(NEW) Endgame: Globalism Through Public Pension Ponzi Schemes Now Manifesting… CalPERS and News Outlets Caught Lying To The Public Again!


UPDATE: Note to my readers: This is a new post with the same title as my last one. That last unedited, incomplete version was posted accidentally by myself a few weeks ago without my realization. It should be as of today read again due to so much more background and information that has been added and now finished. For those that commented on the last post I apologize for those being lost. Sorry for the confusion, and please know that I consider this to be one of the most important blog essays I have put out to date. It really explains in detail all the pieces involved in our collective societal breakdown, with the intent to start the “New World Order” or world government we all hear about but can’t quite see how it has been constructed. This is the blueprint. I give it to you now.

–Clint, Friday, May 11th, 2018

–=–

–=–

“In order that all men may be taught to speak truth,
it is necessary that all likewise should learn to hear it.”

–Samuel Johnson

–=–

This will be my last entry with regards to The Great Pension Fund Hoax and all it entails. Quite frankly, there is nothing more to reveal. The gig is up. The endgame is apparent. Unless all current, un-retired members of all pension funds withdraw what they have voluntarily given (contributed) as the law allows before their actual retirement, and until taxpayers collectively stop allowing their local, state, and federal taxpayer dollars to be funneled away (as required municipal corporation pension contributions) so as to destroy any support in this global investment scheme with the goal of total, centrally organized control and corporate governance worldwide, there is no way to prevent what is and always was the intent of these pension schemes toward globalism and world government. The transference of wealth as the collective possession and ownership of the majority of corporate shareholder stock has now sufficiently been passed into collective, international government hands through these public investment schemes. I’ll waste no more time warning and calling upon deaf ears nor hopelessly believing that anyone will bite the corporate, governmental hand that feeds them. This is therefore my last ditch, last minute attempt to spell out in the greatest of detail and foundational understanding the whole plot of this international public pension ponzi scheme and why it is and has been the number one financial stone supporting this modern move to global governance. This is not just some empty statement to frighten you, though it should, but is merely a statement of known fact. The time for willful ignorance is over. For we must come to understand that through many decades of continuously taxpayer supported pension fund investments, governments around the world are the majority shareholders of nearly all corporations, with very few exceptions.

This doesn’t merely spell socialism or communism, but complete global corporate governance by the world’s governments acting collectively under the unified laws of private, non-governmental associations (NGO’s) and other private functionaries and sets of non-governmental law. These rules have already been put into place, and the financial reporting structures of governments by the CAFR system is in full effect. While the names change from nation to nation, the accounting structure for all governments and organizations, including pension funds, are now being set to a globalized standardization. Social Security is also now in over 140 countries, coordinated through the United Nations and World Bank by the International Social Security Association (ISSA). The full list of International Social Security Association member countries can be seen here: https://www.issa.int/en_GB/directories/organization. And yes, this does in fact mean that communist China has the same “Social Security” system as the United States, United Kingdom, and most other countries, and yes the system has been globalized to entrap all common people into a digital identity and complete dependence upon international investment pension schemes such as these. The goal:

—=—

16.9 – “By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.

—United Nations Sustainable Development 2030 Target Goal 16.9

—=—

No community should be considered to be outside the span of this new agenda. Whatever your ethnicity, whatever your livelihood, whatever your lifestyle or location, all of you are inside the agenda. We need to inform everyone that these goals are the heart of a plan for the future of the worlds people, as well as for the planet itselfPeace and security, human rights and justice, and sustainable development, brought together within this 2030 agenda.”

—David Nabarro, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General of the United Nations, from a speech on April 15th, 2016

—=—

World Bank:

“Overview: Providing legal identity for all (including birth registration) by 2030 is a target shared by the international community as part of the Sustainable Development Goals (target 16.9). The World Bank Group (WBG) has launched the Identification for Development (ID4D) cross-practice initiative to help our client countries achieve this goal and with the vision of making everyone count: ensure a unique legal identity and enable digital ID-based services to all.

—United Nations 2030 Agenda, from a World Bank publication entitled, “Identification for Development”

—=—

For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape… so warns the Bible.

Birth certificates (the creation of legal persons/artificial identities) are printed on bank notes. The certificate assigned to myself is printed by “Midwest Bank Note Company.” You can look it up for yourself, though Midwest has now merged with Colonial Banknote Company, here: http://colonialbanknote.com

To understand why this is so, we must only look at the definition of this banking term of art. What is a certificate?

CERTIFICATEPaper establishing an ownership claim(—Barron’s Dictionary of Banking Terms)

–=–

Why that’s what we do for our dogs and cats, isn’t it? We certify them through registration as property? We chip them with digital identity! But just who is establishing ownership of our vital statistics turned fictional persona (legal status)?

Perhaps you’ve never noticed that there is no line item on a birth certificate that establishes paternity rights or ownership of the child itself? This is not a form filled out by a parent to declare property of the child, but is a certified abandonment of the illegitimate child and paternal rights to the nation state by an “informant” as its ward, usually the mother, while witnessed and signed by “doctors” like former congressman Ron Paul. The birth certificate has nothing to do with the actual child, and is not attached to the child in any way until the parents invoke that legal entity that is created thereof, the person (status) of a United States citizenship. Once this use of the name, number, signature, and other benefits is utilized by the parents until the age of consent, the child is then brainwashed into believing he or she actually is that person, that status, that legal name, and that he or she is in fact identified by a pension number called Social Security like a marked beast of burden, like cattle. Once adulthood is reached, the infant carries on in that false, legal identity so as to function in the false, legal realm of interstate commerce controlled and policed by the United States and its agencies and municipal corporations. We cannot know any better because our parents didn’t know any better. We become volunteers under the strict legal matrix code without even realizing it, aging from 17 to 18 in an unnoticeable moment upon the artificial Roman calendric timeline, and we simply continue using the name and number (mark) of citizenship to the United States as if it were perfectly natural and morally correct. We are even taught to believe this to be the sign of freedom, even as they call us subjects, tenants, consumers, taxpayers, and customers. Out intention is made express by our action of using the status of US citizenship, signing in its name, and receiving its benefits and consumer protections. This is how we become agents, and potentially the enemy of everyone else. For in the legal realm, the law is competition, greed, and amorality. We exist therefore in complete opposition to Nature and Its Law, lost in the circular matrix of legal fiction. Hell, we are even tricked into praying for money (mammon)!

Of course the fictional persona (legal status) assigned from the vital statistics of each man (male or female) at birth is a creation of the United States (the principal) under its agency, and so of course a birth certificate must be established to both prove identity (fictional persona, legal sameness) and also claim original ownership upon that newly, artificially created entity of the legal fiction. The person (status) thus created at this birth certification process is like the car or shoe avatar on the monopoly board — we use it and are responsible for its credits, debts, titles, fees, and taxes. But in the end all the pieces and all the money (credit) go back in the box — back to the central bank (government). We are not the words (vital statistics) printed on these birth certificates, for words are form without substance, existing nowhere in Nature, purely the artful creations of man. Of course, no man of flesh and blood is born from a birth certificate, only a digital copy to be operated commercially in the legal, commercial matrix. Persons have no blood. Persons are not men, though men may choose to pretend to be bond and surety of persons. Insured commercial persons, not men, are then hired under flattering titles like bank teller, doctor, or fireman. Men cannot be hired in the United States without first possessing a fictional, legal identity (personhood) under bond and surety within the United States. No person, no contract. No person, no signature. And of course, on the inverse, with no contract the devil (legal fiction/artifice) has no power.

To be a hireling is not a good thing. We are all being used by devils in suits and ties and nothing else… but some of us get better rewards for it, say, like the illogical, unreasonable, completely artificial interest and gains (usury and engrossment) created in the purely fictional stock and bond “markets” from the investments in public pensions.

HIRE –verb transitive – 1.To procure from another person and for temporary use, at a certain price, or for a stipulated or reasonable equivalent; as, to hire a farm for a year; to hire a horse for a day; to hire money at legal interest2. To engage in service for a stipulated reward; to contract with for a compensation; as, to hire a servant for a year; to hirelaborers by the day or month. 3.To bribe; to engage in immoral or illegal service for a reward. To hire out one’s self, to let; to engage one’s service to another for a reward. They have hired out themselves for bread. 1 Samuel 2:5. To hire or to hire out, to let; to lease; to grant the temporary use of a thing for a compensation. He has hired out his house or his farm. – noun – 1.The price, reward or compensation paid or contracted to be given for the temporary use of any thing2.Wages; the reward or recompense paid for personal service.The laborer is worthy of his hire.Luke 10:7. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

PROSTITUTE – verb transitive – [Latin prostituo; pro and statuo, to set.] 1.To offer freely to a lewd use, or to indiscriminate lewdness. Do not prostitute thy daughter. Leviticus 19:292.To give up to any vile or infamous purpose; to devote to any thing base; to sell to wickedness; as, to prostitute talents to the propagation of infidel principles, to prostitute the press to the publication of blasphemy. 3. To offer or expose upon vile terms or to unworthy personsadjective – Openly devoted to lewdness; sold to wickedness or to infamous purposes. Made bold by want and prostitute for bread. – noun – 1. A base hireling; a mercenary; one who offers himself to infamous employments for hire. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

–=–

You see, the word hire is not just defined as working for money, it is defined as the very form of money to be paid, be it wages or some other reward or compensation, as trading favors for favors. We are all prostitutes in this sense, and its time we stop denying it. Even the word soldier in its etymology comes from the name of a Roman coin, for a soldier of the nation is a mercenary that protects the corporate nation against the States (People) that created it, just as it was in the civil war. But I must also truthfully ask, though I doubt I’ll like the answer, just how many reading this would give up their legal (artificial) contracted “rights” to the rewards of Social Security payments or other public welfare like public pensions, including the standing armies of the United States and its completely corrupt Veterans Administration, despite the knowledge that it is literally the carrot on a stick leading us all into the very mark of the beast/global slave system forewarned about in the Revelation? To be a hireling is to work for mammon and the gods (magistrates) that create, credit, and administer it. This is a self-evident truth. We can deny it no longer.

After all, what is the one thing that defines a nation? It’s unique currency and the valuation of that currency internationally, of course. Government owns the money, owns the printing presses, owns the copyright, owns the central bank to which all others are subservient members, and it owns the ability to set the statutory value of that currency while controlling the markets that set the artificial, commercially driven “market” value. Governments are the only actual bank, the only actual source of money. All others are merely users of governments main product — money. And as we can see, each government uses its citizenry (persons) as the source of money creation. They call us collectively as human capital, the word capital coming from the Latin capita, meaning by the head. This is how a rancher counts his herd of cattle, by the head, within his own fences that create a capitalist society of captured and subservient cows. This is an excellent synonym for what is the typical public status of each US (national) citizenship.

But I work for the post office, you say… how can I possibly be considered a prostitute; a mercenary?

Don’t shoot the messenger. I am not judging anyone, lest I judge myself. I am merely defining terms as they are, not as I want them to be or falsely, patriotically believe they are or should be. We must learn to speak these truths about ourselves, about our own actions, and therefore we must first hear the truth without prejudice and with a neutral mindset. We must admit our own defeat and open-air internment before we can free ourselves. We must learn the language of the creators of fiction, of artifice, of lies, for only then may we protect ourselves from their artful terms. We must be sincere in all things, never allowing what is the Real thing to be fictionalized and thus legalized into the empty name or title of that thing, so we may be always in harmony with Nature, with self-existent Truth, with God, which are invariably the same words (meanings).

All “employees” of all corporations are hirelings, prostituting themselves as workers for hire (mercenaries). Remember, these are neutral terms, not meant to evoke emotion, only Truth. An employee is an agent of its principal, without exception. A public (national) citizen is an agent of its principal in franchise (legal freedom). Both exist to benefit the mother (creator of person/status) corporation. Another word for mother is matrix, an artificial womb offering false security and safety, but never Natural (True) Freedom. A citizenship of the United States is in prostitution to the United States, a foreigner to the 50 States holding no land (territory), always in modern, feudalistic tenancy by contract. One cannot be a national citizenship and also have perfect title to any land in any State. Why? Because anything registered in a United States person (name) is property thereby of the United States. The user (agent/employee) is never the allodial owner, and can therefore only hold anything (as registered property) through the legal name of its principal. The principal holds, the agent uses and pays taxes for that right to use. And this process of rebirthing men into persons of the United States is how the land was stolen from ourselves and our forefathers that were tricked into placing their legitimate children into an illegitimate national citizenship (wardship/apprenticeship). In total neutrality, as a definition of terms, this cannot be disputed. Emotion and personal opinion have no place in legality, nor in its language. There is no love, no devotion, no care, no charity, and no patriotism in the legal realm nor in its terms of art. It is strict and applied strictly. And most importantly, the constitution does not apply to or protect United States public citizenships (subjects), only private “People” in the several States. And so as a pensioner, you should know that there is no constitutional law that will protect your contributions (gifts) given when they start declaring municipal bankruptcy and start taking it away. You fell into a financial trap, and you must either live with the consequences or remove now what you have “contributed” while the corporate law of these organized criminals still allows it. That law can change tomorrow, as you tacitly agreed to when you started contributing.

And hey, by the way, government’s most important office is in fact the Post Office and System, for through that corporate structure its official summons, informations, and notices of corruptions like foreclosures are delivered to helpless victims of the very money and investment schemes we are speaking of now. The post office is like a court without a bar, where preliminary business can be conducted and contracts can be signed and delivered. It is where most people get bad news, where they are informed of their audits and seizures from the illegitimate (de facto) IRS, and where banks warrant and deliver their interest and fees (usury), a criminal activity made legal by man’s law and ultimately protected by the sheriff (executive branch of the state) as our homes and possessions are sold at auction in “sheriff’s sales” on behalf of these banks while we end up homeless on the streets… To protect commerce and serve summons.

But you are just a lowly post office worker, the automaton we interact with, right? No responsibility there, right?

If one thing has been stripped from our society it is indeed the ability to consider and self-actualize responsibility for our own actions, for just doing our “jobs” as mercenary prostitutes for hire, and for treating each other with respect and dignity. We pretend to be lowly even though we are like bolts holding the machine together and the fuel causing it all to operate. The legal system and its support and protection of mammon as its life-blood is the foundation of this curse. We are agents for government, be it in citizenship or in employment. All we do is in support of it and its global corporate investment schemes.

Ask yourself this question: Would you continue to do your current job if you were no longer paid to do it? Of course not. You do it only because you are paid, because that’s what prostitutes do. Charity is our Natural State of Being, and I am willing to bet that every single reader of this essay would seek a more charitable engagement if no money were involved so as to help other men rather than suffer another day at whatever one’s current, corporate job is tracking, using, selling, and all-around harming their customers per capita with a capitalist fake-smile and in the most inventive of propagandist comforts. Only through monetary compensation can we be made to work, labor, toil, and fix that which is against Nature and our own moral compass. We are as of late working for the AI, doing its bidding to make it stronger, mining its digital currency, and giving it all our personal, private information to share publicly and build upon our digital identity. But some of us tell ourselves and others how much we love our jobs as wage-slaves, perhaps the greatest self-deceit we’ve been programmed to endure. To this self-aggrandizing lie I call bullshit every time, and refer back to the original question. If you Truly love it, you’d do it for free, in love, charity, and good will. You don’t love the job, you love the money. And it is the love of money that is the root of all evil, the very lifeblood of mammon.

I didn’t say the Truth doesn’t hurt. But it really hurts for those living their own lies. Truth is the best medicine for all disease, especially the chronic liar and idolator.

One may not believe that working for the “state” is a lewd or vulgar use of one’s time and labor at all, and may find some agentic comfort or even some reprehensible sense of moral superiority by their temporarily granted, hireling flattering titles. The house-slave, after all, is quite content and even proud of his flattering title of slave status as long as he is the limited master of at least some of his fellow slaves. Ah, the idiocracy of that middle management cess pool…

The popular reputation of the typical DMV employee is certainly a sign of how such flattering titles in prostitution (employment) utterly destroy any notion of dignity, respect, and charity to ones fellow man. For these employees do not deal with men, they deal with men acting in persona (mask/status) seeking benefits they believe are rightful and even of God (Natural), and whom often are equal in their contempt for the DMV employee by nature of their own low but delusional worshiped status, that of a US citizenship. Slaves that believe they are free even as the stand in line to pay extortion fees and taxes to the DMV. LOL! Imagine if God exacted taxes for each breath of life and each blade of grass? Taxes and fees are self-evidently not a part of Nature, and DMV fees and charges certainly don’t come from heaven. Let us be clear — ONLY PERSONS CAN BE FORCED TO PAY TAXES. And this is why the scriptural Law teaches never to respect or act as a person (status) other than thyself. The reason for this highest and moral Law of Nature, again, is self-evident. For a person is never of a source in Nature. A person is always a creation of man, and men will always rule over persons, just as Nature and Its Law will always be Highest without exception. For without Nature and Its Law, there would be no men, and with no men, there would be no government, no lies, and no fictional (legal) law that opposes Nature and Its Law. This we call the Law or Word of God, not because some anthropomorphized version of religious art supposing the form of God spoke these words, but because God (Jehovah) is actually defined as “God is Truth.”  Whatever is spoken by any man that is self-evident Truth of Existence in Nature, in the Universe, and not the concepts of man, is speaking the Word of God. The metaphor cannot be mistaken as literalism, lest the Truth be lost as it is today behind kings, popes, and presidents (false gods).

–=–

“Of a truth, God will not do wickedly, and the Almighty will not pervert justice.”

–Job 34:12 

–=–

To avoid wrath, live in Truth, never acting against Nature and Its Law. How simple can it be?

Nature and Its Law is the only Truth. Nature is the epitome of neutrality. It is not good and it is not evil, which are only the conceptions of man. It is Existence. It just Is, as I AM. I Exist without words, without names, without numbers. And this is how God (Jehovah – Lord in English, JHVH in Hebrew, Deus in Latin and Portuguese, etc.) is defined, as a verb of All Being that is the Universe, all of self-existence, and most importantly all that is not an artificial creation of man. If only this aspect of what is God is understood, then the Law of Nature can be almost completely understood. Art (artifice) and Reality are never the same, and always oppose one another even in their simulation. Likewise, the legal name, title, number, and identity of everything in Nature is a creation of man, recreated solely for the intent to control all of Nature and Its Creation (man and other Creatures, etc.) outside of the Law of Nature, to pull everything away from its Source. The demonization of the Bible was the most important step in this process, for the Bible is provably the very foundation of the “unwritten” common law system, where to break that Law of Nature as total self-governance and total charity and forgiveness to others is to enter into the legal matrix system and its false code (law). To obfuscate and replace the Bible Law, they created corporate (organized) religions and caused the public minded commoners to believe that the Bible is religion, not the Law of Nature. And it worked like a charm… literally. The Truth was hidden behind priests and judges in long robes, and religions were thus incorporated under the state, despite the fact that the Bible Law is to be under or replaced by no other doctrine (law of men). And so, as we will discover, moral action against immoral legalism was made illegal. The church and state are inseparable.

All we need to do is to go back to the Truth. This is another way of saying back to God. Sadly, no matter how well I explain this, many will have stopped reading this at the mere mention of these words Bible and God, which is proof positive of how conditioned we all are to remain as the low, vulgar beasts of burden we are currently acting as — consumers akin to a swarm of insatiable locusts, a cancerous growth that denies itself any remedy that might interfere with its pointless, unspiritual growth. We are killing ourselves surely but slowly, and all because we refuse to accept and Live in and as part of the Truth (God). Jehovah (JHVH) is a verb, not a person, place, or thing (noun). And in our Natural State of Being, so too are we nameless and pure and therefore immune from man’s law of legal fiction. For the laws of men only rule over the persons, places, and things (nouns) that man creates, which are always fiction. There are no words in Nature. And this is the ultimate of occulted knowledge. Without words, men are as helpless as animals. For without words men are neutered, having True Born equality in Nature. Only respected names and titles (nouns, as persons places and things) can cause inequity, which is why they are strictly forbidden under the Law of Nature, for without words, there can be no contracts, the tool of the devils (evil geniuses) that men have become. This, again, is self-evident.

