CDZ Con Con Con Job or Rule of Law?

[Josf]

Before returning to Elliot's Debates where defenders are battling with offenders while defenders are figuring out how to justify the paying of costs (past, present, and future) associated with defense, and offenders are figuring out how to con their victims into paying all the costs while they (the criminals) take all the benefits, before returning to 1786, I thought other people might appreciate the following links concerning the concept of "Pro se"

1.
Bonding Code

"To act in pro se fashion in a court of law or equity is to profess in law, thus, casting yourself to drift away from logic and into the arms of a fool."

2.
https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.com/audio_reference/law_01_the_fundamentals.pdf

"For several hundred years, Roman Courts have been falsely converting Natural Persons into Things, this denying logic, reason and justice. Some people even volunteer to declare themselves things, when they accept being “Pro Se”, short for “Pro Se in Rem” or declaration “I am a Thing”."

 

[Josf]

A small group of people, including Alexander Hamilton (representing central banking fraud, and "national debt" plans) met in Annapolis in September 14, 1786.

A report on that meeting is quoted next (from Elliot's Debates Volume 1) and the date of this report is February 21, 1787.

"Congress having had under consideration the letter of John Dickinson, Esq., chairman of the commissioners who assembled at Annapolis during the last year; also the proceeding of the said commissioners; and entirely coinciding with them as to the inefficiency of the federal government, and the necessity of devising such further provisions as shall render the same adequate to the exigencies of the Union, do strongly recommend to the different legislatures to send forward delegates, to meet the proposed convention, on the second Monday in May next, at the city of Philadelphia.”

The concept of a Union, meaning one single power, is hereby replacing the earlier concept of several independent states known as the, or those, or these, or several, or 13 in number, states, as united, as in united states, which are united for mutual defense. The states, meaning a number of states, were united.

A union is a thing separate from the states? Why?

Richard Henry Lee The Forgotten Founders

Richard Henry Lee
6th President of the United States
in Congress Assembled
November 30, 1784 to November 23, 1785

Quote:________________________________
April ushered in the settlement of Massachusetts western land claim to the Northwest Territory and the debates resumed on enacting an ordinance for the vast region. Once again the states failed to achieve the necessary representation to pass legislation and Richard Henry Lee was forced to send out another Presidential appeal:

Sir, New York April 30th, 1785: I have the honor to enclose to your Excellency an Act of Congress that has been produced by a very pressing state of the public affairs. Your Excellency will observe that exclusive of other important business, Congress point to two objects particularly, the requisition for the present year, and an Ordinance for disposing of lands in the western Territory. The honor and justice of the United States is much concerned in the former, and upon the wise, speedy, and effectual execution of the latter, essentially depends the future case; happiness and prosperity of the people
_____________________________________

Those who demanded payment for debts (costs that were distributed: as in "distribution of wealth") because they invested in pecuniary (money value) profits from war had to depend upon all the legislatures of all the states to agree to pay for the idea, and maintenance, of a mutual defense association, which is then the vehicle by which the gambling house pays out to the winners who invest in pecuniary reward for loaning money (real money like gold or silver, or real/good/honest/true promises to pay gold or silver, or real/good/honest/true promises to pay land titles, or even fraudulent money that is nothing more or less than a confidence scheme run by criminals in high places) and depending upon all the independent people in all the independent states to agree to pay these war profiteers their reward for betting on a promise to pay real money was, at this time, looking like bad odds.

The war profiteers could smell the loss of their profits because the necessity of agreeing to cooperate during a war of aggression by foreign interests (criminals demanding national debt payments called "taxes") was no longer a necessity (mother of invention) inspiring said cooperation among all the independent defenders in all the independent states.

If there was ONE, instead of 13, debt collection agency, with the power to "tax" everyone who produces anything of value, then the war debt collectors could consolidate their interests into one single method, a sure fire method, of making damn sure that their war profits were paid on time, paid in real money (gold, silver, land titles, etc.), and paid with interest, and the interest rate is "negotiable," if the single debt collection agency is created and maintained properly, maintenance costs are charged of course to the public account, not the war profiteers own accounts.

So the less controversial (among free traders) method of selling land titles in Allodium (who is going to defend the land if not by honest, trustworthy, honorable, mutual defense associations?) to pay for past, present, and future costs of maintaining honest, trustworthy, honorable, mutual defense associations (such as the existing working federation) is, for some reason, first agreed upon, then a few people make sure that original agreement to base costs on land is thrown out, and instead of basing costs on land the head count idea, basing costs on the value of the number of people replaces the land idea, and that bears repeating in earnest.

Very, very, large states like Massachusetts and Virginia compared to very small states like Rhode Island in a few obvious ways.

large land, people spread out on vast frontiers and boarders that are under almost constant contention, and small lands with a relative number of people relatively packed into the small state.

In fact large states divided into two states, and one state New Jersey, were once two commonwealths/colonies, which became one state. Too big, too much land, and there is no way to represent everyone at once, and then have one vote for their say so in the voluntary mutual defense association, so the idea, a sound idea in fact, is to divide the state into two, and then have two votes, not one vote, because West Virginia and North Carolina may not be represented by the same one vote (in matters of voluntary mutual defense) as Virginia and South Carolina.

Very big, vast stretches of land (some occupied by Indians, some not, since the Indian population before Europeans settled here was wiped out by diseases brought here by early European war profiteers and their agents, and European explorers), meant vast amounts of natural value that can be understood as public lands if not sold at auction to private interests, or in difficult situations, to pay the cost of mutual defense, large states needing large areas defended pay their large fair share to defend large states, with large profits while large land areas are sold to private interests where the private interests are thereby defended as their land is their land held in Allodium (free from taxes by tax tyrants, and national debt collectors).

That was the idea, that was already agreed upon, and then someone had the idea to change that agreement, and instead of the land basis for fair cost (wealth) distribution, the idea of basing cost on the number of people was the replacement idea, and all that is happening after the British stopped investing in war of aggression in America by military means.

All that is not merely my say so.

Back to the link on Richard Henry Lee:

"It is important to note, once again here, as in other chapters that land was the chief revenue source for the States. In a Nation that abhorred taxation exacting capital from its citizens to maintain newly created state and federal governments was a daunting task. The nation’s population, however, still continued to grow and settlers, businesses and investors all sought land. It was through the sale of land that the States raised money for their coffers so border disputes were serious matters of finance. The sale of land was the primary source of revenue to repay the war debt."

 

[Josf]

So my words are incomprehensible to many yet I keep writing because some days some people get it. There is a meme, an idea, a way of thinking, that spread, and this idea spread to the point at which people began creating words that describe the idea, such as The American Dream, and "keeping up with the Jones's," all while another idea was set aside, and that idea was that might makes right because survival if the fittest criminal is the only way to survive ever, you must kill or you will be killed.

1. Rule of law, American Dream, competition to increase the standard of living and lower the cost of living; thereby surpassing, not just keeping up with, the family next door, who may by the Jones family.

2. Rule by criminal orders to be obeyed without question, Divine so called Rights, competition to take over the criminal apparatus, rat eats rat on the sinking ship of rat like construction, and all wealth transfers from every single source of wealth possible, and that wealth flows into the hands of the dominant rats who then spend all that loot on maintaining the sinking ship of tyranny, despotism, and rat like criminal obedience to criminal orders obeyed without question, and one order is "do not get caught" if you question any criminal orders, so back stabbing is one of the less known, more secretive, criminal orders issued secretively in the "National" interest.

So a sure fire way to defend the independent people in the independent states is to allow them the liberty to volunteer to do so when they must do so or failing to do so they are enslaved by an aggressor who demands blind obedience to criminal orders obeyed without question. The independent people in the independent states will even volunteer to join a voluntary federation of independent states whereby the governors of the state decide to pay for, or not pay for, a voluntary mutual defense association, which remains voluntary because the people are independent, and because the states are independent, and that is how a federation maintains voluntary, free markets, including the freedom to choose which independent state offers the highest quality life, at the lowest cost, even for slaves who may have finally managed to break their chains of slavery in one area, in one county, in one less good, moral, state, running, running, running, like a runaway slave, to find sanctuary in another, better, higher quality, lower cost, moral, good, better, state, where defense of Liberty is for all, not just for a small group of people interested in profiting from aggressive war through a fraudulent banking scam involving "National Debt" collection agencies disguised behind a thin coat of Admiralty Law, or Equity Law, or Summary JUST-US, where the criminals order the slaves to pay this much obediently, or pay more disobediently.

A slave running from Georgia, running from one of the few corporate, state subsidized, farming industry "leaders" who bought, sold, and forced people into slavery as if people were worse than cattle, running, running, running, all the way up to Massachusetts, would be a slave running out of the frying pan, into the fire, if the idea was to run away from blind obedience to falsehood without question, since the last battle of the Revolutionary War was fought, and lost, by those defending Liberty, while the aggressors issuing criminal orders, to be obeyed without question, won that last battle of the Revolutionary War, in Massachusetts, in 1787, so those who lost that battle, had to flee, and run away from their farms, they fought to keep in earlier battles of the Revolutionary War, since the banking scam slave traders of the North recaptured the State of Massachusetts, TURNING it back toward the same old tyranny, the same old Empire, the same old tax and spend, the same old aggressive war for the profit of a few who invest in all sides of all wars, investing fraudulent promises to pay (they pay only themselves, as their income, hidden as "National Debt," and they reserve the "Right" to increase their rate of pay at their exclusive pleasure) as their fair share of the war effort (on all sides) is fraudulent money created by them in the form of lies on paper, so their investment amounts to well told lies in ink on cheap paper, where even the cost of running the printing presses are subsidized through fraudulent "taxes," collected through the same old tired devil worshipers in black robes pretending to be judges of all JUST-US.

