CDZ Federation versus Counterfeit

[Josf]

In 1787 a group of closet Tories including George Washington and Alexander Hamilton perpetrated a fraud that still operates as a criminal enterprise today despite the efforts of the patriots who defended against such crimes then and now.

The Constitution of 1787 was, is, and can only be a crime in progress despite the Bill of Rights or any other documented attempt to defend against criminals perpetrating crimes under the color of law, as that crime in Philadelphia was documented by those closet Tories who sold out the people defended during the Revolution.

If your viewpoint is otherwise then please consider the actual facts when those facts become known to you.

 

[Sonny Clark]

In 1787 a group of closet Tories including George Washington and Alexander Hamilton perpetrated a fraud that still operates as a criminal enterprise today despite the efforts of the patriots who defended against such crimes then and now.

The Constitution of 1787 was, is, and can only be a crime in progress despite the Bill of Rights or any other documented attempt to defend against criminals perpetrating crimes under the color of law, as that crime in Philadelphia was documented by those closet Tories who sold out the people defended during the Revolution.

If your viewpoint is otherwise then please consider the actual facts when those facts become known to you.

Please explain the criminal content, along with examples. Thanks.

 

[Josf]

The existing federation was not subject to mob rule authenticated revision. Those who agreed to the voluntary federation knew this, and under no uncertain terms were the representatives empowered to throw out that voluntary union and replace it with an involuntary criminal organization, yet that is what happened.

An example:
"One party, whose object and wish it was to abolish and annihilate all State governments, and to bring forward one general government, over this extensive continent, of monarchical nature, under certain restrictions and limitations. Those who openly avowed this sentiment were, it is true, but few; yet it is equally true, Sir, that there were a considerable number, who did not openly avow it, who were by myself, and many others of the convention, considered as being in reality favorers of that sentiment; and, acting upon those principles, covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished." Luther Martin

 

[Sonny Clark]

The existing federation was not subject to mob rule authenticated revision. Those who agreed to the voluntary federation knew this, and under no uncertain terms were the representatives empowered to throw out that voluntary union and replace it with an involuntary criminal organization, yet that is what happened.

An example:
"One party, whose object and wish it was to abolish and annihilate all State governments, and to bring forward one general government, over this extensive continent, of monarchical nature, under certain restrictions and limitations. Those who openly avowed this sentiment were, it is true, but few; yet it is equally true, Sir, that there were a considerable number, who did not openly avow it, who were by myself, and many others of the convention, considered as being in reality favorers of that sentiment; and, acting upon those principles, covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished." Luther Martin

Excuse me, but that doesn't equate to criminal content, nor criminal intent. Generalizations aren't sufficient to conclude that criminal intent was invoked. Where am I misunderstanding what you mean by criminal?

 

[Josf]

I have no desire to argue, please consider the possibility that you are merely missing the point.

"...covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished."

That is clearly an accusation of fraud. That is the tip of the iceberg of examples. There is no reason for me to argue over what you think that means as you define the meaning of criminal your individual way. Fraud is a very well known crime and given the circumstance concerning this specific fraud it is a fraud that is not relatively insignificant, such as selling poison as a cure all for ailments, or enticing victims into buying into a job with a Royal Prince is South Africa; laundering money.

 

[Josf]

The setup here ought to be perfected. The idea that an accusation of fraud is authorized by one individual only, and that is the end of that accusation according to that one individual, is called dictatorship, or tyranny, or rule by man. There are many additional English Language words and terms used to focus attention on the same general category of criminal behavior, such as Fascism, Communism, Elitism, Corporatism, Debt Slavery, plain old Slavery, or the accurate, English Language version of organized crime under the color of law, which is organized crime under the color of law. The trick, the fraud, is to control the victims in such a way as to make the victims believe that the criminals are the one and only source of authority concerning any wrongdoing done by anyone to anyone anyplace at any time.