Our sole problem is that everything we do, everything we work for, everything we strive to achieve or manifest, is valued in money. We live for the lie that is valuation, in the god of mammon we trust. This wicked disease is so simple to cure, and yet the cure has been made so elusive to us by those who keep us in the darkness of legalism and valuation (mammon). The cure is simply Truth. Life without fiction and lies, which can only be accomplished by total self-government by all men upon themselves. This is the Law. And all governments recognize this fact, which is why they do everything to keep us regulated and sedated from the Truth, from the Bible as Law (not religion), and from a self-governing mentality.

—=—

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

–=–

“Today, not only in philosophy but in politics, government,
and individual morality, our generation sees solutions
in terms of synthesis and not absolutes.
When this happens, truth, as people have always thought of truth, has died.”  

— Francis Schaeffer

–=–

“I believe that in the end the truth will conquer.”

–John Wycliffe

–=–

“Let us rejoice in the truth, wherever we find its lamp burning.” 

–Albert Schweitzer

–=–

“Never let us be guilty of sacrificing any portion of truth on the altar of peace.” 

–J. C. Ryle

–=–

“As a matter of honor, one man owes it to another to manifest the truth.”

–Thomas Aquinas

–=–

To suggest that Truth will prevail or conquer is almost immature or self-evident, for of course nature will continue long after the lies, fictions, and arts of men die. Truth (Nature, the Universe) is the permanent foundation of all things, even lies and liars, while man’s inventions therein are always temporary. So yes, it is a 100% safe bet to say that Truth will conquer. For no lie can exist without the very Truth it pretends and emulates in darkness. What is a lie without some Truth to harm or obfuscate? Truth is, of course, the very Real source of every lie. What lie can exist without some Truth to defy? What would be the point? Truth (God) will prevail. The Universe (God) will continue unending. And unfortunately, that means with or without us. It is our own power of choice by the gift (or curse) of free will that shall ultimately decide our own fate. And most, even the self-proclaimed, flatteringly titled “atheists” will ironically blame God instead of themselves for the consequences of the choices they individually and collectively made, while the Christians will in turn blame the Atheists (absence of God), even though they never followed the Law of God themselves, lost in their false (flattering) title and idolatry, never acting “christian” in any way and thus offering no example that the atheist would seek to emulate. But what is God by definition but the Nature of the Universe Itself in a state of reclamation, reclaiming that which stands opposed and in disharmony with Its structure and Law?

Unless we choose to always speak in what is called as the Word of God, which is nothing more than the Pure and self-evident (not man-made) Truth of all things at all times, and unless we act only upon that Word as Truth, then not only our fictional creations but also ourselves shall perish from this Earth. Some would call this God’s wrath, but It’s really just Nature taking its reasonable course, like the body’s immune system fights an infections disease. To impose a pretended “religious” conscious and intent to Nature (God) is only useful for the blame game, for blaming God when we each are the problem together. Call it what you will… the Truth will remain as hopefully will that remnant of the meek Living in It as inheritors.

To manifest the Truth is to manifest the example of a man following God’s Law, which is of course Jesus the Christos (anointed). This, again, is not religion. It simply means that the “return of christ” will happen when men start acting christ-like. This is the True message of the Bible hidden from us. And so, as soon as we begin manifesting the Truth and Its Law through our own responsible actions, we shall be witness to the return of the Son (Law/Word) of God. Thus, the Bible instructs us to become the “sons of God” as well, meaning that we should follow the example and heed the Law of Truth (God). You see, eventually one realizes that all of these terms are defined as the same thing, the same concept. God is Truth (the Universe), Jesus is Truth manifested as a man following the Word/Law of God, and so man is to become each and every one a son of God as well, by emulating the example, not by worshiping it as an idol as the corporate church does. The story of God’s Law personified through Jesus Christ’s example doesn’t seek fans, but followers. This, again, is self-evident. To follow Christ is to Follow the Law (Son/Word) of God. It’s not rocket science, and it aint even religion. Just common, Natural sense. Religion is nothing but incorporated idolatry; a big, multi-cultural, inter-denominational, membership only fan club for sinners. The Bible is Law. Its followers are sons of God, True and self-governing Christians.

All of this is explained and detailed from the lexicons and concordances and Bible dictionaries in my book, Strawman: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person. Please download it for free, here.

Now, let us examine this agentic delusion more closely so that we may understand the nature of pension payments as a reward for our prostitution to the legal, corporate, de facto (illegitimate) state…

A cop, for instance, may believe he or she is acting lawfully while at the same time exacting his fellow citizens through tickets, though this is obviously an extortion and unlawful summons to appear. One may even state that, well, my department is good compared to the others, as if government is not a complete and whole entity, and as if working for the part is not prostitution of ones self for the well-being of the whole.

A checkout employee at the local grocery store may believe he is acting lawfully, morally, merely doing the simple job description he is paid for. He or she may even do it with a smile, with “service” above and beyond his employee handbook, getting his picture on the wall of shame as employee of the month. Imagine that: prostitute of the month… Little does he or she contemplate that in fact every action taken and every hour worked on behalf of that “grocery” store or other “retail” story was once a crime against all people, before it was made a protected criminal activity by government license. The word retail is a feudalistic term, of course, referring to the profits of landlords over their vassals. But what exactly is a grocer, just what is this modern form of retail sales, and most importantly, why do we accept it as completely normal, reasonable, customary, and even lawful?

GROSS – Great; culpable. General. Absolute. A thing in gross exists in its own right, and not as an appendage to another thing.

GROCER – In old English law, a merchant or trader who engrossed all vendible merchandise; an engrosser. See Engrosser. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ENGROSSER – One who engrosses or writes on parchment in a large, fair hand. One who purchases large quantities of any commodity in order to acquire a monopoly, and to sell them again at high prices.(–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ENGROSS – To copy the rude draft of an instrument in a fair, large hand. To write out, in a large, fair hand, on parchment. In old criminal law. To buy up so much of a commodity on the market as to obtain a monopoly and sell again at a forced price.(–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ENGROSSING – In English law. The getting in to one’s possession, or buying up, large quantities of corn, or other dead victuals, with intent to sell them again. The total engrossing of any other commodity, with intent to sell it at an unreasonable price. This was a misdemeanor, punishable by fine and imprisonment. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

HIGHWAY ROBBERY Theft taking place on a public road. Slang for a transaction where one party has such leverage over the other and can demand such a high price so that it is akin to a robbery taking place.(–Black’s Law Dictionary, 2th Edition)

–=–

This certainly gives new perspective to our “friendly neighborhood grocer” now doesn’t it? America: the land of engrossment. What a gross situation, literally!

It actually makes some sort of vile, reprobate logical sense to us in our entrained, educated, entertained public-mindedness to sell or buy something at more than its actual value. It’s built into the economy. It is, in fact, custom. But even “customs” have been made into a taxable, commercial, legal thing – the customs house. Yes, they found a way even to tax customs, for today, all of our customs (even Christmas) are valued in the usury of mammon! Yet this action of engrossment is perhaps the single source of all our problems! Simply stated, engrossment is the opposite of charity, and charity is one of the Highest of all the Laws of Nature. Engrossment only exists where some form of money (mammon) exists. And in truth, the same thing can be said about needless suffering, poverty, and inequity, which cannot exist without such gross behavior and custom. Even more to the point, the flattery of titles of nobility are as well pointless without the control and hoarding from others (engrossing) of the money supply, whatever it is that is called as money. In other words, without money, there is no purpose for a de facto (illegitimate) government as the “United States” corporation and its district as a monopoly. For money is in fact a non-governmental tool, meaning not a de jure (lawful/legitimate) reason for the existence of any government, especially one claiming the God of the Bible as its excuse for existing!

What was once considered the public crime of engrossing is now made legal (licensed) in corporations that government holds significant or controlling shares of stock in through its pensions and other investment schemes… does this not ring of a conflict of interest to your ears? And not just a mere conflict of interest, but the ultimate one.

The point here is that whatever we do as an employee (agent) of this government-owned and regulated corporate structure, we have been entrained to overlook or to be completely ignorant of the harm we all do and the pain we continuously cause to each other. The “economy” thrives on this societal ignorance of greed, usury, engrossment, and extortion (exaction) toward each other. We literally call it customer service as we rape each other. And government calls us not as taxpayers but as customers, because most of what municipal governments do nowadays is labeled in the CAFR (audit) as non-governmental, for profit commerce, from golf courses to water and sewer districts. And even the most pointless or seemingly harmless and redundant jobs we partake in cannot be excused morally just because we are not CEO’s or Boards of Directors or even managers of the collective corporations we agree to prostitute ourselves to. They could not exist without us grunts, which is why they are pushing to replace us with AI and robotic labor, with self-checkouts and self-paying tickets, with a cashless world society where all men are required to have the mark of digital identity to even purchase or be in possession of a smart-dusted loaf of bread. The harsh reality is that we (the public) are doing this to ourselves, for not one part of this global system could be implemented and carried on without the base hireling at the ground floor selling, fixing, maintaining, servicing, and assimilating us into that which we are prostituting ourselves in mammon (money) to support. It just our jobs. We are paid to screw each other in every way possible, ignoring in every respect the scriptural, moral law that opposes it.

But I digress…

Only persons (legal status) are borne from such a certificate. That we choose to carry that legal identity (sameness) throughout childhood and into adulthood (legalized adultery) is voluntary (avoidable). But the use of that birthed, certified legal identity (name, title, number, mark, signature, etc.), as the property of government, causes us to act in agency under a contractual relationship with government, as virtual employees, and thus to act in accordance and under the administration of its laws. The creator (principal) controls its creation (agent). The user of a creation stands always subservient to its creator. Thus the avoidable use becomes an unavoidable debt, called a performance debt because the user must perform by the law of the person he or she uses. Enforcement of that legal system and law of persons is thus authorized by the volunteer, just as anyone that joins the military as a volunteer agrees to the violent and mental oppression that will be delivered after volunteering (contracting). And this concept is the cause of all our problems, for pension funds are created by government, not us. We are mere users and taxpayers. Of course, one only can be made to pay taxes when one uses that which belongs to another. In the end, all that we do as common US citizens is in persona, in the property of government, which means that in Reality (Nature) we own nothing. What is done or purchased in person belongs to government, for the person is certified by government as property. This is how everything was stolen from us — by tricking us all into acting as that which we are not, as a fictional person of (belonging to) the “United Sates” corporation. We are as art; cartoon characters controlled by the hand of legal artists, for a person is made of words and can only exist by words. Persons exist and have artificial life only in legal jurisdictions, the equivalent of an imaginary cartoon realm. It is in this imaginary, fictional legal realm that all money and property exist as well, for there is no such things as these in Nature.

Don’t believe it? LOL! Whose name is your home registered in? Your automobile? Your children?

When you work as an employee, do you think you own the title you use, or is it an agency (property) and office of the corporation (principal) that hired you?

Simply put, if you don’t own your public, legal name (status), which of course you Lawfully cannot, then you don’t own anything purchased or registered as property in that name either. To register a car in that certified (state-owned) birth name and number (legal identity) in exchange for an empty certificate of title is to claim ownership of that vehicle in a person (status in agency) owned by the United States (principal). Likewise, to contribute to a pension fund, being a taxpayer or pensioner, is to do so while acting as and in the property (persona) of the United States. As a man (male or female), you have no right to that which was contributed in the person (property) of another, any more than an employee can claim ownership of an employers product or property. This will become more clear as we progress, but should be at least basically understood here so as to comprehend the complete picture of how and why these pension funds were set up for “public” purposes. What is public is property of government, to be used and enjoyed by its proprietary citizens but never owned by its citizens. Citizens are public, are property, for citizens are fictional persons created and certified by the United States. What is public is never property of any one person, but of the principal that offers it in contract. Citizenship is a contractual relationship offered and accepted. Our use of the signature in the persona (status) is prima facie proof of our individual consent to the law of persons.

The title “pensioner” is as well property of the state, as is the title and office that employs the federal, legal persona you voluntarily use. And guess what? The state would not hire you without a legal persona it can control and extort taxation from! For every person of the United States is required to pledge allegiance to it and its constitution, its law, and all its de facto (illegitimate) corporate structure. Of course, this allegiance is not a choice, but a character built into the person (status). A man that accepts and uses this status (person) is presumed to understand all of this, though most stand as merely unaware users that never question or bite the feeding hand of their chosen legal masters (false gods).

When we speak of this term “government” in its present, de facto (illegitimate) form we are not speaking of those traditional institutions romanticized from history, but the current corporate, public structure under uniform commercial rules in the administration of international and interstate commerce and trade. We are talking about the universal incorporation of all the world’s corporations under one body politic, controlled by an internationally assembled, unelected, governing body of private, non-governmental associations. E Pluribus Unum… out of many one. For corporations are persons too, remember?

Look at any board of directors today, and you will find nothing less than the representatives of corporations and corporate interests. But it’s how these corporate executives arrive in such positions of authority, as electing board members, that we must come to understand. For if government is the main shareholder of any corporation, and shareholders vote to elect by proxy shareholder voting rules the board members of all the corporations they hold stock for in pension and other investment funds, then government is by default the major holder and thus collective electorate of all boards of directors of all stock-owned corporations in the world. Its really simple math, though with a globalist twist…

If you own votable corporate stock, you get a vote. Done.

As simple as this seems, this is the very heart of globalism, basically defined. And only through these pension fund schemes could this total control and collection of corporate stock have been pulled off. Why? First, they tricked us all into voluntarily contributing to their globalist investment goal, which is the most brilliant deceit imaginable. So there is no illegality here. We let it happen without a whimper. Secondly, they prevented each of us from investing on our own in good conscious, in moral causes or charities, or even in good companies run by good and moral men, in effect causing us to trust them to invest for us, on our behalf. This is called a legal trust, not to be confused with Trust (faith) in God. All legal words are opposite to their Natural counterparts.

They stole our choice with our expressed, contributing consent, and in turn invested in the worst of the worst corporations and elitist investment groups, those that most of us would protest against and hate if we cared to examine them close enough. Today, we continue to let this happen, and now the endgame is apparent. Global corporate governance is key to governance of all economies and social structures. For to control the entire commercial structure of the world is to control the harvesting, resource management, manufacturing, wholesale, resale, price-fixing, and the power of monopoly creation and trust building. For when the lawmaker, the regulator, is also the corporate owner bound by that law, then in effect there is no Real law or regulation, only a global system of organized (legalized) crime through extortion, exaction, engrossment, taxation, and usury. This we call as “government.” And as main shareholder, government’s main purpose is by government law to make a profit for each corporation’s shareholders, which again is mostly government. I can think of no worse situation to be in than this, for laws will be passed to ensure corporate health and welfare (profit) over consumer health (Nature) every time. This is indeed a crisis of unimaginable proportions. But we must remember that government is in control of corporations, never the other way around. The total power and authority lies with government in every way.

Now, when you hear shock-jocks and news outlets make claims that “government is owned by corporations,” you may understand that this is so far from the provable facts that it is laughable. However, you also must realize that it is in the best interest of both corporations and government to let such lies be as prevalent and apparently true and accepted as they are. The fact is, corporations cannot own government, because government has no ownership stock. This, again, is a self-evident Truth. The synthesis of government and corporations, on the other hand, is very concerning, to the point that to be a politician (regulator) is not much different that being a general board member on all corporations. For the regulator is the owner of that which it regulates, meaning that the regulator is bound by law to ensure profitability to each corporation, and thus may not pass laws to cause unprofitability.

So… do you now comprehend why oil spills aren’t cleaned up, why government doesn’t force oil companies to go broke in cleaning up their messes, or why pharmaceuticals are allowed to charge 300,000% markups on drugs that often maim or kill those that take them? This is the very nature of the global, corporate governance world we are allowing to be built all around us.

What is somehow not well-known publicly, though it appears fairly obvious, is that all governments from the district, city, county,  state, and federal level are also municipal or other corporations. Artificial persons. Thus, I named my first documentary and website as The Corporation Nation. If this is hard to believe, just look at your city, county, or state seal:

–=–


 

–=–

Why is this important? Consider this… when under a corporation, one is not self-governing but instead under a contract to perform under strict (contract) law. There is no room for moral diversion or disobedience in a contractual performance debt such as citizenship. The maxims of law state clearly and without confusion that the contract makes the law. That’s why the allegory of the devil is said to be powerless over men without a contract, for in no other way may the devil turn good men away from the protections of God’s Law. In other words, while you are made to believe that you are under the constitutional and common law systems through entertainment and public education, you are in actuality under the public laws of municipal corporations governed by the state in interstate commerce, not the constitutions or so-called “law of the land,” as they say, which is just a romantic term for due process of law. These are, in other words, creations of government, illegitimate corporations created by government, not the legitimate governmental (constitutional) institution itself. Ignorance of this fact is key. A municep or provincial citizen was of course the name of a common Roman without respected higher status. As synonyms for what a provincial or municep is we find peasant, rustic, one-horse, unsophisticated, hick, jerkwater, and bumpkin. You may wear a suit to work as well, but you are no less unsophisticated in your status than anyone else, just a bit more brain-washable and controllable. You may seek to emulate and follow the corrupt example of your false, legal, corporate gods by dressing like them, because you seek to be like them, to earn their income and share in their pensions and bonuses, but to do this you certainly must leave Jesus in the dust of any righteous path.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION – A public corporationcreated by government for political purposes, and having subordinate and local powers of legislation(–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

MUNICIPAL FUNCTION – One created or granted for the special benefit and advantage of the urban community embraced within the corporate boundaries. Sometimes called a private function, as distinguished from a public or governmental function, which is one conferred or imposed on the municipality as a local agency of limited and prescribed jurisdiction to be employed in administering the affairs of the state, and promoting the public welfare generally. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS – A term referring to the internal business affairs of a municipality. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

CORPORATE LEGAL INDIVIDUALMunicipal corporation possesses two kinds of power, governmental and public, and proprietary and private, and in exercise of former, corporation is amunicipal government,” while as to latter, it is a corporate legal individual.” (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

POLITICAL CORPORATIONA public or municipal corporation; one created for political purposes, and having for its object the administration of governmental powers of a subordinate or local nature(–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ENFRANCHISE – To make free; to incorporate a man in a society or body politic.

DISSOLUTION (Of Corporations) – The dissolution of a corporation is the termination of its existence as a body politic. This may take place in several ways; as by act of the legislature, where that is constitutional; by surrender or forfeiture of its charter; by expiration of its charter by lapse of time; by proceedings for winding it up under the law; by loss of all its members or their reductian below the statutory limit….

GUILDHALL – The hall or place of meeting of a guild, or gild. The place of meeting of a municipal corporation. The mercantile or commercial gilds of the Saxons are supposed to have given rise to the present municipal corporations of England, whose place of meeting is still called the “Guildhall.” (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

GUILDA voluntary association of persons pursuing the same trade, art, profession, or business, such as printers, goldsmiths, wool merchants, etc, united under a distinct organization of their ownanalogous to that of a corporation, regulating the affairs of their trade or business by their own laws and rules, and aiming, by co-operation and organization, to protect and promote the interests of their common vocation. In medieval history these fraternities or guilds played an important part in the government of some states; as at Florence, in the thirteenth and following centuries, where they chose the council of government of the city. The word is said to be derived from the Anglo-Saxon ”gild” or “geld,” a tax or tribute, because each member of the society was required to pay a tax towards its support. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

Not a government, but a voluntary guild for commerce (federal and state business, enterprise), a municipal corporation granted subservient administrative powers…

But wait, government isn’t a corporation, it’s a body politic, isn’t it? How much clearer can it get, man? Did you miss the definition above as to how a body politic (corporation) dissolved?

