W. Larson
"In late eighteenth-century England, most felony cases were prosecuted by private parties, generally the victims."
Englishman’s Right
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A BARRISTER at LAW AND A JURYMAN
Printed in the Year MDCCLXIII. (1762)
"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."
There are more examples of vigilantism (individual lawful thoughts and actions in time and place) in practice in reality.
More:
Lysander Spooner, Essay on the Trial by Jury, 1852
"That this right of resistance was recognized as a common law right, when the ancient and genuine ...
VDH: What do rioters want?
[foxnews.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
A decent check for services rendered.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
A decent check for services rendered.
Homeland Security Secretary says ANTIFA absolutely meets definition of domestic terrorist group-
...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Ahhhh...who funds them, who offers moral support, and therefore isn't that treason?
THE REVOLUTIONARY AMERICAN JURY:
A CASE STUDY OF THE 1778-1779
PHILADELPHIA TREASON TRIALS
Carlton F.W. Larson
"The British occupation of Philadelphia was the seminal event of the War for Independence in Pennsylvania. Following Washington's defeat at Brandywine Creek, the British army entered Philadelphia on September 26, 1777. The Continental Congress and the Pennsylvania state government had already fled the city, and Washington would eventually withdraw his army to Valley Forge for the winter. Historians estimate that about one-third of Philadelphia's population, some 12,000 people, had fled the city in advance of the invasion.
The state government, in exile in Lancaster, soon began hearing reports of Pennsylvanians who were actively aiding or joining the British army. In March 1778, the Assembly, with assistance from Chief Justice McKean, passed a law entitled "An Act for the attainder of divers traitors." The law named twelve prominent individuals who had sided with the British and required them to appear for trial by April 20, 1778. If they failed to appear, they would be deemed "convicted and attainted of high treason, to all intents and purposes whatsoever." The Act also authorized the Supreme Executive Council to issue additional proclamations naming persons who had joined the British army. Any such persons who failed to appear for trial would also be attainted of high treason. Although such conditional bills of attainder would soon be prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, Pennsylvania did not seek primarily to hang people without trials, but to seize promptly the abandoned estates of loyalists who had fled to the British. The law accordingly set forth various procedures for seizing the estates of those persons who failed to report for trial."
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Ahhhh...who funds them, who offers moral support, and therefore isn't that treason?
THE REVOLUTIONARY AMERICAN JURY:
A CASE STUDY OF THE 1778-1779
PHILADELPHIA TREASON TRIALS
Carlton F.W. Larson
"The British occupation of Philadelphia was the seminal event of the War for Independence in Pennsylvania. Following Washington's defeat at Brandywine Creek, the British army entered Philadelphia on September 26, 1777. The Continental Congress and the Pennsylvania state government had already fled the city, and Washington would eventually withdraw his army to Valley Forge for the winter. Historians estimate that about one-third of Philadelphia's population, some 12,000 people, had fled the city in advance of the invasion.
The state government, in exile in Lancaster, soon began hearing reports of Pennsylvanians who were actively aiding or joining the British army. In March 1778, the Assembly, with assistance from Chief Justice McKean, passed a law entitled "An Act for the attainder of divers traitors." The law named twelve prominent individuals who had sided with the British and required them to appear for trial by April 20, 1778. If they failed to appear, they would be deemed "convicted and attainted of high treason, to all intents and purposes whatsoever." The Act also authorized the Supreme Executive Council to issue additional proclamations naming persons who had joined the British army. Any such persons who failed to appear for trial would also be attainted of high treason. Although such conditional bills of attainder would soon be prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, Pennsylvania did not seek primarily to hang people without trials, but to seize promptly the abandoned estates of loyalists who had fled to the British. The law accordingly set forth various procedures for seizing the estates of those persons who failed to report for trial."
That'll be my question, too. 😂 🤣
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Pleadings for mercy, thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Pleadings for mercy, thanks.
Time: 26:00 or so.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
The activist pointing out that a Law is not a Statute is himself demonstrably in the dark.
A law is not something written up by "elected" officials who falsely claim to represent the whole people as one. That is a fundamental lie that is a vital part of the Con Game where the actual law power is counterfeited and turned against the people as a whole.
The actual law power is the power afforded everyone by everyone who remains within the law.
The law:
Do unto others as you would have others do to you.
Outside the Law:
Do unto others as you would have others not do to you, or reworded: Do onto others that which you yourself would not allow others to do to you.
A Statute that gives people permission to do onto others that which they themselves would defend against others doing to them is not within the clearly defined boundaries of the ACTUAL law. Those ideas that empower actions that afford some people to injure innocent people ARE NOT LAWS, and that can be demonstrated factually through a process known as due process, also known as the law of the land, and that process is trial by jury as that process proceeds according to the law of the land, our common laws.
They are our common laws only when those in common have the common understanding of the meaning of law:
Do unto others that which you would have others do to you, and do not do to others that which you would defend against having others do to you.
A Declaration of Independence fits into the boundaries of law, and it has an Ancient use in history: so called president.
A notice of liability fits into the law, it is the same form as a Declaration of Independence.
Here are words that describe the function of this law (right of defense against attack):
"[4] Hallam says, "The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. * * If a, vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by treaty, advantageous or otherwise, according to the fortune of war. * * There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long-enduring forbearance. In modern times, a king, compelled by his subjects' ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
The activist pointing out that a Law is not a Statute is himself demonstrably in the dark.
A law is not something written up by "elected" officials who falsely claim to represent the whole people as one. That is a fundamental lie that is a vital part of the Con Game where the actual law power is counterfeited and turned against the people as a whole.
The actual law power is the power afforded everyone by everyone who remains within the law.
The law:
Do unto others as you would have others do to you.
Outside the Law:
Do unto others as you would have others not do to you, or reworded: Do onto others that which you yourself would not allow others to do to you.
A Statute that gives people permission to do onto others that which they themselves would defend against others doing to them is not within the clearly defined boundaries of the ACTUAL law. Those ideas that empower actions that afford some people to injure innocent people ARE NOT LAWS, and that can be demonstrated factually through a process known as due process, also known as the law of the land, and that process is trial by jury as that process proceeds according to the law of the land, our common laws.
They are our common laws only when those in common have the common understanding of the meaning of law:
Do unto others that which you would have others do to you, and do not do to others that which you would defend against having others do to you.
A Declaration of Independence fits into the boundaries of law, and it has an Ancient use in history: so called president.
A notice of liability fits into the law, it is the same form as a Declaration of Independence.
Here are words that describe the function of this law (right of defense against attack):
"[4] Hallam says, "The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. * * If a, vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by treaty, advantageous or otherwise, according to the fortune of war. * * There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long-enduring forbearance. In modern times, a king, compelled by his subjects' ...
Do you have Covid-19? Check the list of symptoms
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Thanks.
[facebook.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Treason is defined by the treasonous.
Sashastone wonders why people are not questioning the orders to obey, and I think he may have missed the memo explaining why people are not questioned the orders to obey:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
People (authorities) are going to claim as Sashastone points out, that people have had it too good for too long, and that is why people are blindly obedient: automatic reaction known as the adjustive function.
From birth to death in the Modern Global Police State (see Anthony Sutton and George Orwell) people are SUBJECT to brainwashing. The power to reach that level of control (power) is well known.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 27, 2020:
Treason is defined by the treasonous.
Sashastone wonders why people are not questioning the orders to obey, and I think he may have missed the memo explaining why people are not questioned the orders to obey:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
People (authorities) are going to claim as Sashastone points out, that people have had it too good for too long, and that is why people are blindly obedient: automatic reaction known as the adjustive function.
From birth to death in the Modern Global Police State (see Anthony Sutton and George Orwell) people are SUBJECT to brainwashing. The power to reach that level of control (power) is well known.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, ...
TimCast: Should we leave Afghanistan?
[youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
Time 5:41 or so...
"The whole reason we went in there was to keep that country from becoming a petri dish for terrorists from which they can launch attacks against the Unites States or one of our Allies."
Was that taken directly from the Project for a New American Century game plan?
I'm not inspired to listen any further.
Just before this guy spells out the game plan in his words he had said something along the lines of asking random individuals sent there for their view on why they are there and each individual offers a different answer.
I talked to someone from deployment there and he said something along the lines of free flowing OPIUM puring out onto his bayonet in fields for the Drug Trade.
How about the story line from Bendon O'Connell?
I can get the quote if needed, but his view is of you brake it you have to fix it, and if U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) pulls out (limited liability?), the end game of total world domination by the Russian led Zionist "Belt and Road" Cabal will move one giant step closer toward their version of Full Spectrum Dominance complete with armies of A.I. robotic drones that render well progagandized (programed) "Patriots" moot. Who needs human cannon fodder when those same humans can be wiped into building an army of machines that have a much better record obeying orders without question?
Do you remember what happened to Thompson in Vietnam during My Lai?
"He landed his helicopter and told Calley to hold his men there while he evacuated the civilians. (One account reports Thompson told his helicopter crew chief to "open up on the Americans" if they fired at the civilians, but Thompson later said he did not remember having done so.) He put himself between Calley's men and the Vietnamese. When a rescue helicopter landed, Thompson had the nine civilians, including five children, flown to the nearest army hospital. Later, Thompson was to land again and rescue a baby still clinging to her dead mother."
The dude was not reading from the official script.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
Time 5:41 or so...
"The whole reason we went in there was to keep that country from becoming a petri dish for terrorists from which they can launch attacks against the Unites States or one of our Allies."
Was that taken directly from the Project for a New American Century game plan?
I'm not inspired to listen any further.
Just before this guy spells out the game plan in his words he had said something along the lines of asking random individuals sent there for their view on why they are there and each individual offers a different answer.
I talked to someone from deployment there and he said something along the lines of free flowing OPIUM puring out onto his bayonet in fields for the Drug Trade.
How about the story line from Bendon O'Connell?
I can get the quote if needed, but his view is of you brake it you have to fix it, and if U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) pulls out (limited liability?), the end game of total world domination by the Russian led Zionist "Belt and Road" Cabal will move one giant step closer toward their version of Full Spectrum Dominance complete with armies of A.I. robotic drones that render well progagandized (programed) "Patriots" moot. Who needs human cannon fodder when those same humans can be wiped into building an army of machines that have a much better record obeying orders without question?
Do you remember what happened to Thompson in Vietnam during My Lai?
"He landed his helicopter and told Calley to hold his men there while he evacuated the civilians. (One account reports Thompson told his helicopter crew chief to "open up on the Americans" if they fired at the civilians, but Thompson later said he did not remember having done so.) He put himself between Calley's men and the Vietnamese. When a rescue helicopter landed, Thompson had the nine civilians, including five children, flown to the nearest army hospital. Later, Thompson was to land again and rescue a baby still clinging to her dead mother."
The dude was not reading from the official script.
[theepochtimes.com]
Fauci Warns Against Rushing Approval of a CCP Virus Vaccine
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
Good News: Fauci’s Out and Common Sense Might Be Returning
By Ron Paul
Ron Paul Institute
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/ron-paul/good-news-faucis-out-and-common-sense-might-be-returning/
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
Good News: Fauci’s Out and Common Sense Might Be Returning
By Ron Paul
Ron Paul Institute
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/ron-paul/good-news-faucis-out-and-common-sense-might-be-returning/
Is there any truth in Qanon or the "deep state"?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
Frank O'Collins once pointed out that those who claim God exists are proving that God exists. I took that as meaning that even if God is only one guy imagining God existing, that proves that - in fact - God exists in that form: an imaginary creation by one individual one time in one place. The next day the same guy could claim that God no longer exists, but that would be an attempt to erase a previously established fact: God being sent down the memory hole: a lie.
Whatever is or is not Qanon, and whatever is or is not the Deep State, all viewpoints constitute reality as the existence of Qanon and the Deep State become factual: even if both are stories imagined into being by creators of stories.
As to the quote:
"QAnon is a baseless internet conspiracy theory whose followers believe that a cabal of Satan-worshipping Democrats, Hollywood celebrities and billionaires runs the world while engaging in pedophilia, human trafficking and the harvesting of a supposedly life-extending chemical from the blood of abused children. QAnon followers believe that Donald Trump is waging a secret battle against this cabal and its “deep state” collaborators to expose the malefactors and send them all to Guantánamo Bay.""
