The Beatings Must Continue
I had a professor in college who always said, "It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better."
My father died thinking that the worst thing in the world were socialist democrats like FDR and Obama.
He was distracted into thinking that way, much the same way that our nation was led to believe Oswald killed Kennedy. That way you see, whether it's socialist democrats or crazed gunman, we all have a villain. Someone to pin all of our troubles on. In the meantime, the real bad guys escape responsibility and thus the plan works.
I used to believe that socialist/ democrat nonsense too until I realized the real culprit- the real source of all of our taxing problems, credit problems, government confiscation of real property via property tax- has been the Federal Reserve, it's member banks, and all of the tertiary banking entities that our monstrosity of a banking system has created.
And we have a 77,000 page tax code to prove just how insane it has become.
You know how I culled the real villains from this story? I figured it out when I discovered that FDR not only confiscated all of our gold- he made it illegal to own. What was government protecting us from? Was gold giving us cancer or birth defects? Why was gold outlawed? It's just a harmless metal not some drug that makes us crash cars and beat women. Gold was outlawed because we were on the gold standard in 1933 and the central bank had fucked our country up so badly in just a mere 16 years- from 1913 to 1929- that the only solution was to illegally confiscate, yes seize, gold- control it's quantity and revalue it. In that way, government could lie about how much we had. Once the gold standard was safely under government control we could print all of the paper we wanted and fund all of those stupid projects and put people back to work until WWII broke out.
I believe our fore fathers had the best intentions. They knew a central bank would destroy our country. Many of them spoke about it at great length and in all of those well intended systems- the checks and balances of the 3 branches of government, the electoral college, and the rights of states not to be subjugated by a federal government, the one thing our forefathers did not create was a central bank. They knew the dangers of that.
They knew a central bank would destroy us and it has. It has created a mountain of debt that will never be repaid. They are now taxing us to death trying to keep the final debt curtain call at bay and they must attempt to inflate all of those trillions away. And they distract us with Obamacare taxes, socialist rhetoric, and a plethora of things to hate and keep us distracted from the real culprit in our story- the Federal Reserve Bank and it's member banks complete with a currency they can create at will with crappy, low interest loans and keystrokes.
The greatest argument I ever had with my father centered on this issue. He believed that socialists and democrats, particularly FDR, ruined this country and while I agree to some extent, the Central Bank was on the scene long before FDR, fueling that disaster which has brought us everything from famine, unemployment, gold confiscation, taxes on virtually everything, and wars.
The facts are there. It is easy to find. All of these assholes we have running around and confiscating our wealth are the cause and effect of one entity. It ain't rocket science to do the detective work but very few do because they weren't taught that and they don't want to believe it- like my dad.
So this whole tax situation we find ourselves in- it's going to get much worse. The government is going to continue to seize our wealth in greater amounts because there is no other way to keep our current system running without an epic implosion.
It's a shame my father never figured this out.
Comments
Johnny Gee
LOVE TO SEE A CLASSIC POST ON THE IMPEACHMENT FIASCO. I HAVE NEVER SEEN SO MANY PUSSIES IN ONE PLACE IN MY LIFE.
WHAT A JOKE.
THEY SHOULD RUN IT LIKE A FRIARS CLUB ROAST.
A86
Always been a "national" debt.. Also has been several National Banks between 1776 and 1899. The Coming Battle by M.W. Walbert.. maybe learn the difference between the legal position of a freeman, and bondsman.. In other words, a sovereign signatory of a political charter and the signatories Posterity, legal bloodline. Forefather means Ancestor.. Your forefather ancestor did not sign the Declaration of Independence… Posterity means biological legal bloodline of an forefather ancestor.. We the People and our Posterity is who again? The signatories of those contracts, and their legal bloodline.. Subjugating you to insane taxation... Brian, all of the history you think you know is all false.. I recommend Vattel's Law of Nations written in 1750...