The question you should be asking is, how did I become a member of my local municipal body politic (corporation)? How the hell did that happen? And the answer, again, is that you are not. Your assigned legal identity (persona) is. And because of that, you (the user but not owner of that person/status) must follow the laws of membership in bond and surety to it. For together, we all constitute an artificial person in law, called a body politic. Congratulations on your unwitting collaboration with this very tricky legal system. And every bad thing that municipal corporation does is in mine and your name, every war and illegal occupation done in our name as one body politic with only one voice, out of many one, E Pluribus Unum.

Yes, corporations are persons too. So don’t feel very special about being an “individual” person. Many natural or individual persons make up a single artificial person but with little or no individual responsibility for the corporations actions or harms. An artificial person (corporation, association, etc.) is never made of only one natural person, except as a corporation sole such as the corporations of the Queen of England and the United Kingdom, the Pope, and the Mormon “corporation of the president.” All of us are just the taxpaying tributes of the municipalities, no different that those of Caesar’s realm. Anything goes and any Law of Nature can be pretended to be broken here in legal land. Where else can men pretend to have limited liability for the damages they cause other men while pretending to be protected behind a corporate name and persona (mask), LLC? Where can doctors practice really bad medicine freely and without consequence unless they have limited liability through the malpractice insurance of a corporation (person) that represents them, allowing those doctors and their fleet of vaccine wielding nurses to harm and kill without consequence or even censure? And where can priests molest freely their trusted non-consenting, underage membership without the corporate protection and veil of the artifice of legal church sanctity? The priest is only one part of the corporation, after all, not the whole. We shouldn’t blame the whole person (corporation) for the actions of just one individual, or at least that’s the bullshit we are taught to accept because its supposedly a sacred institution. LOL!

–=–

“I prayed for a bicycle until I realized God doesn’t work that way.
So, I stole a bicycle and then prayed for forgiveness.”

–Emo Philips

–=–

What is a government issued license? Permission to and forgiveness of committing a crime.

Though the difference here between legitimate and illegitimate governmental structures may seem subtle, I assure you that this is the difference between having that now dead American dream of self-governing Liberty under God, and basic, feudalistic serfdom. But oh, to put this into comprehendible terms… What government creates (e.g. independent municipal corporations and religious corporations) are automatically subordinate, beneath, and therefore subject to that creator (source) government and its false, legal (anti-God) law. Thus the magistrates of governments throughout history have been labeled as “gods,” having nothing to do with religion and everything to do with undue authority. The word god, in fact, is a generic term, used often in law, the Bible, and in history to describe men with higher legal standing and with illegitimate power or authority, as kings, popes, judges, governors, etc. This is general knowledge, though perhaps not commonly known, which well be discussed and qualified (proven) further as we progress.

The same rule of language and Law is to be said about Nature, as all that is not man-made, being a “Creation” of God. Insurance policies, for instance, may or may not pay for an “Act of God,” meaning any Natural disaster or what is not caused by the agency and interference of man. This stands as absolute proof that government recognizes a higher power than man, and thus a higher and more authoritative Law of Nature. This provable fact is all we need to know for our purposes, that this Higher Law and its God cannot be defeated. Unfortunately, most common men have lost this knowledge and understanding to modern religious institutionalism and false doctrines (laws). Here the maxim of law states simply that the creator controls. Thus, to be under such a subordinate municipal corporation (city, county, state, district, etc.) created by the already (legally) existing government, which all municipalities (cities, counties, etc.) are, the public US citizen-ship is automatically and from the beginning so subjected as indirectly governed municeps under that municipal, independent, districted corporation. This common, public status is to be under and subject to that government, not to be the creator and power over government. To be under a municipal government is to be or carry a public status, not private. It is voluntary servitude to the false gods (magistrates) of government.

In a nutshell, this equates to the doctrine and law of agency. Just as an employee is an agent for his or her principal employer, so too is a municipal corporation (city, county, state, etc.) an agent for the principal government that created it. To be under the agent is to be under the principal and law of that agent. For more on agency, check out my book free @ StrawmanStory.info.

And so a pension fund member, for instance, is completely subservient to that fund and its management over its own affairs, just as every other public citizenship has no control over the Social Security Fund most contribute to. When government is higher in status than the people (acting as persons) it governs, then only tyranny and corruption can take hold. A free, self-governing man is foreign (private) to any and all governments, not under their public law but in standing as the private creator of it. We call these “the People,” or in other words, the private States (People) united, which are each foreign (private) to the corporation nation called “United States.” For detailed info on this subject, please get a copy of my book at the link just provided.

—=—

“A thing is private which is not common.

—RES PROPRIA EST QUAE COMMUNIS NON EST. Le Breton v. Miles, 8 Paige (N.Y.) 261, 270. (Black4)

—=—

“A ‘US Citizen’ upon leaving the District of Columbia becomes involved in ‘interstate commerce, as a ‘resident‘ does not have the common-law right to travel, of a Citizen of one of the several states.”

–Hendrick v. Maryland S.C. Reporter’s Rd. 610-625. (1914)

–=–

“The term resident and citizen of the United States is distinguished from a Citizen of one of the several states, in that the former is a special class of citizen created by Congress.

–U.S. v. Anthony 24 Fed. 829 (1873)

–=–

The Importance of the Birth Certificate – Birth Registrar Certification

Do you know the purpose of a birth certificate?

“The legal portion of the birth certificate shows the child’s name, date of birth, and parents’ names, among other things. It establishes Texas RESIDENCY and US CITIZENSHIP. It provides legal identity. A birth certificate is required for Social Security, Medicaid, school enrollment, driver’s license, social services such as a marriage license, and more. In addition, it serves as proof of relationship to parents, which is required for child support services, inheritance, and eligibility for benefits…”

Source –> Texas Government website: http://www.dshs.texas.gov/vs/field/brc/importanceofBC.shtm

–=–

“The governments of the United States and of each of the several States are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other…”

Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404 at 429

–=–

“The distinction between citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a State  is clearly recognized and established. Not only may a man be a citizen of the United States without being a citizen of a State,  but an important element is necessary to convert the former into the latter.  He must reside within the State to make him a citizen of it, but it is only necessary  that he should be born or naturalized in the United States to be a citizen of the Union.”

—Mr. Justice Miller, 16 Wall. 83 U. S. 72, in treating of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as quoted in United States v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

–=–

I could go on and on, but the story is told in just these few official quotes. The birth certificate establishes residency, not citizenship, in the State. It establishes citizenship (domicile) in the Nation, the district of the United States de facto corporation structure and jurisdiction, but not in the State. In other words, to be born in that which is called the United States jurisdiction is to be born in a place (jurisdiction/district) foreign to whatever State (People) inhabits that territory. There is no land in the United States, in the public, just like on the monopoly board, and we go round and round without ever touching any land of our own. US citizenships are foreigners in all 50 States.

Another word for private is foreign. In short, to be common is to be non-private; to be a property of another. To be a common citizen of the United States is to belong (as property) to the United States. To be common is to be public property. There is no Real privacy, only that which is revokable as granted by the authority of the legal gods (creators) of these strawmen, these public persons (legal statuses). And this means one very important thing… all common US citizens are foreigners to the State in which they reside. This is why US “federal” law always trumps state law regarding public, common persons (status). All of the several States are also by law foreign (private) to each other. The “United States” in Washington DC is as well private (foreign) to all 50 States. In this way the federal states’ (municipal) worker public pension scheme we are exposing here can be executed without a hitch. Foreigners have no protected rights in states, and it is in fact illegal for a state to interfere with the forced rights and laws governing US citizens (as properties of the United States corporation). These common rights are not a good thing — not the God-given or Natural Rights of man we believe them to be. The rights of the legal fictions (natural persons) we call as public citizenships are not optional, are forced and enforced at gunpoint, and exist only in the status (persona), never the man. The private (foreign) States cannot protect US citizens against the very fraud being conducted by the federal areas known as “states” and municipal governments thereof. To deny a US citizenship its required and enforced rights per that legal US status would be to break the US constitution and federal law. Protection is an illusion, as is peace and safety (security). Its a well-laid legal trap, a cold comfort based on status (legal personhood), and we have all been caught up in it. Pensioners, however, get an extra bonus, a retirement (death) retainer to keep them quite and numb despite their equal status with all the other common citizenry. They are paid off as prostituting state hirelings to betray their country, to destroy the posterity of their own people in favor of the federal (global) state government and its corporate, de facto municipal structure. And yet it seems that most have no idea they are doing so, standing instead within the arrogance of ignorance caused by public education and entertainment, exactly what we should expect from the common, vulgar class that we have allowed ourselves to become. They’re just doing their jobs, as we say, and as if that slave mentality is some legitimate excuse for total irresponsibility of our actions while employed (in agency).

COMMONadjective – 1. Belonging equally to more than one, or to many indefinitely; as, life and sense are common to man and beast; the common privileges of citizens; the common wants of men. 2. Belonging to the public; having no separate owner. The right to a highway is common 3. General; serving for the use of all; as the common prayer. 4. Universal; belonging to all; as, the earth is said to be the common mother of mankind. 5. Public; general; frequent; as common report. 6. Usual; ordinary; as the common operations of nature; the common forms of conveyance; the common rules of civility. 7. Of no rank or superior excellence; ordinary. Applied to men, it signifies, not noble, not distinguished by noble descent, or not distinguished by office, character or talents; as a common man; a common soldier. Applied to things, it signifies, not distinguished by excellence or superiority; as a common essay; a common exertion. It however is not generally equivalent to mean, which expresses something lower in rank or estimation. 8. Prostitute; lewd; as a common woman… Common in gross or at large, is annexed to a man’s person,being granted to him and his heirs by deed; or it may be claimed by prescriptive right, as by a parson of a church or other corporation sole. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the American Language)

COMMONSThe class of subjects in Great Britain exclusive of the royal family and the nobility. They are represented in parliament by the house of commons. Part of the demesne land of a manor, (or land the property of which was in the lord), which, being uncultivated, was termed thelord’s waste,” and served for public roads and for common of pasture to the lord and his tenants. Squares; pleasure grounds and spaces or open places for public use or public recreation owned by towns; in modern usage usually called “parks.” (–Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition)

VULGAR – noun – The common people. [It has no plural termination, but has often a plural verb.] The vulgar imagine the pretender to have been a child imposed on the nation. – adjective – 1.Pertaining to the common unlettered people;as vulgar life2. Used or practiced by common people; as vulgar sports. 3.Vernacular; national. It might be more useful to the English reader, to write in our vulgar language4.Common; used by all classes of people; as the vulgar version of the scriptures. 5.Public; as vulgar report. 6.Mean; rustic; rude; low; unrefined; as vulgar ninds; vulgar manners. 7.Consisting of common persons. In reading an account of a battle, we follow the hero with our whole attention, but seldom reflect on the vulgar heaps of slaughter. Vulgar fractions, in arithmetic, fractions expressed by a numerator and denominator; thus 2/5. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the American Language)

–=–

Do not miss the most important aspect of being common as listed above. We are always represented, either by a legislature, municipality, or by an attorney in court, never self-governing or self-responsible. We exist not in a constitutional system but an administrative system. Public persons are always administered, for public persons are under strict law, having no legal right or standing to make moral choices. We are all wards of the state by birth certification (abandonment). But what you likely don’t know is that to be represented by another (agent/attorney) is a sign of incompetence, of a vulgar mind, or one not regenerate or versed in the law or higher functions — in other words, one that is not self-governed. This is not merely the author’s opinion, this is the structure of legal, US law. If you don’t know the legal language, you cannot be free from its clutches and trickery.

The following quotes and citations tell the story of how the common citizen is considered by his low, mean, vulgar status in public, legal persona:

–=–

“The practice of Law is an occupation of common right.

–Sims v. Aherns, 71 S.W. 720 (1925)

–=–

“The practice of Law CAN NOT be licensed by any state/State.

–Schwarz v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238,239

 –=–

“Between 75% to 90% of all lawyers are either incompetent, dishonest, or both.” 

—Earl Warren, former Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court

—=—

“(a) The controlling rule is that “absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offenseunless he was represented by counsel at his trial.

–Atgersinger, 407 U.S., at 37. Pp. 5-6. —Alabama v Shelton 535 U.S. 654

–=–

“…the trial of a misdemeanor starts that no imprisonment may be imposed, even though local law permits it, unless the accused is represented by counsel.

–Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 40 (1971)

—=—

“He is however in a sense an officer of the state with an obligation to the court His first duty is to the courts and to the public, not to the client, and whenever his duties to his client conflict with those as an officer of the court, in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the later. Clients are also called ‘wards of the court‘…” 

—7 Corpus Juris Secundum, Section 4, on “Attorneys”

—=—

“His (an attorney’s/public defender’s) first duty is to the courtsnot to the client.” 

—U.S.v Franks D.C.N.J. 53F.2d 128. 

—=—

Clients are also calledwards of the courtin regard to their relationship with their attorneys.” 

—Spilker v. Hansin, 158 F.2d 35, 58U.S.App.D.C. 206. 

—=—

“Wards of court – Infants and persons of unsound mind.” 

—Davis Committee v. Lonny, 290 Ky. 644, 162 S.W.2d 189, 190.

—=—

If you can’t practice law as your public right because you are ignorant of its terms and usage, then you are of unsound mind, which means you must be represented and placed in wardship. This is 99.9% of all US citizenships. Ignorance of law, both of God and of the legal state, and the resulting ineptness that ignorance causes, is key to the whole administrative, corporate state’s existence and business model.

The practice of law is a common right, meaning it belongs to the public. In other words, you give up that right the second you hire an attorney to re-present you. Only incompetent, unlearned, unregenerate men (acting as public persons) need representation. In other words, the second you contract an attorney, you become a ward of the court, for the attorney cannot act on your behalf unless the attorney is hired. Yes, attorneys are the ultimate prostitutes of the corporate state. It’s their job description. They do not work for you, the client, they work for the court, the state, and its profitable interest. This is to say that the second that attorney speaks on your behalf within a court (at bar), this very action sets the jurisdiction and status of the client (you). Once the first word is officially spoken, the client becomes a ward of court. The attorney literally cannot speak and would not unless the assumption of that courts jurisdiction was upon himself as your representative. To put it even clearer, to be a ward is to be subject. In other words, you lose the second you receive and accept representation. You are lost in the legal matrix code at this point. And as we can read, this step is crucial for the administrative process, for it cannot in its de facto (illegitimate) state of commerce and contract law do anything to you unless you accept representation. It cannot throw you in a for-profit prison without representation. There are no exceptions to this rule. So remain ignorant of the law that governs your person at your own peril.

I cannot relay unto you how you and I have been tricked and robbed of all natural right and dignity unless I can cause you to understand that everything we have been tricked into doing, into acting, and into speaking, is vulgar (common). We speak the vulgar language called English, which is also known as the vulgarity of dog-Latin. We therefore read the Bible in English, which is referred to above as the vulgar version. We act in the lowest and thus most vulgar of legal status (persona), which is a common, national citizenship instead of a private, self-governing Statehood (People). Another word for national is listed above as common, which again is why US citizens are not part of the private States we reside in. And we interact in every way and with everything in the most vulgar of intent and purpose, which is on the behalf of money and this artificial value system that can only be expressed via the monetary revaluation of all Reality, and which is referred to as mammon — where all things and all men (under status) have a price, including our own morality, dignity, posterity, choice, and fate. In mammon, even the acknowledgement of Truth can be sold to lies. We have been devolved into this state, even as we are tricked into the delusion that US citizenship is an elevation in status. In fact, there is no lower status than national (commercial) citizenship. We can get no lower, for we can get no farther from being a moral, self-governing people. With this understanding as the basis of exactly what we have been voluntarily subjected to, only then may we come to understand these pension and other financial schemes and why they are created and executed in the distinct and corrupt way they are. Volunteerism, that is, choice, is everything, for it is simply the choice between the Law of God (Nature) or the legal law mammon (money). What is priceless (i.e. a Creation of God) is legally recreated (corrupted) by men into that which carries a price, a valuation in artifice, the fiction of law that is currency, credit, and debt.

This essay is not merely focused on the subject of its title, as should be apparent at this point, but stands as a summation of all my previous exposures of the CAFR accounting system and global pension fund schemes, as well as my free documentary films and CAFR School articles and videos found on this blog and at my other website: TheCorporationNation.com. It also reflects the years of research that went into my book series on law entitled Strawman. It’s now been eight years since I released my first documentary film, aptly entitled, The Corporation Nation, with the in depth follow-up called, The Great Pension Fund Hoax, with CAFR School made shortly thereafter. And, in looking back at this seemingly fruitless adventure in attempting public exposure and action, it’s this authors resulting opinion that we are approaching a time when all these plans heretofore exposed by yours Truly have now reached their pinnacle, a boiling-over point, finally proving themselves as the ponzi schemes they have always been, and thus finally coming to their intended fruition. We are entering into the climax of the story, the end as it was always planned by the authors of these pension “plans.” I offer this essay now not because I feel there is still a time to ward off what is to come, but for the purposes of providing a clearer understanding of the complete story, to leave at least a documentary essay of this almost inconceivable puzzle as a whole, as the incontrovertible truth in all its pieces to those few souls that seek to discover it no matter how uncomfortable and self-damning it may be to those brave enough to comprehend it and thus take equal responsibility for it.

I can only suggest that we have already entered into that not long ago foretold Orwellian time of a dystopian hell on earth, where telling the truth is a revolutionary act, and where, as Arthur Schopenhauer once predicated:

–=–

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

–=–

What I present to you herein is exactly that, being the self-evident truth of our collective, societal disposition under a not-so-new globalist or “one-world” government and just how it has happened – but more importantly how it could not have happened without this globalist pension fund hoax (scheme) and why it was all perfectly “legal.” My name and efforts have been ridiculed and violently opposed by many that have a stake in such pension schemes, as should be expected, even while we are experiencing the reality of its undeniable truths today. Those who shall have their so-called “retirements” washed away into eventual nothingness will watch it all disappear like a ship sailing off into the horizon, a modern great flood caused by the angry and zealous demi-gods of money, the de facto government itself.

Yet make no mistake here, for all of us are complicit. All of us are to blame, myself included. Nothing stated in this essay does not include myself nor dismisses my own publicly imposed ignorance on the subject, which I have happily corrected and at least tempted to share with you. Why is this True? We have all contributed voluntarily to our own collective dystopian transformation into globalism, a corporate new world order, and even now the intolerable consequences of our collective ignorance and inaction are nigh. There is no need to utilize or promote fear, for that time has passed. Fear is only useful for cause or prevention, not for the already manifest consequences of purposeful ignorance. If anything, the reader may find merely a purpose for preparation against what is this globalist scheme. I offer within this exposure no hope, just the truth. For when the truth is known and adhered to, no hope is needed, and no lie can defeat us. I do not hold out any hope that things will change from within this system, only without. And deep down we all know that only each of us alone can change, stop participating, and stop contributing to our own economic enslavement. But this most essential key of the realization and actualization of self-responsibility has been stolen from us, reeducated away from us, to the point where at all times and in all events, everyone else is to blame but never ones self.

In essence, this is exactly the dependent mindset and lifestyle desired and designed for us by those who seek to control us. And so far, it’s been a flawless execution, as we have performed our parts (as debtors) with graceless fanaticism and strangely misplaced patriotism.