That quote starts off deceptively. A claim is made that something is baseless, and that is demonstrably a false claim, there is in fact much data in many places that constitute the base data that forms the story line as people become aware of QAnon. People see "it" because there is base data that forms "it" into being "it."
Then the quote (from whoever constructing the words: authorizing it) claims that "it" is an "internet conspiracy theory," which are word choices that have original origin, and from the original origin of the words the meanings of the words are shared by opposing groups of people who are opposing each other because the meanings of the words have at least 2 opposing meanings.
Meaning A:
conspiracy theory = a hypothesis involving the demand for accountability concerning specific injuries done to specific victims by as yet not tried criminals who are suspected as having caused those injuries.
Example: The grand jury assembled to validate an accusation concerning the death of all those people in Jonestown, Guyana as all those people drank the poisonous coo-aid and died. One of the grand jurors theorized that it was a conspiracy rather than a single individual who willfully murdered all those innocent people.
Meaning B:
conspiracy theory = false information claimed to be true, having no accountable original author, whereby the false information somehow, no accountable reason, manages to attract gullible people into perpetuating the false information despite the information being completely baseless, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
Frank O'Collins once pointed out that those who claim God exists are proving that God exists. I took that as meaning that even if God is only one guy imagining God existing, that proves that - in fact - God exists in that form: an imaginary creation by one individual one time in one place. The next day the same guy could claim that God no longer exists, but that would be an attempt to erase a previously established fact: God being sent down the memory hole: a lie.
Whatever is or is not Qanon, and whatever is or is not the Deep State, all viewpoints constitute reality as the existence of Qanon and the Deep State become factual: even if both are stories imagined into being by creators of stories.
As to the quote:
"QAnon is a baseless internet conspiracy theory whose followers believe that a cabal of Satan-worshipping Democrats, Hollywood celebrities and billionaires runs the world while engaging in pedophilia, human trafficking and the harvesting of a supposedly life-extending chemical from the blood of abused children. QAnon followers believe that Donald Trump is waging a secret battle against this cabal and its “deep state” collaborators to expose the malefactors and send them all to Guantánamo Bay.""
That quote starts off deceptively. A claim is made that something is baseless, and that is demonstrably a false claim, there is in fact much data in many places that constitute the base data that forms the story line as people become aware of QAnon. People see "it" because there is base data that forms "it" into being "it."
Then the quote (from whoever constructing the words: authorizing it) claims that "it" is an "internet conspiracy theory," which are word choices that have original origin, and from the original origin of the words the meanings of the words are shared by opposing groups of people who are opposing each other because the meanings of the words have at least 2 opposing meanings.
Meaning A:
conspiracy theory = a hypothesis involving the demand for accountability concerning specific injuries done to specific victims by as yet not tried criminals who are suspected as having caused those injuries.
Example: The grand jury assembled to validate an accusation concerning the death of all those people in Jonestown, Guyana as all those people drank the poisonous coo-aid and died. One of the grand jurors theorized that it was a conspiracy rather than a single individual who willfully murdered all those innocent people.
Meaning B:
conspiracy theory = false information claimed to be true, having no accountable original author, whereby the false information somehow, no accountable reason, manages to attract gullible people into perpetuating the false information despite the information being completely baseless, ...
Will America suffer the same fate as other empires? [americanthinker.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
"...new nation of the United States' concept of constitutional republicanism..."
No.
Constitutional republicanism is opposite Nation-State Empire Building.
The criminals take-over the government and use the government to perpetrate War of Aggression for the profit of the criminals running the fake government, and all expenses, all costs, are charged to the stupid and servile "electorate."
From defense (constitutional republicanism) of everyone under rule of law the government is turned to offense perpetrated by those who MASTER the SLAVES through a very well worn deception known as Legal Fiction.
Then, to stay in power, those in power blame the victims for their crimes.
Why is this type of bullshit regurgitated so often?
Hint:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 26, 2020:
"...new nation of the United States' concept of constitutional republicanism..."
No.
Constitutional republicanism is opposite Nation-State Empire Building.
The criminals take-over the government and use the government to perpetrate War of Aggression for the profit of the criminals running the fake government, and all expenses, all costs, are charged to the stupid and servile "electorate."
From defense (constitutional republicanism) of everyone under rule of law the government is turned to offense perpetrated by those who MASTER the SLAVES through a very well worn deception known as Legal Fiction.
Then, to stay in power, those in power blame the victims for their crimes.
Why is this type of bullshit regurgitated so often?
Hint:
"The Six Purposes of Schooling" - John Taylor Gatto
“Now you are ready to hear the six purposes of modern schooling taken directly from Dr. Anglisse’s book.”
“The first function of schooling is adjustive. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. It is fixed habits of reaction. Notice that this precludes critical judgment completely. Notice too that requiring obedience to stupid orders is a much better test of function one than following sensible orders ever could be. You don’t know whether people are reflexibly obedient unless they will march right off the cliff.”
“How can you establish weather someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity when they are given sensible orders to follow? That is not what they want to reach. The only way to measure this is to give stupid orders, and people automatically follow those. Now you have achieved function one.”
Creed is one of the greatest American rock bands...FIGHT ME!!!
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVXIK1xCRpY
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVXIK1xCRpY
This election is NOT about Trump or Biden.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
The meanings of words shared by the users of those words is a currency, a power that facilitates effective cooperation.
When the criminal sociopaths use the word "federal" they mean dictatorial, as in you must obey and if you don't you will be made an example of, for others who may otherwise be considering disobedience.
Federal used by regular people who don't want any part of dictatorship have used the word themselves.
Example:
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:"
First Congress deliberations on publishing a Declaration of Independence
Federal: Nation-State Despotic Top Down "love it or leave it" Criminal Organization to Subsidize the enslavement of anyone who can produce anything worth stealing: including children.
Federal: Voluntary Association of Independent People in Independent Counties in Independent States where the people are above (they create, pay for, or dissolve, replace, seceed, nullify, reinstate, renew, improve, reject, defend against, etc.) not below the government.
So...
"A half truth is as bad as a lie."
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."
Out goes the confederation (a federal association: voluntary) and in place is put a ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
The meanings of words shared by the users of those words is a currency, a power that facilitates effective cooperation.
When the criminal sociopaths use the word "federal" they mean dictatorial, as in you must obey and if you don't you will be made an example of, for others who may otherwise be considering disobedience.
Federal used by regular people who don't want any part of dictatorship have used the word themselves.
Example:
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:"
First Congress deliberations on publishing a Declaration of Independence
Federal: Nation-State Despotic Top Down "love it or leave it" Criminal Organization to Subsidize the enslavement of anyone who can produce anything worth stealing: including children.
Federal: Voluntary Association of Independent People in Independent Counties in Independent States where the people are above (they create, pay for, or dissolve, replace, seceed, nullify, reinstate, renew, improve, reject, defend against, etc.) not below the government.
So...
"A half truth is as bad as a lie."
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."
Out goes the confederation (a federal association: voluntary) and in place is put a ...
Ron Paul. We have to overcome these things to achieve freedom:
[share.par.pw]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
What about deception, can't overcome anything if you are fooled.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
What about deception, can't overcome anything if you are fooled.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 56:00 or so...
Tore mentions the Supreme Court, as if mentioning something good.
What type of Court is Tore going to be subjected to when she chooses to move her case to a Supreme Court?
Here I want to quote M'Kean, Chief Justice:
"It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue."
U.S. Supreme Court
Respublica v. Shaffer
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788
Below I laid out the common law due process concept as told by Lysander Spooner in a few quotes. Suffice to say that a stacked, packed, tampered, trial by the government is not by definition a Court of Law, rather it is a crime scene. It is a very serious crime (according to reason, common sense that isn't so common with so many people subjected to so much brainwashing) and people perpetrating jury tampering or counterfeiting an officer of the law, is liable to be prosecuted according to the law.
OK.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..."
I pulled that out of my ass too.
If I am not mistaken, if someone can tamper with a trial jury and get away with it, is it reasonable to suspect that someone could also be able to get away with tampering with a grand jury?
The People's Panel
The Grand Jury in the United States, 1634 - 1941
Richard D. Younger
Page 3
"They proved their effectiveness during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods in helping the colonists resist imperial interference. They provided a similar source of strength against outside pressure in the territories of the western United States, in the subject South following the Civil War, and in Mormon Utah. They frequently proved the only effective weapon against organized crime, malfeasance in office, and corruption in high places.
"But appreciation of the value of grand juries was always greater in times of crisis, and, during periods when threats to individual liberty were less obvious, legal reformers, efficiency experts, and a few who feared government by the people worked diligently to overthrow the institution. Proponents of the system, relying heavily on the democratic nature of the people's panel, on its role as a focal point for the expression of the public needs and the opportunity provided the individual citizen for direct participation in the enforcement of law, fought a losing battle. Opponents of the system leveled charges of inefficiency and tyranny against the panels of citizen investigators and pictured them as outmoded and ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 56:00 or so...
Tore mentions the Supreme Court, as if mentioning something good.
What type of Court is Tore going to be subjected to when she chooses to move her case to a Supreme Court?
Here I want to quote M'Kean, Chief Justice:
"It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue."
U.S. Supreme Court
Respublica v. Shaffer
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788
Below I laid out the common law due process concept as told by Lysander Spooner in a few quotes. Suffice to say that a stacked, packed, tampered, trial by the government is not by definition a Court of Law, rather it is a crime scene. It is a very serious crime (according to reason, common sense that isn't so common with so many people subjected to so much brainwashing) and people perpetrating jury tampering or counterfeiting an officer of the law, is liable to be prosecuted according to the law.
OK.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..."
I pulled that out of my ass too.
If I am not mistaken, if someone can tamper with a trial jury and get away with it, is it reasonable to suspect that someone could also be able to get away with tampering with a grand jury?
The People's Panel
The Grand Jury in the United States, 1634 - 1941
Richard D. Younger
Page 3
"They proved their effectiveness during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods in helping the colonists resist imperial interference. They provided a similar source of strength against outside pressure in the territories of the western United States, in the subject South following the Civil War, and in Mormon Utah. They frequently proved the only effective weapon against organized crime, malfeasance in office, and corruption in high places.
"But appreciation of the value of grand juries was always greater in times of crisis, and, during periods when threats to individual liberty were less obvious, legal reformers, efficiency experts, and a few who feared government by the people worked diligently to overthrow the institution. Proponents of the system, relying heavily on the democratic nature of the people's panel, on its role as a focal point for the expression of the public needs and the opportunity provided the individual citizen for direct participation in the enforcement of law, fought a losing battle. Opponents of the system leveled charges of inefficiency and tyranny against the panels of citizen investigators and pictured them as outmoded and ...
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 55:00 or so...
The 2 speakers are parroting "accountability" and "protest" and "something" needed to be done.
By who?
Rights of Man
Page 52.
"A government on the principles on which constitutional governments arising out of society are established, cannot have the right of altering itself. If it had, it would be arbitrary. It might make itself what it pleased; and wherever such a right is set up, it shows there is no constitution."
Thomas Paine was fooled too, but he eventually figured things out, after the fact.
The criminals set up a system of "accountability" where they enforce their power to decide if they need to be subjected to "accountability."
That is not news.
The law of the land in England was preventing the criminals in England from reaching the goal of World Government (Empire), so they (on the official record, I have the quotes) put in place Admiralty Courts and Equity Courts to entice The People to accept a counterfeit version of a Court of Law (common law), which is easily proven by the fact that the names of the courts remained separate and distinct until recent times, and now no one knows if it is a Court of Law or not, not even most black robe, on the take, criminals claiming to be judges.
At one time (while I was doing my time as State Coordinator in National Liberty Alliance) a guy called me and offered to send me 500 pages of documentation proving (beyond doubt, actual red handed smoking gun, official records) that all the judges in California were in office illegally, as one of the judges had turned.
I digress to prove a point.
A Court of Law proceeds according to the common law, which is the unwritten law, the law that remains in force because human beings have moral conscience, the power of reason, and are able to confirm, over and over and over, again and again, since Ancient times, some basic principles.
Such as: attempt to solve a controversy verbally or once written language is invented, attempt to solve controversy in writing, before moving on to DEFENSIVE violence.
Already, in the above, common law, moral, principle, is the assumption that aggressive violence (do onto others what you would defend against having other do to you) is outside the law.
Example:
"Ancient Law Right of resistance.
