The United States: Its A Trade Union, Dummy!


It’s just a trade union, dummy…

This was what I stated out loud to myself as I came to the cognitive realization that the best possible comparison of just what is the “Union” created by the Constitution of the United States is to that of a simple, organized labor (trade) union. They are a dime a dozen. Pick two and let’s compare them in their similitude.

In 1828, Webster defined what a corporation is before we had a McDonalds and Starbuck’s on every other corner, before malls and stip-malls existed. Before this, corporations were pools of organized labor and trade, such as the Virginia and East India Company, which, once settled as colonies, became bodies politic. In other words, they became politically but not naturally “independent” trade unions – commercial entities (artificial persons/corporations) under a central government.

CORPORATION – noun – A body politic or corporate, formed and authorized by law to act as a single person; a society having the capacity of transacting business as an individual. Corporations are aggregate or sole. Corporations aggregate consist of two or more persons united in a society, which is preserved by a succession of members, either forever, or till the corporation is dissolved by the power that formed it, by the death of all its members, by surrender of its charter or franchises, or by forfeiture. Such corporations are the mayor and aldermen of cities, the head and fellows of a college, the dean and chapter of a cathedral church, the stockholders of a bank or insurance company, etc. corporation sole consists of one person only and his successors, as a king or a bishop. (Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

INCORPORATE – adjective – [in and corporate.] 1. Not consisting of matter; not having a material body… (Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

CORPORATE – adjective – [Latin , to be shaped into a body, body.] 1. United in a body, or community, as a number of individuals, who are empowered to transact business as an individual; formed into a body; as a corporate assembly, or society; corporate town. 2. United; general; collectively one. They answer in a corporate voice. (Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

For years I have been challenged by the purest of unlearned, unregenerate contrarians in my dissertation and source material that the United States is indeed a corporation nation. Such a challenge 230 years ago would have been met with outrage, humiliating laughter, and public flogging as that of being a ridiculous assertion, that of course each nation is and by definition must be a corporation (called also as a body politic). Since we defined in detail just what a municipal corporation is in my last post, there is no need to further clarify here again that every district, city, county, and state government (municipal, body politic) is also a corporation — as a legal, fictional body without a material body. One cannot use the word body politic without meaning a corporation (artificial person at law). The two words are in sameness. And in the end, this means one very important thing. They’re all fiction. They don’t really Exist in Reality. No one is actually born in a nation. One is contracted and given a legal person (status) in the nation (corporation) or one is considered a foreigner (as one without lean, an alien). There is nowhere anyone can point to and say that this physical, tangible thing is or proves the actual Natural Existence of the “United States” or any other nation (corporation), any more than you can point to a Steven King novel as proof of the Natural Existence of IT or Randall Flagg. These are fictional characters and made up (incorporated) places, every one. They must be believed in to have artificial existence and authority. And yet, not ironically, they are used as the excuse to commit the worst possible crimes against Reality and Its Law of Nature.

Likewise, there are actually contrarians out there that will tell you that no “commerce” exists as a function of government. This ridiculous assertion, of course, is defeated by simply reading the constitution and US Code. In fact, without the infamous “interstate commerce” clause and its ability to control it, the United States would have little if anything to do but play with itself, all alone in its little, foreign district, completely outside of the 50 States in actual union.

Tell me why I need a surety bond to do business with the United States? Key words, here, are do business. How can I do business with the “United States” unless “United States” is a business (corporation)?

But do these definitions alone make the United States just another commercial company of the main Crown corporation under the thumb of the Vatican’s spiritual jurisdiction and civil authority?

Well, firstly we must define terms…

Just what is trade? What is commerce? Are they the same thing?

Perhaps a better question is, what in the United States is not considered as commerce?

(Hint: citizenship is commerce!)

COMMERCE – noun – 1. In a general sense, an interchange or mutual change of goods, wares, productions, or property of any kind, between nations or individuals, either by barter, or by purchase and sale; trade; traffick. Commerce is foreign or inland. Foreign commerce is the trade which one nation carries on with another; inland commerce or inland trade, is the trade in the exchange of commodities between citizens of the same nation or state. Active commerce. 2. Intercourse between individuals; interchange of work, business, civilities or amusements; mutual dealings in common life3. Familiar intercourse between the sexes4. Interchange; reciprocal communications; as, there is a vast commerce of ideas.  verb intransitive – 1. To traffick; to carry on trade. 2. To hold intercourse with. And looks commercing with the skies. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

TRADE – noun – [Latin tracto, to handle, use, treat.] 1. The act or business of exchanging commodities by barter; or the business of buying and selling for money; commerce; traffic; barter. Trade comprehends every species of exchange or dealing, either in the produce of land, in manufactures, in bills or money. It is however chiefly used to denote the barter or purchase and sale of goods, wares and merchandise, either by wholesale or retail. Trade is either foreign, or domestic or inland. Foreign trade consists in the exportation and importation of goods, or the exchange of the commodities of different countries. Domestic or home trade is the exchange or buying and selling of goods within a country. Trade is also by the wholesale, that is, by the package or in large quantities, or it is by retail, or in small parcels. The carrying trade is that of transporting commodities from one country to another by water… 3. Business pursued; occupation; in contempt; as, piracy is their trade. Hunting their sport, and plund’ring was their trade… 5. Employment not manual; habitual exercise. 6. Custom; habit; standing practice. Thy sin’s not accidental, but a trade7. Men engaged in the same occupation. Thus booksellers speak of the customs of the trade. – verb intransitive – To barter, or to buy and sell; to deal in the exchange, purchase or sale of goods, wares and merchandise, or any thing else; to traffic; to carry on commerce as a business. Thus American merchants trade with the English at London and at Liverpool; they trade with the French at Havre and Bordeaux, and they trade with Canada… 2. To act merely for money – verb transitive – To sell or exchange in commerce. They traded the persons of men. Ezekiel 27:12… (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

–=–

To the legal mind, that is, the immoral or amorally-based mind, marriage and its consummation is as well nothing but an act of commerce. Trade and barter is commerce. Money in all forms is commerce. And so is amusement, business, communication, and the mutual dealings (transactions/interchanges) in everyday life.

Of course, the most valuable trade was in slaves, the commerce of souls…

So what’s left? What part of life is not considered commerce by the legal societies and policy-makers?

The answer: no part of the fictional, commercial life of a public, common person (national citizenship) is not considered a commercial activity. A person is a vehicle for commerce and nothing else. For a man is never actually the person (status) he pretends to be in legalistic affairs, only pretending to be in sameness with that fictional character. Even driving the kids to school in a legal (illegitimate/fictional) marriage between two legal persons of the United States corporation is considered as commerce:

FAMILY CARAutomobile used to send owner’s children to school was family car.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

FAMILY AUTOMOBILE DOCTRINE – The doctrine is that one who owns and maintains an automobile (car) for the general use of his household makes use of automobile for such purposes a part of his business so that any member using automobile for those purposes under general authority to do so becomes his representative, for whose negligence he is responsible. It is an extension of the principle of respondeat superior to the relation created by operation of family use automobile. See, also, Family Car Doctrine and Family Purpose Doctrine. It is based on theory that members of family were engaged in a joint enterprise or that child was agent of parents. If an automobile is owned and maintained by a family corporation for general use of a family, such as that of corporation’s manager and one of its principal stockholders, corporation may be held liable under the “family automobile doctrine” to third parties. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

In fiction, there is no such thing as a Real family, for no actual bodies exist in an incorporate state. Persons are fiction. Thus the marriage between to individuals (persons) simply creates a new incorporation, a joint personhood. It’s just words on paper, and of course illegitimate in the eyes of God and Nature, such persons having no existence in Nature. You see, for governmental, legalese purposes, a family is a business (corporation). A corporation is legally a “family” by definition. And of course all the kings subjects call the king as father. America has its founding “fathers,” having no idea what this term actually means, for every corporation (family) has a father (founder).

We must remember the fictional aspect of everything legally created, including a “family” (nation/corporate body) of legal persons. Again, when two United States persons as public citizenships get married, this is not a Real marriage in Nature between a male and a female, but instead the incorporation of two fictional (sexless) surnames, as two persons (individuals) become incorporated into one artificial body (artificial person). Thus, every action taken in the corporate marriage is a commercial act, even driving to the grocery store and tucking the kids into bed at night. It can be no other way, for the legal (commercial) persons incorporated in legal marriage are nothing more or less than commercial vessels of the United States. Persons (including individuals, corporations, associations, etc.) have no other purpose than as vessels in international/interstate commerce. And United States persons (citizenships) are always, without exception, foreigners in whatever State (territory) they reside in. The United States is always foreign to every other State or nation, and every State is private (foreign) to the United States and to each other. This is basic law.

Think about it this way… if you get married in The Matrix, a simulation of Reality, does that mean you got married in Real Life? Beware the paradox!

Again, nothing of Nature, nothing of God exists in a legal marriage, for the God of Nature is not the creator of persons (legal status in society). God, in other words, is Truth, and there is nothing but lies in the legal fiction world of men. There is no commerce in Nature, only the Truth of Natural Existence and Its Law, of Life Itself. There is only Existence alone, without words to describe or define it. It just Is… the supremacy of Being. But everything a legal person does is in fact a commercial (fictional) activity, a well told and registered lie, for persons are without exception only ever agents of government. There is no other purpose for establishing personhood than commercial activity, be it for protection, insurance, employment, or some other artificial security. When you sleep at night, the person you play in public is still considered active, which is why you can be insured for theft in the middle of the night. It is the person that the claim is made under, not the man using and posing as the person (strawman) in commerce.

Notice in the definition above that trade comes from the root of the word “use.” To use is just another word meaning to employ. Slaves were forcibly employed (used) for both commerce (trade) and labor, an alternative but certainly proper use of the legal word. Today, slavery is voluntary, ranging from contractual wage slavery to the performance debt entailed by the contractual relationship that is public citizenship. The only difference between a slave and an employee is that the employee is a prostitute, a mercenary, a laborer for hire, also called a hireling. This is a neutral term, and nothing to be offended at. The truth is often uncomfortable when understood for the first time, yet the truth can never actually offend, only set one free of one’s own lies and self-deceptions. I assure you that any and all employees of every corporation fall under the title of “hireling” as defined below. There is no public shame in this simply because the public is clueless of what exactly their shameful, public (vulgar/lowest) status means. The public is a body corporate of individual prostitutes (agents/employees), nothing more, nothing less. That is the nature of being in citizenship. No other purpose exists for citizenship than commerce. When prostituion in mammon is the custom for all “citizens” (as employees) to aspire to, and when the entire culture and education system rears nothing but prostitutes seeking a job after graduation, then who can possibly point to another US citizen-ship and accuse them of such a horrific venture in commerce? Even our parents beg us to “get a job” when we are ready to be properly used (employed) at the age of consent. It’s been built into our wage-slave culture, our entertainments, and our judgements over each other. And what is the societal misconception — that one is a loser or lazy if one is unemployed (not being used)? Amazingly, this amounts to nothing but the worship of and agentic relationship with mammon, with money, taking us all away from the simple lifestyle of tending to the land to support ourselves, our families, our neighbors, our friends, and anyone else that charitably needs what the earth provides to all without consideration of commerce, of trade, or of the greed that only money and the false valuation of our priceless Nature can cause.