The easy version of this essay is simply that all governmental corporations, from the city to the state and national level, have unofficially merged. Not the common people, just the artificial persons (e.g municipal corporations). We must understand though that these are but tools, agents of the actual governmental structure, being incorporated entities thereof and under its umbrella of international law. In other words, these are not governments in and of themselves. Yet they are tasked by the source, de jure (legitimate) government to stand in its place, in its name, and under its law. Chicago, or the incorporated City of Chicago, is not an independent government, but one completely subservient to its creator (state/nation) its law. These, including the so-called “United States” municipal corporation located outside of and foreign to the 50 States united in Washington D.C., are called de facto governments. One seldom if ever finds a system of government in any nation that does not have both, the legitimate always justifying and creating the illegitimate due to reasons such as war and emergency, where constitutional law is all but suspended.

But don’t take my word for it, just read what Congress had to say about it:

Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency… These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.

–93d Congress 1st Session – SENATE Report No. 93-549 EMERGENCY POWERS STATUTES: Provisions of Federal Law Now in Effect Delegating to the Executive Extraordinary Authority in Time of National Emergency – introduction section of the REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE TERMINATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY UNITED STATES SENATE NOVEMBER 19, 1973. Link–> https://archive.org/stream/senate-report-93-549/senate-report-93-549_djvu.txt

–=–

Now stop and think about these statements by Congress for a moment before we move on… and no, they did not fix this problem. In fact, they are quite content with it because it takes any responsibility out of their hands. They can pretend that their hands are tied while the president runs rampant. And no, nothing has changed since this congressional publication, though it has gotten much, much worse.

What, in peace time, controls such things as property management, production, commodity storage and distribution, transportation and communication, private enterprise, travel, and all the other plethora of commercial activity of American citizens?

Why corporations, of course. Why is this true? Because corporations are creations of and under government law. As fictional, legal, artificial persons (corporations), they simply cannot exist without their fictional, governmental source. But most importantly, in peace time, we must ask who owns these corporations that run the commercial world? The answer to that question is the entire basis and intent of the creation of the pension fund scheme. For he that owns stock in a corporation, owns that part of the corporation. Through pension funds, government is now the owner and thus controller of most corporations worldwide not merely in war or emergency, but in peacetime (which is just another word for free-flowing international and interstate commerce). And this is how the illegitimate governmental structure, a creation of the legitimate constituted government, took over its creator in both war (emergency) and peace times. For the distinction between what is a time of war and emergency and what is peace has been so blurred that most common folks have no idea that no war has ever been declared legitimately by congress since World War II, and that all military actions since have been illegitimate Executive Branch (presidential) actions done through the doctrine of emergency, through Presidential Directives and Executive Orders. All that death and destruction on both sides was all done despite Congress, or in other words, without the representatives of the States. And that’s just how they like it.

NATIONAL EMERGENCY – A state of national crisis; a situation demanding immediate and extraordinary national or federal action. Congress has made little or no distinction between astate of national emergencyand astate of war.” (Black’s Law Dictionary)

DE FACTO – In fact, in deed, actually. This phrase is used to characterize an officer, a government, a past action, or a state of affairs which exists actually and must be accepted for all practical purposes, but which is illegal or illegitimate. In this sense it is the contrary of de jure, which means rightful,legitimate, just, or constitutional. Thus, an officer, king, or government de facto is one who is in actual possession of the office or supreme power, but by usurpation, or without respect to lawful title; while an officer, king, or governor de jure is one who has just claim and rightful title to the office or power, but who has never had plenary possession of the same, or is not now in actual possession. So a wife de facto is one whose marriage is voidable by decree, as distinguished from a wife de jure, or lawful wife. But the term is also frequently used independently of any distinction from de jure; thus a blockade de facto is a blockade which is actually maintained, as distinguished from a mere paper blockade. As to de facto “Corporation,” “Court,” “Domicile,” “Government,” and “Officer,” see those titles. In old English law. De facto means respecting or concerning the principal act of a murder, which was technically denominated fact. (–Black’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition)

–=–

So how does a ruler that is unrightfully a dictator at heart, that is, a president or bloodline of rulers that hold only non-plenary (non-possessive) positions in a legitimate government, as non-landholders, become the opposite, as illegitimate plenary holders of that over which they govern? Simple. Turn all legitimate government agencies into illegitimate ones, all established cities into incorporated tools of the dictator (bloodline). In other words, incorporate the world! Turn all Real things into artificial persons, places, and things (nouns) by legal status and place them under your system of law… including all the common people. All common people must become “natural persons” of the illegitimate, incorporated district government, the corporation called “United States,” while at the same time still be made to believe they are part of the source, of the legitimate People of the foreign (private) 50 States united. But the “United States” district corporation is foreign to each state, just as each state is foreign to all others, also called private or several. Please see my free-to-download book, Strawman, for a full, neutral breakdown of these legal facts. They are not disputable but by the ignorant, patriotic believer that holds no evidence for those beliefs.

Whatever you may think your “government” is as it manifests in these corporate, municipal entities, I assure you, they are not the same as what you are taught in history class or political science. Education is a process of dumbing down, not a lifting up. Nor is the securities and exchange scam and pension fund ponzi scheme in any way a legitimate governmental operation. In essence, we have allowed over many dumbed down, tricked generations, the de jure form of government to manifest itself within its own evermore de facto shadow, to the point where the original and rightful government and its constitution sits absentee from most commercial, international operations of its de facto corporations and municipal districts, standing only when it need to justify its shadow in the light of scrutiny, as is the honorary position of all so-called “rightful” kings (legal gods). Congress is too busy with the management of its created, de facto, corporate empire called “United States” to bother with anything legitimate (de jure) anymore. And the reason for this is quite clear and simple… the common people have lost the art and ability to govern themselves, and have become completely dependent and in love with the illegitimate money, credit, and commerce system created by congress into this de facto (illegitimate), non-governmental structure of international and administrative law. By turning the legal status of all men and all things (properties) legally illegitimate (artificial) as well, including our de facto marriages that can be suspended by decree (divorce), causing all our children to be re-born without recognition of blood-right into this de facto district of the corporate municipal states (federal areas/districts) and under that corporate “United States” through birth certification, and leaving us all standing only as national (corporate) foreigners in the States (territory/land) we reside (without ownership).

Yet we still believe that as incorporated, contracted, completely commercial and subservient US citizens that we’re somehow also “Free” as “We, the People.” But those “People” only exist in the States, not in the corporation nation. This, of course, is why Federal (“United States”) commercial (interstate) law trumps state law in every way, for a US citizenship is not protected in any way from “United States” because that legal, national status belongs to its creator, the “United States” corporation and district. This is not a self-governing status in Nature, in blood, but a fictional persona (mask) worn by common (vulgar) people that cannot govern themselves or has been so dumbed-down that self-governing is impossible.

To be clear, there are two forms of freedom. The first is Natural Freedom, being a state of spiritual Being self-governed under the Law of Nature (God), being totally self-responsible, and without legal protection or respect of anything artificial (creations of men). The opposite version is citizenship, or political freedom, called by the legal terminology as freedom, which is defined as enfranchisement – to be free in a legal, public, open-air prison called a district (e.g. that of the District of Columbia). The slaves were not freed naturally, but nationalized by enfranchisement. They were made US citizenships (persons), given protective legal status. But with protection comes subjection, a maxim of law. US citizens, white or black, believe they are naturally free (self-governed) under subjection to God’s Law (the Law of Nature) when in fact they are enfranchised (legally free) under subjection to false, legal gods (magistrates) and their army of administrative agents. And so to understand these international pension fund and globalism schemes, this difference between what is Natural and what is artificial (legal) and political must be understood. For a subject has no rights under God (Nature) as a man, carrying only the contracted to legal rights assigned to his person (legal status) in society, in agency (enfranchisement). Only the self-governing man under the Law of Nature (God’s Law) is and can be Naturally Free. Again, this is not disputable, and stands as the foundation of law. More importantly, we must know that by law and even logically, a person (status) cannot be Truly Free in Nature, for a person is not of Nature, not of the God of Nature. A person (legal status) is a creation of man, not a Creation of God (Nature). Nothing that is legal is of Reality, of Nature. This is self-evident, though it may be ridiculed and violently opposed by those so corrupted by their own legal person-hood that they believe they Truly are that persona. You may believe that you are the mask (persona) you wear (use), but you are not. You are Reality, part of Nature, and nothing of fiction is of Nature nor of man. Pension funds are created and administered on behalf of persons, not men. Men have no right to pension benefits, only persons do. But persons have no rights other than what is bestowed them contractually. This is how men are taken from their Natural element and “God-given” Rights of blood inheritance and rebirth into the legal realm of fiction. In other words, men have no Natural Right to claim anything of the legal fiction, for Natural Rights are said to be God-given and thus unalienable. To make legal claims to fictional properties (persons, places, and things), one must subject themselves to such a status as is recognized by the de facto state (district), which is opposed to Nature and thus Nature’s God (Creator). Remember, this is not religion, but there very essence and structure of law. The legal gods cannot control men of (Creations of) God unless they turn away from God’s Nature and accept legal fiction as their false reality. And this is the whole essence of the Bible and why it is accepted as the foundation of law. Once the Bible (moral) law is broken by men that accept personhood (legal status) for gain in mammon (commerce, money, etc), then the Law of Nature is broken, and the man no longer has the unwritten protection of God’s Law. In other words, he can no longer be self-governing under God’s Law of Nature because he is using the artificial property (fictional title/name/number) of another man’s recreation, not that of God’s Creation of Nature (Reality).

—=—

The true name of Satan, the Cabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but the negation of God. The devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry. For the Initiates, this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty for Free Will.

—Albert Pike, ‘Morals and Dogma,’ Page 102

—=—

“May the Force be with you…”

—Line from Star Wars, a proverb spoken universally by Jedi on both the light and dark side

—=—

It’s all about using the force, a power created by the negation of God and Its Law and Laws of Nature. Power without Law, without God. In other words Super (above) natural power. Authority without conscious or moral checks. What appears as the light leads irrevocably to the dark side and back again, for the light is artificial. And even Satan (darkness) appears as if the light, lies as if Truth.

All sound familiar? Did you actually think the Star Wars saga was a good thing?

Better read between the lines to see the real agenda…

—=—

“…We stand on the threshold of a new beginning. In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire, for a safe and secure society, which I assure you will last for ten thousand years. An Empire that will continue to be ruled by this august body and a sovereign ruler chosen for life. An Empire ruled by the majority, ruled by a new constitution!

By bringing the entire galaxy under one law, one language, and the enlightened guidance of one individual, the corruption that plagued the Republic in its later years will never take root. Regional governors will eliminate the bureaucracy that allowed the Separatist movement to grow unchecked. A strong and growing military will ensure the rule of law.

Under the Empire’s New Order, our most cherished beliefs will be safeguarded. We will defend our ideals by force of arms. We will give no ground to our enemies and will stand together against attacks from within or without. Let the enemies of the Empire take heed: those who challenge Imperial resolve will be crushed

—The Declaration of a New Order,
a proclamation by Supreme Chancellor Palpatine
as an Extraordinary Session of the Galactic Senate
and then to the general populace,
proclaiming himself Emperor of the galaxy:
from the science fiction movie series ‘Star Wars’

–=–

Very familiar indeed. Agenda 2030 as an organized world government within the United Nations is expressed here in its bitter totality. Be it a galaxy of planets or a world of nations, the goal is the same. UN Peacekeeping forces will and certainly are enforcing international law even as we speak. But just does it work?

“The UN has no military forces of its own, and Member States provide, on a voluntary basis, the military and police personnel required for each peacekeeping operation.

Peacekeeping soldiers are paid by their own Governments according to their own national rank and salary scale. Countries volunteering uniformed personnel to peacekeeping operations are reimbursed by the UN at a standard rate, approved by the General Assembly, of a little over US$1,332 per soldier per month.

Police and other civilian personnel are paid from the peacekeeping budgets established for each operation.

The UN also reimburses Member States for providing equipment, personnel and support services to military or police contingents.”

Link–> https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/how-we-are-funded

–=–

When the public subjects (contracted, money-driven agents) can be convinced to militarily force-govern themselves to follow a foreign international law, the law of nations and declarations of the United Nations (global governance), and actually believe that this false offering from the legal gods of “peace and security” is a good thing, then any scrap of private sovereignty and freedom is lost. The national military of the United States (a de facto standing army in peacetime) now contracts and works for an outside force, which was the biggest complaint within the Declaration of Independence.

The typical fool that is the common US citizen would call this unconstitutional, never realizing that the corporate “United States” is strictly an un-constituted commercial entity, and thus already wholly unconstitutional (de facto). The constitution established a union between States (People), not a corporation. Congress created the “United States” later, eventually moving the seat of government to the foreign district of Washington DC, while wearing two very different hats.

What is artificial? It’s a simple equation, really. Artifice is anything created by man. Be it words or inventions or devices, what is man-made is necessarily opposed to Nature and Its Law, designed either to harness it inharmoniously or thwart it altogether. This too is self-evident. It is neither good nor bad, it just is. The Law of Nature only protects that which is belongs to and emirates from (as a Creation of) Nature, which is said to be the continuous Creation of the Living God. Again, this is not religion, but stands as the basic foundation of law as used in all nations. Man’s law only governs man’s inventions (creations) and nothing else, and this includes the names/nouns of all persons, places, and things, for names don’t ever occur naturally, being always manmade. A fox is not born into nature as a “fox” but as a nameless, priceless (without mammon) Creature (Creation) of God and nothing else, as is each man and each flower and each tree. Once the foundation of Law (the Bible) is ignored, one of the most important of those Laws of Nature (God) stating over and over throughout the scriptures that man should never act in or respect persons (names/nouns) or flattering titles (names/nouns) over the Reality they represent, then man can no longer claim any Natural Rights as listed in the Declaration of Independence. For Natural independence and Freedom requires men (male and female) to be self-governing under the Law of Nature (God). Once again, this is a self-evident Truth. One cannot be owned as property and also be Free and Naturally independent of its owner. And the only thing that proves Natural Freedom is the Law a man follows. To this, we may use the correct verbiage of the word religion, where man follows the Law of God (Nature) religiously without err. All religions are legal corporations with their own constituted doctrine (law) against that of the Bible. Again, the Bible is not religion, but is a Book of Law to be followed religiously, just as one might religiously drink a cup of coffee every morning. Religions, as corporations (artificial persons), are property of the state and thus under the legal law. And why is this important? Because the legal law stands only in direct opposition of the Bible as a Book of Law. That’s the whole point. Choice. Volunteerism. De jure and de facto. Religion is a legal replacement for spirituality, causing us to never act according to the Bible Law, but instead paying mammon to a corporation to conduct legal charity. Charity is part of spiritual self-responsibility, not a thing to be passed to another. It is a spiritual action, not a legal property.

For total understanding of these fact, we only need understand just what the totally misunderstood legal term “freedom of religion” actually means as applied to legal law. For this, I refer to my own book, wherein I have already broken down these terms of art (artifice) for what they truly mean:

Begin Excerpt:

To get a clear comprehension of how a man acting in the incorporation and agency of legal persona necessarily and by law chooses government as his religion over that of God’s Law in scriptural teachings, we must understand what it means to have True “Religious Freedom” as a reserved Natural Right as opposed to its adversarial legalese word-magic of positive law terms of art licensing generally the legal right of “freedom of religion.” Just a simple rearrangement of words and the whole meaning changes. Here we find the substance of Religious Freedom juxtaposed to its adversarial legal form of freedom of religion as a purely legal concept of the franchise of public servitude. This positive law recreation of a negative law absolute is reworded and redefined as legal (anti-God) law in the United States district specifically for public performance debtors, as the legal right and obligations of voluntarily enslaved “citizen-ships” (vessels in prostitution to the gods of the nation), which are the subjects of government and its false gods. And these false gods will allow no other gods before themselves, for their law is opposed to the Law of God’s Nature. The choice is clear, Reality with self-control as self-governance under the Natural Law or fiction with military rule and forced governance under the artificial law of gods of mammon.

This is one of the most important lessons in this work. Please ensure full comprehension between these two very different “freedoms” before you proceed with this work. For as a citizenship of the United States, the attachment to your strawman as property under the law of persons only allows you to fall under the “freedom of religion” as a limited legal outlet of commercial franchise. In other words, “Religious Freedom” is against the law of the United States for its subjects (persons). Notice the different phraseology and how important they are here. For remember, to have the “freedom of” anything in a legal society means to have the “franchise of” the altered, fictional concept of whatever that government allows.

RELIGIOUS FREEDOMWithin constitution embraces not only the right to worship God according to the dictates of one’s conscience, but also the right to do, or forbear to do, any act, for conscience sake,the doing or forbearing of which is not inimical to the peace, good order, and morals of society. (Black4)

FREEDOM OF RELIGION – Embraces the concept of freedom to believe and freedom to act, the first of which(belief)is absolute, but the second of which(action based on belief)remains subject to regulation for protection of society.(Black4)

—=—

Now you tell me, what good is religious, moral belief if you are not allowed to act upon it? To be clear, this state of confusion at bar is the very purpose of nations, to prevent self-governing, moral standing in men. For no moral man would allow a nation as this to continue in its abhorrent actions against God (Nature) and man. But the moral man is cowed and pacified by his surety to the law of his persona (mask), afraid to bite the hand that feeds it. We are so smitten and proud of our nationality (false identity), our personality (reputation) in public that we don’t dare risk doing what is Right and Lawful in and under the Law of God (Nature). This is unmistakably and self-evidently the work of the devil (the attorney class) and its scribes.

These are completely separate definitions, on separate pages of the dictionary. They are not at all the same thing. As citizenships of the “United States” corporation, you better damn well know the difference before proceeding herein, and before you try and act morally in a society that strictly forbids moral actions without artificial, legal license from the state.

Freedom of moral thought, but not freedom to act upon that conscious moral thought… This is what public, legal freedom (franchise) is when defined by the commercial gods — a legal corporation called government. It is not the Natural  Freedom of religion under God, but franchise of religion under the legal state. These are as the rules set for employees (agents) by their employer (principal). This is not Natural freedom under God, which is described above as Religious Freedom. This is tyranny named (noun) as “freedom,” where the ability to practice religion is confounded and limited to the franchise it belongs to (of), as freedom (franchise) of (belonging to) religion (memberships to legal corporations, as the legal, anti-God definition of religion as an artificial person in law). In the “United States,” the very opposing lack of a moral standing in God’s Law (religious, spiritual Life) is the official state religion, as an enforced, amoral lack of It. Legal freedom is only a franchise allowed to fictional persons. Governments cannot control in totality your thought processes, only your actions (anti-pro-verb) while in its property. Specifically, we must recognize absolutely that the purpose of the legal law and the institution of corporate (state licensed) religions is to prevent man from acting upon his moral thoughts and beliefs

—=—

“No one is punished for his thoughts.” 

—COGITATIONIS PAENAM NEMO PATITUR. Dig. 48, 19,18. (Black4)

—=—

“It’s impossible to have religious freedom in any nation where churches are licensed to the government.

—Congressman George Hansen, quoted from “In Caesar’s Grip,” by Peter Kershaw

—=—

“The framers of our Constitution meant we were to have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.”

—Billy Graham

–=–

End Excerpt.

Which one of these is listed as a Natural Right protected also in the constitution? Religious freedom.

Which one of these is a legal right of US citizenships? Freedom of religion.

Freedom belonging to (of) religion is the more correct way of saying it, meaning to be under the legal sanction and false liberties of the false doctrines of corporate religion, all of which pay homage and tribute to the legal law of the land over the Law of God, as opposed to the True and moral God-given Freedom to express religiously the Law of God as the highest moral law that causes True Freedom from man’s devices. “Freedom of religion” is a noun (in name only), while “religious freedom” is a verb (action). This difference is everything, and it applies to those so-called freedoms of speech, press, ect. These are but well-told lies. And as Orwell deduced, freedom within and under the government corporation is certainly just slavery by another (legal) name.