"That this right of resistance was recognized as a common law right, when the ancient and genuine trial by jury was in force, is not only proved by nature of the trial itself, but is acknowledged by history.*
*Hallam says, “The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 55:00 or so...
The 2 speakers are parroting "accountability" and "protest" and "something" needed to be done.
By who?
Rights of Man
Page 52.
"A government on the principles on which constitutional governments arising out of society are established, cannot have the right of altering itself. If it had, it would be arbitrary. It might make itself what it pleased; and wherever such a right is set up, it shows there is no constitution."
Thomas Paine was fooled too, but he eventually figured things out, after the fact.
The criminals set up a system of "accountability" where they enforce their power to decide if they need to be subjected to "accountability."
That is not news.
The law of the land in England was preventing the criminals in England from reaching the goal of World Government (Empire), so they (on the official record, I have the quotes) put in place Admiralty Courts and Equity Courts to entice The People to accept a counterfeit version of a Court of Law (common law), which is easily proven by the fact that the names of the courts remained separate and distinct until recent times, and now no one knows if it is a Court of Law or not, not even most black robe, on the take, criminals claiming to be judges.
At one time (while I was doing my time as State Coordinator in National Liberty Alliance) a guy called me and offered to send me 500 pages of documentation proving (beyond doubt, actual red handed smoking gun, official records) that all the judges in California were in office illegally, as one of the judges had turned.
I digress to prove a point.
A Court of Law proceeds according to the common law, which is the unwritten law, the law that remains in force because human beings have moral conscience, the power of reason, and are able to confirm, over and over and over, again and again, since Ancient times, some basic principles.
Such as: attempt to solve a controversy verbally or once written language is invented, attempt to solve controversy in writing, before moving on to DEFENSIVE violence.
Already, in the above, common law, moral, principle, is the assumption that aggressive violence (do onto others what you would defend against having other do to you) is outside the law.
Example:
"Ancient Law Right of resistance.
"That this right of resistance was recognized as a common law right, when the ancient and genuine trial by jury was in force, is not only proved by nature of the trial itself, but is acknowledged by history.*
*Hallam says, “The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much ...
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time: 53:00 or so...
Tore wants to know why we are paying for the U.N.
The Federal government was funded by States, there was no "we" paying for it, other than those States that decided to pay for it. A State could stop paying for it, some did just after the Revolutionary War which causes so much loss of life, liberty, and property, as the British Criminal Empire Builders Enslaving Everyone and making everyone PAY for their own enslavement, were rioting on the blood of the innocent in America, in the attempt to create and enforce a One World British Government Power Monopoly.
So Americans in States said no, we don't want to pay for One World Government enforced by criminals in Black Robes and fancy wigs: slave traders, slave consumers, and they probably eat babies, so..."we" don't want to pay for that, no thanks.
People in States said no. British criminals had many States to take-over. Many autonomous States, over vast areas of land, occupied by freedom loving people, with the real common law, not the British fake common law with Black Robe summary JustUS baby eating judges, were defended, so the British would land in Boston, while people in Pennsylvania were still free to fund their own defensive forces. The Criminal British One British World Government Monopoly Troops would then land in New York, and then the defenders in Massachusetts could lick their wounds, regain defensive power, while the British were spending all they had in New York. Meanwhile, down south, some of the people had the bright idea of giving the Slaves their freedom to help in the fight, but those geniuses just happened to be the ones who DID NOT CONSUME SLAVES.
June 17, 1788
George Mason:
"Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union."
So...
Don't want to pay for One World Government? Prefer to have the option to opt out in the World...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time: 53:00 or so...
Tore wants to know why we are paying for the U.N.
The Federal government was funded by States, there was no "we" paying for it, other than those States that decided to pay for it. A State could stop paying for it, some did just after the Revolutionary War which causes so much loss of life, liberty, and property, as the British Criminal Empire Builders Enslaving Everyone and making everyone PAY for their own enslavement, were rioting on the blood of the innocent in America, in the attempt to create and enforce a One World British Government Power Monopoly.
So Americans in States said no, we don't want to pay for One World Government enforced by criminals in Black Robes and fancy wigs: slave traders, slave consumers, and they probably eat babies, so..."we" don't want to pay for that, no thanks.
People in States said no. British criminals had many States to take-over. Many autonomous States, over vast areas of land, occupied by freedom loving people, with the real common law, not the British fake common law with Black Robe summary JustUS baby eating judges, were defended, so the British would land in Boston, while people in Pennsylvania were still free to fund their own defensive forces. The Criminal British One British World Government Monopoly Troops would then land in New York, and then the defenders in Massachusetts could lick their wounds, regain defensive power, while the British were spending all they had in New York. Meanwhile, down south, some of the people had the bright idea of giving the Slaves their freedom to help in the fight, but those geniuses just happened to be the ones who DID NOT CONSUME SLAVES.
June 17, 1788
George Mason:
"Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union."
So...
Don't want to pay for One World Government? Prefer to have the option to opt out in the World...
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
At Time 50:12 or so...
"Are you for America or are you for The Deep State?"
That (whether those two know it or not) is the Con Game in a sentence.
That is the false choice: Evil, or lesser Evil.
1. America (Nation-State Empire Building Tool, Central Bank Counterfeit System, Summary JustUS Courts)
2. The Deep State (Global-State Empire Building Tool, Central Bank Counterfeit System, Summary JustUS Courts)
Where is the peaceful choice? Where in that list is the common law, the law of the land, the sanctuary from the Con Game Evil or Lesser Evil False Choice?
People think I'm nuts, but to put this in perspective you fence sitters ought to consider listening the facts that matter in the case.
The freedom choice, the liberty choice, defended with peaceful means FIRST (common law Courts to settle any controversy) and only DEFENSIVE violence after peaceful means are truly exhausted (The Enemy is well past the gate and rioting in the blood of the innocent), is FREE MARKETS of governments.
The "utopia" preferred by the so-called Anarchists, Ancaps, even the Anarchist Socialists (Stephen Pearl Andrews for example), is exemplified with the common law, trial by jury, the law of the land, and those organizations defended thusly.
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 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 ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
At Time 50:12 or so...
"Are you for America or are you for The Deep State?"
That (whether those two know it or not) is the Con Game in a sentence.
That is the false choice: Evil, or lesser Evil.
1. America (Nation-State Empire Building Tool, Central Bank Counterfeit System, Summary JustUS Courts)
2. The Deep State (Global-State Empire Building Tool, Central Bank Counterfeit System, Summary JustUS Courts)
Where is the peaceful choice? Where in that list is the common law, the law of the land, the sanctuary from the Con Game Evil or Lesser Evil False Choice?
People think I'm nuts, but to put this in perspective you fence sitters ought to consider listening the facts that matter in the case.
The freedom choice, the liberty choice, defended with peaceful means FIRST (common law Courts to settle any controversy) and only DEFENSIVE violence after peaceful means are truly exhausted (The Enemy is well past the gate and rioting in the blood of the innocent), is FREE MARKETS of governments.
The "utopia" preferred by the so-called Anarchists, Ancaps, even the Anarchist Socialists (Stephen Pearl Andrews for example), is exemplified with the common law, trial by jury, the law of the land, and those organizations defended thusly.
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 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 ...
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 44:51 or so...
Millie claims that Trump is not controlled, if he was then "they" would already "...throw everything they could at him..."
Who exactly is "they?"
Here is one of "they":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFHU68FLTTc&t=78s
Time 8:00 or so...
Brendon O'Connell explains the TOOL used for the intended purpose.
Now, I post that to answer the claim made by Millie about "they."
"They" are not listed by Millie, so who does she mean, exactly, when she refers to "they?"
Brendon O'Connell names names. They are, for example, Sheldon Adelson.
Sheldon Adelson is part of a contending group of people who are busy doing what they can to gain more power and profit, so as to use that power gained to gain more power and profit, and their TOOLS include weapons of mass destruction, and weapons of mass deception.
They are not Legal Fictions:
1. Zionists
2. Democrats
3. Republicans
They are human beings who wear clothes when in public, and are naked when taking a shower or bath.
They cooperate with each other, and to do so they must utilize a PROGRAM that is tailor made to facilitate cooperation. In the PROGRAM tailor made to facilitate cooperation "they" must speak the same ERROR FREE language (currency) because errors lead to powerlessness, so the CURRENCY used empowers them to ever greater levels of power and profit.
An example of currency:
"The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
That is full of errors.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 44:51 or so...
Millie claims that Trump is not controlled, if he was then "they" would already "...throw everything they could at him..."
Who exactly is "they?"
Here is one of "they":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFHU68FLTTc&t=78s
Time 8:00 or so...
Brendon O'Connell explains the TOOL used for the intended purpose.
Now, I post that to answer the claim made by Millie about "they."
"They" are not listed by Millie, so who does she mean, exactly, when she refers to "they?"
Brendon O'Connell names names. They are, for example, Sheldon Adelson.
Sheldon Adelson is part of a contending group of people who are busy doing what they can to gain more power and profit, so as to use that power gained to gain more power and profit, and their TOOLS include weapons of mass destruction, and weapons of mass deception.
They are not Legal Fictions:
1. Zionists
2. Democrats
3. Republicans
They are human beings who wear clothes when in public, and are naked when taking a shower or bath.
They cooperate with each other, and to do so they must utilize a PROGRAM that is tailor made to facilitate cooperation. In the PROGRAM tailor made to facilitate cooperation "they" must speak the same ERROR FREE language (currency) because errors lead to powerlessness, so the CURRENCY used empowers them to ever greater levels of power and profit.
An example of currency:
"The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
That is full of errors.
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 43:00 or so...
Tore claims "The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
Just before that Tore described weaponized deception used by people upon targeted enemies “to avoid war,” or some other claimed justification to deploy weaponized mind-control, brainwashing, freedom stealing, backdoor, Trojan horse, virus formed, liberty killing, people killing, torturous, horrible, destructive, ORDERS to be following without question, because the targets don’t even know they are FOOLED.
Who is the fool?
Who is being fooled?
Who are the deceivers?
Why are they deceiving people?
"The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
That is a clear example of deception working in time and place: a fact that matters.
People in America who still think for themselves, who are not fooled, who are not following criminal orders without question, are free because they still think for themselves, and if their thoughts are filtered through something called MORAL CONSCIENCE, their actions may be lawful, legal, justifiable, just, reasonable, productive, adaptive, sustainable, right, good, beneficial, helpful, cooperative, competitive, nice, honorable, truthful, honest, loving, kind, and therefore free from evil, crime, destruction, torture, horror, rape, robbery, cruel and unusual punishment, judgment of guilt before affording defensive POWER to the presumed to be innocent accused, and free from actions that are unjust, criminal, harmful, destructive, unsustainable, parasitic, false, deceptive, extortive, fraudulent, libelous, slanderous, fake, dumb, moronic, stupid, servile, powerless, defenseless, or providing aid, comfort, finances, support, and power to empower single criminals or criminals in gangs, cabals, cartels, fake governments, or other organized crime organizations.
"The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
The United States of America (plural) is a Federation of Independent States under the common law, as exemplified between 1774 and 1789.
The United States of America (singular) is a Con Game, a Legal Fiction, a method of Subsidizing Slavery through Central Banking Fraud, Mind-control, and Summary JustUS, where the criminals enforce their orders which much be obeyed without question or else.
The Bill of Rights attached to the Constitution of 1789 were set aside immediately upon the first steps taken toward Empire Building (Subsidized Slavery as a goal, Aggressive War for Profit as a means) as each successive National regime from the 1 Party President to the current one took up the same goals with the same means with IMPUNITY.
If I missed a case, a treason case, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 43:00 or so...
Tore claims "The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
Just before that Tore described weaponized deception used by people upon targeted enemies “to avoid war,” or some other claimed justification to deploy weaponized mind-control, brainwashing, freedom stealing, backdoor, Trojan horse, virus formed, liberty killing, people killing, torturous, horrible, destructive, ORDERS to be following without question, because the targets don’t even know they are FOOLED.
Who is the fool?
Who is being fooled?
Who are the deceivers?
Why are they deceiving people?
"The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
That is a clear example of deception working in time and place: a fact that matters.