So these moments where the authority to join, and then pay for, invest into, the benefits to be had, the return on investments to be realized, in time and place, of Confederation, or Federation, or United States of American in Congress Assembled, including a president who presides over the unified states in congress assembled, is an authority acknowledged as an independent people in independent states CREATING and maintaining, or seceding from, and not maintaining, said voluntary association.

In other words; the people in each independent state have nothing directly tying them to any group of people in Congress Assembled for the States that are United for mutual defense of the independent people in those States. Either the representatives of the States pay for, or do not pay for, the costs of the UNION, at their say so, because they know, or do not know, that the investment is sound. The independent people did not CREATE the Federated Union directly. The independent people created their State directly.

That is the federal idea in a nutshell, or the following words intend to reinforce that idea. People create by necessity a voluntary mutual defense association locally, and then local leaders voluntarily join other local mutual defense associations. When one local area is taken over by criminal invaders (covert or overt), the other leaders in the other local areas are faced with runaway slaves running away from the "failed state" or the "tyranny" or the "despotism" where the criminals have taken over, and the criminals may have TURNED some of the independent people into fellow criminal investors; while the runaway slaves run away to find sanctuary in one of the better, moral, localized, free, independent, states that remain strictly voluntary, and strictly defensive.

When the one state goes into tyranny, into despotism, into "national debt scam" mode, then the other states face a problem of refugees refusing to pay the extortion fee, refusing to obey criminals orders without question, refusing the rat deal to be a rat, refusing to be a slave, and on top of that movement of free people moving out of the sinking rat ship run by rats, the other independent states face the ever present, clear and present, danger that the rat state of rats will conscript a slave army of aggression, or the rat state of rats will manage to steal enough loot, or print enough lies on fraudulent finance paper, to buy a mercenary army of assassins who assassinate, plunder, rape, and pillage for their "fair share" of the booty, so the other, independent people, in the other independent states, have both opportunity, and duty, as the flow of people from one formerly independent state flows in those two forms.

1. Runaway slaves, refugees, seeking sanctuary, and opportunity to help, voluntarily, defend freedom, defend liberty, defend their capacity to produce wealth, an invest wealth in creating higher standards of living, to reduce costs of living, independently, as free people, in free states; where it is the duty of free people to defend free people from tyrants, despots, and criminals perpetrating heinous crimes under the color of law, and Statue Number 1, at least in America, spells that all out in no uncertain terms, in a documented called a Declaration of Independence.

2. Criminal armies of aggression for profit may also flow in overt forms as an army of aggression hatched from bad seed in the failed state TURNED into a working despotism where war of aggression is the sole purpose of the state, the one and only source of profits, and that is the obvious problem as armies of plunderers flow out of this criminal state along with the refugees, and runaway slaves. The covert army, on the other hand, flowing out of this TURNED area, this failed state, are secreted behind false claims of moral authority as a Red Coat might wear a false Blue Coat under the color of moral law; when in reality the criminal smells like all the other rats to those who are color blind.

 

[Josf]

Many people in many places have misidentified the vital demarcation line between friend and foe. When the worst evil imaginable is beyond the gate, beyond the driveway, beyond the front door threshold, in your home, in you face, and turning the screws of torture upon you, it matters now at that point what sweet song was sung to lull you into defenselessness.

The evil ones claim to be bankers. The evil ones claim to be the good guys. Why is anyone believing that the evil ones are bankers?

The evil ones are fraudulent bankers. That is not news, the label "money changers" was not invented in 1861 in America. The evil, fraudulent, bankers, along with the evil slave traders, along with the evil fraudulent good guys claiming to be on the moral side, have existed everywhere, and they tend to travel in packs like rats on the sinking ship of their making, and even if a lot of their fellow rats go down with the sinking ship, each rat eating each other rat to survive one more minute longer as oxygen is replaced by water, the rats keep thinking like rats, and the rats keep acting like rats, because they are rats.

There are competitive alternatives and the competitive alternatives are not written by rats. Rats write things that paint other rats into a corner.

One example follows, and it is extremely difficult for people who have been conditioned by rats to cause people to think like rats, for people to get the hidden messages, let alone get the clearly expressed messages out in the open.

Out in the open:
Benjamin Tucker - State Socialism and Anarchism

"First in the importance of its evil influence they considered the money monopoly, which consists of the privilege given by the government to certain individuals, or to individuals holding certain kinds of property, of issuing the circulating medium, a privilege which is now enforced in this country by a national tax of ten per cent., upon all other persons who attempt to furnish a circulating medium, and by State laws making it a criminal offense to issue notes as currency. It is claimed that the holders of this privilege control the rate of interest, the rate of rent of houses and buildings, and the prices of goods, – the first directly, and the second and third indirectly. For, say Proudhon and Warren, if the business of banking were made free to all, more and more persons would enter into it until the competition should become sharp enough to reduce the price of lending money to the labor cost, which statistics show to be less than three-fourths of once per cent. In that case the thousands of people who are now deterred from going into business by the ruinously high rates which they must pay for capital with which to start and carry on business will find their difficulties removed. If they have property which they do not desire to convert into money by sale, a bank will take it as collateral for a loan of a certain proportion of its market value at less than one per cent. discount. If they have no property, but are industrious, honest, and capable, they will generally be able to get their individual notes endorsed by a sufficient number of known and solvent parties; and on such business paper they will be able to get a loan at a bank on similarly favorable terms. Thus interest will fall at a blow. The banks will really not be lending capital at all, but will be doing business on the capital of their customers, the business consisting in an exchange of the known and widely available credits of the banks for the unknown and unavailable, but equality good, credits of the customers and a charge therefor of less than one per cent., not as interest for the use of capital, but as pay for the labor of running the banks. This facility of acquiring capital will give an unheard of impetus to business, and consequently create an unprecedented demand for labor, – a demand which will always be in excess of the supply, directly to the contrary of the present condition of the labor market. Then will be seen an exemplification of the words of Richard Cobden that, when two laborers are after one employer, wages fall, but when two employers are after one laborer, wages rise. Labor will then be in a position to dictate its wages, and will thus secure its natural wage, its entire product. Thus the same blow that strikes interest down will send wages up. But this is not all. Down will go profits also. For merchants, instead of buying at high prices on credit, will borrow money of the banks at less than one per cent., buy at low prices for cash, and correspondingly reduce the prices of their goods to their customers. And with the rest will go house-rent. For no one who can borrow capital at one per cent. with which to build a house of his own will consent to pay rent to a landlord at a higher rate than that. Such is the vast claim made by Proudhon and Warren as to the results of the simple abolition of the money monopoly."

Most people conditioned to think and act like rats when faced with problems created by rats will miss the clear, overt, message offered in that quote; and almost everyone will miss the hidden message. I can try to explain this before linking a quoting from one of the so called "founding fathers" whereby that particular rat explained how the rat game works on a "national debt" rat ledger.

The overt message in the quote just above is the message the informs the reader about the link between true free market forces and the cost of doing business in America with criminal bankers who take over defensive government and turn defensive government into a crime spree under the color of law. Free market forces are individual choices made by individual people who are free to choose better from worse, and best from not as good, and that includes the individual judgment of precisely what is higher in quality according to the one who chooses higher quality, and that also includes the individual judgment of precisely what constitutes lower cost according to the one who is in command of their individual power of will, unaffected by fraudulent false advertisements that may lure a victim into making false choices. Liberty is not the granting of the right to brain wash victims into making false choices that injure the victim and benefit the criminal. So a free market is free from criminal fraud, and a free market is free from criminal extortion, and a free market is free from criminal aggressive war for profit of a few criminals (under the color of law) as those criminals make the victims pay for all the costs associated in perpetuating war of aggression.

Free markets where people are free to offer the best money that money can buy to anyone who is free to use that competitive supply of money constitute the demand side of things in free markets where money is demanded and supplied by people for people; without criminal, rat, influence causing "market distortions."

So people may have only one choice for money in one situation one time, such as being paid for a days work, or such as paying someone to keep money savings safe in a guarded vault - instead of under a mattress - in a storage locker or bank. If by chance the one choice for money becomes poor in quality, or high in cost, for anyone, anywhere, then someone else may be inspired to offer a competitive money instead of the high cost, low quality, money.

Now there are two choices, and before exemplifying two example choices of money, in free markets, it is important to not miss the overt message offered in the quote above, and then the competition in free market money supply can be tied into the free market labor supply. So put on hold the idea of free market money supplies and begin to think about free market labor supplies.

Quote:
"Then will be seen an exemplification of the words of Richard Cobden that, when two laborers are after one employer, wages fall, but when two employers are after one laborer, wages rise."

If you spend your life carefully laboring to produce something other people want in exchange for the best money that your work can buy from them, and you have what you think is a very large amount of purchasing power saved up, a big, big, big, savings account of years, and years, and years, of your life savings, and you start looking for someone somewhere who will help you keep your life savings from vanishing before your eyes, then you are demanding labor from someone else. You are in that state of need, needing help keeping your life savings from vanishing before your eyes, an individual part of a free market demand for labor.

You are an employer. You are creating jobs. You can't do everything yourself, alone, so your need, leads to your invention, and your invention is a notice of demand for someone to supply to you their labor in the form of security against loss of your life's savings.

You are only one individual, and your life may have only just begun, so your demand for labor in the form of security against loss adds a small additional demand to the whole "collective" demand that is constituted by the simple sum of all the individuals demanding the same labor in the form of security against loss.