Contract Between the King and the Thirteen United States of North America, signed at Versailles July 16, 1782:-
ARTICLE 1
"It is agreed and certified that the sums advanced by His Majesty to the Congress of the United States under the title of a loan, in the years 1778, 1779, 1780, 1781, and the present 1782, amount to the sum of eighteen million of livres, money of France, according to the following twenty-one receipts of the above-mentioned underwritten Minister of Congress, given in virtue of his full powers, to wit:
1. 28 February 1778 750,000
2. 19 May do 750,000
3. 3 August do 750,000
4. 1 November do 750,000 Total 3,000,000
5. 10 June 1779 250,000
6. 16 September do 250,000
7. 4 October do 250,000
8. 21 December do 250,000 Total 1,000,000
9. 29 February 1780 750,000
10. 23 May do 750,000
11. 21 June do 750,000
12. 5 October do 750,000
13. 27 November do 1,000,000 Total 4,000,000
14. 15 February 1781 750,000
15. 15 May do 750,000
16. 15 August do 750,000
17. 1 August do 1,000,000
18. 15 November do 750,000 Total 4,000,000
19. 10 April 1782 1,500,000
20. 1 July do 1,500,000
21. 5 of the same month 3,000,000 Total 6,000,000
Amounting in the whole to eighteen millions, viz 18, 000, 000.
By which receipts the said Minister has promised, in the name of Congress and in behalf of the thirteen United States, to cause to be paid and reimbursed to the royal treasury of His Majesty, on the 1st of January, 1788, at the house of his Grand Banker at Paris, the said sum of eighteen millions, money of France, with interest at five per cent per annum."
Source: Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America. Edited by Hunter Miller Volume 2 Documents 1-40 : 1776-1818 Washington: Government Printing Office, 1931.
Book 2 law of nations § 81. The property of the citizens is the property of the nation, with respect to foreign nations.
Even the property of the individuals is, in the aggregate, to be considered as the property of the nation, with respect to other states. It, in some sort, really belongs to her, from the right she has over the property of her citizens, because it constitutes a part of the sum total of her riches, and augments her power. She is interested in that property by her obligation to protect all her members. In short, it cannot be otherwise, since nations act and treat together as bodies in their quality of political societies, and are considered as so many moral persons. All those who form a society, a nation being considered by foreign nations as constituting only one whole, one single person, — all their wealth together can only be considered as the wealth of that same person.
Greg..
"The law of nations is the law of sovereigns.{SOVEREIGNS OWN THE CITIZEN SUBJECTS} It is principally for them, and for their ministers, that it ought to be written. All mankind are indeed interested in it; and, in a free country,{ONLY THE SOVEREIGNS ARE FREEMEN} the study of its maxims is a proper employment for every citizen;{CITIZENS ARE MEN IN BONDAGE} but it would be of little consequence to impart the knowledge of it only to private individuals, who are not called to the councils of nations, and who have no influence in directing the public measures. If the conductors of slates, if all those who are employed in public affairs, condescended to apply seriously to the study of a science which ought to be their law, and, as it were, the compass by which to steer their course, what happy effects might we not expect from a good treatise on the law of nations! We every day feel the advantages of a good body of laws in civil society: — the law of nations is, in point of importance, as much superior to the civil law, as the proceedings of nations and sovereigns are more momentous in their consequences than those of private persons…."
"...But fatal experience too plainly proves how little regard those who are at the head of affairs pay to the dictates of justice, in conjunctures where they hope to find their advantage. Satisfied with bestowing their attention on a system of politics which is often false, since often unjust, the generality of them think they have done enough when they have thoroughly studied that. Nevertheless, we may truly apply to states a maxim which has long been acknowledged as true with respect to individuals, — that the best and safest policy is that which is founded on virtue. Cicero, as a great master in the art of government as in eloquence and philosophy, does not content himself with rejecting the vulgar maxim, that "a state cannot be happily governed without committing injustice;" he even proceeds so far as to lay down the very reverse of the proposition as an invariable truth, and maintains, that "without a strict attention to the most rigid justice, public affairs cannot be advantageously administered."