People in America who still think for themselves, who are not fooled, who are not following criminal orders without question, are free because they still think for themselves, and if their thoughts are filtered through something called MORAL CONSCIENCE, their actions may be lawful, legal, justifiable, just, reasonable, productive, adaptive, sustainable, right, good, beneficial, helpful, cooperative, competitive, nice, honorable, truthful, honest, loving, kind, and therefore free from evil, crime, destruction, torture, horror, rape, robbery, cruel and unusual punishment, judgment of guilt before affording defensive POWER to the presumed to be innocent accused, and free from actions that are unjust, criminal, harmful, destructive, unsustainable, parasitic, false, deceptive, extortive, fraudulent, libelous, slanderous, fake, dumb, moronic, stupid, servile, powerless, defenseless, or providing aid, comfort, finances, support, and power to empower single criminals or criminals in gangs, cabals, cartels, fake governments, or other organized crime organizations.
"The United States of America is the only Nation on the Planet...that on paper...is free."
The United States of America (plural) is a Federation of Independent States under the common law, as exemplified between 1774 and 1789.
The United States of America (singular) is a Con Game, a Legal Fiction, a method of Subsidizing Slavery through Central Banking Fraud, Mind-control, and Summary JustUS, where the criminals enforce their orders which much be obeyed without question or else.
The Bill of Rights attached to the Constitution of 1789 were set aside immediately upon the first steps taken toward Empire Building (Subsidized Slavery as a goal, Aggressive War for Profit as a means) as each successive National regime from the 1 Party President to the current one took up the same goals with the same means with IMPUNITY.
If I missed a case, a treason case, ...
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 42:00 or so...
Now Tore offers the same false (ignorant of the facts or deception on her part) narrative about the law process, as she is shocked that no one is calling for arrests.
If as Tore says, the information available constitutes a cause of action (the British invading America intent on subjecting Americans to British Full Spectrum Dominance was a cause of action), then a name goes on a presentment after an independent grand jury writes one up.
So why is Tore not shocked that no one is assembling a common law, independent, grand jury, in any county in America, so as then to have on a presentment a name of the accused and a court date for the accused to be given an opportunity to DEFEND against any possible false accusations whatsoever?
If that step isn't taken then throw the law out the window, throw due process under the bus, ignore due process of law, ignore the Bill of Rights, forget it, leave it behind, and move on with whatever unjustified, unlawful, illegal, bullshit you want to do with all the people you can convince to go along on the same train wreck, the same boat you make with all the holes drilled into the hull.
Why do you think the criminals began enforcing the Judiciary Act of 1789 before publishing the Bill of Rights?
The criminals set-up a counterfeit Court System OVER the law of the land: the common law. Gone are your rights thereby.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 42:00 or so...
Now Tore offers the same false (ignorant of the facts or deception on her part) narrative about the law process, as she is shocked that no one is calling for arrests.
If as Tore says, the information available constitutes a cause of action (the British invading America intent on subjecting Americans to British Full Spectrum Dominance was a cause of action), then a name goes on a presentment after an independent grand jury writes one up.
So why is Tore not shocked that no one is assembling a common law, independent, grand jury, in any county in America, so as then to have on a presentment a name of the accused and a court date for the accused to be given an opportunity to DEFEND against any possible false accusations whatsoever?
If that step isn't taken then throw the law out the window, throw due process under the bus, ignore due process of law, ignore the Bill of Rights, forget it, leave it behind, and move on with whatever unjustified, unlawful, illegal, bullshit you want to do with all the people you can convince to go along on the same train wreck, the same boat you make with all the holes drilled into the hull.
Why do you think the criminals began enforcing the Judiciary Act of 1789 before publishing the Bill of Rights?
The criminals set-up a counterfeit Court System OVER the law of the land: the common law. Gone are your rights thereby.
Millie and Tore Share More!
Tore Says: Shadowgate Updates
Millie and I used a lap top - sat on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 40:00 or so...
A statement was made earlier along the lines of "...innocent until proven guilty..." and then mention is made concerning "...pressure congress...congressional investigations...lead to the arrest..."
That exemplifies the problem.
The problem is that there is no law in America (hasn't been any since 1789).
The Law (Law of the Land, due process of law, do onto other's as you would have others do to you) is gone and in place is a counterfeit form of law: do onto other's that which you yourself would defend against others doing to you.
The process of law involves a cause of action initiated by a guilty criminal causing injury to an innocent victim, the discovery of that fact that matters, and then a communication to the suspect offering the suspect an opportunity to state their case before the people (a trial jury) in a Court of Law (not a court of Admiralty, Equity, or other Summary JustUS "Court").
Why are people suffering at the hands of criminals who don't know the law parroting the same ignorant statements that drive criminals to cause such suffering?
An individual (Millie) is kidnapped, suffers cruel and unusual punishment, is thereby extorted into "just following orders," as the victim is brought before another criminal in a black robe, and that criminals summons up counterfeit lawful authority to decide the facts that matter in this case of kidnapping, cruel and unusual punishment, extortion, and subsidized slavery (just following orders), as the "Judge" (having no authority whatsoever as to the law: presumption of innocence for example) issues orders to be followed without question to whomever is summarily extorted into such blind obedience to falsehood without question.
So...Millie dares to question the authority of people who fail the basic test of lawful authority (presumption of innocence) and then parrots that same ignorant order following?
You are hereby told to pressure criminals in a counterfeit congress to presume these other people to be guilty and they kidnap them. What next Millie? Have the kidnapped presumed to be guilty accused perpetrators tortured for false confessions or tortured to extort other desired behavior desired by the criminals who allow such torture, even demand such torture upon as yet to be found guilty people?
The invite to a court date (a criminal trial such as treason) is a test of the law power offered to the accused, presumed to be innocent accused, and IF the accused does not agree to show up for the trial, then the accused DEMONSTRATES a fact of crime factually in fact, in time, and in place, caught red handed, on the official record: contempt of court.
There is president.
THE REVOLUTIONARY AMERICAN JURY:
A CASE STUDY OF THE 1778-1779
...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 25, 2020:
Time 40:00 or so...
A statement was made earlier along the lines of "...innocent until proven guilty..." and then mention is made concerning "...pressure congress...congressional investigations...lead to the arrest..."
That exemplifies the problem.
The problem is that there is no law in America (hasn't been any since 1789).
The Law (Law of the Land, due process of law, do onto other's as you would have others do to you) is gone and in place is a counterfeit form of law: do onto other's that which you yourself would defend against others doing to you.
The process of law involves a cause of action initiated by a guilty criminal causing injury to an innocent victim, the discovery of that fact that matters, and then a communication to the suspect offering the suspect an opportunity to state their case before the people (a trial jury) in a Court of Law (not a court of Admiralty, Equity, or other Summary JustUS "Court").
Why are people suffering at the hands of criminals who don't know the law parroting the same ignorant statements that drive criminals to cause such suffering?
An individual (Millie) is kidnapped, suffers cruel and unusual punishment, is thereby extorted into "just following orders," as the victim is brought before another criminal in a black robe, and that criminals summons up counterfeit lawful authority to decide the facts that matter in this case of kidnapping, cruel and unusual punishment, extortion, and subsidized slavery (just following orders), as the "Judge" (having no authority whatsoever as to the law: presumption of innocence for example) issues orders to be followed without question to whomever is summarily extorted into such blind obedience to falsehood without question.
So...Millie dares to question the authority of people who fail the basic test of lawful authority (presumption of innocence) and then parrots that same ignorant order following?
You are hereby told to pressure criminals in a counterfeit congress to presume these other people to be guilty and they kidnap them. What next Millie? Have the kidnapped presumed to be guilty accused perpetrators tortured for false confessions or tortured to extort other desired behavior desired by the criminals who allow such torture, even demand such torture upon as yet to be found guilty people?
The invite to a court date (a criminal trial such as treason) is a test of the law power offered to the accused, presumed to be innocent accused, and IF the accused does not agree to show up for the trial, then the accused DEMONSTRATES a fact of crime factually in fact, in time, and in place, caught red handed, on the official record: contempt of court.
There is president.
THE REVOLUTIONARY AMERICAN JURY:
A CASE STUDY OF THE 1778-1779
...
She’ll do anything for your vote!
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 23, 2020:
That one went on my facebook page, thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 23, 2020:
That one went on my facebook page, thanks.
Indeed who is Jeff?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 23, 2020:
OK, it is me. I promise not to extort people with threats of nuclear war today.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 23, 2020:
OK, it is me. I promise not to extort people with threats of nuclear war today.
Four seconds of this video has been making the rounds on social media, the four seconds where he ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 23, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKWpuCpPczs
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 23, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKWpuCpPczs
(admin) I see this as a shakeout.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Weaponized A.A.I.?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Weaponized A.A.I.?
(admin) I see this as a shakeout.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Silver before making it to gold.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Silver before making it to gold.
For over a century we have been sorting and weighing data to determine every individual's score on ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
A measure of value that is important is first the individuals own measure. I now more that a few people who would not measure up on a I.Q. test as "valuable," but they teach me how to live well like no others can. If people can learn from other people better than the previous best, would that type of ELITE STATUS be worthy of study and emulation?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
A measure of value that is important is first the individuals own measure. I now more that a few people who would not measure up on a I.Q. test as "valuable," but they teach me how to live well like no others can. If people can learn from other people better than the previous best, would that type of ELITE STATUS be worthy of study and emulation?
I’d be putting it on Kijji ..... no reasonable offer refused
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Fearless or just plain stupid, the picture is evidence.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Fearless or just plain stupid, the picture is evidence.
on my way to a BLM protest
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
No, I don't go to Subsidized Treasonous Riots. I hear the pay is good, but there are no benefits otherwise.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
No, I don't go to Subsidized Treasonous Riots. I hear the pay is good, but there are no benefits otherwise.
If this is not a Deep Fake, well, I'm speechless
[twitter.]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDhhXIfIDUs
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDhhXIfIDUs
A State Trooper pulled an 87-year-old woman over for speeding.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Equalizer?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
Equalizer?
What say you?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
When reality sets in, and actual concerns replace false propagandized fears, people dust off their own moral conscience, their own power of logic and reason, and they take steps to deal with potential confrontations with unreasonable people.
"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth -- and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."
Modernized:
They are apt to attempt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, such as the fact that they are the criminals, and they are running the government ever closer toward absolute dictatorship, and they manufacture a narrative that is based upon the "song of the siren" mythology, as they will transform many people into carbon copy beasts such as the criminals running fake government DEMONstrate that they are, but the victims they target include some who hold their own power of moral conscience dear enough to defend. Therefore we arm ourselves with the facts that matter in the case, and if peaceful means (actual law power) fails, we have more than rocks and sticks to defend ourselves when the criminals become even more violent, such as would be an order to poison each one of us with a Snake Oil Poison falsely called a Vaccine.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 22, 2020:
When reality sets in, and actual concerns replace false propagandized fears, people dust off their own moral conscience, their own power of logic and reason, and they take steps to deal with potential confrontations with unreasonable people.
"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth -- and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."
Modernized:
They are apt to attempt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, such as the fact that they are the criminals, and they are running the government ever closer toward absolute dictatorship, and they manufacture a narrative that is based upon the "song of the siren" mythology, as they will transform many people into carbon copy beasts such as the criminals running fake government DEMONstrate that they are, but the victims they target include some who hold their own power of moral conscience dear enough to defend. Therefore we arm ourselves with the facts that matter in the case, and if peaceful means (actual law power) fails, we have more than rocks and sticks to defend ourselves when the criminals become even more violent, such as would be an order to poison each one of us with a Snake Oil Poison falsely called a Vaccine.
On Edge Software Browser I get:
"You must be a member of this group before commenting.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Update:
The following link loads (just tested) in both Edge and Brave browser software, but it does not load from my Group Page here at IDW:
The following is cut and pasted from clipboard the same paste from the same save to both Edge and Brave and it loads:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/6NOV86r1uDk
My Topic with the same link cut and pasted twice more than the original post, and it does not load.
https://idw.community/group/VoluntaryMutualDefense/discussion/124181/the-best-people-are-those-who-dont-know-were-using-them-https-www-youtube-com-embed-6nov8
Instead:
"An error occurred. Please try again later. (Playback ID: Mej915SlKfsiAGYb)"
Also, the message:
"You must be a member of this group before commenting."
