| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
First attempt was sent, not approved for days (even weeks), then approved as demonstrated: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1589205864650073/?multi_permalinks=2088934841343837¬if_id=1513816537950919¬if_t=like How about a history lesson concerning the time and place when the criminals took over the American Federation of Independent States? This history lesson shows how, why, when, where, and by what means the voluntary mutual defense association - federation - was covered up by Slave Traders, Central Banking Frauds, War Mongers, and Drug Pushers, and put in place of the covered up federation of independent states of free people in a perishable liberty was a counterfeit version hidden behind a false front. Shall I proceed in this HIDDEN HISTORY Public Group or is this type of history lesson unwelcome, unwanted, and deemed to be useless? I'd like to know, because the viewpoint I gain from this History Lesson is the path back to Rule of Law, despite the false front FAKE Federation working to prevent any moves back to Rule of Law that are not authorized by the criminal CABAL. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Second effort offered: Approved, and then liked! First on the list of evidence is the official record that inculpates the criminals as criminals: the smoking gun. Before presenting this evidence it is imperative to know the difference between the concept known as a presumption of innocence until proof beyond reasonable doubt of guilt is officially established, and another power of awareness known as a clear and present danger, also understandable with phrases like caught red handed, caught with a hand in the cookie jar, and probable cause. Real, grass-roots, organic, natural law authorities of law are born out of necessity when innocent people were, are, or will suffer injury at the hands of guilty people, in time, and in place. If a real lawful authority also has a badge, shield, license, seat, bench, office, beat, territory, jurisdiction, or TITLE, on a public access record, that fact merely acknowledged the demonstrated fact of the matter: lawful authority in fact, with or without the TITLE. This is a must know, on a must know basis, for anyone, anywhere, anytime, for reasons that go beyond doubt, as dictated by any situation, in any place, at any time, whereby failure by anyone to protect and serve the innocent victim from the guilty criminal affords the guilty criminal all the power needed to perpetrated any intended crime, and confusion over who is authorized to protect and serve the innocent from the guilty shifts the power from the power of lawful defense to the power of criminal offense. That clear understanding of that clear and present danger sets the stage for the knowable powerlessness of confusions associated with criminals who take over governments. Criminals that take-over governments will claim that it is lawful for them to enslave everyone else, and criminals that take over governments will enforce that claim by any means they can impose upon their targeted, innocent, victims, and all the while the victims have been convinced that their only power of remedy, recourse, redress, restitution, and redemption, is to plea for mercy at the foot of the criminal organization that operates under the color of law. There can be no worse clear, and present, danger, than that up-side-down, counterfeit, form of law, as that counterfeit form of law enables the dominant criminal organizations to enslave all of mankind, which ensures that all productive power that can be produced by mankind will be stolen and then consumed in the necessary work required to maintain the False Front that convinces the victims of their powerlessness, and incapacity to choose, voluntarily, a higher quality, and low cost alternative: or two. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Third: Smoking Gun: http://unionstatesassembly.info/journals/index1a.htm Fourth: An explanation of how, and why, the Smoking Gun inculpates the criminals, with their own words (which is a confession of guilt, which is a matter of fact demonstration by the criminals during the crime, with their hands firmly into the cookie jar, caught RED handed handing over the freedom of the people, altering a federation of republics from a voluntary association for mutual defense, and creating instead an enforcement mechanism run by criminal slave traders, central banking frauds, war mongers, and drug pushers) - explanation of that smoking gun - is offered in so many words following, but the aforementioned reality of actual, natural law, is such that each individual who constitutes the true law of the land, must make use of their voluntary defensive power of will, enhanced by their own individual moral conscience, and they must see for themselves, and they must not transfer their lawful power to the jack boots of the criminals, asking for mercy, and asking for the authority to know better from worse: it is up to you, and you, and you, all of those individuals who can take themselves up by their boot straps, out of abject servitude to falsehood, and anoint themselves authorities of true law: your power to volunteer to defend the innocent victims from the guilty criminals in time and place as demanded by the facts of the matter. Fifth: 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. _____________________________________________ |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
6th: 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. |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
10th: HIDDEN HISTORY concerning the moments that constitute the criminal take-over of the independent, free, America that was then populated by independent, sovereign, free Americans, in a perishable liberty is offered above, and so far that clearly published crime scene evidence has not inspired the necessary discussion among the current inhabitants of the Corporate America that was criminally created and enforced from those moments that constitute the criminal, Corporate, take-over of America: turning the voluntary mutual defense association - federation - UNDER THE COMMON LAW, turning that voluntary association into CONFIDENCE SCHEME, a legal fiction, an involuntary, Corporate, Nation State - despotism - claimed to be above any law other than the counterfeit law enforced by criminal organizations perpetrating crimes UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW. Since there is no discussion, no debate, no one taking up the CAUSE for the Legal Fiction Offense, and no on taking up the CAUSE for the sovereignty of individual, innocent, people, in a perishable liberty, I'll remind those who may be perched on an imaginary fence that the LAW did exist, and I'll remain those fence sitters sitting on their imaginary fences made out of Legal Fiction that the real law was what it was, and I'll borrow from 2 people who knew the difference while they took up the true CAUSE known as law. I'll do this cutting and pasting from the records in the HIDDEN HISTORY of America, which is then a risky move on my part, as the BOTS (or humans who create and maintain the BOTS) look for things that trigger so called SPAM "defense" a.k.a. censorship. 