Here is a perfect example from history that shows what freedom of speech really is, and how the Executive Order is used against any legitimate practice or congressional approval of law:

—=—

You will take possession by military force of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce… and prohibit any further publication thereof You are therefore commanded forthwith to arrest and imprisonthe editors, proprietors and publishers of the aforementioned newspapers.

—Executive Order by President Lincoln, May 18, 1864

—=—

And that, ladies and gentlemen of the goyim, common class, is a True look at the actual history of how freedom of the press is just another patriotic fallacy.

Oh, but Lincoln was a hero, right? That’s just more idolatry of this bloodline of false, legal, flatteringly titled gods (magistrates). There is only one hero, one you can emulate and become just like. And Jesus wasn’t even super (above) nature like the rest of the superheros. His powers came only from Nature (God), not above it. Wow! So can yours, if you learn and follow the example.

Or you can pray that your pensions stay outrageously and unreasonable secure. Yep, pray to God for more money. Pray to Nature to invoke its nemesis, mammon. Ask Reality for fiction. That’s the answer… Yet turn on any evangelist on television and that’s exactly what they are instructing the vast wasteland and idocracy of false christians to do!

And you dare to ask why society has degraded as it has? This legal “right” of not being allowed to express your thoughts applies to all moral concepts and scriptural, spiritual Laws, regardless of origin. So declaring oneself an atheist will cause no change in this rule, but rather strengthens the fact that one needs to be a ward in public servitude, for an atheist necessarily decries the Bible as common Law, an act that actually used to be unlawful in public. What would you do with such an idiot that would publicly declare himself to be against the very foundation of law? You’d make him a ward, of course, or perhaps in other countries you’d publicly execute him or her as an infidel and a devil. Ironically, it is the law that protects the lawless from themselves. And from what I’ve seen, every self-proclaimed atheist may dress the part, but acts as a good little citizen complete with driver’s license and social security number. Like the corporate Christian wearing a cross, the title nor the clothing nor the bearing of symbols and idols make the man. One either follows the Law or one follows the anti-law (legalism). There is no in-between, despite what you may call yourself. Again, the Truth may hurt, but only if you live in a lie. Like it or not, my statements here are not only neutral, but backed up by the Bible and the legal system. I forgive any who choose to shoot the messenger instead of facing Reality.

To stand openly in non-belief of “God” is still a religious belief, unprovable and misguided as it may be. The legal law is strict and does not allow moral opposition in action, only in thought. That’s why most religions are called protestants. They protest, but don’t anything about it. Protestors seldom accomplish anything, including the incorporated religions designated by that title. And so to declare that your morals come from a source or no source at all, they are still illegal to act upon. So a public declaration of being “Christian” or “atheist” is in fact, in law, a mute point. Even if it were true, you wouldn’t be allowed to practice your beliefs (or non-beliefs) if they conflict with the legal law. The only Truth is that we are all in this together as duped, contracted common US citizens, regardless of what flattering title (Christian, atheist, etc.) we call ourselves. The Bible does not tell us to be Christians, only to follow the Law by example of Christ. We are not to to be fans (idolators). A slave is a slave by any other name. And that’s why the Bible Law is so adamant that we never call our True Self as anything but a part of the Whole, part of God’s Nature, for the law of man only applies to legalistic names and titles not originating in Nature. This is so simple, so self-evident, that I am astounded we have all been so utterly tricked into worshiping legalism (fiction, artifice) over Reality (Nature, God), and also that it took me so long to figure it all out by untangling this web of deceit and its terms of art.

Let me be clear that there are many men acting as gods (government and church magistrates) in the Bible, all given the name of “god” by the English King’s transliterators.

We merely need to read the Bible itself to understand this:

–=–

“Now I know that the LORD (translation: Jehovah) is greater than all gods (translation: elohiym): for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them.

–Exodus 18:11, KJB

–=–

Natures God is always highest, thus so is Its Law. We can plainly read the comparison of these two different notions of just what a god or lord is. Each use of the word god in the Bible carries up to 20 different meanings, most of them referring to men acting as kings and magistrates (legal gods). Yet those that read the Bible are convince that only the God of Nature is referred to therein with each usage of the generic word. And so God (Nature) in its neutral existence is blamed for the evils of men acting as legal gods, as popes and kings and judges. Why is this important? Because we are worshiping our own false gods, in president Trump and in congress and in the administrative judicial and supreme court. They are lords. Gods. But I assure you that each of them know well their inferiority to the God of Nature and Its Law, which their legal designs and opinions can never defeat. This is not religion, but is the essence of our system of law. Only the self-governing, Bible-reading, Spiritually Lawful man (son of God) may defeat these false, legal gods and their designs by not participating in their schemes. But the deed is now done. This is our story. His-story. It is the entire structure of our system of law. To ignore it is to volunteer to legal enslavement. I don’t desire to cause you to believe in any God, for God is defined as Existence, and so to not believe in God is literally to be a nihilist, to believe that existence does not exist. This is the foolishness of atheism, yet another well-laid and completely irrational legal trap, almost as clever as corporate membership Christianity by a flattering title in idol worship under membership. The de facto (illegitimate) commercial governmental structure can not thrive without causing total ignorance of the Bible (foundational) Law, which is total moral, spiritual, and temporal self-governance in and under Truth (God).

To be clear, if one acts upon the moral, scriptural law, this is considered in the legal realm as a thought crime. The state acts always immoral, or at best, amoral (without moral consideration). The legal law is amoral, while the scripture is purely moral. The two cannot be mixed, only used to prove or disprove the other, or as a check and balance. To act legally is to act against God’s Law of Nature, for what is legal is not of Nature and thus cannot be controlled by Its Law. This is once again a self-evident Truth. This is the very essence of choice, which legally is called volunteerism, or the doctrine of Master and Servant. One is either a servant of God’s Creation of Nature and Its Law or a servant of man’s creation of artifice and its administration (legal law). If the reader cannot somehow accept this because of a lifetime of indoctrination in public schooling and entertainments designed to keep this knowledge from us all, then the reader should consider him or herself a success and should stop reading this and get back to the dissimulation of persona we have been brainwashed to be accustomed to. For those that can get past the metaphor to realize the moral story and its application to Reality, then pleas proceed to get the full story of how we’ve all been duped by false, legal gods (magistrates) of the legal realm, the re-creators of mammon.

Here we stand, unified in our collective ignorance while the entirety of the earth is fictionalized (renamed as legal nouns – persons, places, and things) and purchased (legally conquered) out from under us through such schemes as the world-wide public pension and Social Security systems, the globalism of which would be impossible without the modern creation of digital identity – a global matrix of commercial, legal (artificial) life represented as digital information in what is quickly becoming the central AI, the internet of all legal (artificial) persons, places, and things (names/nouns). We are experiencing its emergent growing pains with every cry of de facto corporate government oppression and mismanagement.

For the purposes of this essay and lesson on CAFR (government audit) reporting and this collective public pension fund scheme designed to rob the middle class government employee and the entirety of the collective taxpayer base that supports them, the following three quotes strike a fatal resemblance to our currently staged, so-called financial crisis.

–=–

“If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom;
and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more,
it will lose that too.”

W. S. Maugham, English playwright, novelist and short story writer

–=–

“The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one
in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it.
The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled.
With something so important, a deeper mystery seems only decent.”

—John Kenneth Galbraith, Canadian-born economist,
Harvard professor, from ‘Money: Whence It Came, Where It Went’ (1975)

–=–

“The king bankers put in motion, in 1907, a great scheme. They had gambled and speculated on Wall Street  until so many watered stocks and bonds had been manufactured The king bankers knew the condition and informed the favored of their friends what was to come. There was to be a panic in the fall of 1907 that would be advertised as the result of our bad banking and currency laws.

 —Charles Lindbergh, Congressman from Minnesota (1907-1917)

–=–

History doesn’t simply repeat as if it was a sentient entity or programmed mechanical contraption. Good history at its best is but a well-told lie by the victors, by the contrivers and schemers, the conspirators behind the story. As an excuse, history is a perfect scapegoat and a wonderfully powerful obfuscation. Only the moral man substantially learns from history. The immoral man seeks to represent it in its sameness under the disguise of modern technique and dress. Thus the value of history to its teller is as a treasure map, a blueprint of criminal design, while to its listener it is merely a form of religious, unprovable belief understood only in the most vulgar of terms, just as a dog understands the simplistic commands of yes and no. History is a game card that is played over and over again under slightly different disguises. For a scheme by any other name is still a scheme. And yet, even though pension funds are literally and popularly known as pension fund “schemes,” this perfect description seems to be ignored by its idyllic worshipers — its members and contributors. But let us be clear… other words as synonyms for the word scheme are contrivance, plan, conspiracy, plot, a waiting game, to connive, a bubble, a falsehood, and an untruth. The judicial system, as well as our current and past economic and social systems, and any other form of social organization, are also called as schemes.

What is a conspiracy but a plan between two or more people to do harm to another?

Hey, we’re so dumbed down that we don’t even understand this country was founded on a conspiracy!

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(Bouv1856)

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 Dictionary of Law, 1856)

–=–

The great scheme is not necessarily the details and schematics of these legal and monetary systems and plans themselves, but rather the control of public opinion. If the end of conspiracy (confederation, combination) is to condition the public hive-mind to believe that usury (interest), grocery (retail), and direct taxes, fines, and fees (exaction, extortion) is somehow not harmful to the public good, or at least not a crime if government does it “constitutionally” or makes it legal (licensed) for corporations to have such privy, and thus to ignore the fact that these are all absolutely crimes against the Law of Nature in every religious, spiritual, and moral teaching (except of course Judaism), then any technical scheme created after this mass social conditioning will likely succeed without even a whimper. What is a nation but a conspiracy? Perhaps you haven’t read the Articles of Confederation (conspiracy)?

A federal government is a state formed by means of a league or confederation. What else needs to be said?

This can only lead to the grossest of behavior and custom…

This word grocer, being the act or organization (incorporation) of the crime of grocery, is a perfect example of how social conditioning schemes (including nationhood) play a most important role in the perfection of such technical schemes as pension funds (i.e. ponzi schemes). We are sold on the idea that we should purchase our food and supplies at our “Friendly Neighborhood Grocer” as if this is a wonderful privilege and convenience (sometimes even called as convenience stores), and as if the grocery store is somehow our friend. But when we uncover the mystery of this word grocer, we suddenly realize how truly dumbed-down we have all been made, how socially organized and schematically controlled we actually are.

We may also discover that the word retail means something quite sinister as well, much akin to usury and extortion:

GROCER – In old English law, a merchant or trader who engrossed all vendible merchandise; an engrosser. See Engrosser. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ENGROSSER – One who engrosses or writes on parchment in a large, fair hand. One who purchases large quantities of any commodity in order to acquire a monopoly, and to sell them again at high prices.(Black4)

ENGROSS – To copy the rude draft of an instrument in a fair, large hand. To write out, in a large, fair hand, on parchment. In old criminal law. To buy up so much of a commodity on the market as to obtain a monopoly and sell again at a forced price.(Black4)

ENGROSSING – In English law. The getting in to one’s possession, or buying up, large quantities of corn, or other dead victuals, with intent to sell them again. The total engrossing of any other commodity, with intent to sell it at an unreasonable priceTHIS WAS A MISDEMEANOR, PUNISHABLE BY FINE OR IMPRISONMENT. (Black4)

HIGHWAY ROBBERY Theft taking place on a public road. Slang for a transaction where one party has such leverage over the other and can demand such a high price so that it is akin to a robbery taking place.(Black2)

TAIL – Fee-tail, as descriptive of an estate in lands, was borrowed from the feudists, among whom it signified any mutilated or truncated inheritance from which the heirs general werecut off. (Black4)

–=–

Every retail store is committing a crime called engrossment. This is not in any way up for dispute, nor is it denied by the self-proclaimed “retail store.” One cannot engross without adding a tail (fee), or re-tailing the products they sell.

So how do they get away with it, and why do we accept it as somehow normal (customary)?

Oh, pardon me. Didn’t I mention that government is the main investor in all grocery and retail chains? This is where your contributions, as a member and a taxpayer go to after all, through not only pension funds but all municipal corporations (governments and districts). Thus, it is understandable that these retail engrossers have permission from government to screw us all, considering not only the return on stock investment and corporate bonds (low or no interest loans) for government, but as well the exorbitant amount of taxation generated from such inflated prices. For government, it’s a win-win!

Let us be clear… when a crime is licensed (made permissive to a certain few) by government, the crime is wedged into the delusion of public opinion as being socially acceptable and even seemingly normal, though still obviously, morally outrageous. Usury as well becomes just an apparent part of our lives, which is the most ridiculous concept imaginable when usury is understood as the anchiently recognized crime it is. This trickery, this educated state of accepted victimhood under organized crime (corporate governance), in a nutshell, is the story of our lives. This is exactly how we are conditioned socially to accept such technical economic and financial schemes as the globalist pension fund ponzi scheme we have all been unwittingly contributing to as taxpayers for decades. We support, in other words, our own victimization without comprehension of the causal, social influence that clouds the reality of the consequences of not merely our individual but collective (pooled) actions in ignorance. Such causalities defeat any modicum of moral or even lawful choice we may otherwise manifest. We choose not only to ignore the truth purposefully, but to suppress it even in our familial relationships with our children and friends (as unorganized and organized social groups). Today, the topics of religion and politics are practically taboo amongst the superficiality of public gatherings. Yet these two topics were considered to be the measure of a man in the former generations and centuries now past.

Of course, public school doesn’t even touch on these topics, for public school is specifically designed to teach and keep us all public minded. This, as well, is self-evident.

–=–

Education is useless without the Bible.”

—Noah Webster

–=–

I don’t want a nation of thinkers. I want a nation of workers.

–John D. Rockefeller, who created the General Education Board (GEB)
in 1903 to dispense Rockefeller funds to “education.”

–=–

The aim of public education is not to spread enlightenment at allit is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality.”

–H.L. Mencken

–=–

The quality of education given to the lower class must be of the poorest sort, so that the moat of ignorance isolating the inferior class from the superior class is and remains incomprehensible to the inferior class. With such an initial handicap, even bright lower class individuals have little if any hope of extricating themselves their assigned lot in life. This form of slavery is essential to maintain some measure of social order, peace, and tranquility for the ruling upper class.”

–“Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars,” page 7

–=–

A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coercedbecause they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day totalitarian states, to ministries of propagandanewspaper editors and SCHOOLTEACHERS”…Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution…”

–Aldus Huxley

–=–

“There is no authority for the common statement that the primary sense of education is to ‘draw out or unfold the powers of the mind.”

–Century Dictionary

–=–

“Education” is not the word you think it is, as usual, and certainly not what parents are entrained from childhood to believe it is. Etymologically, we find that the words education and training are similar, and that under no pretense should it be assumed that public education is designed to allow free forming thought, moral aptitude, or the ability to self-govern. Education, from etymonline.com, is a noun from the: 1530s, “childrearing,” also “the training of animals,” from Middle French education (14c.) and directly from Latin educationem (nominative educatio) “a rearing, training,” noun of action from past participle stem of educare (see educate). Originally of instruction in social codes and manners; meaning “systematic schooling and training for work” is from 1610s.

We are trained for a life of useless labor and technical nonsense, filled with information that is not knowledge of anything Real, merely technical training (empty information) to fix and maintain the fictional legal matrix that contains us, just as the lower slave-classes that built the ancient stone megaliths, tombs, and pyramids to their own detriment, in honor of their own ruling class of gods. Today, however, we are being trained (tricked) into building the very fictional, cashless control grid and social construct that enslaves us, much of it completely intangible, existing only as pure information and code in the now global computer mainframe and internet of things. Form without substance — a digital world without (outside of) reality, without foundation. We are but “animals,” even according to the US CODE and various registered patents.

But why is this important? Why is being labeled by mans law an “animal” a bad thing? After all, technically it’s true, right?

In fact, no. Remember, words are not Reality, and tyranny only exists when words (nouns) are given respect over their Reality (verb/adjective) the represent. One must understand intent behind all things, and the intent of those gods of government is to be “gods” over their own creation. To be a god, all others must be made lower in status. And since all men under God (in Nature) are said under the law to be “Created equal,” there is only one way to break with that Law of Nature. Men must be assigned persons. A person is always form without substance. A person is always only a status, never the actual man (male or female).

—=—

“The fact that the human being can have the representationIraises him infinitely above all the other beings on earth. By this he is a personthat is, a being altogether different in rank and dignity from things, such as irrational animals, with which one may deal and dispose at one’s discretion.

—Immanuel Kant (between 1772-1789), Lectures on Anthropology, Akademie-Textausgabe, Berlin. Reprint Cambridge University (2012)

—=—

Here are a few examples of the “Man or other animal” (MOOA) declaration of legal status in the US Code for US citizenships, keeping in mind that the “Pure Food and Drug Act” of 1906 in Section 6 defines the words “food” and “drugs” to apply to “man or other animals,” and precedes to define man to be in fact “animal” for the purposes of that code:

—=—

“(2)(b) Food – The term “food” means (1) articles used for food or drink for man or other animals, (2) chewing gum, and (3) articles used for components of any such article.”

“(2)(g)(1) – The term “drug” means (A) articles recognized in the official United States Pharmacopoeia, official Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, or official National Formulary, or any supplement to any of them; and (B) articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other animals; and (C) articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals

“(d) Animal – The termanimalmeans all vertebrate and invertebrate species, including but not limited to man and other mammals, birds, fish, and shellfish.”

—21 U.S. Code § 321 – Definitions; generally
—15 U.S. Code § 55 – Additional definitions
—7 US Code § 136 – Definitions

—=—

These definitions are clearly defining man as animal, as equal to “other animals.” Not man, but man-kind, as hu-man beings. Adam… meaning the fallen man or hu-man. In other words, we are considered as mere soulless beasts of burden by these lawmakers of the nobility and majesty of the god corporation (We, the People as a singular entity/voice). This concept of lowering common men in rank and status has been at the center of debate before even Plato, and is what amounts to institutional slavery (voluntary servitude).

What status (persona) is a public citizenship? Well, what is it that separates the human animal from the mammal, the reptile, and the crustacean? The answer to this question, in man’s written law, has no moral Source. The answer, my fellow educated mass of illiterates, is purely one of legal status (person-hood) in fiction. It is them, the self-aggrandized nobility of blood, against us. One cannot be a god without subjecting all others to being a lesser animal. And the best way to accomplish this is to educate men that citizenship raises ones status in society instead of lowering it. Nations, by definition, are the domain of the goyim. For the law of legalism is as well but a scheme by its creators, a conspiracy of the pretended legal gods.

To be clear, the opposite of the word scheme is truth, or a truism. Public (free) education is of course a scheme designed to create workers, not thinkers. It’s just that we are never told that the legal definition for the word “free” is a franchise. To be free in a nation (district) is to have liberty in an open-air debtor’s prison (the public) to pursue ones own course, as long as the organized criminal government gets its cut (tail). We receive a franchise education, and it is certainly paid for through forced taxation (extortion such as property tax). Everything becomes clear when the actual legal (fictional) meaning and intent of words is discovered and correctly applied. My own and your  own personal opinion means nothing, for you we are simply not the creator of this legal system or the terms of its language (terms of art). You are but a user, a citizen (subject), and it (they) your master. Never forget this legal maxim of law, that protection requires subjection, and that the creator of anything controls and defines that thing and the law that controls it. The user of another’s property (persona/legal status) is bound to the creator of and thus lawmaker of that property. A citizenship belongs to government. The user of that citizen-ship is using the property of government, like renting a car (vessel), in order to conduct commercial activity and carry insurance therein. The law is attached only to the person, causing the man bearing (carrying) that mask (public persona) to then perform under that law in person (mask). This is called bond and surety.

