|View single post by Joe Kelley|
|Posted: Sun Dec 9th, 2018 03:37 pm||
|How can people be made to believe these demonstrable lies? The work required must consume a whole lot of blood, sweat, and tears. The goal of indoctrinating the victims into believing their chains are necessary is a goal reached by consuming everything valuable save for that one goal. Who values that goal of absolute power?
Do you think that those who value that one goal, those who work toward that one goal, are going to announce their true colors so as to get to their goal?
No, clearly no, those whose goal is to gain absolute power over all people must keep their victims in the dark about that goal, and to do that there must be a facade in place.
“We may enjoy a democratic process but we live in a Republic where the rights of the minority are protected from the menace of the mob by our Idaho and United States Constitutions.”
That claim is demonstrably false on so many levels that it - that statement - amounts to a confession of willful deception on the part of whoever first constructed that lie. Sure those who have been deceived will be momentarily forced off the path if they question their belief in the lie, but most true believes will go into attack mode the instant the light of truth begins to shine through those cracks, those holes, in that false story.
The 1789 "Constitution" was unconstitutional, there was no power transferred voluntarily from the people as a whole to an elite group who were given the green light to replace the Articles of Confederation with a National Constitution falsely claimed to be a Federal Constitution.
So that is a start in two ways. That message above accounts for the start down the despotic path in America and that message above starts to open the light of truth to those who insist upon remaining in that dark cave.
A second step is to point out that the people as a whole are democratically represented in a republic through trial by the country according to the common laws of free people who have, in fact, constituted democratic republics.
To claim that the people have consented to the crime of replacing the the American federation of republics in 1789, with a despotic nation state run by criminal slave traders, warmongers, and banking frauds is an outrageous claim made by people who confess their ignorance of the facts that matter.
"Sure enough the Supreme Court concurs that the “will of the people” is limited to the bounds agreed in our Constitution."
That is patently false on many accounts: accounts that matter. A supreme court can prove its authority as a supreme court by assembling the most honest and discrete people in each county in America, to form grand juries, which are then independent investigatory agencies working for the whole people as one, and they investigate any matter that threatens the people in liberty, which includes every matter of the utmost importance, such as matters involving treason at the highest levels of a democratic republic. The people constituting a grand jury, in each county, are responsible for investigating and indicting the criminals in government office, to put those alleged criminals on trial by the country, which is trial by jury according to the common laws of free people in liberty.
If the so-called supreme court is legislating the behavior of the people, demanding absolute obedience without question, then said entity is filled with criminals not representatives of the people whose goal is to live and let live in a democratic republic.
So there are 2 easy steps to take for those who may want to get out of their dark cave of blind obedience to falsehood: without question.
"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."
Love it or leave it? What is it?
"It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue."
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236 (1788)
1 U.S. 236 (Dall.)
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788