EMPLOYED – This signifies both the act of doing a thing and the being under contract or orders to do it. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition)

EMPLOYTo engage in one’s service; to USE as an AGENT or SUBSTITUTE in transacting business; to commission and intrust with the management of one’s affairs; and, when used in respect to a servant or hired laborer, the term is equivalent to hiring, which implies a request and a contract for a compensation, and has but this one meaning when used in the ordinary affairs and business of life. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition)

EMPLOYverb transitive – [Latin plico.] 1. To occupy the time, attention and labor of; to keep busy, or at work; to use. We employ our hands in labor; we employ our heads or faculties in study or thought; the attention is employed, when the mind is fixed or occupied upon an object; we employ time, when we devote it to an object. A portion of time should be daily employed in reading the scriptures, meditation and prayer; a great portion of life is employed to little profit or to very bad purposes. 2. To use as an instrument or means. We employ pens in writing, and arithmetic in keeping accounts. We employ medicines in curing diseases. 3. To use as materials in forming any thing. We employ timber, stones or bricks, in building; we employ wool, linen and cotton, in making cloth. 4. To engage in one’s service; to use as an agent or substitute in transacting business; to commission and entrust with the management of one’s affairs. The president employed an envoy to negotiate a treaty. Kings and States employ embassadors at foreign courts. 5. To occupy; to use; to apply or devote to an object; to pass in business; as, to employ time; to employ an hour, a day or a week; to employ one’s life. To employ one’s self, is to apply or devote one’s time and attention; to busy one’s self. – nounThat which engages the mind, or occupies the time and labor of a PERSON; business; object of study or industry; employment. Present to grasp, and future still to find. The whole employ of body and of mind. 1. Occupation, as art, mystery, trade, profession. 2. Public office; agency; service for another. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

HIRELINGnounOne who is hired, or who serves for wages. 1. A mercenary; a prostitute. – adjectiveServing for wages; venal; mercenary; EMPLOYED for money or other compensation (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

–=–

Yes, we are so dumbed down as a society in commercial enslavement that we even employ our selves! We pay our own fictional persons (legal status in the national labor union) while we (as men) do all the work, and in return give government a cut in taxes and other extortions. How stupid is that? In other words, like all unions, we are paying the government mob-style for protection against ourselves as our own boss (employer)! Our taxes are merely dues, the protection money collected by the mob and its enforcement goons. And in exchange, our rented strawman of a person (legal status) receives both employee and consumer rights and protections from the federal union and its United States corporation (the district). Why else would you pay a for fictional character, a strawman, that only exists in “UNITED STATES” and its commercial jurisdiction? And why else would you continue to pay “UNITED STATES” taxes when you are working overseas in a different trade union (nation)? Protection money… that’s all it is! And sometimes the word protection means a knock on the head or a bullet in the gut or perhaps a stay in jail. After all, it is the right of all citizens to be put in pain, punished, taxed, licensed, and extorted (exacted) from. That’s straight outta US Code!

We can of course look at other nations (unions) and their origin to confirm this strange reality of fiction. We certainly cannot deny that the American colonies were originally properties of the Crown corporation, and were organized and run though various “companies” of that Crown, such as the Virginia Company of London, also called the London Company, and its infamous oversees partner the East India Company.

From the definition of corporation above, we can certainly understand what Canada and other countries under the Crown’s “commonwealth” and United Kingdom actually are. For you see, each city, each province, each country, and each nation are actually each separate corporations. They stand each as a corporation sole.

From my book (pages 350-51):

…This is the declaration of a line of kings (land lords), the same blood-line evoked in the British Crown coronation and false anointment ceremony in the public prayer of “may the king live forever…” This is, of course, a reference not to the man but to the Crown, passed from mortal man to mortal man in that immortal fiction of an inheritable corporation sole. May the crown corporation “live” (artificially) forever…

…The “Archbishop of Canterbury” is also an office held by a current living (mortal) man corporately (artificially) clothed in the corporation sole that is that flattering title. The office of Queen and King of England and of the United Kingdom are also in the form of corporation’s sole, where the current monarch carries a different corporate shell wherever she may travel. Elizabeth II currently presents her fictional self as the corporation sole entitled Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the United Kingdom in her most general artifice (office), though when she visits for political reasons the individual states of that kingdom, her entitled corporation sole will change intoHer Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada,” “Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Australia,” and even more specific-ally or locally as the corporation’s sole entitledHer Majesty the Queen in Right of Queensland” and “Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta,” etc. These are merely artificial persons, different corporations for different districted legal jurisdictions. And we must not forget that these words used as titles of land masses are not land masses at all, but merely crown corporations (magic words) and jurisdictions in commerce with no tangible aspect at all. They are nouns/names and nothing else, built merely of words on paper pretended to be placed over territories (land) outlined on maps (simulacra) in legally created treaties. They are all fictions, just as all the cities, counties, states, and districts of the United States exist only on paper. They must be believed in (loved) to exist. This is the trap and legal matrix of the big legal lie, the antithesis to God’s Creation.

The “Lord Mayer of London” is also a corporation sole, as many offices both secular and ecclesiastical are, including the “Minister of the Government” of the Republic of Ireland and all “Vicars,” “Bishops,” and “Deans” of the church of England. Where allowed by state laws, each parish priest in the Catholic church is also a separate corporation sole. And off course, the “Registrar General,” as keeper of public records for the “taxed” and registered populous, is also in the form of a corporation sole…

–=–

With this understanding, that each city, province, and district in Canada and indeed all Crown corporation nations are indeed a separate corporation sole of the crown, we can now take a gander at how Canada’s governmental structure for commerce is set up, and why it is actually uniform in so many ways with both the United States and other nations, under the law of nations (maritime/admiralty, foreign, and interstate commerce). It’s a trade union, dummy!

Our northern neighbor named as the trade union “Canada,” of course, had similar beginnings to the United States, and we can look at Canada today (being still openly under the mother Crown corporation) to see that this fact has never actually or officially changed. For Canadians didn’t revolt nor form a separate labor union by declaring “independence” from that middle management and holding corporation of the Crown/King. Here is a list of just the federal (i.e. Crown Corporation) companies still running the show in Canada (Wikipedia linked):

–=–

Yes, these are all companies (corporations) run by the “sovereign” Crown Corporation. Indeed, the introduction to this list states:

“Canadian Crown corporations are state-owned enterprises owned by the Sovereign of Canada (i.e. the Crown).[1][2][3] They are established by an Act of Parliament or Act of a provincial legislature and report to that body via a minister of the Crown in the relevant cabinet,[4] though they are “shielded from constant government intervention and legislative oversight” and thus “generally enjoy greater freedom from direct political control than government departments.

–=–

Well, isn’t that nice? In other words, they are not only out of the control of the Canadian people as represented in government but “shielded” from the Canadian government’s oversight!

So who’s manning the roost? Who’s pulling the strings?

Why the Crown Corporation and its many artificial corporation soles, of course. The false god. The sovereign of the fictional realm…

So what went so differently in the United States?

Thanks to financial and economic mistreatment by the king of England at the time towards the Crown Corporation’s American colonies (defined as plantations/farms of the Crown), the slave-owning plantation and land owning freemasons got together and formed themselves a little congress, and then a union, as secretly and as behind the backs of management (the king) as any other labor union is formed today, and just as unwelcome by the head of any corporation.

So let’s look now at what a labor union is, what it entails, and what is the difference between a commercial nation (corporation) and an incorporated trade union?

–=–
LABOR UNION: (noun)

What It Is:

A labor union is an organization that advocates for workers’ rights and benefits through collective bargaining.

How It Works:

Labor unions represent workers in both the public and private sector. Individual labor unions represent workers in specific industries and function in an intermediary capacity between employers and employees. Unions negotiate directly with employers on employees’ behalf with regard to compensation, conditions and working hours.

Workers employed by transportation, shipping and manufacturing companies typically maintain contracts with labor unions. The unions agree to engage employers in collective bargaining in return for union dues withheld from payroll. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters and United Steel Workers are two prominent labor unions in the United States.

Why It Matters:

Labor unions protect workers from exploitation and ensure fairness of pay as well as safe, reasonable working conditions. Many economists argue that labor unions have a distortive effect on the labor market that results in decreased efficiency.

–=–

It appears the only difference between a nation and a trade/labor union is that one is local and one is universal (federal). In other words, one applies to a single corporation or type of corporate employee in trade while the other (national/federal) applies to all its federal members (citizenships) acting (in agency) as employees. Both are voluntary, contractual, legal relationships. However, each separately established trade union exists under the federal umbrella, just like the United Nations is taking over as the main trade union of the worlds nations of laborers and tradesmen.

So let’s consider for a moment…

Who sets minimum wage for laborers?

The United States (company).

Who creates all laws governing labor forces and employers (corporations) and their hirelings in America?

The United States (company).

Who created and administers OSHA?

The United States through its Department of LABOR.

“Under the OSH Act, employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace. OSHA’s mission is to assure safe and healthful workplaces by setting and enforcing standards, and by providing training, outreach, education and assistance. Employers must comply with all applicable OSHA standards. Employers must also comply with the General Duty Clause of the OSH Act, which requires employers to keep their workplace free of serious recognized hazards.”

Source: https://www.osha.gov/law-regs.html

–=–

Sounds like a LABOR union to me! Actually, it sounds like fascism light

How were these commercial companies (i.e. colonies) in the United States originally set up?

A Royal Charter from the Crown corporation.

How is a labor union set up?

A corporate charter from the federal corporation.

Hmm…

Let’s look at Fascist Italy as an example (from wikipedia) of where the idea of unions come from, and how they are part and parcel of the state. Notice that this charter was created in “articles,” just like the US Constitution and the Articles of Confederation. Coincidence, right?