To be clear, no member of any pension scheme (municipal corporation) owns the money or equal investment device (stock, bond) in any pension fund. Whatever money was contributed was severed from the person at that point of voluntarily contribution. A contribution is a gift, not an investment. The pension fund accepts the gift and then invests it, offering a reward for such stupid behavior so as to entice one into the scheme, like cheese for a rat into the pension cage, making ultimately impossible promises of future prosperity and wealth.

So what is a contribution?

Well, the root of this word is TRIBUTE!

CONTRIBUTETo lend assistance or aid, or give something, to a common purpose; to have a share in any act or effect; to discharge a joint obligation. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

The synonyms for the word contribution are gift, donation, and offering. So tell me, what do you think your contribution is? When you donate to a political party, do you then have property in that party? NO! When you make an offering in church, do you then have property in that church? NO! When you give a gift at Christmas or on a birthday, do you do so with the intent of keeping any ownership in that gift? NO! So then, when you contribute to a pension fund, what in the hell makes you think you have property or equity in that fund?

Now perhaps you can see the value of a public education… not so much for your own self, but as a benefit for these schemers in the organized criminal government that keep you ignorant through a lack of such knowledge, information, and moral checks and balances?

Botom line: you’ve been tricked. What you have given to pension funds is not yours. And so whatever benefits you receive can disappear at any time. This is the nature of contributory membership. The church, the political party, and the pension fund can close its doors to you at any time with a simple declaration of municipal bankruptcy.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves…

In this expose’ we shall now examine the particular truths about the scheme we call as public pension funds. To do this, many aspects of law and government must obviously also be examined. For this, we must face not only the harsh facts about pensions and their not-so-hidden intent, but as well we must reveal the most uncomfortable self-evident truths about ourselves, both individually and as a collective, ignorant hoard ripe for the raping and pillaging of our posterity, prosperity, and abundance.

To know thyself is to know thy own worst enemy.

And so we begin…

–=–
CAFR’s, CalPERS, And The Great Political Lie Machine
–=–

Nothing disturbs a primary researcher like myself more than when so-called mainstream and alternative “news” outlets report quotes and so-called “facts” without verifying their veracity, or for that matter even bothering to comparatively vet them at all to any primary source. Such irresponsible reporting in an open, public fashion is exactly what Mr. Galbraith warns us about above, causing the simple and verifiable truth to be disguised by rhetoric. A lie well placed can do wonders in the promotion of public illiteracy towards government and its financial schemes.

There exists today, despite my own exhaustive efforts and documentary research, a strangely apparent and seemingly willing denial of the audited information located and easily accessible in the CalPERS pension fund Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) published each fiscal year, and for that matter the same audited report disclosing all government agencies and municipal corporations (cities, counties, districts, states, federal, pension funds, etc.) in their financial standing. All governments and independent agencies of government everywhere are required to complete a CAFR, which shows not only the yearly budget (income/outcome balance) as the more common annual budget report does, but as well all investments and extranious funding for each specific government since its inception — since any government was first municipally incorporated. If the yearly budget report were only the accounting report of the checking account of each government, the CAFR would comparatively be the total or “comprehensive” reporting of the checking, savings, investment portfolio, and any and every other asset not necessarily shown on the budget report. To purposefully ignore the CAFR when speaking of anything regarding the financial markets worldwide is like Helen Keller trying to describe an elephant she can’t touch, see, or hear. Without even a basic understanding of the CAFR accounting system, especially in public pension funds, no one can possibly comprehend the rational behind the purposeful fluctuation and seemingly out-of-control stock market in any way (as ordered chaos), since government is the main investor and thus proxy shareholder voter in all corporations through control of domestic and international equities, mutual funds, mortgage-backed securities, bonds, foreign currencies, precious metals, real estate and real estate investment funds (REITs), bundled debt instruments and loans, and other toxic-debt-type financial “products” of these financial markets and of their own making. To exclude the CAFR from any and all reporting whatsoever about the commercial, governmental, and financial world, the CAFR being the audited financial statements of all corporations including all governments, equates to a blatant, blanket lack of vetting and verification of any and all information emanating from any source, news agency, or other propagandist. Its not just bad reporting, it’s patent laziness and profound, often purposeful ignorance.

Case in point… I was sent a recent link (below) to just that type of irresponsible reporting. As expected, none of the quoted “facts” presented by the CalPERS board member and propagandist were fact-checked. No sign of the CAFR (audit) was presented or referenced in any way, though the subject of that publicly disclosed information can be found easily in the CAFR, which completely debunks those callous, legally protected public lies presented as political “facts.”

Unfortunately, the fear porn industry is alive and well, especially when it comes to finance and public/private pensions. You can’t scare the public with the truth about this global pension scheme, for the truth reveals nothing but massive profits and gains within public pensions. In order to first hide and then legally exact more money for governments’ massive, combined, globalist investment schemes, it takes everything but the truth according to the audited source, including political punditry and pandering. Fear missed with ignorance of facts is the only trick that creates this kind of wind funnel designed for the “legally” extortive strip-funding of the taxpayer base fed into this global pension fund scheme.

From a recent “report” by ZeroHedge.com entitled CalPERS Is Near Insolvency; It Needs A Bailout Soon” – Former Board Member Makes Stunning Admission we get a first hand look at just such second-hand reporting. Even the title is full of anticipation and dread — a real click-baited eye-catcher! And this type of reporting is the perfect example of why you should never trust a politicians’ public rhetoric when his federally required, independent audit is so readily available to expose his blatant lies. And this is the perfect example of why the CAFR is never discussed and never utilized by such armchair reporters, and certainly rarely if never referred to publicly by any politician. Audits are boring, complete, neutral, and without emotion or much speculation. They state the facts with blatant, required accuracy required by law. So why would anyone bother fact-checking their spin-jobs in such a proper fashion?

Well that’s what I do. Call me crazy… or just a bore. Anal? Fine. But I gotta know the truth at all costs!

Now, this statement shouldn’t lead one to assume that one should ever trust a politician or attorney in any situation, that is, in any public situation. Go to the source — the audit, not the puppet mouth-piece. The source is what is required by the highest legal authority under oath, as written in the federal law, which is the CAFR (audit) and only the CAFR. One only need do a token bit of research to discover that, while lying to congress or any government agency or administrative court under oath is a punishable crime of perjury, lying to the public is no crime at all! So a fund manager for the largest pension fund in the United States, for instance, can say anything he wants about the fund he manages and represents, as long as he is not “under oath” to tell the “truth” about his fictional accounting numbers — say, like to some self-proclaimed reporter or when “tweeting” on Twitter. All the public forums are a stage, and the stage is where actors and magicians go to perform their lies and illusions under the illusion of prestige.

PRESTIGESnoun – [Latin proestigioe.] Juggling tricks; impostures. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

PRESTIGIATIONnoun – [Latin proestigioe, tricks.] The playing of legerdemain tricks; a juggling(–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

PRESTIGIATORnounA juggler; a cheat. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

PRESTIGIATORYadjectiveJuggling; consisting of impostures. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

PRESTIGIOUSadjectivePracticing tricks; juggling. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

IMPOSTUREnoun – [Latin impostura. See Impose.] Deception practiced under a false or assumed character; fraud or imposition practiced by a false pretender. –Form new legends, And fill the world with follies and impostures. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

LEGERDEMAINnoun – [See Light.] Slight of hand; a deceptive performance which depends on dexterity of hand; a trick performed with such art and adroitness, that the manner or art eludes observation. The word is sometimes used adjectively; as a legerdemain trick. (Webs1828)

–=–

Yes, universities are ranked by prestige, and so is the papacy. But then so are doctors, lawyers, judges, congressmen, and presidents. And lets not forget actors (professional, paid liars), say, like Ronald Reagan, actor and spokesmodel extraordinaire!

—=—

“I’m sending Chesterfields to all my friends, that’s the merriest Christmas any smoker can have—Chesterfield mildness plus no unpleasant after taste – Ronald Reagan.”

—Excerpt from a 1940’s magazine advertisement for ‘Chesterfield’ brand cigarettes, including a picture of a young Mr. Reagan employed to smoke a cigarette as he writes his Christmas cards with a huge smile on his face as he sells smokable chemical poisons.

—=—

But presidents aren’t just actors, are they? Wake up, man… even George Jr. was a fantastic and intelligent orator and debater before acting as the lame-brain president we were tricked into believing:


Holy crap, Batman! Bush speaks normal.

–=–

The CAFR report is submitted to government under a prestigious oath by its employees and the verified (audited) by independent auditing firms, which in all cases will be charged with the serious crime of defrauding the federal government if they knowingly and inaccurately report their financial position and holdings. A politician, on the other hand, while speaking publicly, to a reporter, or to the public at large and thus not “under oath,” can basically lie through his fake, perma-smile teeth until the cows come home (whatever that means). And so the purposeful, occultist (secretiveness) obfuscation (silence) and confusion (lies) put forward in the public about the audited, verified information within the CAFR will never be part of the typical politicians’ rhetoric, either on or off the public stage. There is no law that requires that “truth” be told to the general public, and there’s no court that will charge anyone for lying to the public, including every news agency out there, unless it causes some consequence or harm. That harmful consequence, though, doesn’t include the incredible profits and gains governments created for their organized criminal activity. For Mr. Bush, there is certainly no law preventing him from acting like an idiot while being quite the opposite, a wolf in sheeps’ clothing.

–=–

FabiansSocialists_oligarchical-collectivismThe original Coat of Arms of the Fabian Society, a wolf in sheeps’ clothing

–=–

This is not to say there aren’t problems with the CAFR when considering its difficult-to-read, highly specialized, coveted terms of art. It is only to say that, like any other field or profession of expertise, anyone that learns the art in order to spot those problems by studying the accounting language they are written in, which we can call collectively as the “creative accounting” non-governmental, private practices that are legalized and required only for government corporations under permissive licensure, will most certainly find what one seeks. The simple reality is that the CAFR, like the UCC, the stock market, and so many other commercialized and centralized systems, were not created for or to benefit the average, common citizen (goyim). They aren’t meant to be read by the public, though required to be publicly available for the one in a million that actually do read it. In fact it’s quite the opposite. Government agents and bankers play by different rules than the public citizenry. And so to pretend knowledge of government finance, the stock market, or for that matter any and everything governmentally regulated without learning to read its audited financial statements and the terms of art they are written in is like playing the game of Monopoly without knowing the rules, the player pieces (agentic avatars), or what the fake-money (an oxymoron) is worth. To then predict its future happenstance… well that is nothing but a purist form of sophism – the prediction of fictional events! And this describes just about every source for “news” and “speculation” out there, including this one.

WORDS (TERMS) OF ARTThe vocabulary or terminology of a particular art or science, and especially those expressions which are idiomatic or peculiar to it. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

For accountants in government and in private corporations, the main rule of the game is quite basic: simply hide any assets behind any and all possible and even faked liabilities. To be more exact, the goal of the game is to hide any current assets as to their current monetary valuation by comparing them (balancing their numbers) to imaginarily predicted future actuarial debt amortization schedules with no foundation in reality. And what if they can’t find any liabilities? Easy-peasy, just make some up. Start a new investment fund, say for a possible future bridge to be built, that you have no intention of using the funds for it building, and then just transfer the value to another investment fund ten years later after collecting millions or billions. There are many, many ways to cheat with legerdemain trickery and juggling of monetary valuation the unwitting, ignorant public through non-governmental schemes.

Now, to get started here, let’s first read the stated quotes and commentary utilized in this stylized fear-porn reporting job posted on ZeroHedge.com, so that we may then discover the repeated and unchecked lies provided by quite simply looking them up to verify their veracity in the CAFR for CalPERS (or any other local or national government municipal corporation, agency, district, or pension fund). Remember, the CAFR is the AUDIT of every incorporated government entity out there, no matter how big or how small, no matter where it is located, and is a requirement of congress as federal law to be accurate under penalty of perjury. That’s every city, county, state, district, and pension in legal, corporate existence. They can’t lie in this singular case, and that makes the CAFR the biggest open secret of these organized criminals in government. Be mindful that the majority of city council and other common political persons are unaware of what is in the very CAFR (Audit) they vote to pass each year. They have unelected accountants and city managers for that. The councils are just yes-men, often completely ignorant of what they actually vote for.

And yes, by the way, the CAFR of the Federal Reserve is the official and federally required audit of the Federal Reserve, and quite easy to find. The entire End The Fed and Audit The Fed mythos is built on what appears to be nothing more than a purposeful, shared set of lies and ignorance of its CAFR (audit) and of the law that created and maintains it, which has been reported and publicly published and easily accessible for many decades. Omission of fact, and worse, the purposeful ignorance and thus omission of this legally required and easily accessible source of fact that is the audit, is to this author the greatest of journalistic crimes. The blind trust put into politicians like pork-master Ron Paul, who never revealed in any substantial way the official AUDIT of the Fed, in the form of the CAFR, is a perfect example of how lying, and especially omission of the most relevant fact, is rampant and effective, causing good people to become activists trying to achieve pointlessly what is already required by law, an audit (CAFR) of the Fed. To this author, this is just a perfection of “alternative” mass mind control.

Here is a link to the CAFRs (audits) for the Federal Reserve Board and Banks.

Link–>https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_fedfinancials.htm

–=–

Please note that the Fed even lists this report on the Federal Reserve Board website link above as the “audited annual financial statements,” another common name for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report [CAFR]. And yes, everything you are told by that Audit and End the Fed movement that apparently isn’t audited is plainly reported in the CAFR (audit), as required by federal Law. It’s even on a Fed webpage called “Audit.” This is where the insert of a “LOL” would be well-deserved, but then I’d be laughing at my former, foolish self and any other fool that has been caught up in such frivolous, pointless activism against something that isn’t even true, without doing research into my own borrowed, blankly parroted opinion.

Here’s the congressional law requiring the audited CAFR:

Link–> https://www.federalreserve.gov/regreform/audit.htm

Link–> https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/714

–=–

Please take notice of the title of this quite old, already existing code: “31 U.S. Code § 714 – AUDIT of Financial Institutions Examination Council, Federal Reserve Board, Federal reserve banks, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of Comptroller of the Currency.” Also notice that this audit, of course, goes straight to the hands of Congress, meaning that Congress is fully aware and in control of everything the Federal Reserve is doing. But they will do anything to cause you to think they have no control over their own created corporations, including, you guessed it, lie directly to and confuse the public, which is perfectly legal and in the best interest of such state secrets. A government is nothing without its secrets and the appointed (not voted for) state and other federal Department secret-aries that keep them.

Listed below are my own depths of primary, sourced research articles about the Fed, serving as both a correction and a heavy criticism upon all who continue to parrot such nonsense for no other reason than the peer pressure of its shock-jock popularity.

Link–> Stop The Religion Of The Fed –>  https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/10/27/stop-the-religion-of-the-fed/

Link–> The Incontrovertible Conundrum Of Dr. Ron Paul –> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/the-incontrovertible-conundrum-of-dr-ron-paul/

Link–> Today’s Creatures From Jekyll Island –> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/todays-creatures-from-jekyll-island/

–=–

Yes, you’ve been lied to by omission this whole time, by the likes of Ron Paul, Alex Jones, G. Edward Griffen, and collectively anyone else that is a false prophet or believer in and supports the End The Fed and Audit The Fed campaigns. Many of the quotes you’ve been hungrily fed to support your unfounded, unsourced mindset, including my own, surrounding the Federal Reserve and its creation through radio, poorly researched documentaries, and from badly, secondarily-sourced books are provably false. The lies are passed from one documentary source to the next, solidifying the lie into the public-minded and yes “alternative” consciousness, where celebrity is used in replacement of vetted reliability. You’ve thus been led to unwittingly lie to yourself and others as false-prophet-activists! Why? Because it is no crime to lie to the public, especially when it happens to be in the best interest of protecting Congress from taking the blame for the actions of the elitist, organized criminal corporations and independent boards it creates, like the Federal Reserve System, of which congress has total control over as its lawmaker, as a congressional incorporate creation. The lie is so powerful that the reader might even now find him or her self actually defending the lie, defending what the programed perception of the Fed is instead of fact-checking ones own beliefs with primary instead of secondary and word-of-mouth sources. And so just as it was in the early 1900s, as the stock market was sucked dry (crashed) by profiteers (government pirates) while being blamed on bad banking practices, the Fed is being used just as then to be the pretended bad guy, the apparently out-of-control banking industry head that is the main cause of the artificial market and its inevitable downturn. And the supposed evil Fed will be blamed instead of those profiteers behind it, just as it was when Mr. Lindbergh was quoted from above — before the central bank was once again recreated after its previous defeat to control the then out-of-control banking industry. Now we have controlled, organized crime instead of just that common, individual crime networks (gangs). The crime of usury was nationalized, and all members get a cut.

In fact, congress even passed its own law over itself limiting its own ability in public congressional forums and inquiries only (but not private/closed ones) from questioning the Fed director, so that no information would be disclosed to the public in public forums, and so that the illusion of natural “independence,” as quasi-sovereign privacy, political separation, and even competition in government could be maintained, as if the congress (the gods/lawmakers of the United States) somehow does not have control over its own creation. More sophistry. Lie after lie after lie… and it works still to this day, despite my own continuous exposure of the 100% required CAFR auditing system by all government entities and agencies, including the Fed and its board and banks.

But I digress, for all these proofs are in my former research articles listed above.

Today, while fear excites and sells…

The boring but piercing truth sleeps. The fear-killer that the CAFR is simply cannot be used to foment misinformation and crime, for it disproves the tactics used to cause that fear.

Why this particular website (ZeroHedge.com) is even referred to as an alternative news site is unclear, since it seems to merely be “predicting” the future by suckling from the creamy mainstream rags and political propaganda we can all get at any Piggly Wiggly or television station, and then saying I told you so… For instance, the state-wide mainstream newspaper The Sacramento Bee also recently reported:

California public pension shortfall one of nation’s largest

BY DAN WALTERS

May 02, 2017 05:10 PM (Updated May 03, 2017 07:50 AM)

Throughout California, local government and school district officials are writing new budgets and confronting rapidly rising costs of pensions.

Many have seen their costs double in the last few years, largely consuming revenue increases that the state’s expanding economy have produced. For instance, a projected $1 billion increase in school districts’ teacher pension costs in 2017-18 will more than equal projected revenue gains.

However, as the old rock song says, “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”…

Link–> http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article148181774.html

–=–

Yes, I’ll take the Fear-Blue-Plate-Dinner special with a side of irrational predictive programming scariness, please. Oh, and on the side, could you provide no supporting or counter-evidence please? Audits just ruins the taste of a good piece of fear.

But is it true? Or rather, are the facts behind all of this true or even provided? For like everyone else, it seems the Sacramento Bee does not report on the CAFR audit to the public. I was informed long ago by Walter Burien at CAFR1.com that all the major news agencies are fully aware of the CAFR, but are required to keep the open secret at the highest levels when it comes to this type of reporting – that is, the long con, the big non-governmental taxpayer investment and pension fund scheme. Why? Because government is the main investor, voter, and regulator of the media, of course! Thus, it is rare that one might find such audited information that completely counters such blatantly one-sided reporting. And of course the lies have that infamous trickle down effect, bleeding into all of the alternative sources out there. And in the end, it turns out not one agency, news outlet, or armchair blogger has actually checked the only required-to-be-credible source — the audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).

Thus web trafic is increased, as is advertising. It’s like watching moths nosedive wide-eyed and entranced into a flame. People pay money to be scared in the movie theatre, and apparently it’s the same with their news source. Everyone screws everyone in their own subtle way, not merely carrying the lies but spinning them to suit the needs of their particular platform and commercial (capitalist) sales model. Lying is legal. Who needs morals? For the art of the lie is the very foundational nature of a capitalist (value per head) government and those in its citizenry hopelessly caught up by its corruption and greed.