So the setup here is almost perfect. Not quite. The problems with this setup include a lack of additional viewpoints focused upon the crime of counterfeiting a federation so as to officially, and authoritatively, determine who, when, how, why, also known as the facts, and also known as the law, in this case. One viewpoint is already offered to another viewpoint, and the second viewpoint is then inspired to offer the viewpoint to a third, a fourth, on and on. If the accusation is trivial, then the chain of authoritative interest, focus, and official scrutiny is either broken, leading no where, or weakened and therefore favoring the accused at the expense of the accuser.

The accuser, on the other hand, may also be accused of the very serious crime of false accusation, lending much interest, focus of attention, reason, understanding, and inspiration to break the chain before the seed grows into exponentially higher cost as everyone involved in authorizing the accusation in an official manner are led down that false path by that false accusation when, on the other hand, all that defensive power could have been employed effectively in defense of the innocent victims from the guilty criminals.

I am not, as the first example (quoted words from Luther Martin) offers, the original accuser in this case that was dropped, the chain was broken, and if the crime is truly a crime, then the original perpetrators got away with what still empowers current criminals today, which is a counterfeit version of a federation, whereby, in the words of Thomas Paine, "when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer."

The idea here, as an open debate forum, a clean one at that, resembles a meeting of concerned people, from the whole body of people, which was once known as "the country," meaning the whole body of people within a given geographical area, and the people in the meeting are debating, in this case, the guilt or innocence of specific people as those specific people are accused of counterfeiting rule of law, in the form of a federation, as those accused, but presumed to be innocent accused, people withstand a trial by the whole country, which was generally known, at least as far back as BEFORE Magna Carta, as "the law of the land," or in Latin "legem terrae," whereby the accused, but presumed to be innocent accused, is afforded his, or her, day in a court that is the people's court (all the people, known as the country), not the Kings Court; a one man show, rule by man.

No such trial, ever, managed to erupt (organically) from the whole body of people (the country) in America, but there have been near misses. One of the perpetrators, or one of the accused but presumed to be innocent accused, did suffer trial by ordeal, but that type of trial was known to be a barbaric form of settling disputes, as Alexander Hamilton was shot dead by Aaron Burr.

So we the people connected to a fragile connecting point, which is the idea of true justice in America, can do what was once known as our duty as free born individuals, and that duty is clearly expressed within such (all too vague and often misleading) ideas as common law, or the law of the land, or legem terrae, or due process, trial by jury, or rule by law; not by man, or again in one word, justice, which is clearly expressible as the effective method by which people defend innocent people from guilty criminals in time and in place. Another 2 sources of information clearly defining the duty of free people arrive in the form of a Declaration of Independence, written by representatives employed UNDER a voluntary association formed in DEFENCE, which was a working Federation. The same working, voluntary, union, or federation, had to be working in order for there to have been a Declaration of Independence offered, organically, by people, for people, and of people, a country of free people: July 4th,1776. The other instruction book on the duty of free people arrived much later in the form of a document called The Bill of Rights to the Constitution of 1787; however that last effort by free people to clue all the other free people in on their duty was too little and too late, for the most part, as the criminals had already taken over with their Judiciary Act of 1789.

Examples of inculpatory evidence, proving the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, abound in great supply to meet the demand, if the demand were to erupt from the whole body of people known as the country.

 

[Agit8r]

In 1787 a group of closet Tories including George Washington and Alexander Hamilton perpetrated a fraud that still operates as a criminal enterprise today despite the efforts of the patriots who defended against such crimes then and now.

The Constitution of 1787 was, is, and can only be a crime in progress despite the Bill of Rights or any other documented attempt to defend against criminals perpetrating crimes under the color of law, as that crime in Philadelphia was documented by those closet Tories who sold out the people defended during the Revolution.

If your viewpoint is otherwise then please consider the actual facts when those facts become known to you.

Actually, they would be more like Old Whigs. And the Jeffersonians were a coalition between Jacobins and Antifederalists. That is the reality of the matter.

 

[Josf]

Agit8r,

Labels constitute inculpatory evidence in this case. How, for example, were those UNDER the voluntary union expressed with a Declaration of Independence able to accurately discriminate the difference between friend or foe? In modern times a fighter jet, for example, will send out a signal that identifies the fighter jet as a friendly fighter jet. A counterfeit version would be an enemy fighter jet sending out a friendly signal.