The Charter of Labour of 1927 (ItalianCarta del Lavoro) was one of the main pieces of legislation Benito Mussolini, the Italian Fascist dictator from 1922–43, introduced in his attempts to modernise the Italian economy. The Charter was promulgated by the Grand Council of Fascism and publicized in the Lavoro d’Italia newspaper on April 23, 1927. It was mainly designed by Giuseppe Bottai, Under-Secretary of State of Corporations.

The Charter declared private enterprise to be the most efficient,[1] thus helping Mussolini to confirm the support of the rich industrialists who were the initial backers of Fascism. It insisted that state intervention was legitimate only where private enterprise was deficient.[2]

Article 1: “The Italian Nation is an organism having ends, life, and means of action superior to those of individuals, singly or in groups, of which it is composed. It is a moral, political, and economic unity, realized wholly in the Fascist State.”

Article 2: “Work, in all its intellectual, technical, and manual forms, is a social obligation. To this end, and only to this end, it is safeguarded by the State. The totality of production is unitary from the national point of view; its objectives are unitary and comprise the well-being of the producers and the development of national strength.”

Article 3: “There is freedom of professional or union organization. But only the union legally recognized by, and subject to, the control of the State — has the right to legally represent the entire category of employers or employees by which it is constituted […]; or to stipulate collective labor contracts binding on all those belonging to the category; or to impose on them dues, or to exercise on their behalf delegate functions of public interest.”

Article 4: “In the collective labor contract is found the concrete expression of the solidarity of the various makers of the product, by means of the conciliation of the opposing interests of the employers and the workers, and their subordination to the superior interests of production.”

Article 6: “Legally recognized professional associations insure the legal equality between employers and workers, maintain the discipline of production and work, and promotes its perfection. Corporations constitute the unitary organizations of production and integrally represent its interests […]. Corporations are recognized legally as organs of the State […].”

Article 7: “The corporative State considers private initiative, in the field of production, as the most efficient and useful instrument of the Nation.” [3]

Article 9 stated that: “State intervention in economic production may take place only where private initiative is lacking or is insufficient, or when are at stakes the political interest of the State. This intervention may take the form of control, encouragement or direct management.” [4]

Article 13: “The duty of employment is under control of the corporate organs. Employers have the obligation to hire workers who are official members of the appropriate trades, and have the power to choose from the rolls of membership, giving precedence to the members of the party and the Fascist unions according to their seniority of membership.”

–=–

Perhaps the biggest giveaway here is the use of a constitution. Yes, my friends, labor unions are constituted.

Just how do you think the “Teamsters” got created in the first place?

–=–

International Brotherhood of Teamsters

CONSTITUTION

Adopted by the
26th International Convention June 25-29, 2001

As Amended by Special Convention April 30, 2002

INTRODUCTION

The Consent Decree entered on March 14, 1989, in

United States v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, et al., 88 Civ. 4486 (S.D.N.Y.) (LAP), made certain amendments to the International Union’s Constitution that the courts have held are part of the Constitution despite the fact that they were rejected by the delegates to the 1991 International Convention.

The following Constitution includes Article XIX, Section 14, which is required by the Consent Decree. Language required by the Consent Decree but not approved by the delegates is printed in ITALICS. Those provisions are currently in effect…

Source: http://old1.teamster.org/about/constitution/constwebtext.pdf

–=–

So a labor union is formed by a delegation in a convention where a constitution is created… Does that sound familiar? It should. For the United States trade union was formed by a delegation of freemasons (an interstate brotherhood) in a continental convention where a constitution was created. LOL! Can it get any more obvious?

But wait, the ignorant, publicly educated, patriotic American worker demands, unions are wholly an American institution and good for the common worker, aren’t they? Isn’t that what we are told? Well sure, if you one of the few in the unions. But how is this possibly in harmony with the principles of equality and equity? It’s not, because its a fascist, communist ideal! It is exclusionary. It is the farthest from Natural Freedom possible. It’s organized crime.

In fact, like most agencies of government, including social security, we now have globalism in unions (From Wikipedia):

The International Labour Organization (ILO) is United Nations agency dealing with labour problems, particularly international labour standards, social protection, and work opportunities for all.[1] The ILO has 187 member states: 186 of the 193 UN member states plus the Cook Islands are members of the ILO.

In 1969, the organisation received the Nobel Peace Prize for improving peace among classes, pursuing decent work and justice for workers, and providing technical assistance to other developing nations.[2]

The ILO registers complaints against entities that are violating international rules; however, it does not impose sanctions on governments.

–=–

Imagine a slave-owner declaring that his slaves should be part of his own plantation labor union, which guarantees work opportunities for all! What a joke. Improving peace (commerce) among classes, as they put it above.

Yes. You read that right. International standards under international law with governance by the United Nations (united trade/labor unions). Most American workers know nothing of international law or the law of nations or the difference between the two, nor have any idea that United States law is bound under that same law of nations, even though this is a well-known fact and even stated in the constitution. Even more on point, a large percentage of “specialized” attorneys as well are not familiar with the law of nations. Specialization breeds ignorance and corruption, not only in law but in the medical, scientific, education (university syndicalism), and even labor fields. More to the point, it breeds dependence on the system — a system built on the ignorance of specialized trades and labor pools. How deliciously ironic.

Article VI § 2 states clearly that “treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the United States” will form part of “the supreme law of the land… any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding,” while Article II empowers the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to “make treaties.” In other words, at any time, foreign or international law can become part of the law of the land (due process of law). Nothing is sacred, not even the constitution, for the constitution allows not only for its own alteration (amendment) and suspension, as all constitutions ever written do, but also that at any time congress can change and alter the law to their purview. They can even alter or add to the articles (amendments) of the constitution by calling a convention, just like the Teamsters. With changing times and moral degradation as we see today in this society, so too does the law change to suit that dis-eased condition of the minds of agentic men.

From Constitution.org, we may read the history of the United States under the law of nations from its inception:

Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 10 of the Constitution for the United States delegates the power to Congress to “define and punish … Offenses against the Law of Nations“. It is important to understand what is and is not included in the term of art “law of nations”, and not confuse it with “international law”. They are not the same thing. The phrase “law of nations” is a direct translation of the Latin jus gentium, which means the underlying principles of right and justice among nations, and during the founding era was not considered the same as the “laws”, that is, the body of treaties and conventions between nations, the jus inter gentes, which, combined with jus gentium, comprise the field of “international law”. The distinction goes back to ancient Roman Law.

Briefly, the Law of Nations at the point of ratification in 1788 included the following general elements, taken from Blackstone’s Commentaries, and prosecution of those who might violate them:

(1) No attacks on foreign nations, their citizens, or shipping, without either a declaration of war or letters of marque and reprisal.

(2) Honoring of the flag of truce, peace treaties, and boundary treaties. No entry across national borders without permission of national authorities.

(3) Protection of wrecked ships, their passengers and crew, and their cargo, from depredation by those who might find them.

(4) Prosecution of piracy by whomever might be able to capture the pirates, even if those making the capture or their nations had not been victims.

(5) Care and decent treatment of prisoners of war.

(6) Protection of foreign embassies, ambassadors, and diplomats, and of foreign ships and their passengers, crew, and cargo while in domestic waters or in port.

(7) Honoring of extradition treaties for criminals who committed crimes in a nation with whom one has such a treaty who escape to one’s territory or are found on the high seas.

And, although it was not yet firmly established with all nations in 1788,

(8) Prohibition of enslavement of foreign nationals and international trading in slaves.

To expand on point (2), Blackstone, in discussing border passes, stated “by the law of nations no member of one society has a right to intrude into another … [I]t is left in the power of all states, to take such measures about the admission of strangers, as they deem convenient.”

Source: http://constitution.org/cmt/law_of_nations.htm

–=–

What is international law?

It’s just the for-profit ethics of international commerce — the sea trade. In essence, it is the logistics of human trafficking in every way.

Of course, most powerful nations are run by either the queen and king or by their bloodline of royal cousins (lesser kings and queens). World War I, for instance, was nothing more and nothing less than a war between ruling family members of the same family — cousins pretending to fight cousins. There was no winner of these wars, nor was there a loser, for the order of inheritance of that bloodline would never change. Only a planned, purposeful shift in the balance of power and the profits of war (weapons, death, and destruction) and thus reconstruction was divided between the family, creating new familial (corporate) mergers and acquisitions, and new treaties born from the lawlessness of war. Only in war may the lawless law of necessity be invoked, allowing for any and every law to be altered or suspended. It is ridiculous to consider these wars of the “world” as anything but a reorganization of the corporation nations (unions) under bloodline rule, and only secondarily as a forced culling of the common (vulgar) goyim populaces of each. War is business, the ultimate commercial venture, plain and simple.

And, of course, what happens after war?

Why free-flowing commerce again between all the nations, of course.

What are wars fought? Because commerce is being blocked somewhere between the nations, either accidentally or intentionally (i.e. false flag) to start the war.

So what is peace really? Free flowing commerce between nations.

And so in times of peace, the nations must not only control but enforce the rules of the international law of commerce while adhering to the law of nations. Since slavery is all but poo-poo’d therein, this complicated system of labor management must be implemented, from the basic minimum wage to the most selective of trade unions.

And so we can not fool ourselves any longer with the romanticism and glory-filled fables of the founding fathers and the origins of the United States. For all intents and purposes, Philadelphia was set up as nothing more and nothing less than an international hub for international trade. It did not make men free, but rather protected slavery and indenture (contract labor). In fact, its whole purpose was to control and regulate the labor force and trade of commodities. To believe that these Crown corporations (colonies) had any other purpose than to expand trade under the Crown’s empire is of course a fools errand. And to believe that the subsequent founding of the United States was anything but the founding of a politically but not naturally “independent” trade union is purely the result of a lifetime of public education steeped in propaganda and lies — the false religion of patriots.

It’s a labor (trade) union, dummy!

This article from Unionplus.com explains the process. Pay close attention to the details…

A labor or trade union is an organization of workers dedicated to protecting members’ interests and improving wages, hours and working conditions for all.

No matter what you do for a living, there’s a union with members who do the same thing. Unions represent:

•    mechanics,
•    teachers,
•    factory workers,
•    office workers,
•    actors,
•    musicians,
•    police officers,
•    construction workers,
•    airline pilots,
•    janitors,
•    plumbers,
•    doctors,
•    pharmacists,
•    IT/computer professionals,
•    government workers at all levels,
•    engineers,
•    writers,
•    nurses,
•    and many more types of workers.