That message continues to load despite my settings at IDW:
1. Show Group Access & Use Options
2. Who can post?
3. Anyone
4. Update
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Update:
The following link loads (just tested) in both Edge and Brave browser software, but it does not load from my Group Page here at IDW:
The following is cut and pasted from clipboard the same paste from the same save to both Edge and Brave and it loads:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/6NOV86r1uDk
My Topic with the same link cut and pasted twice more than the original post, and it does not load.
https://idw.community/group/VoluntaryMutualDefense/discussion/124181/the-best-people-are-those-who-dont-know-were-using-them-https-www-youtube-com-embed-6nov8
Instead:
"An error occurred. Please try again later. (Playback ID: Mej915SlKfsiAGYb)"
Also, the message:
"You must be a member of this group before commenting."
That message continues to load despite my settings at IDW:
1. Show Group Access & Use Options
2. Who can post?
3. Anyone
4. Update
Smart alec 🤣
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
I still can't find a conspiracy theorist.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
I still can't find a conspiracy theorist.
Thoughts on this one?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
"“Joe Biden will be a president we will all be proud to salute,” Powell said."
I didn't get past that in the article. The pathological liar who conspired to murder millions of people in an aggressive war for profit, making false claims at a Marxist/Communist/Satanist Forum (U.N.) says that "we" are going to do something? Who is "we?"
Is "we" the pathological liars, and assorted treasonous devil worshipers?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
"“Joe Biden will be a president we will all be proud to salute,” Powell said."
I didn't get past that in the article. The pathological liar who conspired to murder millions of people in an aggressive war for profit, making false claims at a Marxist/Communist/Satanist Forum (U.N.) says that "we" are going to do something? Who is "we?"
Is "we" the pathological liars, and assorted treasonous devil worshipers?
Woo hoo! level 7!!
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Cool.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Cool.
[youtu.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Time: 25:20 or so...
My ears don't work very well, and I can't hear much in this video as the music makes it even more difficult for me to hear the spoken words. I caught the mention of an effort to find previous competitive governing methods and then I caught the mention of picking government office holders randomly.
That is exemplified in the following quote:
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 own. Through reliance on sortition, ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Time: 25:20 or so...
My ears don't work very well, and I can't hear much in this video as the music makes it even more difficult for me to hear the spoken words. I caught the mention of an effort to find previous competitive governing methods and then I caught the mention of picking government office holders randomly.
That is exemplified in the following quote:
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 own. Through reliance on sortition, ...
[youtu.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
In English the word democracy means government run by all the people (no exceptions, the government is all the people, no factions), and the difficulty with the democratic form of government is that democracy is not possible when dealing with a number of people exceeding a limit of too many people. The limit can be raised with technology, but if people are left out (minority, majority, faction, division of the whole), then it is no longer democracy. When some people exploit other people (enslave them) it is no longer a democracy by definition.
Democracy is a form of government in which all the people govern: the people directly govern themselves as one, which means that democracy is specifically not such that the Majority Rules over a Minority, or a more Powerful Faction makes a less powerful faction obey without question the orders enforced by the more Powerful Faction.
If the government in force is a more Powerful Faction enforcing obedience from a less powerful faction, then the word for that form of government is Organized Crime, and that is because, given the natural laws that government mankind, that type of absolute power empowers criminals to the top of it: as an indisputable rule proven time and again. Absolute power naturally corrupts people, turning natural born people into criminals. Don't give people absolute power and they won't turn into criminals in that way: a lesson worth knowing, an error worth the effort to avoid repeating.
If the government is of, by, and for The People as a whole, but not necessarily a democracy, then the government is said to be a republic, which comes from Latin, whereby the word respublica means The Public Thing. In a republic (which is not a form of government) all the people benefit, because it (the government) is The Public Thing, it is for all the people: no exception except those who choose to reject it, go against it, criminalize it. An example could be the laws governing the free flow of sunlight, the free flow of oxygen, the free flow of palatable water, the free flow of nutritious food, the free flow of land to stand on, also known as natural laws, would be a republic. The free flow of air is governed by nature and that government is a naturally occurring republic: The Public Thing. The free flow of oxygen is a republican government, people can live by it, or people can choose to choke other people to death, or choke other people until other people are extorted into blind obedience.
A criminal government is one where a number of criminals stop the flow of the free flow of oxygen so as to extort people who are thereby having their lives choked off by those criminals, and the victims are made to work harder and harder to make the criminals more and more powerful, because the victims no...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
In English the word democracy means government run by all the people (no exceptions, the government is all the people, no factions), and the difficulty with the democratic form of government is that democracy is not possible when dealing with a number of people exceeding a limit of too many people. The limit can be raised with technology, but if people are left out (minority, majority, faction, division of the whole), then it is no longer democracy. When some people exploit other people (enslave them) it is no longer a democracy by definition.
Democracy is a form of government in which all the people govern: the people directly govern themselves as one, which means that democracy is specifically not such that the Majority Rules over a Minority, or a more Powerful Faction makes a less powerful faction obey without question the orders enforced by the more Powerful Faction.
If the government in force is a more Powerful Faction enforcing obedience from a less powerful faction, then the word for that form of government is Organized Crime, and that is because, given the natural laws that government mankind, that type of absolute power empowers criminals to the top of it: as an indisputable rule proven time and again. Absolute power naturally corrupts people, turning natural born people into criminals. Don't give people absolute power and they won't turn into criminals in that way: a lesson worth knowing, an error worth the effort to avoid repeating.
If the government is of, by, and for The People as a whole, but not necessarily a democracy, then the government is said to be a republic, which comes from Latin, whereby the word respublica means The Public Thing. In a republic (which is not a form of government) all the people benefit, because it (the government) is The Public Thing, it is for all the people: no exception except those who choose to reject it, go against it, criminalize it. An example could be the laws governing the free flow of sunlight, the free flow of oxygen, the free flow of palatable water, the free flow of nutritious food, the free flow of land to stand on, also known as natural laws, would be a republic. The free flow of air is governed by nature and that government is a naturally occurring republic: The Public Thing. The free flow of oxygen is a republican government, people can live by it, or people can choose to choke other people to death, or choke other people until other people are extorted into blind obedience.
A criminal government is one where a number of criminals stop the flow of the free flow of oxygen so as to extort people who are thereby having their lives choked off by those criminals, and the victims are made to work harder and harder to make the criminals more and more powerful, because the victims no...
Tony Heller: We Are Democrats!
The party of the people.
[youtube.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
If they (each one) is in fact (and knowingly) Marxist/Communist/Satanist, and they know (each one) that Marxist/Communist/Satanism will turn the stomachs of moral people (productive people: targets) who comes in contact with it, including such things as spirit cooking, cannibalism, pedophilia, etc., then they (Marxist/Communist/Satanists) are perpetrating Treasonous Fraud when they fraudulently claim to be Democrats when they are in fact Marxist/Communist/Satanists.
What about all the people who believe the fraud? What about all the people who can't see the Marxist/Communist/Satanist Crimes perpetrated by the Marxist/Communist/Satanist Cabal members?
They are still guilty of aiding and abetting Marxist/Communist/Satanists Cabal members as Marxist/Communist/Satanist Cabal members perpetrate crimes, such as fraud, such as Subsidized Riots, and such as the Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud.
Guilt can be willful or simply factual as discriminated with the terms following:
Mens rea (guilty of mind)
Actus reas (guilty act)
How do the Marxits/Communist/Satanist Cabal members (Cult members) accomplish their treasonous fraud as they turn the minds of people into supporters of Marxist/Communist/Satanism?
One step toward the accomplishment of the treasonous fraud is to convince people that everyone is guilty.
Everyone is guilty, just ask them.
Except themselves of course.
Everyone but themselves is guilty.
Thereby no one is innocent, when everyone is guilty.
When no one is innocent, then no one can be guilty.
They are not guilty, thereby.
They can eat babies, drink their blood, sell their little body parts, and they are not guilty.
Everyone else is guilty. If you don't wear a mask, you will be punished to the full extent of the law that does not exist, because it is no longer invested in: defunded.
Which law?
Rather: witch law?
"When the constitutional procedures of the common law were applied, there could be few convictions for smuggling by juries of ordinary people, who shared in the common interest as sufferers from taxes and monopoly, and hence in the common enthusiasm for smuggling. To circumvent the constitutional 6
courts of common law, the prerogative High Court of Admiralty was established to absorb the jurisdictions of the maritime courts of the seaports, which had administered the traditional sea law and law merchant." Page 10
Conceived in Liberty, Murray Rothbard, 1979
"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 ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
If they (each one) is in fact (and knowingly) Marxist/Communist/Satanist, and they know (each one) that Marxist/Communist/Satanism will turn the stomachs of moral people (productive people: targets) who comes in contact with it, including such things as spirit cooking, cannibalism, pedophilia, etc., then they (Marxist/Communist/Satanists) are perpetrating Treasonous Fraud when they fraudulently claim to be Democrats when they are in fact Marxist/Communist/Satanists.
What about all the people who believe the fraud? What about all the people who can't see the Marxist/Communist/Satanist Crimes perpetrated by the Marxist/Communist/Satanist Cabal members?
They are still guilty of aiding and abetting Marxist/Communist/Satanists Cabal members as Marxist/Communist/Satanist Cabal members perpetrate crimes, such as fraud, such as Subsidized Riots, and such as the Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud.
Guilt can be willful or simply factual as discriminated with the terms following:
Mens rea (guilty of mind)
Actus reas (guilty act)
How do the Marxits/Communist/Satanist Cabal members (Cult members) accomplish their treasonous fraud as they turn the minds of people into supporters of Marxist/Communist/Satanism?
One step toward the accomplishment of the treasonous fraud is to convince people that everyone is guilty.
Everyone is guilty, just ask them.
Except themselves of course.
Everyone but themselves is guilty.
Thereby no one is innocent, when everyone is guilty.
When no one is innocent, then no one can be guilty.
They are not guilty, thereby.
They can eat babies, drink their blood, sell their little body parts, and they are not guilty.
Everyone else is guilty. If you don't wear a mask, you will be punished to the full extent of the law that does not exist, because it is no longer invested in: defunded.
Which law?
Rather: witch law?
"When the constitutional procedures of the common law were applied, there could be few convictions for smuggling by juries of ordinary people, who shared in the common interest as sufferers from taxes and monopoly, and hence in the common enthusiasm for smuggling. To circumvent the constitutional 6
courts of common law, the prerogative High Court of Admiralty was established to absorb the jurisdictions of the maritime courts of the seaports, which had administered the traditional sea law and law merchant." Page 10
Conceived in Liberty, Murray Rothbard, 1979
"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 ...
Are you ready for the next shoe to drop?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Central Banking Fraud is not a new thing.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins
It does not need a new name, but a new name can help divert attention away from anyone who may stand in its way, and divert attention away from any information that clearly exposes it for what it is precisely.
I call it Blind Obedience to Falsehood Without Question.
Above is a guy deceiving people as his Central Banking Fraud Cabal attempts to implement it.
It cannot continue to exist unless it destroys powerful competition, which simply means that higher quality and lower cost Banking Services WILL replace it for the simple reason that people prefer higher quality and lower cost over and above lower quality and higher cost....
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 21, 2020:
Central Banking Fraud is not a new thing.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins
It does not need a new name, but a new name can help divert attention away from anyone who may stand in its way, and divert attention away from any information that clearly exposes it for what it is precisely.
I call it Blind Obedience to Falsehood Without Question.
Above is a guy deceiving people as his Central Banking Fraud Cabal attempts to implement it.
It cannot continue to exist unless it destroys powerful competition, which simply means that higher quality and lower cost Banking Services WILL replace it for the simple reason that people prefer higher quality and lower cost over and above lower quality and higher cost....
Wow, what an idea!
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 20, 2020:
"There are at least 5,000 federal criminal laws, with 10,000-300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally. In fact, our entire criminal code has become a leviathan unto itself. In 2003, there were only 4,000 offences that carried criminal penalties. By 2013, that number had grown by 21 percent to 4,850. The code has become so big, that the Congressional Research Service and the American Bar Association simply do not have enough staff to adequately categorize every law we have on the books."
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/06/06/how-many-federal-laws-are-there-again-n2009184
So...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 20, 2020:
"There are at least 5,000 federal criminal laws, with 10,000-300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally. In fact, our entire criminal code has become a leviathan unto itself. In 2003, there were only 4,000 offences that carried criminal penalties. By 2013, that number had grown by 21 percent to 4,850. The code has become so big, that the Congressional Research Service and the American Bar Association simply do not have enough staff to adequately categorize every law we have on the books."
