 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Pleas
Criminals define the meaning of crime as criminals act in ways that Destroy Liberty, whereby voluntary association (a natural occurrence) is replaced with involuntary association (a criminal man-made occurrence).
An accurate measure of the time and place where voluntary association (Liberty) is turned into involuntary association (Crime) is the point at which, and the place in which, the targeted victim no longer has a choice to choose to be separated from the criminal.
The criminal dictates the connection to the victim, taking away the choice to not be connected to the criminal, a choice that existed before the criminal created the involuntary association.
What happens when victims have had enough of being victims, and victims choose to resist the involuntary association dictated into being by the criminals?
"In the autumn of 1690 an expedition, sent by Massachusetts to capture Quebec, returned without success. To defray its cost, which amounted to forty thousand pounds, and to satisfy complaints of "the want of an adequate measure of commerce," the general court, in December, 1690, ordered the issue of "seven thousand pounds of printed bills of equal value with money;" and of the remainder in May, 1691. In July, 1692, within nineteen months of the earliest emission, the first legislature under the new charter which transformed the self-governing colony of Massachusetts Bay into a direct dependency of Great Britain, made "all" these "bills of public credit current within this province in all payments equivalent to money, excepting specialties and contracts made before the publication" of this new law. Their credit was supported by receiving them in all public payments at a premium of five percent."
It must be understood, if the idea is to gain TRUST, to maintain an Accurate Record, in a Court of Record, where, when, and how Liberty was Destroyed, so as to have the accurate information required to regain Liberty, and avoid further Destruction of Liberty.
Why, for example, do people employ words such as Public and Private?
Why do people employ words such as Master and Servant?
As soon as the concept of one man (or woman) raising themselves above the authority of another man (or woman) is realized in time and place, as soon as the connection between one man (or woman) and another man (or woman) is established and realized as a Master/Slave, or Criminal/Victim, or God/Ungodly, or Employee/Employer, or Private/Public, or Better/Worse, or More Valuable/Less Valuable, the Victim knows the score.
TRUST in Liberty becomes TRUST in Crime.
As soon as the Victim is given notice by the Criminal that the Criminal is above The Golden Rule, Above The Law, Above the concept of Liberty, Above Voluntary Association, as soon as the Victim is clued on in the Nature of the Association having been turned into an Involuntary Association by the Criminal, at that moment, in that place, the Victim realizes Victimization.
Liberty is thrown out, Despotism is thrown in, by the Criminal, as the Criminal defines the meaning of Crime.
What can one Victim do when Involuntary Association is Dictated into being, and Liberty is Destroyed?
Find another Victim and start a Victims Anonymous self help group?
"In the autumn of 1690 an expedition, sent by Massachusetts to capture Quebec, returned without success."
Who, exactly, sent an expedition in 1690 to capture Quebec?
The reason for my writing here, in this way, is reasonable because there is a very destructive confusion going on, in many minds, whereby a natural human being is led to believe that there is a THING that can be responsible, and therefore held accountable, for the actions of specific people who willfully decide to DESTROY LIBERTY, in specific places, at specific times.
I am leading up to a point at which some people, who have names, who have their own power of will, decide, these people decide, to gather together voluntarily, and these people decide to go to the Massachusetts Armory and these people seek to regain control of the means of DEFENSE against criminals who have taken over the power of VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENT: i.e. Government by Consent.
Who claims to have been given consent to "capture Quebec" expending, consuming, all those costs, and then failing to enslave the targeted victims, those criminals seek to finance additional criminal adventures?
Then, as a means of regaining the financial POWER to continue criminal operations, said "government" (a list of criminals volunteering to be acting as governors) orders the involuntary payment of so called TAXES (involuntary payments = extortion payments); taxes "collected" from the jurists, from the peers, from those who exist within the boarders of a legal fiction known as Massachusetts, extortion payments are taken from anyone within reach who have anything worth stealing, if they do not resist the order to pay the extortion payments.