Did you know there are over 60 national/international unions that represent millions of workers across America and CanadaSee a list of AFL-CIO-affiliated unions here and a list of Change-to-Win unions here.

Unions work to make America strong.

Unions work like a democracy. They hold elections for officers who make decisions on behalf of members, giving workers more power on the job.

A local union is a locally-based group of workers with a charter from a national or international union such as the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) or United Auto Workers (UAW). A local may include workers from the same company or region. It may also have workers from the same business sector, employed by different companies.

How to form a union:

  1. It starts with the formation of a bargaining unit,  a group represented by a union for dealing with an employer.
  2. It is legal for employers to try to persuade employees not to unionize. However, it is illegal for an employer to prevent employees from unionizing through threats, violence, and other coercive action.
  3. An employer is required by law to bargain in good faith with a union, although an employer is not required to agree to any particular terms. Once an agreement is reached through negotiations, a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is signed.
  4. After a CBA is signed, an employer can’t change details of the agreement without the union representative’s approval. The CBA lasts for a set period of time with the union monitoring to assure the employer abides by the contract. To learn more about collective bargaining and how unions work, visit CollectiveBargainingFacts.com.
  5. As with many other organizations, union costs are paid by member dues that typically cost about $50 a month. Most unions have paid staff to manage their operations. While some staff may be paid by union dues, members also often volunteer.

Everyday benefits to help working families

The collective buying power of union members is also used by Union Privilege to negotiate consumer benefit programs for working families.

Union Plus benefits and discounts are for union members and Working America members. Benefits include everything from financial services and legal services to discounts on AT&T wireless, travel, car rentals, flowers, entertainment and more.

Benefits also include unique assistance for workers facing financial hardship due to disability, layoff (unemployment), strike and more.

NOTE: No union dues money goes into the development or operation of any Union Plus program.

Link–> https://www.unionplus.org/page/how-do-unions-work

–=–

Hmm… so labor unions work just like democracies do? Interesting… no wonder the economy is so fucked up, considering that democracy is the worst governmental structure possible before tyranny takes over.  As I’ve given those quotes before, I will just reference my book here where democracy is exposed for what it really is. (Download book for free and see pages 140-45 at strawmanstory.info)

I have only one question: Why in hell wouldn’t a corporation that was unionized move its manufacturing to China or Mexico or Indonesia for cheap labor? Why should a guy with a beer belly driving a forklift make $60 an hour plus a continued, ridiculous salary for their retirement after 20 years? How is that rational? It only works in the money system, in mammon. It’s purpose is not to help the worker but to destroy the economy and ability of the nation to compete, so as to go global!

Now I can finally understand what patriotism actually is. For it is strongest amongst union members — those who benefit the most from organized trade (organized crime of government), which by its very definition is pointless without the purposeful exclusion of all others. Patriotism and Zionism are virtually the same thing. Such unionization is merely a product of mammon, of the evil that money causes men to do both directly and indirectly to other men, be it wars against nations or the patriotic stomping upon “scabs” that seek to feed their families at a lower wage. It’s really not unlike prostitution in this way at all, each unionized whore defending her own corner and glorifying out of necessity the very organized pimp that protects her (through abuse and extortion) in that organized trade union of pimped-out whores. Don’t stand on their corner, girl, cause them unionized bitches will cut you…

And tell me something… what is the difference between being a non-union member and an illegal alien?

Answer: there is no difference. You are either a member/citizen or you are not, and so you either have special privileges others do not or you don’t. Nothing could be further from the principles of True equitableness (conformity to the Law of Nature) than this.

Now, from the list above, let’s see if the so-called “congress assembled” fulfilled the above 5 requirements to form a corporation (body politic) of States (People) united? Let’s answer these questions and find out:

(1) Did the United States form a bargaining unit (i.e. congress), as a group representing a union of commercial entities (i.e. the colonies/states in union) for dealing with a principal employer/user (employer/king) in commerce? Certainly they did!

(2) Debate as to unionize or not certainly took place, e.g. the federalists and non-federalists. And they certainly tried to persuade the king (employer) in a host of good and bad ways, such as the Boston Tea Party. As a sovereign (false god) though, the king could make threats, commit violence, and use other coercive actions all he liked per the already established union contract of his companies (colonies). Turns out, through Executive Orders, so too can the United States in its own sovereign capacity. Just look at the civil war…

(3) Was there negotiations? Of course. Was the king (principal of the “collective” Crown Corporations) required to accept any particular terms? Obviously not, since war insued shortly thereafter. Was a collective bargaining agreement signed, like say, the constitution for the united States and a treaty of peace (free-flowing commerce)? Yep.

(4) Is the constitution changeable without the union’s representatives (congress’s) approval? Nope.

(5) Are union costs and dues paid by the states and the common laborers (citizenships) thereof? Absolutely. In politics it’s called taxes though.

To answer in another way:

How was the US formed as a trade “Union”?

1. The Union started with a congressional unit for bargaining, as a confederation (conspiracy/combination of unsatisfied men), who represented each State (land-holding People) in dealings with the King (employer, owner of company/colonies)

2. The anti-federalists would qualify as employees of the King seeking non-unionization (non-federalization).

3. The King did not and was not required to agree to the terms of the continental congress. After the war (quite violent negotiations), a treaty of peace agreement was signed, allowing the United States to be its own Trade “Union.”

4. The law and the constitution cannot be changed without congress and the president’s approval.

5. The Union of States is paid for by taxes from member employees (US citizenships) and corporations (artificial persons), as what is “due” for such member/citizen-ship. Citizenship is voluntary, as is membership to any union, and is an act of allegiance to that union, its laws, and its president.

 

–=–

Well, there you have it. The creation of the united States of America was basically the formation of a labor/trade union. Plain and simple. And like any automatous creation, the creation eventually got a bit out of the hands of its creator, the king. Or, at least, that’s what we are supposed to believe. We’ll keep pretending that nations stand in competition. After all, it keeps the false economy going.

Now don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t as if the indentured and common citizenry actually had a vote, and slaves certainly did not carry a voice in the matter. No, this was a bunch of land and plantation holders whining not for the benefit of their slaves, but for their own benefits as employees of the Crown Corporation. And so, when their desires were not met by the king, they formed their own “union” in trade (commerce), not the least of which was the protection of their own commerce in souls (slaves).

—=—

“How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty
among the drivers of negroes?”

—Samuel Johnson, quoted from: ‘Taxation No Tyranny – An Answer To The Resolutions And Address Of The American Congress.’

—=—

“For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty;
only
use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh,
but by love serve one another.”

—Galatians 5:13, KJB

—=—

In the constitution for the United States, the Commerce Clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. And, of course, the Constitution, in its fourth Article, cannot be mistaken in this clear and concise statement:

“No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

–=–

Most Americans, as common US citizens, don’t even know what the word “several” means, a word defined as private or foreign. Yes, each State (People) is foreign to the other, just as the United States (Washington D.C.) is foreign to all States and nations. And most will read this statement of the fourth Article and never fully grasp what is really being said. For like branded cattle, so too shall men be rounded up to be delivered to the People (State) they belong to as property!

Later, of course, with the passage of the reformation amendments (#13, 14, and 15), slaves were enfranchised (set legally free in an open air debtors prison) as national citizenships and, through the assigning of personhood (14th amendment citizenship) as newly incorporated commercial vessels, were suddenly unionized as the persons (property) of government. And so suddenly one could no longer string a “negro” (man with tainted blood) up from a tree without repercussions of law. Where before was just a negro now stood a person (status/property) of the United States corporation. Suddenly each negro was a valued property (voluntary slave) of government, and was protected as such. The slaves were allowed to join the labor/trade union in its lowest possible status of membership, called as public citizenship. This was called colloquially as freedom, which in legalese merely means franchiseAnd since that time, with the advent of the birth certificate process, we are all tricked into volunteering our children into such 14th amendment servitude (public/national citizenship), having no idea we are giving up our paternal rights and making all children as wards of the state (District of New Columbia). Slaves were not elevated as much as all others were devolved. Yet what slave “freed” from forced captivity would not gladly except the protections and benefits of freed (enfranchised) men? What slave would not embrace the union that tricked them into joining it, which without it they would surely perish? And now all US citizenships are of equal franchise, equal (civil) rights, as the lowest possible protected status possible. And in the end, isn’t that exactly what a labor union does? Do not unions organize and protect the lowest possible working class of laborers and tradesmen to make them “equalized,” as compared to the wealthy elite families that have always ruled through such trickery and unionization? The truth is that, just as it is said above that “unions work to make America strong,” so too did slaves and indentures before unionization (federalization). And so too does each nation now work to support the United Nations and other globalist efforts — one big labor union of earthlings, of “world citizens.”

You see, we have all been placed into the “district” of the United States jurisdiction, a place for the lowest class to reside in servitude. And yet most of us have no idea what a district really is:

—=—

DISTRICT:

“A division of territory.
1. Originally,
the space within which a lord could coerce and punishdistrain.
The circuit within which a man might be compelled to appear,
or the place in which one hath the power of distraining.”

—William C. Anderson’s Dictionary of Law, 1889, definition of ‘District.’

—=—

And what is a circuit? Why an enclosed space. A jurisdiction. In other words, an open-air prison for debtors (citizens). Citizenship is a contractual performance debt.

How may times have you heard that the United States is still a British colony? Well, it’s probably more accurate to say that the United States is still a commercial corporation of the Crown, seemingly independent as it may be. In other words, the people (citizenships) of the United States are about as independent from the Crown as an automobile worker is from the company he or she works for. That is, just because the employees (citizenships) are in a Union (i.e. a corporation/company called “United States”) doesn’t make them any less subjects of the Crown. The United States and its congress (Board of directors) are collective bargainers for their public citizenry, standing as a person in law. After all, the constitution was strictly a commercial, maritime deal. The union formed was for their own protection, not ours, just as labor unions are not inclusive of management and owners. This class distinction has not left us, though fools pretend it no longer applies. We were still slaves and indentures, or of families that had not yet even arrived in the country! Nothing changed on that front. No, in this case, the employees of the Crown Corporation were the land and plantation holders sent on Royal Charter here to set up just another trade corporation, a commercial hub dealing in international trade districted under the mother Crown corporation.

At this point, it seems so obvious! How did I not recognize this before?