Where there is a large, sum total, of (collective) demands, there is inspiration by individuals - and groups of individuals working cooperatively - to supply that labor to meet that demand. If there are very, very, very, many unemployed people who need productive work to do, such as offering a competitive form of security against loss, or a banking service, then all that is needed in free markets is the connections required to inspire people to get to work to fill the work order that is demanded by those demanding the highest quality banking service, at the lowest cost among the competitors who offer competitive free market banking services to those who demand a service where their individual - or their sum total of individuals (collective) - demand is met with individual - or sum total of individuals (collective) - supplies of people working in free market banking.

To be continued...

 

[Josf]

The forum slows down on my end for some reason.

If there are many people unemployed then the demand for people laboring to supply such things as securing savings accounts of earnings earned by earners who are seeking to keep their earnings from evaporating right in front of them, then that condition of a large supply of people demanding employment meets that demand for people to be employed in that work, and the obvious condition, in free markets, is a reduction is the unemployed numbers as those unemployed people fill the demand to supply security to those in need of security.

That is free market conditions, that is not fraudulent versions of free market conditions whereby those seeking security have only one monopoly supplier and the monopoly supplier takes all your life savings even before you can earn it.

Let that be identified as the rat thought process that is often infecting regular people as regular people are inspired to then think like rats, or to be confused about simple free market forces.

Non-rat-like thinking:

"Then will be seen an exemplification of the words of Richard Cobden that, when two laborers are after one employer, wages fall, but when two employers are after one laborer, wages rise."

If fewer, and fewer, and fewer, and fewer, people are already busy doing productive work (not unemployed), because they are no longer having their life's earnings stolen before they are even born (so called "national debt"), then the demand for finding people to work for you, so that your personal life's savings, your earnings, are secure, is a problem for you, as you try to find someone, anyone, to work for you, so that you do not have to constantly guard your mattress where all your life savings is kept secure by you alone.

If no one is on the unemployment line, then you might have to find someone like you, someone who also needs help in securing their life's savings, as you two then start creating, inventing, a method by which people are inspired to work for you, to help you, and your friend, secure both of your life's savings, to keep your power to purchase (including your power to purchase helpers who work to help you secure your life's savings), from evaporating before your very eyes; which are 4 eyes, not 2 eyes, once you find someone who agrees with the need to find someone who agrees with the need to keep individual life savings from vanishing before your eyes.

All those unemployed people are unemployed people because there is NO LAW in America other than the counterfeit monopoly version of fraudulent (color of law) "security against loss" whereby all your potential to create mountains of earnings to store in a bank is stolen from you before you are even born, and that power to purchase is spent on making sure that aggressive war for profit continues every day until the end of this particular type of crime spree.

 

[Josf]

Leading to the moment when the criminal element, in the form of a fraudulent bank monopoly power, spills the beans in American history; which turns out to be a time and place that is well before 1861.

Books Reclaiming the American Revolution The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy Hardcover by William Watkins

Quote:__________________________________________
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.

"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
________________________________________________

The idea that the criminals took over in 1861, and these criminals employ fraudulent banking to take over in 1861, while these criminals also perpetrate the crime of treason as these criminals claim to be representatives of the defensive government (voluntary), is one competitive idea in the free market of ideas, but is this time and date of 1861, and America, an accurate accounting that can be trusted if the account is compared competitively with an earlier bold confession by action instead of by false promises?

While reading Elliot's Debates Volume I there are names that are written in the official record and these names of these people constitute two sides in the debate, and in the struggle to maintain one or the other power.

1. Offense, where the offenders take power from those who earn power, and that stolen power is then employed by the criminals to take even more power.

2. Defense, where the defenders invest their earning power into mutual defense against those in the other group, as there would be no need for this type of investment if there were no people working in the work done by people in the other group.

The names Sam Adams, John Adams, George Washington, Robert Morris, and Alexander Hamilton pop up in the official record on one side, and on the other side are names such as Richard Henry Lee, George Mason, Patrick Henry, Luther Martin, Robert Yates, and Thomas Jefferson. Other names pop up somewhere in the middle, names like Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Thomas Paine. Obvious side switching occurs with some, like Sam Adams on the side of defense against British criminal aggressors at Lexington when the criminal aggressors began to arrest vocal opponents of blind obedience to criminals without question, and then as Sam Adams gains criminal power himself in Massachusetts, the man turns his coat from Blue to Red; once the defender, and then once in power the man becomes aggressor, as his own words confess his own turn from defense to offense.

The same man quoted before and after:
Before (blue color of defense):
Samuel Adams Advocates American Independence - 1776

Quote:_______________________________________
The hand of Heaven appears to have led us on to be, perhaps, humble instruments and means in the great providential dispensation which is completing. We have fled from the political Sodom; let us not look back lest we perish and become a monument of infamy and derision to the world. For can we ever expect more unanimity and a better preparation for defense; more infatuation of counsel among our enemies, and more valor and zeal among ourselves? The same force and resistance which are sufficient to procure us our liberties will secure us a glorious independence and support us in the dignity of free imperial States. We can not suppose that our opposition has made a corrupt and dissipated nation more friendly to America, or created in them a greater respect for the rights of mankind. We can therefore expect a restoration and establishment of our privileges, and a compensation for the injuries we have received from their want of power, from their fears, and not from their virtues. The unanimity and valor which will effect an honorable peace can render a future contest for our liberties unnecessary. He who has strength to chain down the wolf is a madman if he let him loose without drawing his teeth and paring his nails.

From the day on which an accommodation takes place between England and America, on any other terms than as independent States, I shall date the ruin of this country. a politic minister will study to lull us into security by granting us the full extent of our petitions. The warm sunshine of influence would melt down the virtue which the violence of the storm rendered more firm and unyielding. In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny. Ye abandoned minions of an infatuated ministry, if peradventure any should yet remain among us, remember that a Warren and Montgomery are numbered among the dead. Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plow, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom--go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!
_______________________________________________

After (blue turns to red coat of offense):
50 American Revolutions You re Not Supposed to Know Zinn Education Project


Quote:______________________________________
Enter Daniel Shays (1747-1825): Massachusetts farmer and former Army captain. He chose not to stand idly as battle lines were being drawn and friends of his faced imprisonment. In September 1786, Shays led an army of some 700 farmers, workers, and veterans into Springfield. “Onetime radical Sam Adams now part of the Boston Establishment, drew up a Riot Act,” says Davis, “allowing the authorities to jail anyone without a trail.” Shays’ army swelled to more than 1,000 men.

Writing from Paris, Jefferson offered tacit approval for, at least, the concept of rebellion. Closer to home, the American aristocracy was less than pleased. Sam Adams again: “In monarchy, the crime of treason may admit of being pardoned or lightly punished, but the man who dares rebel against the laws of a republic ought to suffer death.”
_____________________________________________

The point at which power shifted in Massachusetts, from despots in Red Coats collecting the Red Coat version of "National Debt" (code for war of aggression profits), to the new Establishment of new bosses (out with the old and in with the new) was relatively seamless in the minds of many then and now. The bump in the road from old boss to new boss was that little known historical event where the duty bound independent, free, people, defended their life's work with a determined effort to employ rule of law, or voluntary defense, or defensive, individual, due process, voluntarily combined with other people, in defense, cooperatively, seeking the same mutual goal of defense, against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Shays's Rebellion happened at the same time the criminals were forming their putsch to consolidate each of the independent states, one after another, after another, from North to South, and from East to West, into the rat thinking mentality of might (might of deception, might of threat of aggressive violence, and might of aggressive violence) makes right, survival of the fittest rat, which ends up creating the sinking rat ship known alternately as Central Banking Fraud, Extortion under the color of law, war of aggression for profit, tyranny, despotism, fascism, communism, socialism (false), capitalism (false), Nationalism, National Debt, taxation without representation, Imperialism, Monarchy, Monopoly, Military Industrial Complex, New World Order, World Reserve Currency, and Empire.

The events that became known as Shays's Rebellion inspired a redirection of efforts to wipe out the federal idea entirely, and replace that federal (free market government idea) with one single power to collect false war debt claims which were returns on investing in all sides in all wars of aggression at once.

Neat trick? Who could have imagined such a plan of aggressive attack, let alone be in an position of power to follow through with the ACTS required to make the criminal plan bear fruit?

"He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit."

So called "public credit" constitutes THE collateral backing the issue of (true or false) promises to pay: i.e. credit.

Do you fail to see the lie as it exists in thought and ACTion?

"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."

 

[Josf]

So there it is in black and white, for all to see clearly, the point at which freedom in America was crushed under the jack boots of criminals ever ready to obey any order, no matter how immoral the order is in fact, so as to then get a return on investment in war of aggression for profit.

The date is 1787, not 1861, and the hidden message is such that bankers are bad, and government is bad, because everyone is fooled into thinking that the monopoly, counterfeit, versions of both banking and government are the only representative examples possible.

That is the principle lie that builds the foundation upon which the criminals found their tried and untrue Empires.

You have two choices, they say.

Pay this much obediently, and without question, or, at your pleasure, pay more.

 

[Josf]

What you the reader, and you who are hopefully inspired to investigate on your own, and you who may choose to engage in clean debate in this Clean Debate Zone, you are offered my individual, competitive, free market, voluntary, viewpoint along side many viewpoints expressed by many people, where their own words are being quoted, in a time when the two most powerful ideas met head on in time and place. The idea here is inspired by the idea of investing time and energy, seeking returns on investment, seeking benefits, where everyone, without exception, benefits from investing in mutual defense of Liberty. To do so the alternative, and the opposite, idea of criminal intent, criminal investment, must be understood as it is the obstacle that inspires the change of investment from pure productivity to mutual defense.