Why then were those people spoken about by Luther Martin as conspirators conspiring to covertly overthrow the existing federation calling themselves, why were those conspirators calling themselves: the Federalist Party?

Add more names, and more names, and more names, to the same conspirators conspiring to destroy rule of law and replace rule of law with dictatorship (under any other names they still smell like rats on a sinking ship of their own making) and what is likely to happen to the accurate account that accurately places the name of each individual criminal alongside each individual crime perpetrated by each individual criminal in time and place: confusion, division, derision, fog, smoke, mirrors, false flags, legal fictions, and foes that appear as friends of Liberty?

Is it a random twist of fate that the actual people who worked effectively at preserving a federation (voluntary union) were called, somehow, anti-federalists?

How can that be rationalized, or covered up, or explained away, or marginalized, and why would anyone seek the goal of clouding that inculpatory evidence proving the willful crime, with malice aforethought, of usurping the existing voluntary federation and turning that voluntary union into a dictatorship?

 

[Unkotare]

This thread was posted on the wrong forum.

 

[Agit8r]

Agit8r,

Labels constitute inculpatory evidence in this case. How, for example, were those UNDER the voluntary union expressed with a Declaration of Independence able to accurately discriminate the difference between friend or foe? In modern times a fighter jet, for example, will send out a signal that identifies the fighter jet as a friendly fighter jet. A counterfeit version would be an enemy fighter jet sending out a friendly signal.

Why then were those people spoken about by Luther Martin as conspirators conspiring to covertly overthrow the existing federation calling themselves, why were those conspirators calling themselves: the Federalist Party?

Add more names, and more names, and more names, to the same conspirators conspiring to destroy rule of law and replace rule of law with dictatorship (under any other names they still smell like rats on a sinking ship of their own making) and what is likely to happen to the accurate account that accurately places the name of each individual criminal alongside each individual crime perpetrated by each individual criminal in time and place: confusion, division, derision, fog, smoke, mirrors, false flags, legal fictions, and foes that appear as friends of Liberty?

Is it a random twist of fate that the actual people who worked effectively at preserving a federation (voluntary union) were called, somehow, anti-federalists?

How can that be rationalized, or covered up, or explained away, or marginalized, and why would anyone seek the goal of clouding that inculpatory evidence proving the willful crime, with malice aforethought, of usurping the existing voluntary federation and turning that voluntary union into a dictatorship?

There isn't anything to suggest that The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was considered an at-will arrangement.

"Even in the case of a mere League between nations absolutely independent of each other, neither party has a right to dissolve it at pleasure; each having an equal right to expound its obligations, and neither, consequently a greater right to pronounce the compact void than the other has to insist on the mutual execution of it."
-- James Madison; from letter to Nicholas P. Trist (Feb. 15, 1830)

 

[Josf]

Agit8r,

Are you changing the subject for a reason? Will you eventually change the subject from the subject to my personal character? I'm curious that is why I ask.

If you want to change the subject from the subject, then by all means do so, and it may be a good idea to start your own debate/discussion/thread with the new subject.

The subject here is a subject concerning a working federation, which was a voluntary union, which was formed organically in defense against criminals perpetrating crimes under the color of law, known then as "The British," "Red Coats," "Tories," and "Loyalists," to name a few general names, or group names, without actually naming individual names of those perpetrating crimes under the color of law, such as the crime of torturing and mass murdering kidnapped defenders as those kidnapped defenders were then placed on so called "hospital ships" where those kidnapped defenders were starved to death, dehydrated to death, poisoned, by the thousands IF they did not obey the order to join the criminal organization and work effectively as fellow criminals; under the (false) color of law.

So the subject matter involves the voluntary, organic, formation of defenders into a collective defensive force, on one side, and that side can be called a federation, and on the other side are criminals who become accurately known as criminals because those criminals perpetrate crimes upon innocent people, such as the "hospital ship" crime example, on the other side. The subject matter involves the usurpation of the voluntary, organic, defensive, union of free defenders with their working federation that they invest into, or don't invest into, at their Liberty, as the counterfeit version is brought in, in time, and in place, by criminals posing as saviors.