Of course modern labor unions are labeled as “communist” for good reason, simply because they are run by the State, as state-controlled capitalism, not against it. While the US constitution was essentially the creation of a company store, where employees (citizenships) were paid in United States dollars (company script) and forced to use that script in place of any other form of trade with any other currency or metal.

So, for all intents and purposes, the United States of America is a corporation set up essentially as a trade union. It’s all about commerce.

As a similar example, let’s take a peak at the Egyptian trade union story:

Egyptian Independent Union Federation, 28 June 2011

Statement: In light of the growing controversy about the independent trade unions and malicious accusations and allegations aimed at undermining the Egyptian workers’ movement and the trade unions which it created, we, the representatives of the independent unions, are signing this statement of the fundamental principles on which they are being built and on which trade unions which represent workers are founded. 1. Independent unions have appeared in Egypt ending an era during which trade union work has been monopolised by the state and the ruling party. This is due to the struggle of the Egyptian workers and their sacrifices, and nobody can claim otherwise. At the same time we extend our thanks and greetings to all those who support the principles of trade union freedom and the right to organise so long as this support iswithout conditions. 2. The independent unions confirm their independence from all political parties, official institutions and organisations, human rights organisations, and individuals. The independent unions confirm that they only follow the wishes of the general assemblies of their members and that the principle of independence is a general principle which applies to all without exception. In the same vein, the independent unions assert that only elected representatives from the base of the unions have theright to speak on behalf of the trade unions and declare their positions, and that no outside parties have the right to do so, unless those positions have been agreed by the elected representatives of the independent unions. 3. The independent unions depend for their funding on the contributions of their members and will not accept financial support from any other source at home or abroad. The general assemblies have complete authority for the financial supervision of the unions. We affirm that this principle self-reliance and self-funding is an inseparable part of the principle of independence on which the unions were founded. 4. We affirm that this principle of independence dates from before the revolution and that the revolution came to bless this perspective and to issue laws to protecting this same principle, the first of which was the constitutional declaration on the right to form unions and the announcement of the principle of trade union freedoms. This declaration contributed to Egypt’s name being removed from the ILO blacklist of countries violating workers’ rights as did the draft law on trade union freedoms. We affirm that the principle of independence is not tied to an individual or a government but is a fundamental right of all of who work for a wage in this country, and they will not give it up in any circumstances. 5. The independent unions completely reject any form of normal relations with the Zionist enemy, as they reject all forms of co-operation with any person or organisation who is involved in normalisation or is calling for normalisation. We affirm our complete support for the right of the Arab Palestinian people to create an independent state in the whole of Palestine, and their right to use whatever means of resistance to achieve their rights. We affirm also that one of the principal reasons forour rejection of the old Egyptian Trade Union Federation is its subservience to the state and the National Democratic Party, and its participation in a visit to occupied Jerusalem and its failure to take any position opposing the policy of normalization, such as the QIZ [Qualified Industrial Zones] Agreement and the gas supply agreement and other policies which the Egyptian Trade Union Federation by its silence supported while the Egyptian workers’ movement rejected them and was resisting them. 6. The independent unions value the Arab people’s struggle for freedom and social justice. Long live the Egyptian Revolution! Eternal glory to the Martyrs! 

Egyptian Independent Union Federation Signatories:

1. The Real Estate Tax Authority Union
2. The General Public Transport Authority Workers’ Union
3. The General Union of Civil Aviation Pilots
4. The General Union of Builders and Woodworkers
5. The Egyptian Peasants’ Union
6. The General Union of Antiquities Workers
7. The General Union of Sales Tax Workers
8. The General Union of Health Sciences
9. The General Independent Union of Teachers
10. The General Union of Communications Workers
11. The Manshiyet al-Bakri Hospital Workers’ Union
12. Du’aa Hospital Union
13. The General Union of Workers in the Ministry of Labour
14. The Media Production Workers Union
15. The General Union of Pensioners

Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/59594040/Egyptian-Unions-Declaration-of-Independence

–=–

Gee, doesn’t the Egyptian Trade Union Federation sound a lot like the United States federal corporation trade union and its government over all international and interstate trade/commerce, even down to its notorious beating of civil rights protestors as in American history? It loves the illegal occupation called Israel, that’s certainly in common.

So if a trade union and a nation can both be a federation, just what is a federation?

FEDERATION – noun – 1. The act of uniting in a league2. A league; a confederacy(–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

CONFEDERACY – Criminal law. An agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act, or an act, which though not unlawful in itself, becomes so by the confederacy. The technical term usually employed to signify this offense, is conspiracy. (–Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

CONSPIRACY – Criminal law, torts. An agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act, or an act which may become by the combination injurious to others (–Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

–=–

Of course! What is a union but an unwanted, unwelcome organization of conspirators against the company or already established union? Be it a workforce or a People, their union is but a combination of two or more people to do an unlawful act, unlawful either under the king, under the nation, or under the corporate by-laws.

Sorry folks. Just as the confederacy was a conspiracy against the United States, so too was the constitution a conspiracy against the king of England. The only difference is that the United States never officially recognized the confederacy as a union. If it had, it would not have been able to treat confederate citizens in such horrible ways. In other words, the “Union’s” actions would have fallen under the purview of the law of nations if the Confederacy was recognized as a separate union.

We can verify this easily, by visiting the government website for Appamotix Courthouse, where they tell us exactly why the north was able to treat its own members like dirt. For you see, a civil war never ends, it’s merely suspended until the next confederation (conspiracy/combination) of men attempt to form their own union:

Where was the treaty signed? 

There was no treaty signed to end the Civil War. The surrender at Appomattox Court House was a military surrender of an army which was surrounded. The Confederate government never surrendered and even had it wanted to the United States government would likely not have accepted. To do so would have legally acknowledged the existence of the Confederate States of America and would have legitimized it and given it certain legal status internationally. Treaties are between two nations and the U.S. would never concede the legal existence of the Confederacy – even though it had a government, armies, taxes and all the trappings of a modern government.”

Source: https://www.nps.gov/apco/faqs.htm

–=–

Honestly, this simple explanation describes the evil underbelly of the so-called civil war, the war of Northern aggression, almost entirely. In essence, the “union” had no law, no moral or ethical considerations, and no peers on the international level. They could treat their fellow citizens considered still bound and inside of the union with absolute disregard under Executive Order, and they did. And just as the king sent his troops to preserve his own union (company) because he didn’t recognize the United States as a legitimate conspiracy (confederacy) and thus refused to concede its separate legal existence internationally and thus outside of his vast union of commercial companies, so too did the congressionally abandoned, now illegitimate United States completely disrespect the desires of its confederate states to be free and independent of that original confederated union. Conspiracy breeds conspiracy. This is not the story we are told in history class, that’s for sure. There was nothing honorable or patriotic about the civil war, and if anything, it should be a lesson to all of us in the common that we are considered property of the union, and certainly not free men. And as far as the modern ridiculousness of the state successionist movement, all one need do is read their state constitution to find that succession would be a treasonous crime and theft of territory and property from the Union, and those modern confederates would be equally punishable as was the original conspiracy (confederacy) to separate, for the succession would again not be recognized by the union and have no protection as a nation under the law of nations or international law. Only a fool believes that a civil war is about race. Civil is not skin color, its law. Roman law. And only one that is unlearned in this history can possibly believe that the North or its Union President Lincoln had the best interest of slaves as their goal. It was nothing more and nothing less than a war to preserve the corporate union. But more importantly, as we can read above, the truth about the civil war is that it never ended, for there were not two nations to sign a treaty. No, this was a smackdown, and still is. For by the Trading With The Enemies Act we are all still considered as potential conspirators, or as they legally refer to us, potential enemies of the state. Honestly, I’ve talked and reported on this so many times from primary sources that I won’t take the time to do it again here.

But wait just another minute… Doesn’t this Egyptian unionization document sound a lot like a Declaration of Independence, like they want to be independent from the first union and its government/king?

There are 15 unions listed above, all wanting independence from the federal or sovereign state. Doesn’t that sound a bit similar to the current 16 commonwealth realms of the Crown Corporation?

“A Commonwealth realm is a sovereign state that is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations and shares the same person, currently Elizabeth II, as its head of state and reigning constitutional monarch, but retains a crown legally distinct from the other realms. As of 2017, there are sixteen Commonwealth realms: Antigua and BarbudaAustraliaBarbadosBelizeCanadaGrenadaJamaicaNew ZealandPapua New GuineaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSolomon IslandsThe BahamasTuvalu and the United Kingdom.” (–Wikipedia)

COMMONWEALTHSMAN – noun – One who favors the commonwealth, or a republican government. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

COMMONWEALCOMMONWEALTH – noun – 1. An established form of government, or civil polity; or more generally, a state; a body politic, consisting of a certain portion of men united by compact or tacit agreement, under one form of government and system of laws. This term is applied to the government of Great Britain, which is of a mixed character, and to other governments which are considered as free or popular, but rarely or improperly, to an absolute government. A commonwealth is properly a free state; a popular or representative government; a republic; as the commonwealth of Massachusetts. The word signifies strictly, the common good or happiness; and hence, the form of government supposed best to secure the public good. 2. The whole body of people in a state the public. 3. The territory of a state; as, all the land within the limits of the commonwealth. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

WEAL – noun – [G., Latin , to be strong, to avail, to prevail. The primary sense of weal is strength, soundness, from the sense of straining, stretching or advancing.] 1. A sound state of a person or thing; a state which is prosperous, or at least not unfortunate, not declining; prosperity; happiness. As we love the weal of our souls and bodies. The weal or wo in thee is place. So we say, the public weal the general weal the weal of the nation or state. 2. Republic; state; public interest. [But we now use commonwealth, in the sense of state.]  noun – The mark of a stripe. [See Wale.]… (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

–=–

What was it that Ben Franklin was quoted as saying after the signing of the constitution…? A republic, if you can keep it.

So how then is the United States different than any other “commonweal” of the Crown Corporation? That’s common welfare, not wealth. Big difference. Welfare is for the poor, common plebes like you and me. All the union States in compact are republics (commonwealths) too, kept by austerity and military force, in fact.

It is important to note here this word as it was meant to be understood, as a common weal, not the vulgar meaning of just monetary wealth.