That can be seen in four categories:

1. Invest time and energy purely along the competitive lines of reaching the highest quality of life for all, and reaching the lowest cost of life for all, sooner rather than later; knowing while doing that the best way to reach this goal is through strict voluntary association, or free markets, whereby no one volunteers to be a criminal in time an place, so there is no need to waste time and energy on any defense whatsoever.

2. Recognize the irrefutable fact that some people will volunteer to be individual criminals, and worse than that inevitability is the combined power of organized crime as individual criminals will learn to cooperate with individual criminals to form a criminal organization that is more aggressively powerful than the sum of the individual criminal powers, and with this recognition of this clear and present danger, some of those who are capable of economic production in free markets realize that it is their duty, as free people in Liberty, to employ a portion of their economic power that is used to create more economic power, to employ some of that high quality and low cost economic power toward individual defense of individuals on an individual level, as well as employing some of that high quality and low cost economic power toward cooperative, voluntary, mutual defense associations, such as the tried and true common laws of free people exemplified with due process, also known as trial by jury, also known in the past as legem terrae, which translates into English as the law of the land.

3. Volunteer to be an individual criminal, target victims on your own authority, employ deception, threat of violence, and aggressive violence as you alone (the lone gunman) add each new victim to your list of serial victims, as you consume other people for your exclusive pleasure, your exclusive benefit, at their expense, because you can, at least until you are caught by other criminals who do not appreciate you volunteering to take from them their targeted victims, and they you are given a false choice by those other criminals, to either join their gang, obey their orders without question, or become a victim of theirs as they consume you for their exclusive pleasure and benefit.

4. Organize the dominant criminal gang in such a manner as to convince the free volunteers constituting mutual defense association in Liberty that their ideas of voluntary association are undesirable, unworkable, unbelievable, impossible, and forgotten in the dust bin of history, while this one dominant group of criminals offer a counterfeit version of voluntary association instead of the genuine articles.

That above sets the stage for the following quote from Elliot's Debates Volume I as I dive back into that historical record that was never placed into so call "public" schools as an important source of useful information because the criminals took over in 1787 and they know, better than their victims know, which lessons of history serve which idea best.

1. Liberty
2. Voluntary Association in Defense of Liberty as a Duty of Free, Independent people, expressed at least in a Document titled a Declaration of Independence.
3. Crime as a choice made by people who prefer destructive work instead of productive work, as individual criminals, or as groups of cooperating criminals.
4. Counterfeit versions of 2, which are not 2, rather the false front of a counterfeit 2 is a covering up of the fact that 4 is the dominant criminal group in 3.

Page 120
"The measure in question, if not within the letter, is within the spirit, of the Confederation. Congress, by that, are empowered to borrow money for the use of the United States, and by implication, to concert the means necessary to accomplish the end. But without insisting upon this argument, if the Confederation has not made proper provisions for the exigencies of the states, it will be at all times the duty of Congress to suggest further provisions; and when their proposals are submitted to the unanimous consent of the states, they can never be charged with exceeding the bounds of their trust. Such a consent is the basis and sanction of the Confederation, which expressly, in the 13th article, empowers Congress to agree to and propose such additional provisions."

That is part of the reply to objections form Rhode Island and I've lost my place in this study. Were those telling words quoted above (I left out other words of significance following those brief words above) before or after the "unanimous consent" (so called) to switch from the idea of wealth distribution (costs distribution) based on land acreage in each State (each of united states), switch from land acreage, and switching to an idea of counting each potential source of revenue, counting each individual source of wealth that can then be redistributed, counting each PERSON, with the obvious problem that was not a problem with the land acreage idea, where victims of criminal slavery are counted as Three Fifths of a TARGET (PERSON)?

In other words; which was the first significant move by the criminals to replace voluntary mutual defense association with a counterfeit (thereby criminal) version of a voluntary, unanimously agreeable, consensual, mutual defense association; whereby the accurate account of the cause to ACT criminally is to enslave everyone under a local (American) Empire?

 

[Josf]

Going back to page 63 in Elliot's Debates Volume 1 to find the 1775 time-line where 12 former Colonies (people in areas of land) are represented by delegates who issue (voluntary) orders to people who are then inspired to choose side:

1. Follow defensive order in defense against the criminal British = free people acknowledge a duty to cooperate in mutual defense.

2. Remain obedient to the criminal British, obey orders without question no matter how immoral the order may be from the criminal boss or bosses.

3. Remain strictly neutral by all and every means possible which is very difficult but not impossible as exemplified by the existing populations of religious followers such as the Quakers.

Finding:
"On the 14th of June, Congress resolved to raise several companies of riflemen, by enlistment, for one year, to serve in the American Continental army; establish the pay of the officers and privates, and appoint a committee to prepare rules and regulations for the government of the army."

A fatal mistake at this point, or an infiltration by criminal agents at this point, whichever way you the reader (you the jurists) care to judge the matter, involves the selection of George Washington as the dictator chosen to dictator criminal orders to be obeyed without question, no matter how immortal, to the entire voluntary army of the former colonies which are now forming as voluntary mutual defense associations.

Enlistment is voluntary. The Congress, unanimous consent of representatives, or "majority rule" (not known by me which at this point) agree that voluntary military troops must be financed and led by military (not "political") leaders.

Here is where the reader may be ill prepared to understand the stark differences between rule by voluntary association as opposed to rule by involuntary association and the stark difference is decided in voluntary association by trial by jury, not by "summary justice," in any case in time and in place.

3 cases serve to illustrate the point as follows:

1.
RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE 1 U.S. 35 1778 Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center
RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE, 1 U.S. 35 (1778)

2.
http://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44539282.pdf
Trial of Dr. William Whiting by Stephen T. Riley

3.
An Account of the My Lai Courts-Martial
An Introduction to the My Lai Court-Martial by Doug Linder

 

[Josf]

I had intended to move on with Elliot's Debates Volume 1 from that moment when the representatives decided to fund and control the voluntary, defensive, military. I was sent off on finding further evidence that documents the criminal take over of America concerning something called the Newburg Conspiracy.

People get lost when people become aware of the word "conspiracy," as that word triggers a feedback loop in their minds, and their minds shut down, and they no longer control their own minds. This is called by many names, such as the name cognitive dissonance. The facts of what is, or is not, the Newburg Conspiracy are placed before the people who care, who may or may not volunteer to be jurists in any case. The entire war effort could have easily been financed with sales of vacant (public) land that is no longer under the control of criminal organizations such as The British, and those lands can be sold to free people where free people then hold that land that they purchase, and they control that land, and they are responsible for that land, and the legal term for the title of that land is Allodium. The buyer holds the title in Allodium, and that means that the buyer has complete control of the land, the king of his land, no one tells the owner to pay land taxes, it is his (or her) land, as that is it. You can look it up if you want, or ask questions, and I can provide links, but that was the idea. If you recognize that it is your duty to defend your land from criminals, then you volunteer to do so, whichever way you can, including selling a portion of your land, to pay a portion of the finance costs, or you stop farming and you start fighting, or you produce a little extra at your farm, sell that extra food, and pay your duties to address the clear and present danger existing in the form of Red Coat Boots on the Ground, rioting in the blood of innocent people, demanding blind obedience to a lie, such as the Divine Right of Kings lie, where criminals may issue orders to perpetrate evil deeds, and you must obey without question.

So the whole concept of a conflict over how to pay for mutual defense is already exposed in the evidence already shown to you, as that conflict was unnecessary, is unnecessary, and always will be unnecessary, because it is positive proof of the conspiracy to take over voluntary government through central banking fraud, which is the tried and true method by which criminals financed all sides in all wars with fraudulent "legal" money, and they add the cost of paper and ink to the "National Debt" they create, so that even the cost of printing lies on paper (fraudulent money) are paid for by the people who produce anything worth stealing.

The tried and true method of financing was already written into the statutes when the statutes suggested the sale of land to investors for covering mutual defense costs. So the false conflict was introduced by infiltrators as a conflict between "insiders" who buy up all the fraudulent paper once the fraudulent paper becomes worthless, and then those "insiders" make sure that their fraudulent paper is paid back to them "on par" at "face value" and the obvious slight of hand involves the fact that no one ever claimed that the paper was worth anything in the first place. If someone did makes such a claim, then that someone could be accused of fraud, a Grand Jury assembled to acknowledge the legitimacy of the accusation, and the accused would then face trial for treason, for aiding and abetting, lending moral, and lending material support to the enemies of Liberty.

If you are not stupefied by the central lie employed by central banking frauds, then you see the point offered to you right now. Any one of the powerful people in America could have pushed for a trial according to the common laws of free people in any case where a conspiracy was alleged. The so called Newburg Conspiracy was a typical example of a thief pointing to innocent people and the thief shouts "thief" in ORDER to control the focus of defensive attention away from the thief, allowing the thief to steal while the defenders are thereby misdirected.

The Newburgh Conspiracy December 1782-March 1783 - American Memory Timeline- Classroom Presentation Teacher Resources - Library of Congress

"Mystery shrouds the so-called Newburgh Conspiracy, so named because the Continental Army officers who sent a memorial of grievances to Congress were stationed at Newburgh, New York. Some scholars believe that nationalists in Congress actually encouraged these officers in hopes of providing the Congress with greater powers relative to the states."