Back to here
Here:
In the autumn of 1690 an expedition, sent by Massachusetts to capture Quebec, returned without success. To defray its cost, which amounted to forty thousand pounds, and to satisfy complaints of "the want of an adequate measure of commerce," the general court, in December, 1690, ordered the issue of "seven thousand pounds of printed bills of equal value with money;" and of the remainder in May, 1691. In July, 1692, within nineteen months of the earliest emission, the first legislature under the new charter which transformed the self-governing colony of Massachusetts Bay into a direct dependency of Great Britain, made "all" these "bills of public credit current within this province in all payments equivalent to money, excepting specialties and contracts made before the publication" of this new law. Their credit was supported by receiving them in all public payments at a premium of five percent.
Moving ahead in time:
Victims defend against subjugation
Specific to the concept of consent of the governed:
[Side-bar. Article XI of the Articles of Confederation is curious and interesting. It reads: “Canada acceding to this confederation, and joining in themeasures of the united states, shall be admitted into, and entitled to all the advantages of this union; but no other colony shall be admitted into the same, unless such admission be agreed to by nine states.”]
The forces knowable as England (in particular The Bank of England) orders Massachusetts government "employees" to invade and capture Canada, and finance those expeditions with fraudulent paper money designed to extort the savings (surplus wealth) of the productive people in Massachusetts.
The victims find out about it. The victims focus efforts to defend against the Largest Army of Aggression for Profit (financed by The Bank of England) invading each Constitutionally Limited Republic, such as New York and Massachusetts, according to the concept of government by the consent of the governed, well reported in a Court of Record, whereby The Declaration of Independence records the record of the victims having reached the point at which resistance against criminal invasion, occupation, and enslavement, was bound as a duty of free people in Liberty.
Under The Articles of Confederation the volunteers in voluntary government, in each Constitutionally Limited Republic, managed to get rid of the Criminals from England; which is no small feat, not an insignificant fact.
Back to a source of information (I smell a rat):
Stinky Rat smell
Experience with mustering and employing militia forces during Shays’ Rebellion, 1786-1787 and the very specter of ‘insurrection’ as depicted by that rebellion were significant influences during the Constitutional Convention. For example, Washington writing to James Madison, 22 November 1786, said: “What stronger evidence can be given of the want of energy in our governments than these disorders? If there exists not a power to check them, what security has a man for life, liberty, or property?...Thirteen Sovereignties pulling against each other, and all tugging at the federal head will soon bring ruin on the whole; whereas a liberal, and energetic Constitution, well guarded and closely watched, to prevent encroachments, might restore to us that degree of respectability and consequence, to which we had a fair claim and the brightest prospect of attaining” (Coakley, p. 7).
Here is where PAINTING INTO CORNERS becomes obvious to me. The concept of a National Monopoly of FORCE, or Consolidated Energetic Government, is STARKLY comparable to the opposite, which is a Confederation of Constitutionally Limited Republics all of which are free to join, and free to leave, said Confederation.
All of which are free to consent to pay for, and free to consent to not pay for, a MONOPOLY CABAL of MONEY LENDERS, MONEY CHANGERS.
A.
The duty of free people is to resist criminal governments.
B.
The duty of free people is to obey when ordered to pay, and to obey when ordered not to question the payments.
If you do not read the next 6 books, then you will not have the information that I have discovered during my Jury Trial that I have volunteered to conduct on my own.
I have no PEERS in this, none, not yet.
The closest I have found to having any PEERS in this Fight for Liberty (A. not B. above) is my fiend bear, Frank O'Collins, and the people organizing The National Liberty Alliance, and yet, on that short list, none appear to understand the gravity of the situation whereby false steps are being made instead of solid steps onto sound foundations here, right here, in America (Frank is in Australia so he is excepted in at least that way).
1.
Uncommon Sense
Pay the extortion fee and what do you expect will happen?
2.
Secret Proceedings
The Articles of Confederation were thrown out because of (so called) Shays's Rebellion. The Central Banking Frauds, who already controlled England, realized how POWERFUL The Articles of Confederation were for the Targeted Victim's effectual defense established IN FACT. The Victims had, with The Articles of Confederation, the means by which Defense against Criminal Governments was EFFECTUAL in FACT. So the Central Bankers knew that The Articles of Confederation, a Voluntary Association among Constitutionally Limited (imperfect) Republics had to go, and instead of a Free Market Government design, an Involuntary Government had to be Enforced by that Central Banking Cabal. I can provide quotes to back up the facts discovered in this case.