Commonwealth (U.S. state)

Commonwealth is a designation used by four of the 50 states of the United States in their full official state names: Kentucky[1] (the law creating Kentucky names it the “State of Kentucky”[2] but it was originally part of the land grant of the Colony of Virginia), Massachusetts,[3] Pennsylvania,[4] and Virginia.[5] Each was, prior to 1776, British colony, or parts thereof, and share a strong influence of English common law in some of their laws and institutions.[6][7]

The term “commonwealthdoes not describe or provide for any specific political status or legal relationship when used by a state.[8] Those that do use it are equal to those that do not. A traditional English term for a political community founded for the common good, it is used symbolically to emphasize that these states have a “government based on the common consent of the people”[9] as opposed to one legitimized through their earlier colonial status that was derived from the British crown. It refers to the common “wealth”, or welfare, of the public[10] and is derived from a loose translation of the Latin term res publica.[a]

–=–

Social security is a tool of universal welfare, plain and simple. Pension funds are welfare for the middle class, and are as well mostly paid for by commonweal taxpayer dollars. Common welfare – this is exactly the term one might use in any corporate office, for the welfare of employees.

Common = corporate (united).

Union = common franchise under contract/compact

Franchise = legal (artificial) freedom, a district

Commonwealth = An incorporated state (people)

But if all the member states of the Crown Corporation, including the United Kingdom, are commonwealths, and all of the states in the American union are commonwealths as well, then where does that leave us? Is the world just one gigantic set of trade unions in commonweal controlled by a collaboration (conspiracy/confederation/combination) of centralized, federal ones? Well of course! This is not the earth, not Nature we are talking about, but the fictional world of commerce. The earth and its nature is already global. It can’t help itself for being that way (sorry flat-earthers) nor is its nature and shape a causality of man. But this commercial sphere must be shaped and textured by the commercial powers that be — the federal trade unions known as nations that operate under the international law of nations.

What are sanctions, for instance, but limitations on trade? A sanction is merely a punishment applied to worldwide commerce with a particular country, so that no trade may be done internationally therein. It’s like being having one’s membership to the commonwealth of the world taken away or limited for a period of time until agreement (contract) is made. Though international law has no sanctions, the law of nations is a club, a commonwealth of commercial states, and generally one of them (as the United States) is commissioned as the “evil” to bring obedience to some statute or condition of signed treaties. Before war, sanctions (punishments) are used to attempt to cause balance to worldwide commerce. In other words, smaller unions (nations) are allowed to exist as long as they play by the rules of the law of nations, and their regimes are subsequently toppled and replaced if they don’t. By comparison, all trade unions are under the thumb of the nation’s trade and employment cycle they effect, i.e. the United States. Internationally, more and more, all nations (unions) are under the purview of the United Nations. So what’s the difference?

Here’s an interesting read to put into perspective how close we indeed are to an international cooperative trade union (international) globalization:

The member states of the Commonwealth of Nations are mostly former British colonies, as is the United States, so why isn’t the United States a member of the Commonwealth of Nations?

There’s no reason it couldn’t be. It is simply too lazy to apply.

Many Americans think the USA would have to become a monarchy if it joined the Commonwealth, but this is simply not true. India, for example, is not a monarchy, but is in the Commonwealth.

Member countries do have to recognise the queen as Head of the Commonwealth, but that’s just like a country recognising Kofi Annan as the Secretary General of the United Nations, it doesn’t make her their queen.

Some people think that the USA would somehow be accepting ‘British rule’ if it was in the Commonwealth. Try telling India it is still ruled by Britain! In fact, joining would not require any kind of constitutional adjustment at all.

Some Americans think they can’t be in the Commonwealth ‘because they fought for their independence’. But all the members of the Commonwealth are entirely independent and many fought to become so, Kenya for example, so this argument makes no sense either.

The reality is:

The Commonwealth is open to any country which has had at any time either constitutional or administrative ties to at least one current member of the Commonwealth of Nations.

Traditionally, new Commonwealth members had ties to the United Kingdom. And considering we have invaded practically everywhere at some point most places do! Sorry Mongolia!

We were too busy drinking tea to invade the places in white.

.

Of course, as the USA has ties to the UK it would be eligible to join. Countries do have to be democracies with at least minimal respect for human rights (Fiji, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe have all been suspended at times for failing to do so).

I’ve been led to believe that the USA is a democracy with OK’ish human rights, so you’re good there too.

There are many other countries that could be part of the Commonwealth if they wanted to, including The Republic of Ireland, Israel, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan and numerous others – even France! And there are even two countries in the Commonwealth now that never actually had British ties: Rwanda and Mozambique.

So, the reason for not joining is just inertia and lack of ‘can do’ attitude.

Shake off your sloth, America, and join us!*

Source: https://www.quora.com/The-member-states-of-the-Commonwealth-of-Nations-are-mostly-former-British-colonies-as-is-the-United-States-so-why-isnt-the-United-States-a-member-of-the-Commonwealth-of-Nations

–=–

Logical, but foolish, considering the list of grievances in the declaration of independence.

Again I must ask here, what is globalism but a unification of already established trade (commerce) unions (nations), a placing together of all labor pools (common populations) so as to form one giant labor/trade union, where everyone is identified digitally with Social Security numbers and other marks and branding of common beasts of burden?

One last note and reason on why the United States corporation is just a trade union…

Out here in legal hell (the district), we are stupid enough to hire an attorney (agent) from the BAR Association (part of the Executive Branch Dept. of Justice) for representation, which is a sign of incompetence in an admitted state of non compos mentis. But when the company does something bad to an employee that is a labor union member, the employee then files grievances through the organized power of the union that represents (as agent/attorney) that employee (in United States persona/status/mask). And so it is safe to say that the main reason for starting a trade union in the first place is because the employees have unheard or unanswered grievances outstanding and that nothing is being done with them by the corporation.

So how is this any different than when the colonists formed the Declaration of Independence and in doing so listed all of their own many grievances against the king of England as head of the Crown corporation?

I, for one, fail to see any substantial difference. They formed “a more perfect union”, one more “perfect” than what the Articles of Confederation (Conspiracy) entailed. In other words, the management employees of the Crown corporation formed a trade union for land and plantation holders, as a union of People (States/commonwealths). Since all unions of this sort, being called as nations, are under the law of nations, I don’t see how they are any different from any other trade union except in their “federal” capacity. Each has its own area of the globe to manage behind jurisdictional lines, and all international trade is done through corporate contract under admiralty/maritime law (law of the flag at sea).

What does the Coast Guard do?

NVDC – The National Vessel Documentation Center facilitates maritime commerce and the availability of financing while protecting economic privileges of United States citizens…

That’s what a union does, alrighty.

The coast guard practices maritime law enforcement. It does not protect the sea, it protects the commercial law of the sea. It protects international monopolies on commerce and prevents non-union members (i.e. illegal aliens) from entering the union to work.


It’s commerce and nothing but commerce!

The coast guard has not always been named the coast guard, of course. In fact, it has always been about commerce, or more accurately, revenue.

Perhaps you’ve notice this symbol on the US dollar:

–=–

Before it was renamed, the Department of Treasury of the United States was originally the Treasury of North America. Why? Because it was a Crown corporation holding for the geographical area known as North America.

Likewise, the coast guard has not always carried on under that name. It was originally the Revenue Cutter Service (from Wikipedia):

The United States Revenue Cutter Service was established by an act of Congress (1 Stat. 175) on 4 August 1790 as the Revenue-Marine upon the recommendation of Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton to serve as an armed customs enforcement service. As time passed, the service gradually gained missions either voluntarily or by legislation, including those of a military nature. It was generally referred to as the Revenue-Marine until July 1894, when it was officially renamed the Revenue Cutter Service.

President Woodrow Wilson signed into law the Coast Guard Act on 28 January 1915. This act combined the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service with the United States Life-Saving Service to form the new United States Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard assumed the responsibilities of the United States Lighthouse Service in 1939 and the Navigation and Steamboat Inspection Service in 1942.

In 1990, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, Admiral Paul A. Yost, Jr. established a military award known as the Coast Guard Bicentennial Unit Commendation, which commemorated the original founding of the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service.[25]

–=–

Revenue comes only from commerce. The logical fallacy then would be to assume that the job of the coast guard is to rescue and save lives, for that’s what every television propaganda piece shows. There’s certainly no coincidence that the term television commercials have the word commerce in them. They are advertisements for commerce. Thus one would expect to see the Revenue (customs) Cutter Service commercially advertised, while at the same time portraying it as if angels in whirlybirds will always be there to come to save us, heroes out to help the common folk. Nope. They are tax collectors and customs enforcers. They work for the Union. They ensure free-flowing commerce and the fees (customs) extorted therefrom. And yes, a small part of that happens to be search and rescue. And no, this is not an honorable job. It’s trafficking.

MERCHANT – One who is engaged in the purchase and sale of goods; a trafficer; a traderA man who trades or carries on trade with foreign countries, or who exports and imports goods and sells them by wholesale. Webster. Merchants of this description are commonly known by the name of “shipping merchants.” (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

MERCENARIUS –  Latin. A hireling or servant(–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

MERCES – Latin. In the civil law, reward of labor in money or other things. As distinguished from “pemio,” it means the rent of farms, (prædia rustici.) (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

What is traffic? Part of transportation.

What is transportation? Part of commerce.

We just can’t win… for, since governments can only control commerce, they have turned everything we do (in person/legal status) into a commercial (legalized) act. And yes, that includes sexual reproduction and dropping the kids off at a government sanctioned school. To control the common population, every aspect of life must be recreated, renamed, and turned into a legal action. To accomplish this, we are all given legal (fictional) vessels of commerce, also called persons (status in society). Thus we are all put into commerce, which means we are all in competition. Our problem is not selfishness, for we are not acting as ourselves. We are acting as commercial vessels, as agents for our principal employer, the union government of the corporation of “United States.” No self, no selfishness. No, we suffer from the side effects of a money (evil) driven society in mammon. We suffer from greed. We suffer because we do not love on another. How can we if we don’t love or even use our True Selves?

 

–=–

In peace and war… In other words, in free-flowing international commerce (peace) and when commerce is blocked (war). We kill those who don’t like our system of commerce and its sanctioned rules, and we throw money at those who do. But that’s ok, we can always create more money. It, or rather, its value, doesn’t really exist. For what is evil (opposed to Nature/God) but that which is artificial, and what can be more evil than a respected lie?

This nation was created in commerce, and then recreated by civil war in commerce.

After the Coercive or “Intolerable” Acts were passed by the British Parliament, the colonies had a giant list of grievances, which were eventually enumerated in the Articles of Confederation (Conspiracy/Combination) and addressed in the constitution. Some examples of the grievances that were addressed in the constitution, so as to form what — a more perfect UNION — and ensuring that all states have representation in Congress, which sets taxes, are as follows:

Here are just some of the grievances solved by the forming of this new union of States under the articles of a confederation (conspiracy) and constitution.