Revolutionary War-Era Sequestration New Taxes War-Time Debts Commutation and the Newburgh Conspiracy Revolutionary War Command Posts

"The Continental officers’ numerous critics claimed they had taken advantage of wartime opportunities—ranging from sweetheart supply contracts to loose accounting practices—to enrich themselves at public expense. For their own part, the officers believed they had sacrificed the best years of their lives for the Revolutionary cause, and many were beginning to ask, “For what?” Even those who had managed to avoid injury and illness had suffered economically, they said, because Congress and the state legislatures had rarely managed to pay them their modest salaries."

For those who do not understand how criminal organizations work it may help to consider some realities of life as an organized criminal. If you volunteer to be an organized criminal then all the other organized criminals, including Red Coats working for the "King" in 1786, have something on you, they know your game, and they can rat on you to the so called "public" since they have the means to do so. They can expose your game, how you operate your confidence scheme, to the general public through the available media, and they can start a smear campaign to ruin your organized crime career under the color of law.

You are then in. Once you are in, you are not allowed out. If you TURN, then you may find sanctuary if there is sanctuary somewhere, as you are then no different than any other runaway slave. If you think that the existing government is not "on the take" then you might get an offer of protection from them, spirited away in the "witness protection program" or other methods of due process due to you who "turns state evidence" as you "blow the whistle" and you "plea bargain" for a lighter sentence? Note the question mark. Trial by jury is not plea bargaining. Facts are found, the guilty are then officially, legally, legitimately, known for the crimes they are found guilty perpetrating, and the jury, not a judge (summary justice), orders any punishment that the unanimous jury decides on their legal authority (common law) to be just in that case at that time; and they can ask for, and they can receive help from past cases, or advice from a common law (impartial) judge.

 

[Josf]

Busy doing other things then return to Elliot's Debates Volume I page 60.

Here is a link to Elliot's Debates
Elliot s Debates Home Page U.S. Congressional Documents

Oct. 14, 1775

"On the same day, Congress unanimously resolved, "that the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage according to the course of that law."

Those words can be interpreted many ways while the fact finding effort is demonstrated time and again as people actually process due process in time and place. In other words arguments over the meaning of words in any case, in any time, and in any place, can result in violent conflict unless there are agreed upon methods of avoiding violent conflict such as a process that works to find the facts and then decide if anyone is guilty of doing anything wrong whatsoever. That process was called trial by the country, or trial by unanimous agreement of everyone, where no one disagrees with the decision based upon the facts that someone accused of wrongdoing is guilty of wrongdoing in time and place.

Since the whole country cannot physically be present during a trial by the country the method that worked instead was to randomly pick (sortition) a number of people from the local area where the accused was accused of a crime, but presumed to be innocent until proven guilty, and then those people were a reasonable, expedient, efficient, and proven (trial and error) representative of the whole country as the accuser must convince the whole country that the accused was, in fact, guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Not having your own words in your own mind with which you can convey the meaning of common law, or trial by jury, or legem terrae (law of the land in Latin), or due process, or rule of law, is a consequence of many factors that may include ignorance (of the true law, or accurate law, or law based upon willful fact finding instead of willful deception), apathy, response conditioning, behavioral modification, false advertising, indoctrination, deception, threat of violence, and demonstrations of aggressive violence upon those who intend to convey this type of accurate information to those who have yet to discover this type of accurate information, let alone apply this type of accurate information in time and place.

So...despite all the factors working to cover-up, dilute, consolidate, take-over, nullify, usurp, replace, counterfeit, actual rule of law, the actual rule of law due process still exists today in America. The Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial is one example of watered down (too little and too late) common law due process.

Unmistakable evidence is presented to you from the document titled Elliot's Debates Volume I page 60. This is a place founded on trial by the country, also known in English as the law of the land, or common law. Also on page 60:

Quote:_____________________
They further resolved, "that they were entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes as existed at the time of their colonization, and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several and local circumstances."
___________________________

That happened just before the infiltrator George Washington was somehow elected as a representative of free people seeking sound military leadership in defense against a criminal army of aggressors whose goal was nothing less than total subjugation of the people in America under tyrannical rule. Anyone spending any time looking into the actual history of George Washington, with few (filtered) exceptions, will encounter the same obvious, repetitive, criminal mind driving criminal acts including torture as a means of achieving goals, and the necessary deception required to cover-up that naked abuse of power, for all to see, in front of God and everyone, as the tyrant inflicts cruel and unusual punishment as a means of keeping his slaves in line. Contrast that so called founder with Richard Henry Lee and the picture of the battle to either defend rule of law in America or to subject all people in America to centuries of tyrannical rule is clearly presented as a clear and present danger in America because a small group gained power by crafty employment of deception, threat of aggressive violence, and demonstrations of cruel and unusual displays of horrific violence.

Somehow the so called founder Washington managed to help the British slaughter, or capture, many volunteers for the defense of people in America, while the same "leader" managed to escape harm as the "leader" led his flock to slaughter.

Economically speaking that type of tactic is sound military execution. To place an infiltrator in positions of power was not invented in 1775, not patented in 1775, and not placed in a military storage facility to gather dust after the first time the tactic was used effectively. Those who refuse to see the facts are known to be powerless in defense against those who employ those facts on a regular basis, so why do you think you might be refusing to see these facts now?

 

[Josf]

I am having trouble reaching the point at which the idea was printed in writing where the idea was to get rid of rule of law and replace rule of law with the counterfeit version which is might makes right, or rule by criminal rule, which is obedience without question.

This can be seen from many angles. Such as a time frame in between Oct. 14, 1775 and these printed words:

"On the same day, Congress unanimously resolved, "that the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage according to the course of that law."

A time frame between Oct. 14, 1775 (and those printed words declaring trial by jury as the law of the land) and the uncontroversial solid smoking gun proof beyond reasonable doubt here:

July 9, 1868
"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."

That is solid inculpatory evidence proving the fact that the criminals are back in town; beyond any reasonable doubt whatsoever.

After Oct. 13, 1775, and those printed words (trial by jury is the law of the land) in the official Federated Record of the facts on the ground at the time America moved from dependence upon criminal blind obedience to enforced slavery of everyone under tyranny (British rule), and then after Oct. 13, 1775 whereby the actual law of the land (trial by jury) was officially recognized, another document in July of 1776 became the official federal government number one Statute, known as a Declaration of Independence, which established for perpetual union of free people, for posterity, the duty of free people as free people, independent people, have a duty to defend people from tyranny. Simple stuff really.

Somewhere between Oct. 14, 1775 and the official declaration of criminal blindness, where a demand to obey without question, is actually confessed, actually written, actually printed, and actually published as the official (false) government orders that must be obeyed without question, or/else. The or/else part is determined through fraudulent examples of criminal versions of "due process" which can also be known as "summary justice," "Exchequer," "Chancery," "Equity," "Admiralty," "Maritime," Nisi Prius," and other forms of aggressive war for profit "debt" collection agency.

Again, to help the reader reinforce the knowledge of the clear and present danger, the routine organized criminal process is the lie where a private group of organized criminals claim to be loaning the money needed by both sides in aggressive war for profit, whereby the FUNDS needed to buy the necessities of conducting both aggressive and defensive war, are fraudulent pieces of paper invented by, produced by, and then "loaned" by this private group of organized criminals who "loan" these subsidized "funds" (meaning the costs of ink, paper, accounting, and transfer of so called funds, all costs, are charged to the public at large, where the public is given the bill that must be paid through deceptive, threatening, and aggressively violent "National Debt" collection processes), these subsidized funds are "loaned" to both sides in the (easily avoided) war of aggression for the profit of a few at the expense of everyone, and the "public" on both sides of the war are then targeted for exploitation after the war, as the productive people who produce anything worth stealing are said to "owe" these individual, private, organized criminals both the principle of the "loan", and the interest rate (set by the criminals themselves along with the criminals setting their own pay rate also taken out of the "public fund"), both "principle" and "interest" paid at face value on the fraudulent bills, notes, and false promises to pay, for the "privilege" of "borrowing" "money" from these "central banker" criminals.

Many of these "central banker" criminals gained their power through fraudulent acquisition of valuable land, and profits of exploiting the valuable land through "subsidized" slave labor; whereby again, the costs of maintaining the criminal "low wage" slave labor is charged to the "public" through the process of "national debt" collection agency, or "direct tax" whereby the actual independent farmers who actually fight the defensive war are led (by deception) to believe the opposite of a Declaration of Independence.

You must obey without question, instead of the well established fact that it is the duty of free people to question criminal orders at the very least one individual can do for everyone else in time and place.

If free people, at the very least, question immoral criminal orders, then that idea may gain currency, become more defensively powerful than the power that enforces blind obedience to criminal orders, which may then set in motion true due process based upon the principle of finding the truth beyond a reasonable doubt, whereby anyone accused of wrongdoing is afforded the exact same power of law as anyone else who may also be accused of wrongdoing. That includes any Congressmen who may be accused as well as any farmer, and in those days the President of the United States in Congress Assembled was one of the Congressmen, so even the President was not falsely claiming to be immune to the laws that the President claims to be his source of power and authority.

So that is the situation before the criminal "central banking" slave traders took over between those two dates in the officially recorded history of American mutually defensive Federation.

 

[Josf]

Preparing to dive back into Elliot's Debates to find more inculpatory evidence published as the official record of when, how, why, where, and what the criminals took over in 1787 a list seems appropriate.