Providence occasionally bestows on the world kings and ministers whose minds are impressed with this great truth. Let us not renounce the pleasing hope that the number of those wise conductors of nations will one day be multiplied; and in the interim let us, each in his own sphere, exert our best efforts to accelerate the happy period." ~ [Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations]
I can't even add an awning on the house, "their" house, without going through tons of BULLSHIT via their idiotic county lackeys.. This country is a joke managed by little blind humpty dumpty ho ho tyrants at all levels..
We live in a scientific dictatorship..
Greg...
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
So they took over the taxing power. Because running a country is lucrative business. Now is it for profit? They say what happens in case of impeachment and "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States" [Article I section 3] So the Nation-State is a profit generating device. It is a business. This is why everything is and always was CORPORATE.
Article I Section 8 - Powers of Congress
~ To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
What is "necessary and proper"? Anything they want it to mean. There is no such thing as an unconstitutional law because if it got passed it had to be "necessary and proper".
Article VI - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
~ All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
Meaning there is no disputing the debts of the United States.
~ This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Meaning they knew they were going to be passing more laws and signing Treaties with other Nations, and all of these treaties in international law, shall be the supreme “Law of the Land”, and the Judges are upholding international law and upholding the Constitution when they do.
According to the treaties that have been signed and are extant in International Law for the past 10 centuries, you cannot sue the state. This is the current system of “voluntary” forced labor using arbitrary private monopolistic powers. However, “fighting” the system with the system or within the system, is never going to work. The U.S. and its affiliate states have copyright on all of their “law”. If you use it without a variation by agreement, you are a tort-feasor. The remedy, is to pledge to support a better system, and stop begging and expecting this one to change. This alone is reason to “move out” or “expatriate”. In other words, create a new state and become the State/status/state-us. [Not their state, a new one.] The template is as follows: “When in the course of human events, a long train of abuses...” (remember?)
Article I Section 8 - Powers of Congress
~ To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
Do you know what the Offences against the Law of Nations are? If not, how do you know what your duties and obligations as a citizen are? I invite you all to ask around. Ask any of the Constitutionalists if they have ever read the Law of Nations. Because when the Framers referenced this book, by mere reference to it they incorporated the entire Law of Nations into the Constitution. Today, hardly any so-called constitutional scholars, Freemen, or Patriots have even heard of the Law of Nations much less read the book or discuss it because if they had, there would be nothing to complain about. There would be no political parties, there would be no Occupy movement, there would be no Tea Party movement, no “peaceful protesting”, and no welfare state, and most of all, — NO EXCUSES..
“. . . Let the colonies always keep the idea of their civil rights associated with your government–they will cling and grapple to you, and no force under heaven will be of power to tear them from their allegiance. But let it be once understood that your government may be one thing and their privileges another, that these two things may exist without any mutual relation–the cement is gone, the cohesion is loosened, and everything hastens to decay and dissolution. As long as you have the wisdom to keep the sovereign authority of this country as the sanctuary of liberty, the sacred temple consecrated to our common faith, wherever the chosen race and sons of England worship freedom, they will turn their faces toward you. The more they multiply, the more friends you will have, the more ardently they love liberty, the more perfect will be their obedience. Slavery they can have; they can have it from Spain; they may have it from Prussia. But until you become lost to all feeling of your true interest and your natural dignity, freedom they can have from none but you. This commodity of price, of which you have the monopoly. This is the true Act of Navigation, which binds to you the commerce of the colonies, and through them secures to you the wealth of the world. Deny them this participation of freedom, and you break that sole bond which originally made, and must still preserve, the unity of the empire. . . Let us get an American revenue as we have got an American empire. English privileges have made it all that it is; English privileges alone will make it all it can be.”