From the absolutely unverified and un-vetted ZeroHedge.com report we read the following quotes:

Tweet: @SteveWestly

The pension crisis is inching closer by the day. @CalPERS just voted to increase the amount cities must pay to the agency. Cities point to possible insolvency if payments keep rising but CalPERS is near insolvency itself. It may be reform or bailout soon.http://ow.ly/CQGw30iyLko

–=–

The preceding tagline for this tweet as a commentary by ZeroHedge.com states:

“…having reported over and over and over (and over, and over) again that public pensions are in deep trouble, two days ago none other than Steve Westly, former California controller and Calpers board member – manager of the largest public pension fund in the US, made a stunning admission, confirming everything

–=–

This is obviously and admittedly not the first time such fear tactics have been reported by ZeroHedge.com about the so-called “public pension crisis” while calling it as news. It continuously pretends to be in the know while in fact knowing nothing but what other news outlets, politicians, and market analysts publicly report (lie) and tweet. Round and round the parrots repeat each other, spinning their opinions while imagining their own not-at-all uniquely re-reported perspectives are somehow actually to each their own original analysis, just as the bird in a cage fallaciously squaks “hello” over and over without any substance or experiential knowledge of what that term actually means. This type of reporting is akin to a see, I told you so mentality, reporting over and over the glib and often false or even planned predictions that others make, in order to put forward the illusion of ones own newsworthy correctness over that which is not at all demonstrable or predictable.

If I say it will happen in the future because other “experts” do, then chances are it will, at least in some inevitable form or the other and in an unlimited time period, and I can then say I told you so… This is the same reason one might invest in the stock market, because Warren Buffet says I should. Of course this only benefits those already invested, driving up the price of the stock in the short term as the public lemmings emulate their false financial gods.

Predicting an up or down boom in these volatile financial markets sometime in the future is like predicting a politician will lie to the public. It’s a self-evident certainty, and ultimately just a matter of time… Of course it will crash, dummy! Of course it will rise, idiot! For these are the only two possible options that can actually happen! And so by predicting both will eventually happen, one really can’t lose. It’s like predicting the sun will rise. And so another false guru is thrust on the unwitting public telling us so.

But therein lies the very heart of the game…

You see, they bet against it before it gains or crashes. They cover their bets, their options, and they reinsure what they already have insured. They can’t loose, man! The market must go artificially up so that it can then be brought artificially down. The lemon must grow to ripeness before it can be squeezed to make lemonade and the seed replanted for the next squeeze. This is basic organized crime 101. There is no right or wrong prediction. It’s a continuum; a fractal without totality, without sum, a cancer that keeps growing and being cut back down ad infinity. But more importantly… it’s without (outside of/opposed to) Reality. Super-natural. It’s fiction. And in any fiction, the artist (creator) creates the future, not the neutral randomness of Nature, and certainly not those reporting on its history.

For those that don’t quite understand the basic con game of reinsurance and its various forms, let me give you a generic example of what happens behind the scenes:

  1. In the U.S. (or any nation) I (through government) legally collect taxpayer money (or other capital from any and all willing, ignorant suckers) by incrementally placing taxpayer money into a public investment fund.
  2. When I reach $10 million in my local or state investment fund, it is now time to “legally” steal that money from the public.
  3. I now open a dummy corporation in Zimbabwe, where I place $10 million in capital.
  4. Back in the US, my $10 million of taxpayer money is enterprise fund (non-governmentally) invested in or “bet” on a certain stock or portfolio thereof in the similarly performing stocks.
  5. I, of course, have inside knowledge (or create it) that the stock market or certain sectors thereof will take a nosedive or “crash” soon, as planned. And so its time to extract the excess wealth from these now purposefully over-priced companies.
  6. I then invest that $10 million from my obscure, unreported dummy corporation in Africa into the American stock market. But I bet against (via put options) the same stock I invested public funds in back home, just like they bet against airline stocks for the day of 9/11/2001 with apparent pre-knowledge of the “event.”
  7. The market crashes, just as I fully expected and have planned (insured and reinsured) for.
  8. I lose $10 million of my governmental taxpayer fund balance in the United States, and look to the taxpayers to bail out my apparent mistake, pretending (lying to the public about) a total loss, and may even have the gall to ask for bailouts or bonds (government sponsored loans) to cover it.
  9. But at the same time I gain that same $10 million (or much more) in Zimbabwe, and cash out.
  10. In the market itself, nothing looks suspicious. Just business as usual, where a few win, most lose. Some, however, play both sides. The loser always pays the winner.
  11. I launder and convert my holdings, pay my accomplish in Africa the value of $1 million under the table, and simply close that dummy corporation so it cannot be traced back to me. And no one in the idiocracy of the public, taxpayer base is ever the wiser. The balance has not changed. One bet pays another. The criminals protect each others private prospects. This is merely a laundering of money from the taxpayer base into an offshore account, done within the appearance of (de facto) “illegitimately legal” legitimacy using this organized criminal platform called the worldwide stock markets. What is constantly exacted as investment-based and other losses from these public funds is constantly being gained somewhere else. It’s a quite basic, completely legal con job.
  12. And this is why our incestuous, nepotistic congressmen within their familial accomplices (the People) have vacation homes and investment properties all over the world, sitting arrogantly on each other’s boards and laughing all the way to their offshore banks.

–=–

On a micro/macro-cosmic scale, this same model is the basis for both the wealth of the organized criminals calling themselves as a de facto (illegitimate/militarized) “government” in pretended legitimacy compared to the absolutely controlled poverty level (called “welfare”) of the common class. If I insure one thing I reinsure it in the background. In other words, I insure against the insurance, betting against what the original policy or other investment pays out for. Thus disaster or no disaster, I am covered and will come out ahead, especially if I can cause the law to require and sanction taxpayer funding of one of my bets and coverage (bailout) of any losses. For the financially illiterate goyim, as the limited common citizenry, there is only the gamble of insurance or no insurance. Yes or no. But for this upper class, all bets are covered. There is no easier way to explain this. But this is also why there is no easy way to explain the ups and downs of all financial markets, for we are not allowed to see their game-plans, their blueprints for the continual, perpetual destruction and rebuilding of their own artificial markets. They care not the value of corporate stock, only that they have the majority and thus control of it and the company it represents. They and their corporate funders are the beneficiaries of the financial phoenix they create and recreate as it burns and is reborn with every click of the market ticker and every computer-generated, purposeful flaw they take precise advantage of through techniques in arbitrage.

ARBITRAGE – Transactions of bankers and mercantile houses by which stocks or bills are bought in one market and sold in another for the sake of the profit arisirg from a difference in price in the two markets. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

Why do pension funds and government investment funds hold so much in all foreign currencies traded on all different (foreign) markets/exchanges? Because of arbitrage, a constant buying and selling so as to capitalize upon the continuous, minuscule mistakes in pricing from exchange to exchange. Of course high-speed computers are set up to catch every single mistake as it happens, as what is ultimately missed by human disadvantage. The action of an arbitrage exchange can happen in a 10th of a second, multiple times — beyond what the human eye could possibly track.

They buy yen for one dollar on one exchange and sell it at the same time on another foreign exchange for $1.01 before the two exchanges have registered the change, and they can do this all day and all night long in various 24 hour time zones. Sound illegal? Remember, it’s government taking advantage of these little cheats.

Who ya gonna call?

While we watch that impressively complicated shit-storm, distracted by the volatile and fiery inferno of constant market activity that upon appearance means nothing to us, they are profiting from every change in market valuation. The magicians, the illusionists always work by the art of distraction, keeping their audience the fools and stranding them behind their own wonder and awe, amazed by their own ignorance of what lies behind each trick and yet utterly confident that something just ain’t right here. Yet still we need to believe it’s all real, even legitimate, and not just the long-con Ponzi scheme it always has been…

But what we do have access to out here in la-la land is the CAFR. We can see what they did after the fact each year and on a continuing basis. This audited report is a thorn in their side, of course, and yet their collective crimes cannot be “organized” without it. It is a necessary evil, or necessary good, depending on whose hands it gets in to. In my hands, for instance, the CAFR is their Achilles Heel, the shining light to their projections of darkness through lies. The CARF simply cannot be denied, though they certainly try. It can, however, be ignored and made publicly invisible by simply never referring to it in any public forum, including congress. For the CAFR is the great false mystery that is the holy grail of government accounting; that metaphoric, governmental fountain of youth (rejuvenation) that are these collective, extortive investment funds kept out of the public spotlight.

Let’s read from this latest CAFR, for instance, about how CalPERS invests, holds, and profits from one of the most toxic debt instruments ever invented:

7. DERIVATIVES

“CalPERS holds investments in swaps, options, futures, rights, and warrants and enters into forward foreign currency exchange contracts… The fair value of international currency forwards represents the unrealized gain or loss on the related contracts, which is calculated as the difference between the contract exchange rate and the exchange rate at the end of the reporting period.”

–=–

Do pensioners care what their governmental or private pension fund invests in? Well, I cannot in good conscious venture to guess what this group of dependents on state and federal welfare for the middle class personally care or don’t care about. However, in appearance, it seems that as long as their extortion and usury-based retirement checks keep coming in, they certainly appear to not have a care in the world just what their collective contributions are invested in, let alone the resulting globalist control or illegal, permanent state of occupational world war it causes. Hell, most have no idea where to even find the list of corporations and holdings invested in! Many have never even logged in to the CalPERS website, let alone contemplated that their own retirement payments necessarily represent nothing but mass profiteering and pirating from the worst of the worst companies from around the world, as well as the debt of most of their fellow citizens. They have no idea they are handing the entire control structure of corporations around the world to government.

I invite you, the “pensioner,” and you, the “taxpayer,” to pull up this investment holdings report for CalPERS, with the understanding that this is just one of many thousands of such pension investment funds worldwide. Look at the stock holdings and the market values, and allow yourself to grasp the importance of being the collective holder of so many shares of stock in any and all substantial corporations around the world. Imagine the power of being the main shareholder through collective bargaining and proxy voting, while at the same time being the government, lawmaker, and regulator (and de-regulator) of all corporations, having the ability to ruin any rogue, moral, uncooperative company in the world.

One cannot imagine the scope and size of this organized criminal network until this particular report is seen for oneself. Look up the worst corporation imaginable and it is there. Look up the main banks, investment firms, and corporations in communist China and other supposedly “enemy” countries, and there you will find massive, controlling, United States and other globalist government pension and other organized fund investments. Like it or not, this applies to all of us, for whether you are a pensioner or a taxpayer or both, you individually are equally complicit in this self-destructive, globalist scheme. Ignorance is no excuse. If you do not look, you will never believe that you have been played as the fool. If you are a pensioner and do not look, you will never contemplate just how much your own false piece of mind in such a false sense of security as this retirement scheme in mammon has caused the entire world population. You will never imagine your benefits are gained solely at the expense of everyone else in the world, let alone your fellow majority of extorted taxpaying citizens. And you will never understand just how this monstrous, monopolistic, corporate world governance structure came into power as it has.

Seriously… do a search in this report for the word China. You think America imports cheap Chinese crap from just Chinese companies? Well, I have news for you sunshine… those corporations in China were built with American investment capital from such investment funds as your own. The proof is undeniable, listed right here in this investment holdings report:

Link–> https://www.calpers.ca.gov/docs/forms-publications/annual-investment-report-2016.pdf

Where do you buy food? Governments own the majority share of its corporate stock and by collective shareholder proxy votes for its board of directors, etc.

Where do you buy clothes? Governments own the majority share of its corporate stock and by collective shareholder proxy votes for its board of directors, etc.

Where do you bank, get gas, and what television news, magazines, and newspapers do you subscribe to? Governments own the majority share of their corporate stock and by collective shareholder proxy votes for its board of directors, etc.

Of course the board of directors of each corporation elects the CEO and other officers, in accordance to what government collectively desires. After all, the board does the shareholders’ bidding, and its even the government’s law regarding these for profit corporations that that corporation’s board must make profits and gains for the shareholders (governments) its top goal.

Again, no corporation owns government, as the empty rhetoric of propagandists and alternative newsie parrots have been conditioned to believe. By law, and by evidence of stock certificates and participation in mutual fund activities, government provably owns shares in all corporations and expresses its will through proxy shareholder voting, and this cannot be disputed.

In fact, there is a whole section of the CAFR and the website for CalPERS devoted to its activities in “corporate governance,” the general term used to describe such governance of corporations through stockholder voting, or in this case, governmental agency stock-holders.

From the CalPERS website we read (links active):

As a long-term shareowner, CalPERS sees voting our proxies as the primary way we can influence a company’s operations and corporate governance. This is why it’s important for shareowners to vote and make their decisions based on a full understanding of publicly available information.

For more information on CalPERS proxy voting, read the CalPERS Governance & Sustainability Principles (PDF).

Proxy Voting Decisions

To view a record of all CalPERS global proxy voting activity, visit Global Proxy Voting Decisions.

CalPERS also publishes additional voting information for high profile votes and company-specific shareowner campaigns. Visit Key Decisions for additional details. All votes are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice.

For more information, read the related article Proxy Access Gains Ground as Companies Reach Pacts with Shareholder Proponents.

Link–>https://www.calpers.ca.gov/page/investments/governance/proxy-voting

And for their corporate governance page, see here:

Link–> https://www.calpers.ca.gov/page/investments/governance

–=–

Note that CalPERS admits here to being a “long-term” shareholder and voter of its invested in corporations. Yet it openly obfuscates this fact when reporting on bad years in the stock market, as if the yearly performance of a stock or portfolio thereof is somehow its infinite state of valuation, as if one year accounts for the past or next 50 years of performance while that stock is held in the long-term. More trickery… for what goes up will come down, and what goes down will go up again. But oh the propaganda and falsified taxpayer bailouts they can create in between.

When we take a photo on vacation, do we believe somehow that this single snapshot is the entirety of our experience, or do we consider the whole vacation before we assign such a valuation? The snapshot is the budget, while the whole vacation experience, with all its ups and downs, is the CAFR. A budget report is like the accountant’s voluntary, monetary alzheimer’s disease. Selective statistics are used to prevent accurate information in the yearly budget alone.

To be clear, all bad news that these accounting magicians report to the public is always of the short-term or budgetary (yearly), but never of the long-term or comprehensive (from inception). This is the essence of word magic, the delusion of creative accounting at its best. The temporary, short-term results can always be used to hide the long-term Truth by omission of long-term facts and totals, or by simply hiding those long-term results from the public discourse, from the yearly budget. And this is especially the greatest difference between the budget report and the CAFR. There is no hiding anything in the CAFR, for all assets must be reported, even if that reporting standard is done so in what I call creative accounting language. As with any commercial art, one must learn the language, the terms of art, and accounting tricks before one may fully grasp the scheme. And it is perhaps this fact alone, the lack of proper use and understanding of terms of art, that wholly disqualifies just about all reporters and alternative websites on the planet. Public ignorance of the accounting and legal languages is key to success.

One never teaches ones slaves ones private language, lest the slave become equal with the master, for words are the only chains that bond us in surety.

Here we read that CalPERS uses “global proxy voting activity” to “influence a company’s operations and corporate governance…” In other words, this is the definition of global governance. Globalism – the Order in the New World of centrally controlled, fictional finance.

Can you dig?

In fact, I here and now defy you to find a public corporation not listed as a government-held US or international equity on this report! Maybe then you may begin to comprehend just how the world of finance and corporate governance actually works — besides what those government owned news outlets publicly report to you. Maybe you’ll get why the practice of usury (interest) and grocery (retail) is so accepted and protected by government, for the profiteer is after all always government and those who suck upon its teat the hardest. After all, and as we will discuss in a moment, government is also the largest holder of toxic debt instruments and loans. Debt, it turns out, is one of the most profitable investments one can make! Investing in debt is how billionaires are generally made. And yes, these are also listed in that asset holdings report, for debt is certainly an asset to the purchaser, and thus by proxy, the creditor.

CONTRACT SYSTEM – As applied to state prisons, this phrase signifies that the labor of the prisoners is utilized by private persons or contractors, who thus secure the profits of such labor. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

What happens when eventually, through these investment schemes, government purchases all our debts, both corporate and personal? Why debtor’s prisons, of course. For the lawmakers and their prescriptive legal laws can only become more corrupt as more and more industry is subsumed by the master corporation nation that are organized (united) national and world governments. As the main shareholder, it is in the best interest of government to pass laws allowing debtors to be imprisoned, as forced labor. As the regulator of corporations, which by law must make a profit for its shareholders (i.e. government), government must create ways to extort money from debtors that cannot pay their debts, and thus again debtor’s prisons are a logical solution. This is the purest construction of conflict of interest.

I was shocked to learn that the “Made In America” symbol is placed on products made in US prisons. And to me, nothing could be more telling of our societal and moral degradation and ignorance than that! But then again, the 13th Amendment to the US constitution did make “involuntary slavery” perfectly legal for punishment of crimes, so this would be the logical conclusion. Oh, and you thought it fired the slaves? LOL! It nationalized slavery in the form of the 14th Amendment citizen and allowed prisoners to be used as labor force. If that’s your idea of freedom then just shoot me now.

In any case, what we are most certainly witnessing today in the public sphere is the mass-induced fruition of such quotes and warnings as these:

–=–

“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.

–Martin Luther King, Jr.

–=–

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.

―Søren Kierkegaard

–=–

“Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance.

–Confucius

–=–

“We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.

―Benjamin Franklin

–=–

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.

–Aldous Huxley

–=–

“Sometimes a man wants to be stupid if it lets him do a thing his cleverness forbids.”

–John Steinbeck

–=–

“The two pillars of ‘political correctness‘ are, a) willful ignorance, and b) a steadfast refusal to face the truth.

–George MacDonald Fraser

–=–

But you can’t make people listen. They have to come round in their own time, wondering what happened and why the world blew up around them. It can’t last.”

―Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

–=–

“No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed, and love of power.”

―P.J. O’Rourke

–=–

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means thatmy ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.

―Isaac Asimov

–=–

“Any formal attack on ignorance is bound to fail because the masses are always ready to defend their most precious possessiontheir ignorance.

―Hendrik Willem van Loon

–=–

“The vast majority of human beings dislike and even actually dread all notions with which they are not familiar… Hence it comes about that at their first appearance innovators have generally been persecuted, and always derided as fools and madmen.”

―Aldous Huxley

–=–

Blind party loyalty will be our downfall. We must follow the truth wherever it leads.”

―DaShanne Stokes

–=–

“He didn’t believe that, surely.” “Of course not! But he had to pretend he did, as otherwise he would have had no choice but to be insulted. And since there would be nothing he could do about that, being insulted would only lead to humiliation. And since he didn’t want that, the simplest path to follow was to believe what I said.”

―Isaac Asimov, Foundation’s Edge

–=–

“The moral complexity of the situation had grown past his ability to process it, so he just relaxed in the warm glow of victory instead.”

―James S.A. Corey, Leviathan Wakes

–=–

“The more you can escape from how horrible things really are, the less it’s going to bother you…and then, the worse things get.

―Frank Zappa

–=–

“The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see.

―Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead

–=–

“The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance – it is the illusion of knowledge.

–Daniel J. Boorstin

–=–

“Willful ignorance and endless laws become the replacement for self-education and self-restraint, because ignorance and laws are easy.

―Holly Lisle

–=–

“Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think.

―Thomas A. Edison

–=–

And so the armchair bloggers and digital alternative newsies call out in their illiterate, parroted spin with the type of arrogant ignorance only an unlearned conspiracy theorist could love. But in reality these are just useful idiots helping in the spread of these lying fear campaigns created by those seeking to spread such propaganda for their own benefit, turning the self-proclaimed “alternative” reporter into a valuable mouth-piece for the opposition, into a necessary tool (unwitting agent) for the accidental spread of perfected misinformation. Problem, reaction, solution.