1. Rule of Law in the form of trial by jury according to the common laws of duty bound defenders of innocent victims from guilty criminals is recognized officially in the official Federal Record Oct. 14, 1775.
2. Declaration of Independence July 5, 1776.
3. Congress of the United States of American, a body of leaders who elect among themselves their presiding officer, or President of The United States in Congress Assembled, recognized that rule of law applies to them too, as they are not above the law of the land, which is trial by jury according to the common laws of duty bound defenders of innocent victims from guilty criminals.

I want to find that date again in Elliot's Debates Volume One since that is a very important part of the official record of the American free market version of a federation of independent states where independent people share a duty to defend each other from tyranny and from other guilty criminals who injure innocent people for profit; whereby people share the concept of duty in a form known as legem terrae, or the law of the land, also known as trial by jury according to the common law. It is important to understand how, when, and why the criminals altered, changed, and counterfeited the reasonable idea that Congressmen, like everyone, are subject to the same moral laws that every duty bound defender is subject to, whereby it is wrong to perpetrate capital crimes, such as torture, such as mass murder, such as malfeasance, such as treason, such as aiding and abetting the worst criminal aggressors ever to dishonor the meaning of human civilization. As soon as the good people in power become the bad people in power is the crucial moment, at that moment, that the people truly capable of defense against the bad people must act in defense effectively.

Once someone claims that they can get away with any act, no matter how immoral, such as a claim made by someone that they can get away with torture, or mass murder, because they say so, because they claim that they are above any quaint notion that it is wrong to inflict cruel and unusual punishment, and these claims also include a claim that it is an outdated notion that it is wrong to end the lives of innocent people, doing so with malice aforethought, so as to profit from their deaths, such as taking over the land occupied by the formerly living people before their lives were snuffed out, and to top off this obvious turn for the worse these people claiming that the can perpetrate these heinous acts with impunity also claim that anyone else found guilty of doing the same thing are guilty of wrongdoing while they alone are not guilty for doing the same thing: obey my orders without question while I get away with doing whatever I want, including my orders ordering you to torture and mass murder for me, and then I may, or may not, order you tortured and murdered for obeying my orders. I get immunity, you get whatever I say you deserve, and don't ever question my orders, ever. If that does not sound familiar, then you are probably not questioning the orders.

Page 96 of Elliot's Debates Volume One and Article 5 of the Articles of Confederation republished in that volume are the following words:

"Freedom of speech and debate in Congress shall not be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Congress; and the members of Congress shall be protected in their persons from arrests and imprisonments, during the time of their going to and from, and attendance on, Congress, except for treason, felony, or breach of the peace."

July 9th, 1778 is the date on that copy for Ratification of "the union" that "shall be perpetual," and before returning to the agreements concerning how to FUND the maintenance of the united states in congress assembled, which would include any defensive war "debt" payable to anyone, anywhere, anytime, someone claims to be owed war "debt," the earlier list of crucial events now has another crucial date:

1. Oct. 14, 1775
Rule of Law in the form of trial by jury according to the common laws of duty bound defenders of innocent victims from guilty criminals is recognized officially in the official Federal Record.

2. July 5, 1776
Declaration of Independence. Free and independent people are duty bound to defend each other (through rule of law, common law, due process, trial by jury, the law of the land) against criminals whereby criminals include those criminals who claim to be above the law.

3. July 9th, 1778
Congress of the United States of American, a body of leaders who elect among themselves their presiding officer, or President of The United States in Congress Assembled, recognized that rule of law applies to them too, as they are not above the law of the land, which is trial by jury according to the common laws of duty bound defenders of innocent victims from guilty criminals.

How does due process according to the common law treat anyone, anywhere, accusing anyone else of treason? What, for example, would have been the common law due process method of handling an accusation that a congressman, including a President of The United States in Congress Assembled (a congressman), as someone gains access to the law in the form of an official accusation?

The time is after July 9th, 1778, and it is clearly stated in Statute # 1, which is the declaration of independence, and clearly stated in these federal articles, that breach of the peace is not allowed, against the law, even if congressmen are accused (yet to be found guilty according to the common laws of duty bound free and independent people) of breaching the peace, or treason.

Case in point:
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER 1 U.S. 236 1788 Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center

Accusers bring their accusations to someone in charge of acknowledging, recording, and processing accusations. If the criminals have already taken over that specific part of the common laws of duty bound people, then that criminal will censor that accusation at that crucial point. In history it was known that there were duty bound people bound to the idea of defense of all the people, and they were the coroner, and the sheriff, of all the people, and for the defense of all the people, and that sheriff of the people would receive a valid accusation and proceed thereby to the assembling of a Grand Jury for the purpose of judging the validity of the accusation. The random selection of jurists in the Grand Jury works toward the idea of trial by the whole country of people, not trial by special interests groups who may want to claim immunity from rule of law. In history there were counterfeit versions of a sheriff of the people whereby the counterfeit sheriff of the people was a paid member of the King's entourage. Of course, standing to reason, an accusation of breach of the peace against the King, or against one of the King's Sheriffs, would be snuffed out before an accusation would ever move to the Grand Jury phase.

 

[Josf]

Criminals declare open war on everyone other than themselves.

I wrote that above so as to help anyone make sense of the next quotes from Elliot's Debates Volume I where the goal is to figure out when, why, and how the criminals took over a free market, common law, mutual defense association in America known as a federation.

Page 68:
1.
"On the 6th of January, 1776, a regulation was adopted relative to the division of prizes and prize-money, taken by armed vessels, among officers and men."
2.
"On the 11th of January, Congress ordained that persons refusing to receive the Continental bills of credit in payment, or who should obstruct and discourage the currency or circulation thereof, should, on conviction, be deemed, published, and treated, as an enemy of the country, and be precluded from all trade and intercourse with inhabitants of the colonies."
3.
"On the 27th of January, resolutions were entered into for carrying on trade with the Indians, and for procuring the necessary supply of goods for that purpose.
4.
"On the 30th of January, it was resolved that no apprentice should be enlisted within the colonies of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the counties on Delaware, or Maryland, as a solider in the army or navy of the United Colonies, without the previous consent of his master or mistress, in writing; all those enlisted in a contrary manner were ordered to be discharged, on application, and a reimbursement of expenses incurred for enlistment; and every person under the age of twenty-one years, who had enlisted in the army of navy, was, within twenty-four hours thereafter, entitled to his discharge on refunding the amount of money and articles with which he had been supplied. It was, at that time, recommended to creditors, who had claims against persons in the army or navy for less than thirty-five dollars, not to arrest the debtors until their terms of service had expired.

Page: 70:
1.
"On the 3rd of April, instructions to the commanders of private armed vessels were considered and adopted. They authorized the capture of all ships and other vessels belonging to the inhabitants of Great Britain, on the high seas, or between high-water and low-water marks, except vessels bringing persons who intended to settle and reside in the United Colonies, or conveying arms, ammunition, and warlike stores, for the use of such inhabitants of America as were friendly to the cause of liberty."
2.
"On this occasion, the importation of slaves was expressly prohibited."

To those who are as yet stuck in a world view that is constructed out of a criminal mind, where slavery is acceptable in your mind, to those who have that problem, those words above may be of little significance to you, because you have no sense of morality at this time. There is always hope in some form or another.

To someone who has studied how the criminals take over the above stands out as inculpatory evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the criminals were at work already in 1776. The clues in the above words concern the mode by which claims of wrongdoing were processed by people for the benefit of people.

Common law, for the benefit of all people without exception, is a mode by which claims of wrongdoing involve randomly selected people in the area where the wrongdoing was alleged to have occurred and these 25 or so Jurist in a Grand Jury authorize the accusers claim of wrongdoing in the form of a Presentment, where the accusation then sets in motion a trial by jury. The common law trial by jury idea worked for thousands of years so as to benefit all people because the random selection process was the idea that the whole country of people judge right or wrong based upon the facts demanded by the whole country as the accuser must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt to the whole country of people. In that way no special interest takes over government.

Admiralty law came from ancient abuse of power as a criminal mode in which private gangs of mercenaries seize prizes from their hapless victims and the mode of dividing the spoils, the loot, among the criminals often resulted in conflict among the various gangs of criminals. A court, such as Exchequer, Chancery, then Equity, then Admiralty, is a mode in which all the criminal gangs agree that they are all criminals and rather than fight among themselves they agree to allow a criminal judge to divide up the prizes, the loot, equally among the criminal gangs. There is no presumption of innocence. There is no effort to find the facts. A convicted criminal with a guilty mind will tell his version of how he managed to possess the loot, and another convicted criminal with a guilty mind tells his opposite story, where those guilty minded criminals stick to their stories, and the guilty minded criminal judge hammers down his verdict which ends up with the guilty minded criminal judge receiving the lions share of the stolen loot for his precious time having been consumed in this mode of keeping the rats from eating each other when the steady flow of stolen loot is not enough to make all the rats happy.

 

[Josf]

One at a time:

1.
"On the 6th of January, 1776, a regulation was adopted relative to the division of prizes and prize-money, taken by armed vessels, among officers and men."

Keep in mind here that the British were heavily invested in American people in American States (former colonies) collecting debts through bogus paper money schemes where private (privateer) bankers charge governments for fraudulent money when governments need money to fight this or that opponent. Keep in mind that it is the British, not the French, who are the criminals masterminding the criminal take-over of defensive government in America. The Red Coat British criminal government is the same Red Coat British criminal government named by name in the Declaration of Independence, not the French.