That is the subject matter.

You appear to be barking up a tree that is an argument over the meanings of words. If you do that, which is fine by me, then please consider defining the one meaning (not the many meanings) you intend to convey with the words you choose. What do you mean, for example, when you choose the words/term Perpetual Union?

I take the meaning of that word to mean: "Any time volunteers volunteer to defend each other with a working federation said union perpetuates in that way."

The counterfeit meaning, which would be counterfeiting the above meaning, I can offer (voluntarily) this: "Any time the criminals take over defensive government they enforce their will upon everyone, controlling the behavior of everyone, so as to transfer all power of any kind from those who produce anything worth stealing, from the producers who are now victims, as that power flows to the criminals, perpetually, as the criminal connection is maintained perpetually, at least until the victims figure out how to defend against it." I can add that it is a neat trick when the criminals operate their organized crime under the color of law, because the victims are inspired to send all their defensive power to the criminals in a form that can be called fraudulent extortion, for if it were merely extortion then the victims would not be calling those extortion payments by a counterfeit name, such as income tax payments.

 

[Josf]

This thread was posted on the wrong forum.

Published Notice Quoted:
The Clean Debate Zone is to be used for the clean debating of Government Policies, Candidates, Current News and Events ONLY. No personal attacks, name calling, flaming etc is allowed in this section.

If the Federal Government was, is, and will continue to be a counterfeit government, or a government based upon a fraud, then the above is to be used for debating what?

1. The fraudulent government fraudulent Policies, Candidates, Current News, and Events ONLY.
2. The actual government Policies, Candidates, Current News, and Events ONLY.
3. The demarcation line, points, places, where the fraudulent government contacts the actual government Polices, Candidates, Current News, and Events ONLY.

Examples:

Bundy Ranch


Ferguson


911
911Truth.org - Investigation. Education. Accountability. Reform.911Truth.org

Geoengineering
Geoengineering Watch Exposing the climate engineering geoengineering cover-up

SOA
SOA Watch Close the School of the Americas

In each of the above recent and current examples there are clearly 2 groups comprised of the false and the actual government of the people, by the people, and for the people in America today.

Another example of information that proves beyond a reasonable doubt how and when the criminals took over is offered here and now with two more links, the first is a lecture and the second is a book linked and attributed to the same individual offering the lecture and the book.

The last battle of the Revolution explained in a sound bite:


Detailed explanation of the last battle of the Revolution in America:
Amazon.com Shays s Rebellion The American Revolution s Final Battle 9780812218701 Leonard L. Richards Books

The obvious and irrefutable continuation of the battle between the false and the true government power struggle does not ever start when the people are rendered powerless by effective lies. When those lies are defeated, on the other hand, there are tried and true methods by which the struggle is won peacefully.

An example (too late, too little, but an example none-the-less):
http://www.thekingcenter.org/sites/default/files/KING FAMILY TRIAL TRANSCRIPT.pdf

Example quote from that transcript of an effort by the whole country, represented in a trial by jury according to (some of) the common law, are the following words of a witness testimony.

Quote:_________________________________________________________________________
Page 1582

William Schaap

"Because when year, after year, after year you hear that something was the case, one story -- one day saying, hey, the whole thing was a lie, and it doesn't register on their brain."

Page 1614

"Q. (BY MR. PEPPER) Mr. Schaap, you've described an awesome power that exists in government influenced and controlled, sometimes owned, media -- print, audio, visual media entities -- and how that infrastructure gets focused on opponents of the United States such as Martin Luther King."

[Defenders of the innocent are not opponents of the many (50 or so) Republics which are united into a voluntary federation, the Legal Fiction known as U.S. Inc., is a false front, so people who are opposed to frauds are opponents of frauds, not opponents of the false word]

Page 1632

A. Oh, but -- as we know, silence can be deafening. Disinformation is not only getting certain things to appear in print, it's also getting certain things not to appear in print. I mean, the first -- the first thing I would say as a way of explanation is the incredibly powerful effect of disinformation over a long period of time that I mentioned before. For 30 years the official line has been that James Earl Ray killed Martin Luther King and he did it all by himself. That's 30 years, not -- nothing like the short period when the line was that the Cubans raped the Angolan women. But for 30 years it's James Earl Ray killed Dr. King, did it all by himself.

