 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Questions for Presidential 'Debate' Participants
1 (a.)All of you who use an income tax preparer, raise your hand.
(b.) If you (who raised hands) can not prepare your own taxes, how do you propose to run the country?
I do not propose to run the country. I propose to end legal crime, and I have a specific method by which that goal can be achieved, only, if enough honest productive American's are willing to work toward that same goal, and I have very specific things that must be done to reach that goal. I do not pay taxes, to my best ability, since I know that the power I earn is stolen by legal criminals and then those thieves use that stolen power to keep power flowing in that direction, from honest productive Americans, to them, the legal criminals, and they have no moral limit whatsoever as they lie, torture, and mass murder to keep the power flowing in that specific direction.
Is my answer cut down to a small enough sound bite to please you?
2. If you can not prepare your own tax returns, is it reasonable to hold the average citizen criminally liable for errors?
To the best of my ability: I will use what political power I have, and I will use the economic power I have, to make taxes as voluntary as can be, and returning to a limited National government tax structure, taxing only State legal fictions, and no longer taxing sovereign individuals will be done, by me, if I have enough legal power, political power, and economic power to do so, when elected, or not. How much power will I gain when gaining the office of The President of The United States? You tell me. Who will shoot me, when I try to do these things, alone gunman? Will my family be threatened? You tell me.
3. How do you expect to understand bills sent to you for your signature if you can't fill out a tax return?
The Founding Fathers who resisted adoption of The Constitution favored The Articles of Confederation because one was better than the other in their Founding Father brains. They said that The Constitution was too ambiguous, too easily misinterpreted, too libel to be constructively interpreted by evil people, they warned that The Constitution was much too much, in the way of words, to be good enough as a simple, easy to understand, law power, working for The People, on the road to Liberty. They were right, look at the volumes upon volumes of text written by criminals who have taken over your government, as those legal criminals manage to enslave you, by deceit, by threats of violence, and by acts of horrible, terrifying violence, not limited to torture, and mass murder. You tell me why there are are too many laws, smarty pants. Criminals lie, and one lie creates a demand for two more lies, then four, then eight, is that simple enough, a small enough sound bite, to answer the question asked, directly, and without any room for misinterpretation?
4. At what point will the national debt be "too high"?
That is a question that is based upon a lie. The Nation cannot be held accountable for any debt. Honest productive American people are the source of all credit, and they are the benefactors of any profits of any loans that are borrowed from them. How is that fact turned upside down whereby those same honest productive American people are then convinced of a false belief that they owe something to the borrowers? You tell me. Why do you ask a question that is based upon a fundamental error, a fundamentally based fraud, a fraud that is perpetrated upon the honest productive American people, by legal criminals? When honest productive American people demand something better, that is when that lie you speak of is "too high". I can quote Henry Ford: "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." How much sound bite time to I have left, before tomorrow morning?
5. What is the case law giving the federal government power to prohibit the possession of drugs?
I am not a lawyer, I am an honest productive American, if that group agrees with me on that point, if I earn that credit, that is what I am, and as to the question that may, or may not, be answered accurately, and honestly, by a qualified, licensed, lawyer, or me, as an honest productive American, or as The President of The United States of America, the accurate answer would require a lot of careful effort, much, much, too much effort for me alone, to tackle that job, of answering that question, considering the fact that people are being tortured, right now, and I am paying for it. I have more important things to do, than answer that question accurately.
If I have time, I see a need to add:
Alone, all by myself, without any help, from anyone, that question is not within my power to answer, accurately, but I can guess. My guess is that the people who have invented drug prohibition, on a National level, have done so fraudulently, by constructively interpreting The Constitution to suit their own interests, at the expense of everyone else's interest, as warned by The Founding Fathers who opposed The Constitution.
6. Assuming all of you are against waste, fraud and abuse; what specific programs and agencies do you propose to eliminate?
My method of returning the force of government back to a force used only in defense against crime, instead of a force that enforces crime, involves specific things, such as specific legal monetary products which will stop the flow of power currently flowing to the legal criminals, and once that power stop flowing from the honest productive Americans, and once that power stops flowing to the legal criminals, on the National level, the honest productive people in America will be more powerful, and the legal criminals will be less powerful as time goes by, since the honest productive American people will invest their power wisely, and the legal criminals will consume their power carelessly, and soon, very soon afterward, there will be no more demand for those specific programs that have been invented, produced, and maintained by the legal criminals at the National level. At the State level those same boondoggles may persist, and then the honest productive American people will have the power to vote with their feet to States that are not so careless as to spend hard earned wealth on wasteful, or even destructive expenses. Do I have any time left?
7. Should any federal departments or programs ever be eliminated, if so, which ones?
The very first federal department that can be eliminated by way of competition is The Federal Reserve System of Extortion, and that is my number one target, that is the one "program" that will be eliminated by my offering of two legal financial competitors, of which I have not the time to explain here and now. In any case, by any effective method, once that one "program" is no longer powerful, on the National level, all other destructive programs can then be eliminated, one by one, as the power flowing to those destructive programs will no longer be flowing to them, they will wither on the vine, for lack of the sustenance they are currently feasting on, which, again, comes from the honest productive people in America. Once the power stops flowing to those destructive programs, where will the inventors, and producers, and perpetrators, the profiteers, of those destructive programs get their power? You tell me.