When the criminal British start landing troops and war prosecuting goods into America, and the criminal British troops begin their collecting of loot from their targeted victims in an aggressive war for profit of the British criminals who took over the government of British people; that fact inspired defensive measures that include an obvious need to end happy times trading with good people in England. So the rubber meets the road on land and on water where it is vital to know friend from foe as trading with the enemy is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. Military matters are done in two ways. Absolute criminal military dictatorship where everyone is forced into labor in any way that the slave can be made to aid and abet the criminal military dictatorship, or the precise opposite is a free market voluntary agreeable cooperative organized mutual defense association where slavery is the enemy.

In between the two extremes is the history of people.

Keep in mind that the British, with their Red Coats, let it be known that they were the criminal aggressors running the absolute criminal military dictatorship. Let that set in your mind when history progresses to the point at which the Alien and Sedition Acts were enacted and where anyone daring to speak against aiding and abetting the BRITISH and anyone speaking in favor of the FRENCH were guilty of perpetrating a crime "against the state" because they spoke the truth. So keep that in mind when reading these words written in reference to the awakening of American voluntary defensive government in 1776 WHILE criminal infiltrators infested (like rats) in the America version of voluntary defensive government. Keep in mind also, that the good guys managed to amend the criminal Constitution with the Bill of Rights.

2.
"On the 11th of January, Congress ordained that persons refusing to receive the Continental bills of credit in payment, or who should obstruct and discourage the currency or circulation thereof, should, on conviction, be deemed, published, and treated, as an enemy of the country, and be precluded from all trade and intercourse with inhabitants of the colonies."

If the money is backed by titles of land, or backed by gold and silver, or backed by shares of competitive businesses like farms, factories, foundries, mines, and even banks (non-criminal-monopoly-fraud-subsidized), then the money is redeemable, the promises to pay are redeemable, on par, on face value, so long as the issuer of the note remains competitive, sound, productive, where there is redemption in valuable goods possible. If the issuer of the note plans on inflating the currency so as then to be able to buy back up the currency at low value, then redeem the currency at face value once they have the lion's share of the fraudulent currency, if that is the plan, then the intended victims are demonstrably unaware of that plan, for if the intended victims were aware of the plan then the intended victims could declare their independence from such a plan, and they could back up their claims of independence with a will to fight against the aggressors who enforced fraudulent debt schemes with mercenary and slave armies, and devil worshiping judges in black robes running a criminal version of common law court proceedings.

Who decides if someone is found guilty of a crime? What does "obstruct and discourage the currency" mean? If you know the truth about fraudulent central banking crimes and you speak out against fraudulent banking crimes, can you file a complaint against an accused fraudulent central banking criminal who may also be a congressman? Is there a common law of the land that works for all the people all the time in the effort to defend against any criminal and especially against the worst criminals?

 

[Josf]

3.
"On the 27th of January, resolutions were entered into for carrying on trade with the Indians, and for procuring the necessary supply of goods for that purpose."

The clash of civilizations (not civilized people claiming to annex land held by "savages") included an American Continent recently populated by many competitive Indian Nations whereby those competitive Indian Nations were largely wiped out by diseases brought here by European people. There are studies made of what happens to people in groups where large percentages of the population die off in a short period of time, and the overall effects are negative, destructive, and difficult to overcome. Some of the people in some of the Indian Nations grew stronger than others, and were therefore more able to defend themselves against further harm from aggressors that include other people in other Indian Nations, and Europeans. A common practice throughout the history of people is to set one group against another group so that both groups are weaker and therefore both groups are easier to subdue once those two side wipe each other out, and this common practice has been perfected in the form of a process known simply as central banking.

If someone aids, abets, lends moral support, and lends material support to aggressive people in aggressive (savage) Indian Nations, or someone aids, abets, lends moral support, and lends material support to aggressive people in aggressive (savage) European Nations, then does it stand to reason that voluntary, defensive, welcome, mutual defense associations, or states, in former Indian Nations, and former Colonies, can share, trade, pool, collectivize, organize, incorporate, subsidize, cooperatives whereby the true, actual, moral, goal is defense and NOT offense?

Who decides who is friend? Who decides who is foe? How is someone, or some group led by someone, accused of an individual crime, or accused of a crime involving many individuals (conspiracy), whereby the accusation sets in motion a concept called rule of law? How is that rule of law remembered by people so as to afford people the means by which people can accurately determine, discriminate, know, understand, realize, acknowledge, friend from foe in time and place reliably, and in an accurate manner so as to facilitate effective defense of innocent people from guilty criminals?

 

[Josf]

4.
"On the 30th of January, it was resolved that no apprentice should be enlisted within the colonies of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the counties on Delaware, or Maryland, as a solider in the army or navy of the United Colonies, without the previous consent of his master or mistress, in writing; all those enlisted in a contrary manner were ordered to be discharged, on application, and a reimbursement of expenses incurred for enlistment; and every person under the age of twenty-one years, who had enlisted in the army of navy, was, within twenty-four hours thereafter, entitled to his discharge on refunding the amount of money and articles with which he had been supplied. It was, at that time, recommended to creditors, who had claims against persons in the army or navy for less than thirty-five dollars, not to arrest the debtors until their terms of service had expired."

The most telling words I read in the above quote are these words: "...had claims against persons...," as those words refer to a processing of claims. In those words are claims of ownership of people by people, also known as slavery, also known by many other names that tend to dilute, excuse, apologize, rationalize, falsify, cover-up, hide, disguise, smoke screen, mirror, and deceive the accurate account of the true nature of criminals who perpetrate crimes with malice aforethought upon their innocent victims in time and place such as enslavement into forced labor whereby those performing forced labor have the fruits of their labor stolen from them and the fruits of the labor of those forced into forced labor is spent by the criminals for the pleasure of the criminals and for maintaining the slave trade.

Maintaining the slave trade is very costly for criminals and for victims, as the fruits of labor are finite for reasons that criminals know intimately. Criminals know that too many criminals and not enough slaves constitute a short supply of fruits of labor which increases the work load of the criminals as the criminals are then inspired to reduce the number of criminals and increase the number of slaves. Someone has to dream up better lies. A lie that works to enslave fellow criminals, inspiring fellow criminals to do more of the criminal work, so as to afford the better liars more time for pleasure, is a good lie for a criminal mind. Good lies, good liars, are hard to find, good help is hard to find, and that includes the work of figuring out how to know good help, the best help, when faced with a whole lot of mediocre help, or worse, as a situation where nothing but criminals show up for work leaves little to be desired when the supply of the fruits of labor sinks so low as to be insufficient to feed the growing number of criminals, who take the lion's share from the actual productive workers, as the actual productive workers have no cake to eat. Let them eat cake was said, and yet the criminals already ate all the cake, along with the goose that lays the golden eggs. Let them feast on famine?

"...had claims against persons..."

Hi, my slaves claim that they are not slaves, can you help me out of this jam?

Why yes, of course, sign here on the bottom line, but first you must give blood to fill the inkwell.

Note that the quotes are from Elliot's Debates Volume I concerning someone's viewpoint concerning the historical record during the time when people declared their independence from English criminals who were currently rioting in the blood of the innocent in America, as those Red Coat criminals were collecting debt claims, and the defenders included many people who sent a few people as representatives of many people. People sent people to figure out how to prosecute an effective defense, including how to pay for it, and one competitive idea among many less competitive ideas was to finance the defensive war effort by selling land to people where the concept of ownership was backed-up with the concept of Allodial title of the land, where the land owner would then own the land free and clear of any so called debt owed to any so called tyrant of any kind whatsoever, and thereby inspire the individual and owner to defend their own land voluntarily.

Many people in a few states were decidedly against all forms of slavery, including such people as the people calling themselves Quakers. Not everyone invested in the idea of debt slavery as a form of investment in benefits returned to the investor over time. The idea of loaning and borrowing is a competitive idea that can be explained in many competitive forms including the idea that liabilities associated with loaning and borrowing are liabilities, risks, shared by both lender and borrower. Who decides when someone is unfairly taxed into bearing too much liability in any case involving any mutual agreement to lend, borrow, trade, exchange, transfer, invest, finance, incorporate, pool, collectivize, share, cooperate, voluntarily? Who decides when someone crosses over the moral line and steps from voluntary association and steps decidedly into involuntary association whereby the act of stepping over the line is a criminal act made by a criminal with malice aforethought in perpetrating a crime upon the innocent victim in time and place?

 

[Josf]

Page: 70:
1.
"On the 3rd of April, instructions to the commanders of private armed vessels were considered and adopted. They authorized the capture of all ships and other vessels belonging to the inhabitants of Great Britain, on the high seas, or between high-water and low-water marks, except vessels bringing persons who intended to settle and reside in the United Colonies, or conveying arms, ammunition, and warlike stores, for the use of such inhabitants of America as were friendly to the cause of liberty."

Knowing that the evil side is the side where any immoral act must be acted out or failure to obey the order to act out any immoral act results in immoral acts acted out upon the disobedient is knowing something worth knowing like it or not, it is still worth knowing, since the obvious consequence of not knowing this vital fact is misdirection as ignorance misleads people into embracing slavery, like Stockholm Syndrome, whereby the slaves on the evil side love their chains, and work ever harder in order to gain more misery.

Knowing can free the slaves in mind, if not yet in spirit, and if not yet in body.

Knowing can inspire a breaking of human spirit too, I suppose, but hope arrives in many forms worth repeating.

"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."

Misdirection is to fight so as to maintain slavery.

People are in command of individual power. When individual power is misled, misspent, mal-invested, collected into a fund, and then criminals get ahold of the collective fund, and then criminals spend the collective fund on things that empower the criminals at the expense of the slaves, the result is something that can be called a zero sum game. Something can be called Empire too. When individual power is no longer used in defense of individual power, the individual is powerless in defense, and collectively speaking about all the individuals who no longer have defensive power is the same thing as saying the word Empire, since the result is the same zero sum game whereby the individual contributes to a collective hell on earth whereby there is no longer enough individual power to feed the worst criminals who manage to steal the last of the valuable things, and the weakest individuals are literally eaten alive.