QUESTION: Is there legal evidence that the Constitution did not apply to the American people at large from the very beginning?
ANSWER: Yes.
QUOTE:
The Padleford Case
“But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach in the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. States are the parties to it.
Padleford, Fay & Co. v. The Mayor & Aldermen of the City of Savanna, 14 Ga 438, 520, S.C. Georgia (1854)
greg
Constitutor: “In the civil law, one who, by simple agreement, becomes responsible for the payment of another's{$23 Trillion} debt.”[Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Edition page 282]
How is possible that people in this country still believe they own anything?
"*All Settlers and Traders, within the Precincts or Jurisdiction of the said Posts*, shall continue to enjoy, unmolested, all their property of every kind, and shall be protected therein. They shall be at full liberty to remain there, or to remove with all or any part of their Effects; and it shall also be free to them to sell their Lands, Houses, or Effects, or to retain the property thereof, at their discretion; *such of them as shall continue to reside within the said Boundary Lines shall not be compelled to become Citizens of the United States, or to take any Oath of allegiance to the Government thereof*, but they shall be at full liberty so to do, if they think proper, and they shall make and declare their Election within one year after the Evacuation aforesaid. *And all persons who shall continue there after the expiration of the said year, without having declared their intention of remaining Subjects of His Britannick Majesty, shall be considered as having elected to become Citizens of the United States.*" — https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jay.asp#art2
ANSWER: Yes. In the phrase, “We, the People” the capitalized word makes it a proper noun, which means that “the People” was a specific group (i.e., the aristocrats). In the phrase, “We, the people” the common noun indicates that the phrase refers to people in a general sense. [The Myth and The Reality, by The Informer, Pages 25-26]
In 1776, who was “We, the People” referring to in the U.S. Constitution?
ANSWER: The “People” referenced by the Constitution were the wealthy aristocrats. All of the men held Grants and Charters with the King. They owed him, as well as The Crown, interest on the credit extended to them for planting the new society. They profited very well from their exports all over the world. [The Myth and The Reality, by The Informer, Page 23]
Does the word “plantation” mean a large farming enterprise?
The definition found in Burke on Conciliation of the Colonies stated, “Plantations–colonies; the plantings of a new society or race. The term is regularly so used in Acts and Charters, and has no reference whatever to cultivation of the soil.”
I could put all of this reality in a book, cite case law to no end, it would be ten thousand pages right out of your owners law libraries...
I can stand on the street, in the store, in their courts, and watch them all acting it out.. And they know not what they really are nor what they're really doing..
"It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch- treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences that have unhappily interrupted the good correspondence and friendship which they mutually wish to restore, and to establish such a beneficial and satisfactory intercourse , between the two countries upon the ground of reciprocal advantages and mutual convenience as may promote and secure to both perpetual peace and harmony; and having for this desirable end already laid the foundation of peace and reconciliation by the Provisional Articles signed at Paris on the 30th of November 1782, by the commissioners empowered on each part, which articles were agreed to be inserted in and constitute the Treaty of Peace proposed to be concluded between the Crown of Great Britain and the said United States, but which treaty was not to be concluded until terms of peace should be agreed upon between Great Britain and France and his Britannic Majesty should be ready to conclude such treaty accordingly; and the treaty between Great Britain and France having since been concluded, his Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, in order to carry into full effect the Provisional Articles above mentioned, according to the tenor thereof, have constituted and appointed, that is to say his Britannic Majesty on his part, David Hartley, Esqr., member of the Parliament of Great Britain, and the said United States on their part, John Adams, Esqr., late a commissioner of the United States of America at the court of Versailles, late delegate in Congress from the state of Massachusetts, and chief justice of the said state, and minister plenipotentiary of the said United States to their high mightinesses the States General of the United Netherlands; Benjamin Franklin, Esqr., late delegate in Congress from the state of Pennsylvania, president of the convention of the said state, and minister plenipotentiary from the United States of America at the court of Versailles; John Jay, Esqr., late president of Congress and chief justice of the state of New York, and minister plenipotentiary from the said United States at the court of Madrid; to be plenipotentiaries for the concluding and signing the present definitive treaty; who after having reciprocally communicated their respective full powers have agreed upon and confirmed the following articles." ---First paragraph The Paris Peace Treaty 1783…