Go back in time before the War of Independence (falsely labeled a "rebellion" or an "insurrection" and falsely labeled by criminals seeking to enforce an involuntary association) to number 3 on the reading list:
3.
Shays's Rebellion
Rebellion, Insurrection, or duty bound people resisting victimization by criminals who wear false badges of false authority as if the criminals somehow become Gods in their own twisted minds?
Which side are you on? Are you painting yourself into a corner? Do you side with the Central Bankers in this specific case? Do you see the need to regain control of the Armory when the Armory has been taken over by the Central Banking Cabal? When the Central Banking Cabal orders fraudulent (but legal) paper money used to finance invasions of sovereign countries, to occupy, enslave, and CONSOLIDATE those targeted lands, resources, and those targeted people, is that RIGHT? Is it RIGHT to keep paying the payments to such Criminal Governments through direct (involuntary) Taxes and indirect (involuntary) Taxes hidden covertly as "Inflation" and "Quantitative Easing"? Pay up and don't question the payments?
So Generalissimo Washington is pulled out of retirement to become the new King of a new Consolidated Nation State that will then have the power to enforce a Money Monopoly and whereby any competitor can be CRUSHED or Incorporated into the fold?
Why can't anyone else see this?
4.
The Whiskey Rebellion?
Why are such events as those events claimed to be a Rebellion? When the Victims Declare their Independence it is no longer CONSENT of the Governed and therefore the ACT perpetrated by those who seek to enslave the "governed" are the aggressors, the criminals, the Despots, the MASTERS, and the FALSE GODS who claim to be above the rule of law. In the words of the Criminal, there is a confession. The King enslaves (conscripts = no longer voluntary = no longer consent of the governed) an Army of invaders to invade a Constitutionally Limited Republic so as to crush or incorporate a number of money competitors, and it is called a "Rebellion"?
If the War for Independence is to be called a Rebellion, then who is doing the name calling? Which side are you painting yourself onto?
5.
The Founders on the side of LIBERTY
Do you really think that all those loyal to the Central Banking Cabal running England were driven out of all the Constitutionally Limited Republics under The Articles of Confederation upon the conclusion of the Rebellion that could be called a War for Independence FROM the Central Banking Cabal running England?
6.
Madison's Coat Turns Blue
Why did the author of The Constitution suddenly realize how damaging his work was to the concept of government by consent (Liberty or Voluntary Government or Free Market Government) and therefore why did Madison TURN his coat from RED to BLUE and begin to take Revolutionary Steps in Rebellion against the Central Banking Cabal running England, and now running a Subsidiary arm of that Corporation known now as Washington D.C. or United States Inc. (LLC)?
The battle can be clearly understood when consent is no longer a factor.
When common law (law of the land, law of custom, law of nature, law of God, law of no one being above the law) becomes Common Law (Maritime Law/Admiralty Law/Corporate Law/Statutory Law/Edict/Despotism), the obvious becomes obvious when those resisting enslavement are being called rebels and insurgents on ONE SIDE and the other side are denying the validity of the claim.
You don't own me, sir, so my resistance to your claims of ownership are not acts of rebellion or insurgency, just leave me alone, please.
What is to be done when the other side, the side you appear to be painting yourself onto, refuses to leave the free, liberated, people, the innocent productive targets, alone?
The POLITICAL PARTY SIDE during those days when Liberty was Crushed by Frauds and Extortionists working for the Central Banking Cabal run out of England included George Washington (Invading Pennsylvania with a slave army to crush money competition), Alexander Hamilton (Central Banking National Debt Fraud Founder), and John Adams (Famous for what? His words? Or his deeds, acts, such as The Alien and Sedition Acts), whereby for some odd reason these so called "Founders" sided with Despotism, Involuntary Association, Monarchy, Central Banking Fraud, Monopoly, Consolidation, and England (Bank of England).
Why did Madison (Federalist at the start) change his colors and join (reservedly) with Jefferson in the works that became known as the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions?
Why were the opponents of The Constitution, such as Luther Martin, Robert Yates, George Mason, and Patrick Henry against ratification of The Constitution, and why did they end up demanding The Bill of Rights attached to that USURPATION of LIBERTY?