And when that is imprinted in the minds of the general public for 30 years, if somebody stood up and confessed and said: I did it. Ray didn't do it, I did it. Here's a movie. Here's a video showing me do it. 99 percent of the people wouldn't believe him because it just -- it just wouldn't click in the mind. It would just go right to -- it couldn't be. It's just a powerful psychological effect over 30 years of disinformation that's been imprinted on the brains of the -- the public. Something to the country couldn't -- couldn't be.
End Quote:_______________________________________________________________

The true government due process at work above, is an example of true "law of the land" "checks and balances" known before the criminals took over in 1787, as the palladium of Liberty, which, in the following quote also in the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial Transcript, explains:

Quote:___________________________________________________________
Arthur Jackson Haynes, Jr

Page 804

"I have considered in my thirty-five-year career a jury is the best lie detector there is."
_________________________________________________________________

The false, deceptive, fraudulent, cover-up, so called government employees order, and perpetrate, the capital crime of murder in at least one case proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, and it is the people, the whole country of people represented in the jury, determining this detection of this ongoing lie.

So, the obvious demand becomes, when did the criminals take over, and that discovery was already done, by more than a few individuals, if not ever reaching the point at which a trial by jury was employed by the people, for the people, and of the people, in defense of the people, against the criminals who took over in 1787. It is not too late to get the official record straight, as it was in the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial, where all the major culprits are long dead, or retired and out of office, but truth be told, in an official, authoritative, legal, and lawful manner, such as due process, the law of the land, the Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights, common law, common sense, and common reason DICTATES as that which ought to be done for ourselves and posterity.

Failing to hold the worst criminals to account while they torture and mass murder at will, under the color of law, is the non-option, the feeble, weak, fatal, flaw.

So this subject matter is, in fact, and explained in this way, justified as belonging in this Forum, or any other Public Access Forum for that matter.

 

[Unkotare]

This belongs on the Conspiracy Forum.

 

[Josf]

This belongs on the Conspiracy Forum.

Is that a dictatorial order of fact as determined by the authorities in question, or is that a subjective opinion offered by one member of a web based forum, so as to offer said subjective opinion to any other members of the Public at large which includes other members of the web based forum? I ask because I am curious concerning any other opinions concerning the words quoted above.

If facts mean anything to anyone, then genuine, honest, questions seeking those facts demand accurate answers instead of the alternative.

 

[Unkotare]

This belongs on the Conspiracy Forum.

Is that a dictatorial order of fact.....

A simple recognition of fact.

 

[Josf]

Edict:
"...an official order or proclamation issued by a person in authority."

If the edict is one and not a subjective opinion, then the belonging character is fixed simply with a few commands by the commander.

 

[Josf]

For me, as someone who managed to get on the false federal ballot in 1996, testing to see if an average Joe can occupy a seat in the false federal Congress, this lack of debate is not a surprise.

Despite the fact that the evidence proving (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the criminals took over the true federal government in 1787, and despite the fact that the criminals have been perpetrating very evil crimes, including torture, and including mass murder, since 1787, under the color of law, despite all those easily demonstrated facts, there is only silence, or ignorance, or apathy, inspired by that irrefutable evidence proving those facts.

That is not a surprise because that is understandable as the founding principle required in order for the criminals to perpetuate their power over their victims.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

That above, that message quoted above, is unfortunately only half true, because something is being done, and the doing is meticulously accounted as a steady, ongoing, transfer of power from those who create it voluntarily to those who steal it through the false federal government National Debt scheme, and all that goes with that process. Something certainly is being done, and everything that can be stolen from anyone producing anything worth stealing, is being stolen, and that value flows in the form of "Legal" Purchasing Power, into one massive fraud called a FUND, where those in command of that POWER use that POWER to maintain their command of that POWER, and they torture, and they mass murder, and they do so with impunity, and that has gone on at least since 1787 here in America.

Good luck with it.