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/06/06/how-many-federal-laws-are-there-again-n2009184
So...
Why Canadians are polite...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 20, 2020:
Got it, thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 20, 2020:
Got it, thanks.
"The best people are those who don't know we're using them."
[youtube.com]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 20, 2020:
Time 28:00 or so...
The term "Talent Spotting" is offered.
Examples of Talent Spotting:
1.
CIA/NSA/FBI/HS, etc. look for and find employees fit for their "very particular set of skills."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZOywn1qArI
2.
Is it a good idea to put on a jury 12 pathological lying psychopaths in a trial by jury case involving a high level government official involving a false flag that starts a war that lasts decades for no good reason whatsoever, other than to line the pockets of the pathological lying psychopaths infecting government?
Yes, I'm one of the best people that doesn't know I am being used by pathological lying psychopaths who have amassed almost unlimited power by lying and infecting governments including corporate governments.
No, the costs born by decades of perpetual wars that line the pockets of pathological lying psychopaths inevitably lead to a steady decline in standards of living and inevitable increases in the cost of living for all future generations leading to human extinction.
3.
Check out a good Science Fiction Series called The Ender Series by Orson Scott Card
4.
Is it a good idea to vote for ONLY pathological lying psychopaths when choosing the people who have control over weapons of mass destruction that can wipe out all life on Earth, and this is a trick question because ONLY pathological lying psychopaths would build such things as weapons of mass destruction, let alone use them for extortion or extermination.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 20, 2020:
Time 28:00 or so...
The term "Talent Spotting" is offered.
Examples of Talent Spotting:
1.
CIA/NSA/FBI/HS, etc. look for and find employees fit for their "very particular set of skills."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZOywn1qArI
2.
Is it a good idea to put on a jury 12 pathological lying psychopaths in a trial by jury case involving a high level government official involving a false flag that starts a war that lasts decades for no good reason whatsoever, other than to line the pockets of the pathological lying psychopaths infecting government?
Yes, I'm one of the best people that doesn't know I am being used by pathological lying psychopaths who have amassed almost unlimited power by lying and infecting governments including corporate governments.
No, the costs born by decades of perpetual wars that line the pockets of pathological lying psychopaths inevitably lead to a steady decline in standards of living and inevitable increases in the cost of living for all future generations leading to human extinction.
3.
Check out a good Science Fiction Series called The Ender Series by Orson Scott Card
4.
Is it a good idea to vote for ONLY pathological lying psychopaths when choosing the people who have control over weapons of mass destruction that can wipe out all life on Earth, and this is a trick question because ONLY pathological lying psychopaths would build such things as weapons of mass destruction, let alone use them for extortion or extermination.
Oh dear, Biden in Wonderland.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Can we be realistic for awhile?
If Trump can't help give Clinton her day in a Court of Law (not Admiralty or Equity) to answer for many alleged crimes (a campaign promise by the way), then the Office of President of The United States is an obvious fraud.
The power to hold criminals to account for their crimes against innocent people (a steady flow of children into the meat grinder for example) is The Law if it is what it is advertised so as to get people to invest in it.
Where are the Court Transcripts?
I found these:
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).
The "government" is found guilty of conspiracy murder, which amounts to execution of someone guilty of speaking the truth about the criminal Vietnam War.
"Our" government will execute you if you speak the truth (or worse), a fact that matters, a fact determined in something resembling a Court of Law (not speedy trail, therefore not according to the common law), therefore outside the law (outlaw) if the Bill of Rights means anything to the criminals in offices of "government."
2.
"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
That one is a little more complicated compared to murder, or even compared to conspiracy murder often claimed to be ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Can we be realistic for awhile?
If Trump can't help give Clinton her day in a Court of Law (not Admiralty or Equity) to answer for many alleged crimes (a campaign promise by the way), then the Office of President of The United States is an obvious fraud.
The power to hold criminals to account for their crimes against innocent people (a steady flow of children into the meat grinder for example) is The Law if it is what it is advertised so as to get people to invest in it.
Where are the Court Transcripts?
I found these:
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).
The "government" is found guilty of conspiracy murder, which amounts to execution of someone guilty of speaking the truth about the criminal Vietnam War.
"Our" government will execute you if you speak the truth (or worse), a fact that matters, a fact determined in something resembling a Court of Law (not speedy trail, therefore not according to the common law), therefore outside the law (outlaw) if the Bill of Rights means anything to the criminals in offices of "government."
2.
"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
That one is a little more complicated compared to murder, or even compared to conspiracy murder often claimed to be ...
Vernon Coleman: Is This Fraud Ever Going to End?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wbgrhr2Bw=emb_logo
The COVID-19 Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee www.ACU2020.org Corona-Ausschuss Englisch
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wbgrhr2Bw=emb_logo
The COVID-19 Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee www.ACU2020.org Corona-Ausschuss Englisch
During Barry Soetoroes first election, anything American, white, Christian, heterosexual, male, etc ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
He was not alone, the army of sycophants along with the army of fellow sociopaths have grown in America for over 200 years, because "they can."
There is no law in America, how about using the law now, it isn't too late.
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities [were] convenient and at hand. Any person could act in the capacity of a constable without being one, and when summoned by a law enforcement ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
He was not alone, the army of sycophants along with the army of fellow sociopaths have grown in America for over 200 years, because "they can."
There is no law in America, how about using the law now, it isn't too late.
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. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
Page 42
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities [were] convenient and at hand. Any person could act in the capacity of a constable without being one, and when summoned by a law enforcement ...
i have been doing some research into the fall of civilisations and one thing crops up time and time ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Natural complexity is naturally met with competitive use of thought and actions by living beings capable of solving natural complexities.
How about an example?
If these living beings that can natural solve all kinds of natural complexities are fooled into believe one lie, then will those living beings be able to solve that one lie and move on, or will those living beings suffer the exponential growth rate associated with the natural expansion of complexity as one lie requires another lie to cover up the first one, and then there are 2 lies needing 2 more lies to cover up each one of those, then 4, then 16, then 256.
Can you add?
Addition isn't good enough.
How about some algebra?
"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."
Alexander I Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Lecture, 1970
In America the lies have grown rather complex since 1789.
From here:
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt,...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Natural complexity is naturally met with competitive use of thought and actions by living beings capable of solving natural complexities.
How about an example?
If these living beings that can natural solve all kinds of natural complexities are fooled into believe one lie, then will those living beings be able to solve that one lie and move on, or will those living beings suffer the exponential growth rate associated with the natural expansion of complexity as one lie requires another lie to cover up the first one, and then there are 2 lies needing 2 more lies to cover up each one of those, then 4, then 16, then 256.
Can you add?
Addition isn't good enough.
How about some algebra?
"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."
Alexander I Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Lecture, 1970
In America the lies have grown rather complex since 1789.
From here:
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt,...
Awhile ago I started a Topic on my own Forum titled The Chinese Void.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 36:40 or so...
The reporter claims that the Iranians have suggested that the Cornholio Sickness targets the leadership in Iran. Don't blame me for that Conspiracy Theory.
My point here is to point out that the Cornholio Sickness can't be both a Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud and a Bio-weapon targeting specific people in specific places.
1. Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud
2. World War III and the use of tactical Bio-weapons by criminal regimes (actual people in actual groups of criminals)
The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud is obviously a False Advertisement Campaign whereby the False Propagandists have fooled people into thinking that they are all going to die unless they wear masks, "social distance," and shut down small businesses such as restaurants, disrupting economies, destabilizing populations, and generally making people sick physically and psychologically through deception, false propaganda, brain-washing, mind-control, I.I.A. Military Grade Weaponized Networking, and the additional Sub-Crime of National Subsidized Riots where agent provocateurs are paid (out of the Public Fund) to rop, rape, kidnap, extort, assault, torture, murder, and mass murder for fun and profit, with impunity, as "Police" are coincidentally "defunded" in the local area where the "Rioters" are being unleashed upon the innocent population (perhaps only the children are innocent).
That is one thing, with a sub-category, but that is not also World War III and the use of tactical Bio-weapons used by criminal gangs to cause injury to competitor criminal gangs, where the weapons target specific people within the boundaries of the capacity of the specific Bio-weapon.
To see this in a better light (perhaps) look here:
The COVID-19 Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee www.ACU2020.org Corona-Ausschuss Englisch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wbgrhr2Bw=emb_logo
That is from here:
“We Have A Lot of Evidence That It’s A Fake Story All Over The World” – German Doctors on COVID-19
By Arjun Walia
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/no_author/we-have-a-lot-of-evidence-that-its-a-fake-story-all-over-the-world-german-doctors-on-covid-19/
In some places (not targeted by the Bio-weapon, but targeted by the Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud) the data collected by some people (not proven in my opinion) suggests that the Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud is only real in that it is a well played Con Game, a use of I.I.A. Military Grade Weaponized Propaganda Techniques, and that only works on gullible, brain-washed, mind-controlled, people only is some places, not all places.
A Bio-weapon made from Military Grade Weaponized biological poisons (think Mustard Gas used in World War 1, or Military Grade Anthrax) targets specific people as ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 36:40 or so...
The reporter claims that the Iranians have suggested that the Cornholio Sickness targets the leadership in Iran. Don't blame me for that Conspiracy Theory.
My point here is to point out that the Cornholio Sickness can't be both a Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud and a Bio-weapon targeting specific people in specific places.
1. Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud
2. World War III and the use of tactical Bio-weapons by criminal regimes (actual people in actual groups of criminals)
The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud is obviously a False Advertisement Campaign whereby the False Propagandists have fooled people into thinking that they are all going to die unless they wear masks, "social distance," and shut down small businesses such as restaurants, disrupting economies, destabilizing populations, and generally making people sick physically and psychologically through deception, false propaganda, brain-washing, mind-control, I.I.A. Military Grade Weaponized Networking, and the additional Sub-Crime of National Subsidized Riots where agent provocateurs are paid (out of the Public Fund) to rop, rape, kidnap, extort, assault, torture, murder, and mass murder for fun and profit, with impunity, as "Police" are coincidentally "defunded" in the local area where the "Rioters" are being unleashed upon the innocent population (perhaps only the children are innocent).
That is one thing, with a sub-category, but that is not also World War III and the use of tactical Bio-weapons used by criminal gangs to cause injury to competitor criminal gangs, where the weapons target specific people within the boundaries of the capacity of the specific Bio-weapon.
To see this in a better light (perhaps) look here:
The COVID-19 Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee www.ACU2020.org Corona-Ausschuss Englisch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wbgrhr2Bw=emb_logo
That is from here:
“We Have A Lot of Evidence That It’s A Fake Story All Over The World” – German Doctors on COVID-19
By Arjun Walia
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/no_author/we-have-a-lot-of-evidence-that-its-a-fake-story-all-over-the-world-german-doctors-on-covid-19/
In some places (not targeted by the Bio-weapon, but targeted by the Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud) the data collected by some people (not proven in my opinion) suggests that the Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud is only real in that it is a well played Con Game, a use of I.I.A. Military Grade Weaponized Propaganda Techniques, and that only works on gullible, brain-washed, mind-controlled, people only is some places, not all places.
A Bio-weapon made from Military Grade Weaponized biological poisons (think Mustard Gas used in World War 1, or Military Grade Anthrax) targets specific people as ...
TRUMP ASKED IF HE SUPPORTS ‘CONSPIRACY THEORY’ THAT HE’S ‘SAVING WORLD FROM SATANIC ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
"2,000 Facebook groups pushing the baseless conspiracy theory"
And the Earth is Flat is now a Scientific fact I suppose.
Conspiracy of Silence (Banned Documentary on Pedophilia)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsHs3eOL0mM
Ted Gunderson - Former FBI Chief Exposes 'Illuminati' (disturbing content)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqjNa-Jpsf0
Marxist/Communist/Satanist Dictionary:
baseless
information unfit for public consumption due to the fact that it is inculpatory evidence proving a crime
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
"2,000 Facebook groups pushing the baseless conspiracy theory"
And the Earth is Flat is now a Scientific fact I suppose.