11th: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/.../elliot/vol3/june17/ George Mason: Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union. 12th: Debate in Virginia Ratifying Convention 1788 Elliot 3:89, 430--36, 439--42 [6 June] George Mason: Among the enumerated powers, Congress are to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, and to pay the debts, and to provide for the general welfare and common defence; and by that clause (so often called the sweeping clause) they are to make all laws necessary to execute those laws. Now, suppose oppressions should arise under this government, and any writer should dare to stand forth, and expose to the community at large the abuses of those powers; could not Congress, under the idea of providing for the general welfare, and under their own construction, say that this was destroying the general peace, encouraging sedition, and poisoning the minds of the people? And could they not, in order to provide against this, lay a dangerous restriction On the press? Might they not even bring the trial of this restriction within the ten miles square, when there is no prohibition against it? Might they not thus destroy the trial by jury? 13th: http://www.barefootsworld.net/trial12.html#p222 ______________________________quote It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States. If the trial by jury were reëstablished, the Common Law principle of taxation would be reëstablished with it; for it is not to be supposed that juries would enforce a tax upon an individual which he had never agreed to pay. Taxation without consent is as plainly robbery, when enforced against one man, as when enforced against millions; and it is not to be imagined that juries could be blind to so self-evident a principle. Taking a man’s money without his consent, is also as much robbery, when it is done by millions of men, acting in concert, and calling themselves a government, as when it is done by a single individual, acting on his own responsibility, and calling himself a highwayman. Neither the numbers engaged in the act, nor the different characters they assume as a cover for the act, alter the nature of the act itself. If the government can take a man’s money without his consent, there is no limit to the additional tyranny it may practise upon him; for, with his money, it can hire soldiers to stand over him, keep him in subjection, plunder him at discretion, and kill him if he resists. And governments always will do this, as they everywhere and always have done it, except where the Common Law principle has been established. It is therefore a first principle, a very sine qua non of political freedom, that a man can be taxed only by his personal consent. And the establishment of this principle, with trial by jury, insures freedom of course; because: 1. No man would pay his money unless he had first contracted for such a government as he was willing to support; and, 2. Unless the government then kept itself within the terms of its contract, juries would not enforce the payment of the tax. Besides, the agreement to be taxed would probably be entered into but for a year at a time. If, in that year, the government proved itself either inefficient or tyrannical, to any serious degree, the contract would not be renewed. The dissatisfied parties, if sufficiently numerous for a new organization, would form themselves into a separate association for mutual protection. If not sufficiently numerous for that purpose, those who were conscientious would forego all governmental protection, rather than contribute to the support of a government which they deemed unjust. All legitimate government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily agreed upon by the parties to it, for the protection of their rights against wrong-doers. In its voluntary character it is precisely similar to an association for mutual protection against fire or shipwreck. Before a man will join an association for these latter purposes, and pay the premium for being insured, he will, if he be a man of sense, look at the articles of the association; see what the company promises to do; what it is likely to do; and what are the rates of insurance. If he be satisfied on all these points, he will become a member, pay his premium for a year, and then hold the company to its contract. If the conduct of the company prove unsatisfactory, he will let his policy expire at the end of the year for which he has paid; will decline to pay any further premiums, and either seek insurance elsewhere, or take his own risk without any insurance. And as men act in the insurance of their ships and dwellings, they would act in the insurance of their properties, liberties and lives, in the political association, or government. The political insurance company, or government, have no more right, in nature or reason, to assume a man’s consent to be protected by them, and to be taxed for that protection, when he has given no actual consent, than a fire or marine insurance company have to assume a man’s consent to be protected by them, and to pay the premium, when his actual consent has never been given. To take a man’s property without his consent is robbery; and to assume his consent, where no actual consent is given, makes the taking none the less robbery. If it did, the highwayman has the same right to assume a man’s consent to part with his purse, that any other man, or body of men, can have. And his assumption would afford as much moral justification for his robbery as does a like assumption, on the part of the government, for taking a man’s property without his consent. The government’s pretence of protecting him, as an equivalent for the taxation, affords no justification. It is for himself to decide whether he desires such protection as the government offers him. If he do not desire it, or do not bargain for it, the government has no more right than any other insurance company to impose it upon him, or make him pay for it. Trial by the country, and no taxation without consent, were the two pillars of English liberty, (when England had any liberty,) and the first principles of the Common Law. They mutually sustain each other; and neither can stand without the other. Without both, no people have any guaranty for their freedom; with both, no people can be otherwise than free. ____________________________________ 14th: No one is willing to take up either cause: for the criminal take-over by slave traders, war mongers, central banking frauds, and drug pushers, or the opposite cause for independent, sovereign, free, people, voting with their lawful authority in tribunals where the people themselves exercise 1/12 part of the whole population known as THE PEOPLE, and these judges command all jurisdiction civil and criminal in their independent, sovereign, counties, in each independent, sovereign state, that makes up the whole republic (public thing) known as a federation (voluntary association for mutual defense), here? |
|||||||||||