Grievance #1 – Taxation without representation, while today we are over-taxed with representation

Grievance #2 – The King had absolute power, and now Congress has the reserved power to override Presidential veto

Grievance #3 – Colonists were not allowed to publicly speak out against or criticize the King (corporation), now addressed by the 1st Amendment, as “Freedom of Speech”

Grievance #4 – The Quartering Act (part of the Coercive Acts) forced colonist to house troops, now addressed by the 3rd Amendment, as “no quartering of troops”

Grievance #5 – The King allowed homes to be searched without warrants, now addressed in the constitution by the 4th Amendment, as “no unwarranted search and seizure”

Grievance #6 – There was no trial by jury of peers required, now addressed in the constitution by the 6th and 7th Amendments, as the “speedy and public trial by an impartial jury,” and the “right of trial by jury”

–=–

Well heck, this sounds like some of the grievances that might be found in any shitty job, doesn’t it? Don’t talk shit about the president or the middle management, don’t search my office and personal belongings without permission, don’t speak to me without my union representative being present, don’t overcrowd my office or cubicle… Just the typical and never-ending battle between management and employees.

And hey, has anyone even stopped to consider that the “Labor Party” is a political party in England? LOL! How much more obvious does it get?

Isn’t the democratic and republican party system in the United States just the laborers and tradesmen vs the corporate owners and managers?

The United States… It’s a trade union, dummy!

Still don’t believe it? Well then why don’t you go try and get a job without using your trade union identification card, your United States citizenship information, birth certificate, driver’s license, and social security number? Good luck, because most corporations won’t hire you without union affiliation, that is, United States federal ID. Why? Because the union (United States) requires it. A corporation cannot exist in the United States without agreeing to US law! Without it, you are just a scab.

Fortunately for us disenfranchised common scabs out here that don’t wish to participate in that unionized system of taxation, there is still the chance to be hired secretly, as an illegal worker, one not using United States union membership. We call this working under the table. And in doing so, we are no different than any other illegal alien out there. We are all scabs if we try to actually be Naturally Free. In fact, isn’t that what the mark of the beast will represent, a united union membership ID, while all non-marked men will be veritable scabs outside that monopoly of unions/nations unable to work, buy, sell, or TRADE?

Such is legal life on the unionized planet earth!

Before I sign off, there is one more word we must discuss. Most of you reading this will go back to your job tomorrow without conscious awareness of the routine, customary enslavement your employment represents. I understand perfectly this effect of cognitive dissonance mixed with the usual mouths to feed and bills to pay excuses. I get it. It’s a commercial trap. You cannot participate in commerce without allowing yourself to be used (employed) by that which enslaves you in its money system — a veritable company store called the economy. And the same old excuses will be used even as we watch nature unfold and the darkness of our collective employments in support of the big lie that is society is visible and undeniable. We will employ ourselves in our own demise and justify it any way we can, even as our children suffer the same and even worse effects. But hey, at least they won’t be hungry, and they can be entertained and babysat by affordable computers and “smart” phones while they get dumber and dumber, perfectly trained subjects to fill their parents shoes as useless eaters fulfilling mindless occupations that only contribute to the very structure that enslaves them! But I understand, we’ve all been entertained and educationally entrained that we are being brave, nurturing, and even responsible by working 8 hours a day and paying babysitters and the public school system to surrogate. Actually, this is the easy route, being an irresponsible parent in the unionized employment system. And ease is one of the grand old sins. Knock knock Neo, you’re in the legal, commercial matrix!

What is a job?

JOB – noun – [of unknown origin, but perhaps allied to chop, primarily to strike or drive.] 1. A piece of work; any thing to be done, whether of more or less importance. The carpenter or mason undertakes to build a house by the job. The erection of Westminster bridge was a heavy job; and it was a great job to erect Central wharf, in Boston. The mechanic has many small jobs on hand. 2. A lucrative business; an undertaking with a view to profit. No cheek is known to blush nor heart to throb, Save when they lose a question or a job. 3. A sudden stab with a pointed instrument. [This seems to be nearly the original sense.] To do the job for one, to kill him. – verb transitive – To strike or stab with a sharp instrument1. To drive in a sharp pointed instrument verb intransitive – To deal in the public stocks; to buy and sell as a broker. The judge shall job the bishop bite the town, and mighty dukes pack cards for half a crown.

SMART – noun – [This word is probably formed on the root of Latin amarus, bitter, that is, sharp.] 1. Quick, pungent, lively pain; a pricking local pain, as the pain from puncture by nettles; as the smart of bodily punishment2. Severe pungent pain of mind; pungent grief; as the smart of affliction.  verb intransitive – 1. To feel a lively pungent pain, particularly a pungent local pain from some piercing or irritating application. Thus Cayeene pepper applied to the tongue makes it smart. 2. To feel a pungent pain of mind; to feel sharp pain; as, to smart under sufferings3. To be punished; to bear penalties or the evil consequences of any thing. He that is surety for a stranger shall smart for itProverbs 11:15 adjective – 1. Pungent; pricking; causing a keen local pain; as a smart lash or stroke; a smart quality or taste…

–=–

Ah, so that’s why hitmen and contract killers get assigned a job.

Every business is a job to its intended customers. Why? Because every product out there is sold at interest, with profit and gain in mind. Every business is out to smart its customers, and for that matter, its employees with low pay and no share in the profits. The actual value matters not, only supply and demand. Corporations must make profit or they must die (figuratively). Thus, entire continents of people will be starved to death in order for corporations (artificial persons, including governments) to make money, the root of all evil. So what is your job? What part do you play in the jobbing of others? Can any of you reading this say with a clear conscious that your job doesn’t lead to stabbing everyone else in the back or taking advantage of anyone? What is your end product? What is your end service? What is the point to your employment? Would you do it without pay? In other words, what is it that you are allowing yourself to be used (employed) for in order to earn money as a corporate prostitute? Just asking…

We are all acting as surety for a United States person in our job, and we are all smarting each other because of it. One’s accumulated debt in college loans show how smart one actually is.

All this because the meaning of the words that enslave you and cause you to harm others are all but lost in translation.

But by all means, don’t let this distract you from all your smart technology. There’s a job to do.

So long, from a fellow dummy, just figuring it all out as I go…

.

–Clint > richard-son (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, June 13th, 2018

Advertisements
Leave a comment

10 Comments

  1. Dave Cassidy

     /  June 14, 2018

    Thanks Clint , From a fellow dummy great work and you certainly are no dummy.

    Dave

    >

    Reply
  2. wow. did i help

    Reply
  3. MikeV

     /  June 14, 2018

    Check it Clint the basic blueprint of the commercial corporate NWO and basically how the whole thing is controlled today….commerce, commerce and commerce!
    http://www.mindserpent.com/American_History/reference/law_merchant/malynes.htm

    Our federal reserve notes are basically “Bills of Exchange”, anyone handling these (B of E) were considered being a merchant in English law, an older book on English law they explained, “resident alien” was what they called foreign merchants in England we simply use “resident” now. The Queen dictates the SS program here we are registered foreign employees also using a foreign trust account set up through the W4 form when your legal name is converted with a middle initial and SS# is converted into the Tax ID#. we are foreign employees operating a commercial foreign trust here on American soil, For BC see “certificate of registration” the registration of a vessel and given a national identity, the birthing hospital is simply the port of entry where registration happens, then bonds are issued “bottomry bonds” for care and maintenance until of age when the vessel can start producing revenue on its own.

    The Constitution is a bitch to any and every international treaty the US has ever signed into, why (Article VI, Clause 2) is called the Supremacy Clause! And the “Elastic Clause” (Article I, Section 8 ) “The Congress shall have Power … To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” ….so any future Department or Officer not even conceived yet will have the power of whatever future laws they decide to create and deem “necessary”.

    Reply
    • So, are you trying to tell me its a trade union, dummy? LOL!

      Thanks for the info. Good contribution, Mike.

      Reply
      • MikeV

         /  June 16, 2018

        One of the best law dictionaries is “Tomlins 1835”,
        LOl I just noticed yesterday on the title page “Copious information on the subjects of TRADE AND GOVERNMENT” …trade being first of course.
        See how “transportation” is defined, and what we are really registering as when we get our ID/Licences LOL!
        Also see “merchant” and how the Merchant Trade Corporations were created and these were used to fund the army and navy.
        http://www.mindserpent.com/American_History/reference/1835_Tomlins/

        Reply
  4. Maxx

     /  June 16, 2018

    To me ? Its all an unlawful contract.

    Reply
    • You tell a judge that and he’ll laugh in your face. I learned long ago that my opinion means shit. The law is not mine to define or alter to my wit. The sooner you learn that you are under another’s law by default of participation in a legal status/entity the sooner you will understand that I do this blog not to offer my opinion but to teach the law as it is, and under which we are all voluntarily enslaved to in nativity. Next you’ll say I didn’t volunteer, to which I’ll explain AGAIN about confirmation and ratification, use of another’s property, etc, and then we’ll forget the original topic and just call it the truth or libertarian movement.

      He who makes the contract declares what is lawful or not. He who performs the contract declares nothing.

      Reply
      • MikeV

         /  June 17, 2018

        Very simply “unlawful” to who? And define contract? This is essentially all Roman Civil Law and quasi- contracts , any accepted benefit creates a reciprocal obligatory contractual nexus , unknowingly or not, accept a benefit and owe an obligation, exist in any societal construct not of your own design and there is an obligation for some minute level of benefit. The only real question is what exact law and jurisdiction ( nature and cause ) define the terms of the contract I am defaulting on as to at least know your standing.Great scene that popped out to me in the recent Noah movie when Kane offered the hammer to Noah’s son, this was a benefit that Noah made him decline.

        It took me years to understand why i lost a simple small claims case against a storage unit business that sold all my shit 2 weeks after making a payment and the total due was about $50 or something so trivial. I had them on about 10 different faults in the State-statutes and LOL the Judge actually nodded off about 3 times actual snored. It was decided from the first minute he sized me up and sized up the nice little husband wife business owners and their employee that lied her ass off and was being paid on the clock to even be there. The laws were NOT my laws to use they did not belong to me, if i had an attorney he possible could have argued them because his license to use the private law of the law merchant. The entire court system is a masonic class structure you are judged on degrees of status in the society and ours being a commercial based one more money more status including how do you personally benefit the society ? In Masonry it is allegorical when they refer to the great temples they built but really referring to the great societies that were designed and built.
        Simple accepting Federal Reserve Notes is a contract it clearly states “In God We Trust”, who’s God ? and what does Trust mean but a contract no? Not to mention the benefit of playing in the private monopoly game, backed by human capitol stock represented by bonds evidenced by the bills/notes themselves, so we are all benefiting from a human debt slavery system and criminals every time we enter a court, I’ve heard judges are not allowed to have money on them in court ?

