 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
http://unionstatesassembly.info/journals/summaries/A%20Brief%20History%20of%20the%20ONLY%20Lawful%20Government.pdf
Quote_________________________________
Here are the exact words for the approval of the Convention proposal (Constitution for the United States):
“Resolved, That the proceeding Constitution be laid before the United States in Congress assembled, that is should afterwards be submitted to a Convention of Delegates, chosen in each State by the People thereof, under the Recommendation of its Legislature, for their Assent and Ratification; and that each Convention assenting to, and ratifying the Same, should give Notice thereof to the United States in Congress assembled.”
This violates existing federal law (the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union) in terms of how changes to the law form are to take place. Here, the Convention tells Congress to just look at (“be laid before”) the Constitution for the United States and then pass it on to the states.
Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union addresses changes to the law form and says “Every state shall abide by the determinations of the united states in congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this confederation shall be inviolably observed by every state, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a congress of the united states, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every state.” (Emphasis added)
Notice the difference? With existing law, Congress FIRST has to agree to any proposed changes/alterations and then send it to the States for their approval. The recommendation from the Federal Convention bypasses Congress’s approval process, thus a violation of existing federal law.
By violating federal law, the resolution of February 21, agreeing to only have the Federal Convention for the sole and express purpose of making alterations to the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union (existing law) and NOT for a new type of government, and then the Federal Convention delegates propose to break federal law again by NOT abiding by Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union by ignoring the approved process to change federal law.
The “new and proposed” law form (Constitution for the United States) requires 2/3 majority to make changes or bring into execution the “new and proposed” law form, again violating existing law that requires a unanimous vote to make changes.
Let’s look at the letter from Washington given to Congress. In the first paragraph is says “. . . a different organization.” The 2nd paragraph says “. . . give up a share of liberty . . . rights to be surrendered . . .” Clearly he is informing Congress that the proposed Constitution for the United States will not be pleasant to those states that want to retain their sovereignty, and the people that populate them.
On September 27, 1787 Congress reads, for the first time, the proposals from the Federal Convention. Please read this passage from the Journals of the Continental Congress for this date carefully. These are the smoking guns of all smoking guns proving, once and for all, the unlawfulness, according to the law of the time, of the Constitution for the United States. Simply put, it was not brought forth and put into place according to the law of time, thereby making it 100% unlawful, meaningless, and irrelevant! (See Volume 33, pages 540-542).
“On motion of Mr. [Edward] Carrington seconded by Mr. [William] Bingham the motion of Mr. [Abraham] Clark was postponed to take into consideration the following motion viz “Congress proceeded to the consideration of the Constitution for the United States by the late Convention held in the City of Philadelphia and thereupon resolved That Congress do agree thereto and that it be recommended to the legislatures of the several states to cause conventions to be held as speedily as may be to the end that the same may be adopted ratified and confirmed.”
Yes, this is ACTUALLY stricken out in the Journals but still there to be able to be read. It clearly shows treason, and thus stricken out as if it never occurred. One can only conclude it is still in the Journals to provide remedy for those wishing to regain their freedom.
What is treasonous about this? Simple, the fact the Congress took a vote to approve of the Constitution for the United States, clearly breaking federal law as Congress can ONLY deal with existing Federal law, the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union, and not discuss any other law form.
_____________________________________________
7th:
So there it is and before I am deemed guilty without trial as to my crime of Spamming this Facebook page I will let the chips fall as they may above. If someone picks up the CAUSE in this case in a form of defense FOR the guilty, then please do so now. If you think you can rationalize, explain, help cover-up, apologize for, authorize, or in any way explain why the crime scene documented on the official record was not a crime scene, then do so, as you may. The mountain of evidence backing up the conviction that the crime scene above is, in fact, a confession of guilt, a confession of treason, a confession of having counterfeited the voluntary mutual defense association, or federation of independent states under the common law, and putting in place a Satellite Corporate Limited Liability Criminal Organization Under the Color of Law, or Nation State backed by The British Empire, which is owned by the Vatican (as far as I know to this day), or Legal Fiction, is following this initial History Lesson on this HIDDEN HISTORY Facebook page.
8th
In other words: The criminals took over in 1787/89, as documented on the official record that records that crime scene as it happened. The only defense offered to those who may want to take up the CAUSE of defending organized crime under the color of law, whereby criminal slave traders enslave everyone with false history, false claims of authority, which include, in writing, a claim that they, the criminals, can collect extortion payments falsely called "federal taxes" so as to render the volunteers who volunteer to defend innocent African Slave victims from that "crime against nature itself" powerless in their voluntary mutual defensive efforts, as by this criminal enterprise (counterfeiting a federal government power) all Americans are made to pay-for (subsidize) the African Slave Trade from 1789 onwards - the only defense offered to those who may want to take up the CAYSE if defending organized crime under the color of law is a phrase common to all criminals who organize or criminals who don't organize, and that phrase is Might Makes Right. That Might Makes Right is your go to defense if you choose to defend the actions of these criminals who confess their guilt on the official record in the HIDDEN HISTORY of America, which is found right there on the official record.
9th
I will avoid posting any more links, with any more quotes, that confirm, inculpate, prove beyond reasonable doubt, the crime that brings all Americans under criminal rule today, because doing so appears to trigger the Facebook Spam Bot Software, or some other power is at work when notices are sent to my computer informing me that the evidence offered is SPAM. What is needed at this point in time is discussion, debate, which is not antagonistic in a offensive way, such as is the case when people willfully choose to "shoot the messenger" when people do not like the message, but that which is certainly needed now, is prejudicial debate, concern, discussion, investigation, validation, authorization, with extreme prejudice, concerning those who are, in fact, guilty of impersonating lawful authority, and all the crimes required to maintain that initial criminal act. Lawful authority is NOT without prejudice; if it were without prejudice then there could be no guilt whatsoever, as lawful authority without prejudice for the innocent, and prejudice against the guilty would be lawlessness whereby no one is ever guilty, and reasonably so: no one is innocent. That type of counterfeit lawful authority is a clear and present danger to all innocent victims who have suffered in the past, who are currently suffering, or who will suffer without a clear prejudice for avoidance of all injury done to the innocent, and a clear prejudice against all who choose to injure innocent victims for whatever criminal reason that they may be inspired to adopt as their own criminal non-reason: might makes right.