Conspiracy of Silence (Banned Documentary on Pedophilia)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsHs3eOL0mM
Ted Gunderson - Former FBI Chief Exposes 'Illuminati' (disturbing content)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqjNa-Jpsf0
Marxist/Communist/Satanist Dictionary:
baseless
information unfit for public consumption due to the fact that it is inculpatory evidence proving a crime
Let’s be specific...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
People paid to vote (think and act) a certain way (not that votes are actually counted mind you) include people known as Corporations.
If these privileges are going to be spelled out clearly, then amounts of money paid for services rendered (privileges with strings attached) are warranted.
The most privileged is The Federal Reserve Gang (or Cabal), and the tally isn't hard to find.
https://www.usdebtclock.org/
Who is owed all that privilege? Who will actually pay all that privilege?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
People paid to vote (think and act) a certain way (not that votes are actually counted mind you) include people known as Corporations.
If these privileges are going to be spelled out clearly, then amounts of money paid for services rendered (privileges with strings attached) are warranted.
The most privileged is The Federal Reserve Gang (or Cabal), and the tally isn't hard to find.
https://www.usdebtclock.org/
Who is owed all that privilege? Who will actually pay all that privilege?
The National Debt is almost 27 trillion.
[usdebtclock.org]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Guess which one is $388,011.00?
The Con is not new.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins
"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 ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Guess which one is $388,011.00?
The Con is not new.
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and their Legacy
by William Watkins
"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 ...
Some people are on that imaginary fence, a fence placed for them to sit on by people who profit from...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 1:21 or so...
2 subjects on the table:
1. If China has perpetrated War of Aggression for Profit against the rest of the world with The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud, then what is the response?
2. Which business model is economic (good, productive, sustainable, long-term, reasonable, moral, just, increases standards of living while reducing costs of living, prosperous, competitive, adaptive, open-source, free market, reproductive, and constantly improving) and which business model is merely criminal?
Is that a trick question?
You take the deal or die, and I wonder if that is the right business model?
The right business model is the one kept right with the right defense model such as the common law, also known as rule of law, where those using the wrong business model (organized crime, extortion, conspiracy murder, etc.) are held to account for their crimes in an economical manner: speedy, based on the facts, true, just, right, moral, etc.
That answer also answers the first question. If "China" did it then people in China did it, and an actual investigation into the facts could discover the names of the people who did it, and then those people with those names are offered a court date in a Court of Law to then have them state their case before the jury who represent the people as a whole.
I'm on crack?
What do you think was the Declaration of Independence?
The document clearly spells out the facts that matter in a case where a named individual was currently perpetrating War of Aggression for profit. A so-called King (claiming divine right no less) was currently caught red handed doing this, that, and the other thing to innocent people in America. Did the accused show up for a Court Date to clear his name and explain the justified reasons for his actions?
No.
The aggressor charged in the document doubled down on the War of Aggression, pouring more economic wealth into the risky venture of Empire Building, where America was going to be enslaved into Subsidized Slavery, which is a condition of living in living hell where the slaves are made to pay for their own enslavement, and that turns out to be non-economical, because the Empire builders have to add more enforcers on the dole to keep the business model going which thereby reduces the number of productive slaves that can be wrung out like a wet rag, and eventually the number of drones enforcing the business model outnumber the number of slaves that can somehow continue producing anything worth stealing, which is clearly not sustainable.
Would any of that information be discovered during the trial in a Court of Law?
Why not?
Because there is no law.
Not Globally, not Nationally, not at the State level, not at the County level, not ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 1:21 or so...
2 subjects on the table:
1. If China has perpetrated War of Aggression for Profit against the rest of the world with The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud, then what is the response?
2. Which business model is economic (good, productive, sustainable, long-term, reasonable, moral, just, increases standards of living while reducing costs of living, prosperous, competitive, adaptive, open-source, free market, reproductive, and constantly improving) and which business model is merely criminal?
Is that a trick question?
You take the deal or die, and I wonder if that is the right business model?
The right business model is the one kept right with the right defense model such as the common law, also known as rule of law, where those using the wrong business model (organized crime, extortion, conspiracy murder, etc.) are held to account for their crimes in an economical manner: speedy, based on the facts, true, just, right, moral, etc.
That answer also answers the first question. If "China" did it then people in China did it, and an actual investigation into the facts could discover the names of the people who did it, and then those people with those names are offered a court date in a Court of Law to then have them state their case before the jury who represent the people as a whole.
I'm on crack?
What do you think was the Declaration of Independence?
The document clearly spells out the facts that matter in a case where a named individual was currently perpetrating War of Aggression for profit. A so-called King (claiming divine right no less) was currently caught red handed doing this, that, and the other thing to innocent people in America. Did the accused show up for a Court Date to clear his name and explain the justified reasons for his actions?
No.
The aggressor charged in the document doubled down on the War of Aggression, pouring more economic wealth into the risky venture of Empire Building, where America was going to be enslaved into Subsidized Slavery, which is a condition of living in living hell where the slaves are made to pay for their own enslavement, and that turns out to be non-economical, because the Empire builders have to add more enforcers on the dole to keep the business model going which thereby reduces the number of productive slaves that can be wrung out like a wet rag, and eventually the number of drones enforcing the business model outnumber the number of slaves that can somehow continue producing anything worth stealing, which is clearly not sustainable.
Would any of that information be discovered during the trial in a Court of Law?
Why not?
Because there is no law.
Not Globally, not Nationally, not at the State level, not at the County level, not ...
Some people are on that imaginary fence, a fence placed for them to sit on by people who profit from...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 1:14 or so...
The reporter lays it out very well to John Perkins, along the lines of qui bono (who benefits) as Perkins claimed that U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) with 5% of world population had 25% of the world deaths of Cornholio Virus (Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud): China did it, by the who-benefits-most reasoning, and then John Perkins appears to be realizing something, but John Perkins is sticking to the "belief" in the unproven Germ Theory that is essential for The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud.
If the Germ Theory is a well worn hoax, and instead many (not all) "pandemics" are being proven to be caused by poisons dumped into the environment by careless or criminal members of Corporations, then the whole Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud evaporates and in place is an obvious use of I.I.A. Weapons in a Cyber Attack during the ongoing World War III.
Is U.S.A. destabilizing?
Does destabilization of a target country make the target population more or less capable of defending itself against further attacks WHEN the people in that country can't even admit that they are under attack, let alone identify the attackers who are perpetrating the aggressive attack in an aggressive war for profit, which by the way is the crime perpetrated by the infamous Nazi Party, the same crime that earned a few of those Nazi's a date with a hangman's noose.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 1:14 or so...
The reporter lays it out very well to John Perkins, along the lines of qui bono (who benefits) as Perkins claimed that U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) with 5% of world population had 25% of the world deaths of Cornholio Virus (Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud): China did it, by the who-benefits-most reasoning, and then John Perkins appears to be realizing something, but John Perkins is sticking to the "belief" in the unproven Germ Theory that is essential for The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud.
If the Germ Theory is a well worn hoax, and instead many (not all) "pandemics" are being proven to be caused by poisons dumped into the environment by careless or criminal members of Corporations, then the whole Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud evaporates and in place is an obvious use of I.I.A. Weapons in a Cyber Attack during the ongoing World War III.
Is U.S.A. destabilizing?
Does destabilization of a target country make the target population more or less capable of defending itself against further attacks WHEN the people in that country can't even admit that they are under attack, let alone identify the attackers who are perpetrating the aggressive attack in an aggressive war for profit, which by the way is the crime perpetrated by the infamous Nazi Party, the same crime that earned a few of those Nazi's a date with a hangman's noose.
Some people are on that imaginary fence, a fence placed for them to sit on by people who profit from...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 1:10 or so...
A very good question was asked by the reporter concerning the possibility that China responded to Trump Trade BALANCE moves (China was leveraging U.S.A. heavily with sanctions: imbalance) with an Economic Hitman move which I call The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud.
So...
Previous to that question John Perkins admitted that China was a rising dragon with technological advances in Cyber Warfare, but now John Perkins answers with no, China (as far as he knows) did not cause The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud in response to Trump attempting to balance trade.
No?
John Perkins claims (as part of his reason for saying no, that China didn't cause The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud) that Bill Gates predicted a virus, so...
John Perkins thinks that Bill Gates is an authority on "natural" biological viruses?
Bill Gates is an authority on how to criminally employ networking to gain a lot of power, by creating both virus and anti-virus software and making a killing selling both to an unaware, and well propagandized, target market.
Bill Gates criminally employs networking to gain a lot of power creating biological weapons claimed to be natural viruses, then sell biological weapons as a cure, a patented criminal-made "virus," and a patented criminal-made "anti-virus" (vaccine), where both products are injected into the target market, and that crime just so happens to consume the targets while power just so happens to flow to the criminal who makes these "products," and that is the guy who is referenced by the Economic Hitman (conspiracy murderer) as evidence that proves that China didn't cause The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud as an Economic Hit on their competitors, like U.S.A. Inc, now run by Trump et al.?
In the recent report titled Shadow Gate the weapon known as I.I.A. (Interactive Internet Activity) was confessed as a part of current Economic Hitman type moves made by criminals running Private (so-called) Corporations (Organized Crime) and I.I.A. weapons are confessed as being used by Public (so-called) Nation-States (Corporations) for Economic Hitman type moves internal and external to their own "turf."
None of that seems familiar to you?
An army of fake people on the internet spread fear about a bug (germ theory is not a proven theory) that will kill you if you don't wear a mask, and suddenly the whole world is wearing masks?
The same army of fake people on the internet spread fear about a bug that will kill you if you don't stay at home, and suddenly people are staying at home?
The same army of fake people on the internet spread fear about a bug that will kill you if you don't close your "non-essential" business (actual producers of wealth), and suddenly around the whole world small...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Time 1:10 or so...
A very good question was asked by the reporter concerning the possibility that China responded to Trump Trade BALANCE moves (China was leveraging U.S.A. heavily with sanctions: imbalance) with an Economic Hitman move which I call The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud.
So...
Previous to that question John Perkins admitted that China was a rising dragon with technological advances in Cyber Warfare, but now John Perkins answers with no, China (as far as he knows) did not cause The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud in response to Trump attempting to balance trade.
No?
John Perkins claims (as part of his reason for saying no, that China didn't cause The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud) that Bill Gates predicted a virus, so...
John Perkins thinks that Bill Gates is an authority on "natural" biological viruses?
Bill Gates is an authority on how to criminally employ networking to gain a lot of power, by creating both virus and anti-virus software and making a killing selling both to an unaware, and well propagandized, target market.
Bill Gates criminally employs networking to gain a lot of power creating biological weapons claimed to be natural viruses, then sell biological weapons as a cure, a patented criminal-made "virus," and a patented criminal-made "anti-virus" (vaccine), where both products are injected into the target market, and that crime just so happens to consume the targets while power just so happens to flow to the criminal who makes these "products," and that is the guy who is referenced by the Economic Hitman (conspiracy murderer) as evidence that proves that China didn't cause The Global Treasonous Pandemic Fraud as an Economic Hit on their competitors, like U.S.A. Inc, now run by Trump et al.?
In the recent report titled Shadow Gate the weapon known as I.I.A. (Interactive Internet Activity) was confessed as a part of current Economic Hitman type moves made by criminals running Private (so-called) Corporations (Organized Crime) and I.I.A. weapons are confessed as being used by Public (so-called) Nation-States (Corporations) for Economic Hitman type moves internal and external to their own "turf."
None of that seems familiar to you?
An army of fake people on the internet spread fear about a bug (germ theory is not a proven theory) that will kill you if you don't wear a mask, and suddenly the whole world is wearing masks?
The same army of fake people on the internet spread fear about a bug that will kill you if you don't stay at home, and suddenly people are staying at home?
The same army of fake people on the internet spread fear about a bug that will kill you if you don't close your "non-essential" business (actual producers of wealth), and suddenly around the whole world small...
The real enemy within [youtu.be]
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Injustice to Dou E
"As Dou E is led to her execution, she prophesies that there will be snow in midsummer at the outrage of her death. She is beheaded, and snow falls."
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Injustice to Dou E
"As Dou E is led to her execution, she prophesies that there will be snow in midsummer at the outrage of her death. She is beheaded, and snow falls."
Bunnings ad for Karens.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Excellent, thanks.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
Excellent, thanks.