        Reply
  5. He who makes the law declares what is unlawful, not he who follows and benefits from the law. One lives under the written (civil/legal) law or the unwritten (moral/self-governing/common) one.

    In support of your comment, indeed, this is a commercial (contract), international system founded on Roman Law:

    ROMAN LAW – In a general sense, comprehends all the laws which prevailed among the Romans, without regard to the time of their origin, including the collections of Justinian. In a more restricted sense, the Germans understand by this term merely the law of Justinian, as adopted by them. In England and America, it appears to be customary to use the phrase, indifferently with “the civil law,” to designate the whole system of Roman jurisprudence, including the Corpus Juris Civilis; or, if any distinction is drawn, the expression “civil law” denotes the system of jurisprudence obtaining in those countries of continental Europe which have derived their juridical notions and principles from the Justinian collection, while “Roman law” is reserved as the proper appellation of the body of law developed under the government of Rome from the earliest times to the fall of the empire. (Black4)

    —=—

    “How can we whet (put into practice, use and exercise) God’s Word upon our children and household, when we are violently kept from it and know it not? …On the holy days which were ordained to preach God’s word, set up long ceremonies, long matins, long masses and long evensongs, and all in Latin that they understand not, and roll them in darkness, that ye may lead them whither ye will… And yet Paul (was…) forbiddeth to speak in the church or congregation save in the tongue that all understand.”

    —William Tyndale, quoted from: ‘The Obedience of a Christian Man…”

    —=—

    LEX TERAE – The law of the land. The phrase is used to distinguish this from the civil or Roman law. 2. By lex terrae, as used in Magna Charta, is meant one process of law, namely, proceeding by indictment or presentment of good and lawful men. In the constitution of Tennessee, the words “the law of the land” signify a general and public law, operating equally upon every member of the community. (Bouv1856)

    LEX TERRAE – The law of the land. The common law, or the due course of the common law; the general law of the land. Equivalent to “due process of law.” In the strictest sense, trial by oath; the privilege of making oath. Bracton uses the phrase to denote a freeman’s privilege of being sworn in court as a juror or witness, which jurors convicted of perjury forfeited, (legem terrae amittant). The phrase means “the procedure of the old popular law.” (Black4)

    LEX SCRIPTA – Written law; law deriving its force, not from usage, but from express legislative enactment; statute law. (From the Latin Maxim) “If the written law be silent, that which is drawn from manners and custom ought to be observed; and, if that is in any manner defective, then that which is next and analogous to it; and, if that does not appear, then the law which Rome uses should be followed.” This maxim of Lord Coke is so far followed at the present day that, in cases where there is no precedent of the English courts, the civil law is always heard with respect, and often, though not necessarily, followed… (Black4)

    WRITTEN LAW – or lex scripta. This consists of the constitution of the United States, the constitutions of the several states, the acts of the different legislatures, as the acts of congress, and of the legislatures of the several states, and of treaties. See Statute. (Bouv1856)

    —=—

    The constitution of the United States is lex scripta. So whatever subject-matter is not specified in the written law therein, or by custom, etc., reverts to the Roman (pagan) Law! This is anti-scripture! I cannot stress the importance of this statement by Mr. Bouvier, whose 1856 dictionary was commissioned by Congress and ratified as a strict part of the “law of the land.”

    —=—

    “The principles of the Roman law, being generally founded in superior wisdom, have insinuated themselves into every part of the law. Many of the refined rules which now adorn the common law appear there without any acknowledgment of their paternity, and it is at this source that some judges dip to get the wisdom which adorns their judgments. The proceedings of the courts of equity and many of the admirable distinctions which manifest their wisdom are derived from this source. To this fountain of wisdom the courts of admiralty owe most of the law which governs in admiralty cases.”

    —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, definition for ‘Sources Of The Law’

    —=—

    EQUITABLE – That which is in conformity to the natural law. (Bouv1856)

    EQUITY – …2. In a moral sense, that is called equity which is founded, ex oequo et bono, in natural justice, in honesty, and in right. (Bouv1856)

    EQUITY – …In an enlarged, legal view, “equity, in its true and genuine meaning, is the soul and spirit of the law; positive law is construed, and rational law is made by it. In this, equity is made synonymous with justice; in that, to the true and sound intpretation of the rule.” …This equity is justly said to be a supplement to the laws; but it must be directed by science. The Roman (pagan) law will furnish him with sure guides, and safe rules. In that code will be found, fully developed, the first principles and the most important consequences of natural right. “From the moment when principles of decision came to be acted upon in chancery,” says Mr. Justice Story, “the Roman law furnished abundant materials to erect A Super-structure, at once solid, convenient and lofty, adapted to human wants, and enriched by the aid of human wisdom, experience and LEARNING.” (Bouv1856)

    —=—

    And here is the big difference between these laws, one the law of blood (Arms/Heraldry) and the other the law of place (jurisdiction of a corporate state/district). The law operates differently depending on whether you are a man (of blood) or a person (legal status without blood consideration), also called an attainder or taint.

    JUS SANGUINIS. The right of blood. See Jus Soli.

    JUS SOLI – The law of the place of one’s birth as contrasted with jus sanguinis, the law of the place of one’s descent or parentage. It is of feudal origin.

    JUS SCRIPTUM. In English law. Written law, or statute law, otherwise called “lex scripta,” as distinguished from the common law, “lex non scripta.” 1 B1.Comm. 62. In Roman law. Written law. Inst. 1, 2, 3. All law that was actually committed to writing, whether it had originated by enactment or by custom, in contradistinction to such parts of the law of custom as were not committed to writing. Mackeld. Rom. Law, 8 126. After stating that the Roman law was written and unwritten just as it was among the Greeks. Justinian adds: “The written part consists of laws, plebiscita, saatus- coflsulta, enactments of emperors, edicts of magistrates, and answers of jurisprudents.” Sand.Inst.Just. 1, 2, 3. See Jus Ex Non Scripto.

    —=—

    The written (Roman/strict/contract) law applies to persons/property of government.

    The unwritten (common/Scripture) law applies to blood-right and descent.

    The Bible is the considered in both nations to be the unwritten (moral) law, considered the foundational part of the common law. Once the Law of the Bible is broken, then no man may claim Natural (God-given) Rights any longer, instead falling into and under the written (amoral/strict) law under contract in persona (strawman)/mask). Most importantly, it is illegal to act on the moral law (Bible) while also acting as a legal entity, a citizen and subject of the law of persons (legal law/lex script). This is called “freedom of religion” which is the right to believe but not act on those beliefs. It’s a legal trick, because the word “freedom” in legalese means “franchise” of the state. It’s a lie.

    —=—

    “It is impossible to enslave, mentally or socially, a bible-reading people. The principles of the bible are the groundwork of human freedom.”

    —Horace Greeley, founding editor of ‘The New-Yorker’ and ‘New York Tribune’ newspapers

    —=—

    A Bible-reading people would never take a name, title, number, mark, or other blemish of legal fiction because the whole bible is based on avoiding such marks of fiction, of legal property. If you have a birth certificate, then you are under this same written law system. And this is the world system, with Social Security being active now in over 140 countries. Every man on earth is due to be assigned a digital (artificial) person, a legal (fictional) identity. There are no exceptions.

    This has already become a global government, and soon this will be apparent.

    Once under international law, or commerce law, everything changes, and the contract makes the law. The common law and many maxims of law are based on the Bible. One cannot be in both, cannot be in the legal matrix and also free from it.

    Reply
    • MikeV

       /  June 18, 2018

      Already there I believe, the contract makes all law, the Constitution has no power over private contracts why you have no rights when obligated under private contracts through governmental agencies like the DMV, or the IRS why cases are bounced for being a Political Question (contractual) . And private Trusts are contracts why creating a private family trust is basically creating a private society outside of government . The government is essentially a private trust, as stated in the constitution “positions of trust or profit”, all banks are Trust corporations LOL and was painfully clear who was running things in 2008 and the bailouts.
      Check out “All The Plenary Men” on Youtube, basically expose on how International banking pulls the strings of the US DOJ!

      The Declaration of Independence was an exercise of the right of self determination, didnt last long though most of those guys were destroyed before the Constitution was written, which was basically adopting the Kings compromise based on the Treaty of Peace.
      Great interview with David Williams I heard last night where he said he sat with Richard McDonald years ago ( the pioneer of the States Rights movement for like 40-50 years) Richard pulled out Vattels book and said basically this is it what the US runs by! So Dave responded well what about the States rights etc ? Dave said he didnt have much to say about it, guess didn’t want to admit he was way off for so many years?

      Gotta admit by now referring to common law is useless, even in Blacks commentaries it was Judges case law, today it is case law, essentially unless you have a private society with established common law that a foreign court will recognize but as soon as a contractual nexus is established POOF! its gone. People roll into court with stacks of maxims and case law definitions etc , they mean nothing only the contractual nexus that got you their in the first place, even stacks of sworn affidavits POOF! gone sorry cant see those either. ALL laws within a specific forum are Common Law to that forum.

      Quote under “War” from Tomlins 1835 –
      “…But when, by invasion, rebellion, &c. the peaceable course of justice is stopped, then it is adjudged to be a time of war: and this shall be tried by the records and the judges, weather justice at such a time had her equal course of proceeding or not. For time of war gives privilege to them that are in war and all others within the kingdom.”

      You have covered War Powers and Liber Code, Quiet Weapon etc, so can clearly see this is where we are at now, part of an international commercial banking occupation.
      Notice “equal course of proceeding or not” this is where we are exactly, under mock proceeding designed to resemble a justice system, they appease you until it starts to eat into there profit margins. Even Eric Holder basically stated ““Due process” and “judicial process” are not the same”. We have a legal system of process and procedures , even in the same exact court room two different judges can impose their own rules and procedures for the same exact type cases, heard from an ex-lawyer same exact case can loose to a different judge in the exact same court room simply on personal Judge’s process No justice No law involved, except the law governing the contractual nexus that got you there in the first place like international commercial bankruptcy laws established by treaty ???

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: