View single post by Joe Kelley
 Posted: Thu May 30th, 2019 08:57 pm
PM Quote Reply Full Topic
Joe Kelley


Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6405
In order to comprehend a comprehensive reality, we the people can share our less than perfect viewpoints as we reach for the goal of weeding out the distortions in favor of clarity.

In the founding generation, there were a number of people (less than the whole number of people) who constituted the worst of the worst, and this exceptional elite group of individuals did what those of their kind always do, which is well recorded, extensively studied, meticulously documented accurately, for those who may want to know, so as not to repeat the same path through man-made hell on earth. Some of those records are actually in the so-called law books.

"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."
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236 (1788)

Those who usurp the common laws of free people in perishable liberty commit treason against innocent people. Innocent people are targets, always, and without an effective defense, innocent people will be consumed rapidly, slowly, or very slowly.

There is a law power (voluntary association for mutual defense) and then there is counterfeit. If a single individual takes absolute power from the people as a whole, is that not treason? If the dictator issuing edicts through a system of summary justice claims: "anyone failing to agree is a traitor," is it a good idea to obey without question? When does a voluntary association for mutual defense turn into factions seeking to gain absolute power over factions, by any means necessary?

Back to Calhoun for another view from another angle:

"But the difference in their operation, in this respect, would not end here. Its effects would be as great in a moral, as I have attempted to show they would be in a political point of view. Indeed, public and private morals are so nearly allied, that it would be difficult for it to be otherwise. That which corrupts and debases the community, politically, must also corrupt and debase it morally. The same cause, which, in governments of the numerical majority, gives to party attachments and antipathies such force, as to place party triumph and ascendency above the safety and prosperity of the community, will just as certainly give them sufficient force to overpower all regard for truth, justice, sincerity, and moral obligations of every description. It is, accordingly, found that in the violent strifes between parties for the high and glittering prize of governmental honors and emoluments—falsehood, injustice, fraud, artifice, slander, and breach of faith, are freely resorted to, as legitimate weapons—followed by all their corrupting and debasing influences."

The technological means to reach either goal (evil or good, counterfeit or the real thing) with voice, paper, or digital data, and a pointed stick, or an assault weapon's ban, changes - the means to the opposing ends change - while the fundamental principles remain in force on both paths toward or away from both goals and all the assaults and defenses failed or succeeded in between can proceed slowly, rapidly, or now all at once in the evil, all-consuming, direction: Mutually Assured Destruction. What would an accurate lie detector app, applied to all digital data transfers, do to modern politics? Talk about weapons of mass destruction: destroy the power of lies. Why not destroy the power of lies? What is common law if not that very thing? Are too many people now preferring to be deceived? How did mass deception happen exactly?

Either naturally born morally conscious individuals cooperate agreeably for our mutual defense in tried and true methods that are designed to adapt to fit each case - the law - or we allow the worst of the worst to do to us what they do best, in every single, individual, case, everywhere, every time, all the time. Those are the goal posts.

Too many of those in the founding generation joined what I call the cult of might makes right, as oligarchs, aristocrats, central banking whores, warmongers, slave consumers, and other so-called tories or counterfeit patriots. They, like many of us today, fell victim to the involuntary association dogma - produced by members of The Cult of Might Makes Right - and too many then and now set upon the path that consumes all innocence. Technology accelerates the process in either direction.

I don't know what force is at work (other than to say generally the force of willful ignorance) which prevents people from understanding when, why, how, and by who specifically, these people in these places called America went from Liberty into Despotism. It happened in 1789 on the official record, available to anyone who cares to know. Few care to know, many are inspired to repeat obvious falsehoods. Some do their homework as they alone see fit.

Perhaps there are too many words that mean the same thing, adding to the difficulty in presenting the facts that matter in that case when the true law power was outlawed in 1789.

List of names for good government:
1. Liberty
2. Freedom
3. Voluntary Mutual Defense
4. Common Law (actual not counterfeit) - the people as a whole above the government
5. Democracy (actual not counterfeit) - the people rule as one, not so-called might makes right
6. Republic (actual not counterfeit) - the public thing, not the special interest's legal fiction thing
7. Federation (actual not counterfeit) - voluntary association for mutual defense, not Nation State for subsidizing slavery
8. Anarchy (defined by modern day proponents such as ancaps or libertarian socialists)

List of names for evil government:

1. Arbitrary
2. Tyranny
3. Despotism
4. Empire
5. Monarchy
6. Aristocracy
7. Oligarchy
8. Plutarchy
9. Communism (also known as Marxism)
10. Socialism (also falsely known as communism)
11. Nationalism (also known as National Socialism)
12. Anarchy (as defined by anyone other than proponents of life without so-called - counterfeit - government)
13. The Cult of Might Makes Right (my term)
14. Organized Crime Under The Color of Law (my term)

Many more labels circulate for the same principle things.

1. Voluntary Association
2. Involuntary Association

In my opinion, you ought to be a member of a true Grand Jury in your county, you do the work, why not get the credit? Why not act upon the information? Why not put the accused on trial according to common laws of free people? Counterfeit laws do what they are designed to do: disenfranchise. People can read the Constitution when it gives them the power to subsidize slavery, but people can’t read the Bill of Rights when a slave seeks equal protection under the law?

"The state is divided into counties. In every county are appointed magistrates, called justices of the peace, usually from eight to thirty or forty in number, in proportion to the size of the county, of the most discreet and honest inhabitants. They are nominated by their fellows, but commissioned by the governor, and act without reward. These magistrates have jurisdiction both criminal and civil."
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia

You and people similarly constituted in capacity are vital parts of the device that nullifies all those who join the cult of might makes right. You merely hold people who probably cause injury to innocent people to account. If the criminals had not taken over in 1789, natural laws could work to bring those accused to a point at which they are afforded actual (not counterfeit) due process. Who on earth would not want that afforded to them too?

Perhaps people have lost sight of actual, true, law, and perhaps the only thing most people can see when they look at the power of law is the criminal - counterfeit - product. They then see organized crime under the color of law, they see the work done by members of The Cult of Might Makes Right, and they see pending hell on earth; rightfully so.

The accused can be either proven guilty or the accuser is, perhaps abusing power. Who is empowered to move an accusation from an individual into a process of finding the truth in that case?

I will stop here; refraining from borrowing from Roger Roots in his book The Conviction Factory.

I wish you well, and thanks for adding to the clarity.