[youtu.be] every 30 years they try
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
People who have a use for words fall into at least 2 categories:
1. Words mean something specific to everyone using the same word: one useful meaning like using the words ONE METER LENGTH. If the words mean anything, it becomes very difficult to get anything produced: I need 100 wooden boards ONE METER LENGTH.
2. Words mean something specific to the targets of deception, while the exploiters of deception use an OPPOSITE meaning for the same word.
Case studies include the morphing of language to turn the right of travel into a privilege awarded to the obedient. The word "driver" becomes someone authorized to have a license to travel instead of someone merely driving a vehicle that accelerates the natural act of traveling.
Other case studies include the morphing of the words on a long list:
1. Socialism
2. Nationalism
3. Oligarchy
4. Monarchy
5. Republicanism
6. Conservatism
7. Liberalism
8. Communism
9. Fascism
10. Freedom
11. Good
12. Bad
A few names stand out as having not yet undergone the transformation from original meaning (driver) to "official" legalese, enforced, meaning, which is often opposite the original meaning, such as:
1. Liberty
2. Evil
Perhaps the second one on that last list is currently morphing.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 19, 2020:
People who have a use for words fall into at least 2 categories:
1. Words mean something specific to everyone using the same word: one useful meaning like using the words ONE METER LENGTH. If the words mean anything, it becomes very difficult to get anything produced: I need 100 wooden boards ONE METER LENGTH.
2. Words mean something specific to the targets of deception, while the exploiters of deception use an OPPOSITE meaning for the same word.
Case studies include the morphing of language to turn the right of travel into a privilege awarded to the obedient. The word "driver" becomes someone authorized to have a license to travel instead of someone merely driving a vehicle that accelerates the natural act of traveling.
Other case studies include the morphing of the words on a long list:
1. Socialism
2. Nationalism
3. Oligarchy
4. Monarchy
5. Republicanism
6. Conservatism
7. Liberalism
8. Communism
9. Fascism
10. Freedom
11. Good
12. Bad
A few names stand out as having not yet undergone the transformation from original meaning (driver) to "official" legalese, enforced, meaning, which is often opposite the original meaning, such as:
1. Liberty
2. Evil
Perhaps the second one on that last list is currently morphing.
Some people are on that imaginary fence, a fence placed for them to sit on by people who profit from...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
The discussion in the above video turns to a claim of balance between democracy and marketing at about time: 38:00.
What is not said (and why?) during that discussion of that pendulum swinging balance between democracy and marketing was the previously CONFESSED threat of DEATH to those who do not TAKE THE DEAL.
So...once again it is a False Narrative (democracy and marketing) when the true (not half true) factual accounting (not story telling) has to do with Free Markets (free from crime) and Criminals running Counterfeit Governments where Criminals Rule with Criminal Rules that involve Blind Obedience to Falsehood Without Question (a.k.a. TAKE THE DEAL an offer that can't be refused), which is the END of competition.
So...they also speak about competition. As in: government providers A tax too much, cost too much, quality of service is lower and plummeting, while taxes are accelerating to ever higher rates (take a look at the so-called National Debt Clock Real Time) while across the street there is a better deal: competition.
I'll end this comment with a relevant quote:
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 ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
The discussion in the above video turns to a claim of balance between democracy and marketing at about time: 38:00.
What is not said (and why?) during that discussion of that pendulum swinging balance between democracy and marketing was the previously CONFESSED threat of DEATH to those who do not TAKE THE DEAL.
So...once again it is a False Narrative (democracy and marketing) when the true (not half true) factual accounting (not story telling) has to do with Free Markets (free from crime) and Criminals running Counterfeit Governments where Criminals Rule with Criminal Rules that involve Blind Obedience to Falsehood Without Question (a.k.a. TAKE THE DEAL an offer that can't be refused), which is the END of competition.
So...they also speak about competition. As in: government providers A tax too much, cost too much, quality of service is lower and plummeting, while taxes are accelerating to ever higher rates (take a look at the so-called National Debt Clock Real Time) while across the street there is a better deal: competition.
I'll end this comment with a relevant quote:
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 whom it may concern:
I recently started using the Browser Software called Brave.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
Further testing:
If I am not signed into IDW on Edge I cannot see the posts I publish, nor can I find the Group I created, at least not without learning all the hoops I would need to jump (other than signing in) to see my Group or my posts from my Group.
Is that an IDW feature? If so, why is it a feature? We (IDW) don't want the Public to know what we publish to the Public? Someone might want to discuss the topic we publish to the Public, and so we don't want that, and so we discourage that from ever happing?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
Further testing:
If I am not signed into IDW on Edge I cannot see the posts I publish, nor can I find the Group I created, at least not without learning all the hoops I would need to jump (other than signing in) to see my Group or my posts from my Group.
Is that an IDW feature? If so, why is it a feature? We (IDW) don't want the Public to know what we publish to the Public? Someone might want to discuss the topic we publish to the Public, and so we don't want that, and so we discourage that from ever happing?
For the experts on American constitutional rights in this group, Does anyone know if this is still ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
As to natural rights (constitutional or not): the concept of "free speech" is based upon the freedom to publish (or speak before written language) facts that expose powerful people and powerful groups who are factually criminals, especially when those criminals are counterfeiting governments.
This goes way back, which I will show in a quote, but for now it may be useful to turn to the principles behind the law which is defensive as the law applies to injuries done by people who lie.
The above quote claimed to be a quote made by Kamala Harris may be true, and if so, then it would be a confession of intent to harm innocent people by abusing the power of counterfeit government, an act of treason. A reasonable number of discrete and honest members of any lawful area, such as a County area, could form a common law grand jury, and investigate that confession for validity, and then if it proves to be factual, then those independent common law grand jurors could write up a presentment, hire a constable to deliver the presentment, and the accused is thereby afforded a court date in a Court of Law (common law) to defend the seditious, treasonous, words spoken by Kamala Harris (not simply yelling "fire" in a theater when there is no fire).
The same independent grand jurors could use their lawful jurisdiction powers to investigate the source of the claim and find that someone wrote those words and falsely attributed those words to Kamala Harris, causing actual, measurable, damage to Kamala Harris in their independent estimation, and again they would be duty bound to write up a presentment to offer the LIBELOUS author of the LIBEL his or her or their day in court to state their case before an independent trial jury.
Since there has been no law in America since 1789, and the Law Power has been counterfeiting instead, nothing will be done, and natural laws revert to laws of the jungle.
Oh, and the quote from history:
Ancient Law Right of resistance
"That this right of resistance was recognized as a common law right, when the ancient and genuine trial by jury was in force, is not only proved by nature of the trial itself, but is acknowledged by history.*
*Hallam says, “The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. If a vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
As to natural rights (constitutional or not): the concept of "free speech" is based upon the freedom to publish (or speak before written language) facts that expose powerful people and powerful groups who are factually criminals, especially when those criminals are counterfeiting governments.
This goes way back, which I will show in a quote, but for now it may be useful to turn to the principles behind the law which is defensive as the law applies to injuries done by people who lie.
The above quote claimed to be a quote made by Kamala Harris may be true, and if so, then it would be a confession of intent to harm innocent people by abusing the power of counterfeit government, an act of treason. A reasonable number of discrete and honest members of any lawful area, such as a County area, could form a common law grand jury, and investigate that confession for validity, and then if it proves to be factual, then those independent common law grand jurors could write up a presentment, hire a constable to deliver the presentment, and the accused is thereby afforded a court date in a Court of Law (common law) to defend the seditious, treasonous, words spoken by Kamala Harris (not simply yelling "fire" in a theater when there is no fire).
The same independent grand jurors could use their lawful jurisdiction powers to investigate the source of the claim and find that someone wrote those words and falsely attributed those words to Kamala Harris, causing actual, measurable, damage to Kamala Harris in their independent estimation, and again they would be duty bound to write up a presentment to offer the LIBELOUS author of the LIBEL his or her or their day in court to state their case before an independent trial jury.
Since there has been no law in America since 1789, and the Law Power has been counterfeiting instead, nothing will be done, and natural laws revert to laws of the jungle.
Oh, and the quote from history:
Ancient Law Right of resistance
"That this right of resistance was recognized as a common law right, when the ancient and genuine trial by jury was in force, is not only proved by nature of the trial itself, but is acknowledged by history.*
*Hallam says, “The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. If a vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by ...
For the experts on American constitutional rights in this group, Does anyone know if this is still ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
Can that be verified?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
Can that be verified?
They could've cleaned the tyres.
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
"Tires not included."
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
"Tires not included."
Is this the new thing now?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
If you just woke up to a blank memory then, yes, this is a new thing.
Elections lead to Oligarchy, something well known since Ancient times.
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 own. Through reliance on sortition, random selection by lot, the Council could be guaranteed to represent a fair cross-section of the Athenian people — a kind of proportional representation, as it were. Random selection ensured that those selected would be ...
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
If you just woke up to a blank memory then, yes, this is a new thing.
Elections lead to Oligarchy, something well known since Ancient times.
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 own. Through reliance on sortition, random selection by lot, the Council could be guaranteed to represent a fair cross-section of the Athenian people — a kind of proportional representation, as it were. Random selection ensured that those selected would be ...
[youtu.be] every 30 years they try
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
The Communists (read Communist Manifesto) rejected Socialism so...what gives with the shell game with the labels?
Josf-Kelley comments on Aug 18, 2020:
The Communists (read Communist Manifesto) rejected Socialism so...what gives with the shell game with the labels?
Details
- BirthdayJuly 5
- Education2-Year
- Top tags#government #USA #rights #video #truth #crime #money #world #reason #laws #evidence #freedom #justice #evil #god #children #death #federal #society #media
- Level8 (85,725pts)
- Followers 17
- Fans 0
- Following 1
- Referrals11
- Joined Oct 29th, 2019
- Last Visit 3+ months ago
Josf-Kelley's Groups
Q is for question
460 members, Host
Voluntary Mutual Defence
37 members, Host
End Game (formerly Ryan Faulk Fans)
14 members, Host
Controversial Charts
48193 members
Jordan Peterson Group
25437 members
Ben Shapiro Group
22986 members
Joe Rogan Group
16345 members
Just Jokes and Memes
14496 members
Tucker Carlson Fans
13549 members
Dinesh D'Souza Fans
10234 members
IDW Topic-of-the-Day
9848 members
News From All Views
7280 members
DaisyCousens
5902 members
Tim Pool Group
5879 members
Sydney Watson Fanspace
5513 members
Classical Liberalism
4844 members
Canadian Politics
4021 members
Arielle Scarcella FanSpace!
2802 members
IDW Political Party
2798 members
Politically Incorrect folks
2479 members
Anti-Socialism
2269 members
Learning from Christ
2237 members
President Donald J. Trump... Latest
2066 members
Saving Western Civilisation
2055 members
RamZPaul
1889 members
John Paul Watson Group
1610 members
Liberalism Is A Mental Disorder
1568 members
Alex Jones Fans
1301 members
Conspiracy Truth : Wolves And Sheeple
1227 members
Stefan Molyneux Fans
1049 members
Anti Communists
1022 members
Emergency Preparedness and Survival
949 members
Libertarian Freethinkers
897 members
COVID-19
765 members
The Great Reset
708 members
The Second Amendment Sanctuary
649 members
True Crime Discussion Group
597 members
Conspiracy Research
575 members
Words of Wisdom
480 members
Feminism = cancer
474 members
International News
396 members
Comedy, Laughs and Humor.
327 members
Vaccine Education & Discussion Group
307 members
Ideas of God
291 members
The Case Against Corona Panic
250 members
Dr. Steve Turley Group
185 members
Joe Biden Is Not My President
178 members
United We Stand
153 members
The History Corner
150 members
Brain soup
128 members
IDW.Community Senate
124 members
ORIGINAL MEMES ( GREGORY ALAN ELLIOTT )
118 members
Liz Wheeler Fans Page.
116 members
Red Pilled Hotties (Yes you can still flirt & remain politically engaged)
107 members
Propaganda Clearing House
95 members
MGTOW: Exodus From The Plantation
63 members
Anarcho-Capitalism / Voluntaryism
55 members
IDW Liberty Alliance Culture War Room
49 members
Now You Are Talking With
48 members
Rednecks Anonymous
43 members
Current Events
28 members
50 Policies
23 members
Anthony Brian Logan Fans
21 members
Freemerica
19 members
Children's Health Defense
16 members
UnCommon Sense 42020 PodCast
9 members