That can certainly tend to break one's spirit, like the stick in the concept of a carrot and a stick, while the carrot is so well hidden behind a fog of lies.

"...for the use of such inhabitants of America as were friendly to the cause of liberty."

Financing the war on the sale of land held in allodium was the initial idea that financed the American voluntary free market mutual defense association under rule of law which was trial by jury whereby congressmen admitted that they were under the law of the land, not above it, not exempt from it, not immune from prosecution. At the same time of this adaptive, free market, voluntary, liberty idea in America there was a competitive idea still in force in some minds of some people whereby slave mentality (masters of slaves or slaves with masters is two sides of the same coin) included black slave trade, indentured servitude, debt slavery (to central banking frauds), and all of those connections between those slave minded people had one commonality which was English so called Monarchy where the Red Coats were called The British. The East India Company (which included Dutch version of the same organized crime under the color of law) was heavily into the slave trade along with the central banking fraud, and all of that had ties to the Vatican and the Jesuits.

So these idealists with their ideas of liberty for all who agree and volunteer to do their part, their duty, in defending each other from the criminals who take over governments actually produced a working free market federation for voluntary mutual defense despite the infestations of the connections persisting between runaway slaves, called Rebels, and those claiming to be the masters of the runaway slaves, whereby the Masters were making their claims from their so called Kingdom headquarters in British England.

Why then, as this story unfolds, didn't the slaves completely sever their connections of servitude to the British fraudulent debt collectors?

Here in the records available the effort to sever the connection is clearly written as such.

""On the 3rd of April, instructions to the commanders of private armed vessels were considered and adopted. They authorized the capture of all ships and other vessels belonging to the inhabitants of Great Britain, on the high seas, or between high-water and low-water marks, except vessels bringing persons who intended to settle and reside in the United Colonies, or conveying arms, ammunition, and warlike stores, for the use of such inhabitants of America as were friendly to the cause of liberty."

 

[Josf]

Page 74 Elliot's Debates Volume I

The slippery slope is expressed in many words such as "the slippery slope" whereby moves are made from voluntary association or liberty and moves are made into involuntary association, as if liberty and voluntary association were high or above the alternatives concerning a concept such as rule of law, as expressed in many religious writings, expressed in many philosophies and science writings, expressed in many writings known as statutes, and is expressed by people who act upon their ideas, which are above, or higher, not below, or lower down the slippery slope idea, where people may slide down into hell on earth, slide down into torture and mass murder subsidized by honest, honorable, just, moral, productive, people.

One of many possible ways to slide down into the slippery slope was the idea invented by immoral, or ignorant, people whose idea was majority rule in a specific (involuntary) form.

Majority rule concerning anything voluntary is one form. Someone not volunteering to abide by majority rule, whereby the individual not volunteering to abide by majority rule remains in liberty, remains within rule of law, so long as the one not volunteering to abide by majority rule is in no way injuring anyone other than a majority of criminals where the majority of criminals are only injured because they do not get to steal from the individual who does not agree to have their life enslaved by that criminal majority.

In other words the other form of majority rule is not voluntary association, and in other words the slippery slope is a trap door whereby the victims are suddenly dropped into hell on earth because the majority commanding majority rule are criminals whose rules are criminal orders that must be obeyed without question and failure to obey without question is a quick trip into a dungeon, a gulag, a prison industry complex of forced labor, forced rape, forced vacations for some subsidized by the remaining productive individuals, forced, involuntary, servitude, knowable as slavery, where cruel and unusual punishment is preferred for those who dare to accurately account for the facts that the so called majority rule formed involuntarily is the criminal form, which is as much a crime as any other, if not more so, even as the majority claim that it is not crime.

Randomly pick 12 people from the whole country, to find a representative sample of what the whole country considers to be a crime, or not, and then unanimity is expediently justified in any case any time. Ask the jurors if they prefer daily rapes for the so called crime of failing to pay the extortion fee that funds the rape center's continued profitability? If all 12 agree that they too want daily rapes for failing to pay for daily rapes, then daily rapes for those who fail to pay for daily rapes is well within the unanimity of the whole country of rape victims and rapists. More power to them. If one out of 12 says no, then majority does not rule. No more rapes for those who fail to subsidize daily raping as a form of entertainment.


Page 74:

1.
"That the effect of the resolution of the 15th of May has proved this, which, raising the murmurs of some in the colonies of Pennsylvania and Maryland, called forth the opposing voice of the free part of the people, and proved them to be the majority even in these colonies:..."

2.
"That it would be vain to wait either weeks or months for perfect unanimity, since it was impossible that all men should ever become of one sentiment on any question:"

Those are the words of someone who discredits rule of law in the form known as trial by jury according to the common laws. Those are the words of someone seeking to threaten people with injury as a means by which involuntary association is formed and founded upon those threats, and all that is needed to inculpate the speaker of those words as to the employment of deception, along with threat of violence, is the reasonable competitive alternative viewpoint that nullifies this supposed fact of this matter as told by this speaker in this time, for this situation.

What was the resolution of the 15th of May whereby someone is claiming that majority rule is favorable over rule of law?

 

[Josf]

Back to page 71 (pdf copy page) of Elliot's Debates Volume I:

"A preamble to this resolution, agreed to on the 15th of May, stated the intention to be totally to suppress the exercise of every kind of authority under the British crown."

If you an put on your thinking caps and imagine the difficulties in unifying (unanimity) every single individual in every "possession" of British (criminal) rule (absolute tyrannical rule) who is in favor of defending liberty against criminal rule, then a few things ought to be put on the table as to what type of rule replaces the criminal tyranny of the British organized crime slave traders, central banking frauds, and their armies of enslaved assassins, and their army of mercenary assassins, and their army of misdirected defenders of a counterfeit British "liberty."

1. Out with the counterfeit British version of "liberty" and in with an American genuine (voluntary) liberty.

2. What ensures genuine voluntary liberty in America once the British "courts" are gone, and once the British troops have run out of money.

3. What replaces the British counterfeit money once that too is gone?

4. What replaces the British criminal military conscript army of slaves, and their assassins for profit army of looters for hire, and their misled defenders of British (counterfeit) liberty?

How many people then or now, or how many people in between then and now, know in their actions the meaning of the word liberty, the meaning of the words free markets, and the meaning of the words trial by the country?

Trial by the country still survives today, so actions speak louder than words, even if the words on paper have official looking stamps on them.

Already in the official record, up to 1776, proposed as a replacement for criminal British counterfeit voluntary defensive government is trial by jury; which is trial by unanimity of the entire country, and anyone, anywhere, can acquit anyone of any charge of wrongdoing in any case any time; because that was the law of the land that was the genuine voluntary defensive government imported to America from England; which was the same genuine voluntary defensive government imported to England from Germany by the Saxons.

If you living now are unaware of genuine voluntary government in the form of trial by the unanimity of the whole country, known as trial by jury according to the common laws of free people, then you represent ignorant America. Surviving even to this day, right now, is the Bill of Rights which amended the criminal take-over Constitution of 1787 when the slave traders and the central bankers took over a working federation, turning a working federation into a counterfeit, criminal, version.

Alongside the words that confirm the idea that leads people to act according to rule of law, which is trial by the whole unanimous country, which is trial by jury, along side the words that confirm that idea to be the replacement that replaces the criminal British counterfeit rule of law, is the idea to finance the mutual defense of all the people with the sale of land whereby the owner who buys the land is afforded trial by jury as their rule of law in defense of their ownership of their land against any counterfeit claims made by any tyrants seeking to "tax" that land owned by that owner who purchased that land for their own, exclusive, benefit, where the title of the land is held free and clear, and the term is allodium.

Allow anyone into the country who proves to be in favor of American liberty, held with rule of law which is trial by jury, which is trial by the unanimity of the whole country, and proof positive that someone running away from slavery in another land so as to be free in America is proven with a purchase of land, which then inspires another individual to defend that land from criminals known as tyrants.

1. Out with British Exchequer, Admiralty, Equity, Chancery, Nisi Prius, Summary JUST-US, and in with the tried and true common law trial by jury rule by unanimity of the whole country required to convict anyone of failure to pay so called taxes, or any other claim of wrongdoing, and any individual member of the country can acquit anyone of any wrongdoing.

In history that was spelled out in the deal made between land Barons in England and a criminal King John, in a deal written down as Magna Charta, or Magna Charter, or Magna Carta, way back in time before English was a language, and educated people read and wrote in Latin, or Greek, or other ancient languages. King John was so evil as a tyrant as to convince the entire country of people to act against King John, including the land Barons that depended upon a rule of some kind so as to defend their ownership of their land, and their claims of "indentured servitude" of their "employees," who may be victim to a counterfeit money scheme, or other confidence scheme themselves. So that establishes the genuine existence of rule of law BEFORE, and during, and even after King John and the Barons wrote those words in that document, as any individual randomly picked out of the whole country could acquit anyone charged with any crime whatsoever. In order to convict someone as guilty, as charged, by an accuser, the whole country unanimously had to agree, beyond reasonable doubt, based upon the facts discovered during trial, that the accused was in fact guilty, as 12 randomly picked jurors, from the area where the crime was allegedly perpetrated, represented the whole people, all the people: unanimity. One individual had as much power to acquit as one King had the power to accuse.