8. How many military bases does the U.S. maintain in foreign countries?
As an honest productive American, a member of the public, the answer to that question is not within my power to know, it is not "for public consumption", but there are guess, and there are numbers that are "for public consumption", numbers that do not include secret bases, or top secret bases, and the numbers that are "for public consumption", minus those that are not, are, as far as I know, hundreds, even thousands, and the costs paid for by honest productive Americans, for those bases, are roughly equal to the cost of the supposed "National Debt". How, then, has it happened, that the people who profit from those bases, have borrowed the money to build and maintain those bases, from the honest productive American people, and then, those borrowers then borrow more money, and then those borrowers use that money to make the honest productive American people believe that they owe the borrowers for having loaned that money to the borrowers? You tell me how that trick works. Please. And on top of that immensely careless, and incalculably costly fraud, the borrowers have even managed to convince the lenders, that the borrowers are owed interest on the power they stole from the producers of that power.
The answer to the question is the same answer already offered, once the money stops flowing, those bases will close, troops will return to defensive, moral, work, and troops will no longer be consumed in the legal crimes known as aggressive wars for profit, the same crimes that Nazi perpetrators where found guilty of perpetrating, and those Nazi legal criminals were hung by the neck, or otherwise killed, for having committed those very crimes. I'm not proposing a death penalty as a solution, a final solution, I am proposing legal monetary competition as the solution, and I can explain in detail how legal monetary competition solves the problem whereby honest productive people, in America, finance legal crime. It isn't rocket science, or brain surgery, and it is simple enough for a 5 year old to know. If you send power to criminals, what do you think will happen? You can call me stupid, or call me a conspiracy theorist, but before doing so, you most certainly have to avoid looking in the mirror. Have I run out of time?
9. How many do you propose to close?
That is a very serious question, and there are people who are being tortured right now, innocent people being tortured right now, in secret bases, paid for by honest America people, and if elected, that is my number on priority, while working to end the legal money monopoly, to use the power credited to me, in those two directions, simultaneously, to stop the torture, and stop the mass murder as soon as possible, and at the same time, stop the power flowing from the honest productive American people as that power is now flowing to the legal criminals who have ordered, and continue to order, those tortures, and those mass murders. My plan, on that front, is to seek out honest people in each National government agency, CIA, FBI, etc., reward them for fingering known criminals, account for those known criminals, and use those agencies to compete with each other, eventually working toward raising the quality of their services, and lowering the cost of those services, in the work of defense, and to end the use of those services as they are currently employed in legal crimes. I will find those secret bases, pull the funds, pull the resources, pit each agency against the other, to weed out the criminals, and to credit the honest, defensive, agents with what they deserve, as they help turn their work from legal crime, aggressive wars (on terror, or drugs, or whatever cover story is uncovered to be a lie), from aggressive wars for profit, to defensive power only. That question will be answered in fact, if I am elected, and not shot before that answer is made real.
10. How much does it cost to keep the above-mentioned bases in operation?
The total cost of surplus wealth, denominated in dollars, and not including costs borne by torture and murder victims, including the families of the tortured and mass murdered, is roughly equal to The National Debt as advertized, not including the debts that are not "for public consumption". That number is published on a web page, just search for The National Debt Clock, it is a crime in progress. A legal crime in progress.
11. If a state chooses to nullify a federal law, what action would you take?
In the spirit of a Democratic Federated Republic form of government, which is not the case with The Constitution, my actions are, and will continue to be, supportive of all exercises of legal sovereignty, right down to the individual level, from the Federal Level, to the State level, to the County level, to the City level, to the Company level, to the small business level, to the family level, and to the individual level. If another State that has not nullified a federal law grows jealous, and threatens to attack a State that does nullify a federal law, then a Democratic Federated Republican form of government would support the State, defensively, that is being threatened, the same one that nullified a federal law, and the Federal government would therefore be against the belligerent State, the aggressive State, the one that grew jealous of the State that did nullify the federal law, and there is historical precedent on this point in the example of Shays's Rebellion under The Articles of Confederation, which can be explain in detail, but not in a sound bite. How much time to I have left?
12. If a state were to secede from the union. what action would you take?
A Democratic Federated Republic form of government is what you would be voting for if I am elected, and in that capacity I can interpret The Constitution in that way, since The Constitution was written to be constructively interpreted, and therefore, as The President, I interpret the law of the land to be such that all the States are bound voluntarily into a voluntary Union of Separate and Sovereign legal fictions, and as such, they are free to join, and free to secede, at will. Having said that, and in reference to the previous question, the duty of the Federated legal fiction, controlled by me, as The President, I would see my duty to be such that a belligerent State, whereby the elected representatives of that state, planning on, and the following through with the plan, to conduct aggressive wars for profit, would be cause for me using my power in defense against such actions, internally, or externally, and again, there is historical precedent in Shays's Rebellion on this point, however, in that case the elected officials at the federal level were impotent; which means that they allowed the legal criminals to perpetrate aggressive wars for profit. I would allow no such thing, not within my power, not on my watch. Liberty or you are dead, not me, in my way of thinking. If the choice is given to me, Obey, without any other choice, and I have within my power to disobey, what do you think I will choose? You tell me. I am an American. You don't give me that choice. I earn that choice. How much time left?
Please excuse me, I have an opportunity to earn my living, and if I don't grab this, someone else will, and so I have to get some work done now, and I can return here later.
Thank you very much for the good questions, I will be looking, with great interest, in any answers offered by the competition.
No time to edit.