http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1776-1785/paris-peace-treaty-1783.php?fbclid=IwAR3sO0mb5AtuqnGvOokew2IIhupe8JPS5K6CPhioSVSgyXX26OD31qF1DI0
THE HISTORY OF LAWFUL GOLD AND SILVER LEGAL TENDER AND THE DEBT BROUGHT ON BY UNLAWFUL FIAT PAPER MONEY
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/monie.htm#THE%20HISTORY%20OF%20LAWFUL%20GOLD%20AND%20SILVER%20LEGAL%20TENDER%20AND%20THE%20DEBT%20BROUGHT%20ON%20BY%20UNLAWFUL%20FIAT%20PAPER%20MONEY
Lawfulness of the Law of Nations concerning societies as well…
"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; Individual so-called "ownership" is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State." Senate Document #43; SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 62 [Pg 9, para 2] April 17, 1933.
The U.S. has been implementing the Law of Nations and International Law..
§ 33. And may change the constitution. In virtue of the same principles, it is certain that it the nation is uneasy under its constitution, it has a right to change it. There can be no difficulty in the case, if the whole nation be unanimously inclined to make this change. But it is asked, what is to be done if the people are divided? In the ordinary management of the state, the opinion of the majority must pass without dispute for that of the whole nation: otherwise it would be almost impossible for the society ever to take any resolution. It appears then, by parity of reasoning, that a nation may change the constitution of the state by a majority of voles; and whenever there is nothing in this change that can be considered as contrary to the act of civil association, or to the intention of those united under it, the whole are bound to conform to the resolution of the majority. (22) But if the question be, to quit a form of government to which alone it appeared that the people were willing to submit on their entering into the bonds of society, — if the greater part of a free people, after the example of the Jews in the time of Samuel, are weary of liberty, and resolved to submit to the authority of a {sovereign} monarch, — those citizens who are more jealous of that privilege, so invaluable to those who have tasted it, though obliged to suffer the majority to do as they please, are under no obligation at all to submit to the new government: they may quit a society which seems to have dissolved itself in order to unite again under another form: they have a right to retire elsewhere, to sell their lands, and take with them all their effects. Self Govern. Self Determination. Diplomatic Immunity from the Monarch.. This is not gained by challenging their system.. Law of Nations; or, Principles of the law of Nature: applied to the conduct and affairs of nations and sovereigns –1750 - Emerich. de Vattel
In the process of relearning the Biblical scriptures via the Strong's Concordance, and including all of the books of the original Bible, currently in my possession, 87 books, allegedly non inspirational thus Rome decided to remove them from our scrutiny, turns out they are highly valuable, I've learned that when men write, transcribe, translate, update, and copy over thousands of years they always alter the interpretation, words and insert their own meanings. Which ends up being religions, customs and traditions of men, their commandments..
Well in doing a deep forensic analysis of the legalisms involved in this little empire it can be seen that in just the 230 years that this politically chartered country allegedly became separated from England, it in fact still remains a colony under a cleverly designed different compact and use of clever wording that has fooled the majority of this societies men since day one..
The devil pulled off another of his most infamous unbelievable scams similar to his non existence trick.. Unfortunately fooling everyone repeatedly. With sweet terms mistaken for words..
They're mocking those who cannot see them.. What we have enjoyed here, this pretense of enlightened liberty, is due simply to the liars being in a Divine leash. Thats it. We owe our allegiance to the H410 Almighty El.. Not the H430 elohyim of this world who owns this system screwing us all over..