 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Example A:
"That is to say, they cannot create opinions on their own. They must conform to the common law as it is laid down by precedent."
That is a message.
My reply to that message:
"In theory the concept fails to account for the natural facts of life, and in practice the theory is proven false, so the idea, in reality, is called summary justice, which is just another word for crime, which is again crime perpetrated under the color of law."
There is, in your message, no reason, no morality, no understanding, no value, no leadership other than naked dictatorship.
People A in history act a specific way for specific reasons, and these reasons may be good or evil, and these actions may be nurturing, defensive, and productive, or these actions may be poisonous, cancerous, offensive, and destructive, but the fact of the matter is that these people in history (who can be called People A) acted in a demonstrable, on record, manner.
That is precedent.
People B, now alive, while People A are now deceased, issue an edict of absolute enforcement, whereby injury, punishment, banishment, and other consequences enumerated, will be set in motion targeting anyone caught stepping out of the lines drawn by People A in the recorded precedent.
That is a second precedent.
What happens if the first precedent is the use of children for food and a form of entertainment such as pedophilia, or other tortures, which is entertaining to some people in history, now, and most likely in the future: food and entertainment are forms of profit, gaining profit from children is enslavement?
What happens if the first precedent is effective, expedient, voluntary, moral, mutual defense against all people in every place, and every time, within the boundaries of human inefficiency and error, but the record was falsified during the process of preserving the record of the precedent set, and instead of following the example that worked to voluntarily preserve and nurture life on earth, the record being followed is the opposite actions that lead to hell on earth and the extinction of all life?
That is why my message in response to your message is intended to be conveyed to you.
The record of what is, or is not, precedent is demonstrably counterfeited, a few examples may suffice to illustrate the point.
Magna Carte (claims of ownership of people by a special interest group, while mentioning under duress that the law maintained by the people themselves is the common law)
Declaration of Independence (doctored, edited from the first draft, removing the indictment against slavery as a crime against nature itself)
Constitution of 1787 (making slavery legal, usurping by deception a voluntary federation for mutual defense under the common law)
Judiciary Act (creating a criminal power known as summary justice to overrule voluntary mutual defense in courts of conscience in trial by the country also known as the common law)
Naturalization Act (enforcing a criminal accounting process by which the newly made slaves are enumerated)
Alien and Sedition Act (dictating the thoughts and words tolerated by the slave masters and punishing anyone daring to think or say otherwise: destroying moral conscience)
People A, in that case were people who volunteered to defend each other against British criminal invaders perpetrating war of aggression upon the defenders, and they set a precedent (that was already set in England before Magna Carta) in America whereby the common law (trial by jury in courts of conscience as the law of the land, where trial by the country is the process by which law is enforced) is above law acted out by individual men in individual groups, including the precedent of organizing 13 separate, independent, states voluntarily joined into one voluntary mutual defense association or federation.
People B, in that case, are the falsely named "federalist" party members, who altered the record by counterfeiting the voluntary record and put in place the involuntary, dictatorial, record, so as to enable dictatorship above common law.
That is why your message is replied to with my message, and my message is not just my message, because I say so, it is a message backed up by the messages offered by Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, George Mason, Patrick Henry, Lysander Spooner, court cases during the voluntary federation, and the record of the first congress of the United States of America in Congress Assembled.
Your message is backed up with a history of two opposing forces recording their deeds in many forms:
Group A: moral people defending each other voluntarily in time and place according to their power to do so which includes their own power of moral conscience.
Group B: immoral people agreeing to cooperate with anyone who will reach the goal of enslaving weaker people in time and place within their power to do so, and this group claims, falsely, that they are the law, which means specifically that these people claim that the law agreed upon by the people who are targeted for enslavement IS NOT THE LAW.
If it was a precedent in common law that justices of the peace, known as magistrates, constituted the pool from which a common law grand jury was formed, as Thomas Jefferson claims in his notes on the state of Virginia, and these people are the most honest and discrete people that can be found and encouraged to volunteer in the common law county, and these justices command jurisdiction civil and criminal, and these volunteers work without compensation (interest), then that precedent may actually reason out as a moral method of voluntary mutual defense of innocent people who are routinely injured by criminals who fraudulently command criminal public office, or the criminals defended effectively against might not be in any public office.
The war (so called) with words is the moral power that is morally above the war perpetrated by criminal aggressors whose type of war is demonstrably - aggressively - violent, destructive, and leads to hell on earth: but it pays well (supposedly) in the short term.
Is that not a message worth acknowledging?
I said that the war has ended with taking the Trading with the Enemy Act out of the Bankers' Code.
Is that something done, by you, in time and place, according to precedent set by someone else, some other time, and some other place, or is it not according to precedent A, or precedent B, and what is likely to be the precedent followed by those people who prefer to keep their power to enslave innocent people with their false precedents that include the falsification of the federation that turned the federation into a criminal organization (syndicate?)?
What is the next step to reach the goal you have in mind?
If the war has ended what are some of the forms of money that are replacing the fraudulent money? The power of falsehood is powerless now in money markets? Where can I get a loan and what is the interest rate?