And when the trigger is pulled, this cushioning effect of so many parroted reports and warnings about bankruptcy, insolvency, and the undefined “pension crisis” will allow these organized criminals in government to steal what was promised to the collectively foolish pensioners and taxpayers that voluntarily contributed to these funds in legal trust. The cushion of constant fear and threat in effect causes pitchforks, and for that matter guns, to remain locked up instead of used in revolt against such corruption in government. Like good, patriotic subjects of the state, the mass of middle class fools in their love of servitude will once again outweigh the loss of financial security in retirement once promised by the slave masters. The constant fear propaganda softens the blow, so that revolt or revolution appears to be too little, too late, even as the globalist government mafia laughs all the way to the bank. To live in fear and anticipation is to accept that which is feared and expected when its planned fruition commences. This is simple, Orwellian dystopia mixed with Bernaysian propaganda and public relations.

Ever asked why a government needs public relations? Why the military has commercials?

Ever considered that only that which keeps secrets, lies, and seeks to mislead or cheat the public would possibly need a public relations office?

One that tells the Truth relates the Truth at all times, and therefore needs no agency.

This insanity of an idiocracy seems to mirror the American and Italian propagandists in their support of the leftist social democrats, being labeled as quite “useful idiots” for their then blind support of foreign communism, while the similar term “useful innocents” was used by the Austrian-American economist Ludwig von Mises in his 1940’s pro-war book entitled Planned Chaos, a term that was used by communists for liberals, whom von Mises describes as “confused and misguided sympathizers.” In the end, such blind support and repeated spreading of these emotional and fear-driven public perceptions as political “facts” (legal fiction), though they are easily provable lies, ends up helping the organized criminals cause instead of harming it. And after so many years of being in the middle of this cornucopia of “alternative news” armchair reporters and disinformation websites and radio networks, some innocent and some not so innocent, this spreading of lies seems to be the entire unintended, oppositionally-controlled purpose and certainly the result of the so-called alternative truth movements. We ultimately and without reason serve to expose without any consequence whatsoever of that exposure, except to further excite false information and reveal public actors as agent provocateur personalities as if they are the actual players behind the crimes. We then say simply, I told you so… No one gets busted because no truth, no secrets are being reported to the organized criminals in government. Only lies are given, which are then imagined to be facts by that public, alternative or mainstream. And so we all end up believing this is exactly what was supposed to happen, no matter how obviously criminal its design.

Again, the “truth” about the Fed is the perfect example — so many empty lies that with just a token bit of research are destroyed as patriotic myths designed to re-direct blame away from the legislative gods (creators/lawmakers) of all governmental agencies, corporations, and banks, which is the “United States” corporation Congress (a de facto board of directors).

This alternative network of ineffective reporting is like solving a Rubick’s Cube. One solves the puzzle and puts the pieces together in a pattern, only to realize later that there are 5 other sides to solve at the same time. And when one correctly, finally puts all those sides together, one realizes that there now sits a solved puzzle, one which serves no purpose except in its perfect representation of a perfectly played out plan. When all sides are seen, then one may finally see that what was apparently broken or out of order wasn’t broken at all, but is instead a well-oiled and perfectly operating machine. In governments case, as the premier purveyor of police and military protected, organized crime, the ability to read the CAFR through all its creative accounting and terms of art is like solving that Rubick’s Cube. And so one comes finally to the only accurate conclusion one can, which is that this is all legal. They make the rules. They set the standards. They lie to the public with their own permissions and protection. And they have organized and are currently playing out the end of one of the biggest ponzi schemes in the history of all scams. And its all legal, because those perpetrating the scheme are also the lawmakers, law enforcers, and beneficiaries that would otherwise stop such a crime.

And what is the end? Why, its not the end at all, just a transitionary stage with severe growing pains. For what is the end for us is just the beginning of a totally controlled globalist government modeled after this one. Same scheme but on a world-wide scale. Thus all men must be marked with a digital, biometric, legal identity and forced into the global social security pension fund scheme in order to continue the grand ponzi scheme. And those willing to cooperate will of course be given the opportunity to do it all over again, to contribute into new globally managed pension funds in exchange for global taxation on all global taxpayers to further purchase the controlling share of all corporations world-wide.

Don’t you realize that congress is the bank, and that all corporations calling themselves as banks and men as corporate bankers are under the unified umbrella and law of the only actual bank that exists — government?

Who prints the money? Government.

Who holds copyright on the money? Government.

Who controls that money’s circulation? Government.

Who allows and disproves banks to participate as members of the Federal Reserve? Government.

Who passes all laws regarding money? Government.

And don’t forget that Nelson, Jay, Winthrop, and Winthrop P (Jr.) Rockefeller and of course the Rothschild cousins were also politicians, not just bankers… and they pretend to be both Democrats and Republicans!

So what don’t you understand?

–=–
“Those who manipulate the organized habits and opinions of the masses constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of the country… It remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by this relatively small number of persons… It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world As civilization has become more complex, and as the need for invisible government has been increasingly demonstrated, the technical means have been invented and developed by which opinion may be regimented.
 
Edward Bernays (18911995), Author, Propaganda, and Chief Advisor to William Paley, who founded CBS in 1928
–=–

Is it really so difficult to imagine this, even as we watch with every new administration the same corporate shills and CEOs flowing freely in and out of public and corporate office, only to later be hired or rehired back under the same or higher office and title that he or she was before responsible in regulating (read de-regulating)? When bankers become Fed Chairmen, Monsanto executives become head of the FDA, and even when only Zionist, duel-citizen, warmongering Israeli “Jews” become chiefs of staff and sole advisors in trust for strictly Arab nations, we can see there is a grave fault in this regulatory, legal, and political system. A fault, indeed, but not to those organized criminals in tow. For again, the system is running as smoothly as can be imagined from an extortive, criminally minded perspective, the litmus test being not only these obvious rewarding and stratigic corporate moves in and out of government, but the exact control of public opinion and purposeful ignorance spoken of above.

Consider this: what was and still is a “bank” before these very modern buildings we have so named as such were constructed, before fiat currency and digital credit systems? Just like the church is not a building created by the hands of men but is the righteous people thereof, so too is a bank not just a building built by men, but the incorporated persons thereof. The bank is government! For all corporations are under, registered to, and premised by government. A bank only exists because government says it can, and for no other reason. Always has been this way, always will be, for there is no purpose or power to any legalistic, corporate government without control of commerce and its monetary tools.

BANK – A bench or seat; the bench of justicethe bench or tribunal occupied by the judges; the seat of judgment; a court. The full bench, or full court; the assembly of all the judges of a court… (Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition)

FIAT – [Latin from fio.] Let it be done; a decree; a command to do something(Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

–=–

“A banker is one who makes merchandise of money
An act to be done by a bank means an act to be done
by those who have the authority to do it.”

–W.C. Anderson’s Dictionary of Law, 1889, Definition of Bank

–=–

The root of all evil is not money itself as a tool of exchange, but making money from money and changing that which is valued in money into merchandise. The money-changer is evil because he changes the intention of money into that of usury (interest) and grocery (retail). If money and its creation were at all times and by law not for profit, most of the worlds problems would be solved. Mammon would have no cloths. And none of this cancerous, out of control, never payable growth and debt would be possible. To be clear, without debt (contract), no man or government would ever have power over another. This will become very clear as we proceed.

Most use the word fiat as attached to any currency without knowing its actual meaning. Of course, a fiat currency is simply the will of the king or head of the church and state, or in our modern sense, the “government” as defined and constituted. The government (under the head magistrates of congress and president) writes (appropriates) a bill, and out of thin air valuation (mammon) is created by these false gods (creators of artifice), a fictional value to be later manifested by and represented as fiat currency, with the caveat that this creation from nothing is actually a debt upon the entire public realm, which in Reality can never actually be paid without destroying the “economy.” Once the negative value is positively placed (balanced) into the legal accounting or doomsday book, it can then be printed into some form of certificate of debt, as legal tender.

It is said that only a god can create something from nothing. Well, government is a legally constituted god you fools! It is master over what it creates…

One only need understand one’s own disposition in court to understand the master (god) and servant relationship between a citizen and a magistrate (judge). For today we may use the word plea or plead in official standing, but it still means the same as it did from its inception. The citizen can know only one, legal god, for the citizen is not of Nature and thus not part of or under the Law of Nature.

When we plead to a judge, we are actually, legally, praying to a god (magistrate). The fact that the reader may deny this in any way shows how ignorant, how “imbecilic” we have all been made as to the very law system that governs our persons.

PRAYER – The request contained in a bill in equity that the court will grant the process, aid, or relief which the complainant desires. Also, by extension, the term is applied to that part of the bill which contains this request. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition)

PRAY IN AID – In old English practice. To call upon for assistance. In real actions, the tenant might pray in aid or call for assistance of another, to help him to plead, because of the feebleness or imbecility of his own estate. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition)

PRAYER OP PROCESS – is a petition with which a bill in equity used to conclude, to the effect that a writ of subpoena might issue against the defendant to compel him to answer upon oath all the matters charged against him in the bill. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition)

PRAYER OF PROCESS – chancery. Plead.That part of a bill which prays that the defendant be compelled to appear and answer the bill, and abide the determination of the court on the subject, is called prayer of process. This prayer must contain the name’s of all Persons who are intended to be made parties(–Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

PRAYER FOR RELIEF – chancery. Pleading. This is the name of that part of the bill, which, as the phrase imports, prays for relief. This prayer is either general or special but the general course is for the plaintiff to make a special prayer for particular relief to which he thinks himself entitled, and then to conclude with a prayer of general relief at the discretion of the court. (–Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

PRAYverb intransitive – [Latin precor; proco; this word belongs to the same family as preach and reproach; Hebrew, to bless, to reproach; rendered in Job 2:9, to curse; properly, to reproach, to rail at or upbraid. In Latin the word precor signifies to supplicate good or evil, and precis signifies a prayer and a curse. See Imprecate.] 1. To ask with earnestness or zeal, as for a favor, or for something desirable; to entreat; to supplicate. Pray for them who despitefully use you and persecute you. Matthew 5:44. 2. To petition; to ask, as for a favor; as in application to a legislative body. 3. In worship, to address the Supreme Being with solemnity and reverence, with adoration, confession of sins, supplication for mercy, and thanksgiving for blessings received. When thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly. Matthew 6:5. 4. I pray that is, I pray you tell me, or let me know, is a common mode of introducing a question.verb transitiveTo supplicate; to entreat; to urge. We pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. 2 Corinthians 5:20. 1. In worship, to supplicate; to implore; to ask with reverence and humility. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee. Acts 8:22. 2. To petition. The plaintiff prays judgment of the court. He that will have the benefit of this act, must pray a prohibition before a sentence in the ecclesiastical court. 3. To ask or intreat in ceremony or form. Pray my colleague Antonius I may speak with him. [In most instances, this verb is transitive only by ellipsis. To pray God, is used for to pray to God; to pray a prohibition, is to pray for a prohibition, etc.] To pray in aid, in law, is to call in for help one who has interest in the cause. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

–=–

Like being so lost in The Matrix virtual reality simulation that you have no idea you are even in it, so too have we been tricked and deceived into calling these men in uniform dress and code as our false gods (magistrates/judges) without realizing what we are doing. You pray to these magistrate gods with every question, with every answer, and with every supplication (solicitation) to any government functionary or agency. And this is exactly how the Bible instructs us we will be deceived, by the love of false gods (idolatry). There is no mystery here, just the love of fiction over Nature (Reality). This is not colloquial, not metaphor, and not to be taken lightly. For it establishes the doctrine of master and servant, meaning we voluntarily worship, pray to, and thus are fallen through contract under government oppression and extortion. It is new feudalism by contract law, for the contract makes the law. This is the legal meaning of volunteerism. And what is most misunderstood about volunteerism is that, just like in the military after one has voluntarily joined, the coercion and violence happens only after one has volunteered, not before. In other words, the fallacy of involuntarily or unwillingly receiving services at the barrel of a gun is completely misconstrued, for the service can only be forced once volunteerism, as the doctrine of master and servant, has been contracted (e.g. public, US citizenship). Once under contract (use of person), the contract makes the law, and he who makes the contract makes the law of the contract, and thus is the god over anyone under the contractual relationship (as a user of anothers property). If you use the name, number, signature, or any other mark of identity (sameness) of any legal creation, then you are bound to perform as that legal persona (mask) and pray to these false legal gods for everything. It is they that permit you to fish and hunt and drive on their public lands, feud style. If you have received any such license, then you received it voluntarily by praying (applying for permission) to a magistrate (legal god) for it.

It’s time we are re-taught that the word god is a generic, general term meaning nothing until qualified, and that this word god in its legal sense applies to many political positions (persons/flattering titles) of men. While today we use the words plea (plead) to the judge (lord) of the court, the court records of just 100 years ago show a very different and honest language, revealing clearly that we prayed to the god of the court, which was the judge (magistrate). Even today in rare court cases can we find the word prayer instead of plea. It is even law in England that certain high-ranking judges be called as “lords.” And so we must realize that this word god is not merely a religious one, but also a term of the legal art. A god (lower case) is therefor a construct of the legal matrix, having no authority except over that which it creates and governs as property. And whether you care to admit it or not, your gods are certainly well-defined for you, especially if you are a pensioner.

GODnoun – …2. A false god; a heathen deity; an idol. Fear not the gods of the Amorites. Judges 6:10. 3. A prince; a ruler; a MAGISTRATE OR JUDGE an angel. Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people. Exodus 22:28. Psalms 97:7… 4. Any person or thing exalted too much in estimation, or deified and honored as the chief good. Whose god is their belly. Philippians 3:19. – verb transitiveTo deify (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

MAGISTRATEnoun – [Latin magistratus, from magister, master;magis, major, and ster, Teutonic steora, a director; steoran, to steer; the principal director.] A public civil officer, invested with the executive government or some branch of it. In this sense, a king is the highest or first magistrate as is the President of the United States. But the word is more particularly applied to subordinate officers, as governors, intendants, prefects, mayors, justices of the peace, and the like. The magistrate must have his reverence; the laws their authority. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

–=–

You may not like religion, but you have chosen your anti (false) gods and worship them daily because you have chosen citizenship under them and their legal system. You vote for them and honor them as if you are castrated, sacrificial goats. You allow them power over you in surety of their offered citizenship in personhood and they accept your voluntary sacrifice and thus reward you justly with debt-slavery in the credit form of fiat currency, allowing you freedom (commercial franchise) within their district (open-air debtors prison).

But then, I wouldn’t expect the average joe to know what it is to be confined (interned) in a district, what the word means, and why it is the foundation of debt-slavery as a citizen to it:

DISTRICTnoun – [Latin, to press hard, to bind. See Distrain.] 1. Properly, a limited extent of country; a circuit within which power, right or authority may be exercised, and to which it is restrained; a word applicable to any portion of land or country, or to any part of a city or town, which is defined by law or agreement. A governor, a prefect, or a judge may have his district… (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

DISTRAINverb transitive – [Latin dis and stringo. See Strain. Blackstone writes distrein.] 1. To seize for debt; to take a personal chatel from the possession of a wrong-doer into the possession of the injured party, to satisfy a demand, or compel the performance of a duty; as, to distrain goods from rent, or for an amercement. 2. To rend; to tear.verb intransitiveTo make seizure of goods. On whom I cannot distrain for debt. For neglecting to do suit to the lords court, or other personal service, the lord may distrain of common right. [In this phrase however some word seems to be understood; as, to distrain goods.] (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

–=–

And that’s what you are patriotic about, carelessly and without conscious understanding as to why, waving the US flag of your particular district of Caesar?

The question you should be asking is not when but when aren’t you in the district of the Untied States and its gods (magistrates) and administrative law? The answer, my friend, is never. Why? It’s really simple. Just like a cartoon can’t exist outside of the cartoon realm, nether can a citizen (person/status) exist outside of the fictional district (jurisdiction) that created it. You cannot pretend to be a US citizen-ship unless you worship the law and authority of its gods. So stop pretending you aren’t a volunteer, a servant, and for once in your life acknowledge your free will choice and where it has led you. And don’t you dare call yourself a “Christian” or any other religious flattering title while acting under these false gods under their law and while idolizing them and their system of schemes in mammon with legal “freedom of religion.” If you can’t act like a follower of Christ by penalty of law, then you cannot call yourself as a son of God. You don’t qualify. You aren’t acting the part. Just stop!

IDOLATRYnoun – [Latin idololatria. Gr. idol, and to worship or serve.] 1. The worship of idols, images, or any thing made by hands, or which is not God. Idolatry is of two kinds; the worship of images, statues, pictures, etc., made by hands; and the worship of the heavenly bodies, the sun, moon and stars, or of demons, angels, men and animals. 2. Excessive attachment or veneration for any thing, or that which borders on adoration. (Webs1828)

IDOLATERnoun – [Latin idololatra. See Idolatry.] 1. A worshiper of idols; one who pays divine honors to images, statues, or representations of any thing made by hands; one who worships as a deity that which is not God; a pagan. 2. An adorer; a great admirer. (Webs1828)

–=–

Why do so many religions cause you to worship angels and saints with halos of light above their heads? Do you know that there are no halos in the Bible, and that the halo appeared upon pre-christian era art of the Egyptian god of Ra, the rays of the sun god? It is idolatry to worship saints (sinners), not the least of all because “saint” is a flattering title, to which the Bible says to never respect. But then, who reads the source of their religion anymore to find out everything they are doing and worshiping and praying for is indeed against Nature’s God and Law.

Whose portrait (image) is on money? Why, its the most celebrated, idolized heads of past magistrate gods, of course — the presidents of the Untied States!

In god(s) we trust… Really?

It would be easier to point out the few things we are not committing idolatry on a daily basis than to point to each instance.

But hey, you don’t believe in God (all of self-Existence/Nature/the Universe)? Then why have you manifestly chosen a replacement, anti-god (president, king, pope) for your idolatrous worship? Why the worship of money and its false existence and valuation (mammon)? Which is more ridiculous, to worship all of Nature as on (monotheist) God, or to worship all things fictional as Real, as a replacement system for Nature and its Law? How can you prove or even consider that God doesn’t exist (i.e. trying to prove a negative, which is impossible) when you have voluntarily voted for so many false, replacement gods in government in Its stead? How can we call ourselves anything but fools in this regard? To be clear, this taking of a false god signifies one and only one thing, an abandonment of God and thus what is called God’s Law, or the Law of Nature, which is where all Natural Rights of men are said to come from even by these legal gods. You do not need to be religious in any way to understand what this means, nor that it is a choice. Only a fool would write this off as just religion when in fact it is all recognized as the foundation and opposing force of (and salvation from) the legal law. It is the common law. For you must realize above all else that the legal system and its false creator gods (magistrates) not only believe in but wholly acknowledge in their law the existence of a higher, uncontrollable power called as “God.” And if they acknowledge it as master, thus so do you as their servant. Again, you have no choice, for they are the lawmakers, administrators, and masters of the persona (property) you pretend to be and use as a districted citizenship.

ACT OF GODInevitable accident;vis major. Any misadventure or casualty is said to be caused by theact of God when it happens by the direct, immediate, and exclusive operation of the forces of NATURE, uncontrolled or uninfluenced by the power of man and without human intervention, and is of such a character that it could not have been prevented or escaped from by any amount of foresight or prudence, or by any reasonable degree of care or diligence, or by the aid of any appliances which the situation of the party might reasonably require him to use. Inevitable accident, or casualty; any accident produced by any physical cause which is irresistible, such as lightning, tempests, perils of the seas, an inundation, or earthquake; and also the sudden illness or death of persons. Under the term “act of God” are comprehended all misfortunes and accidents arising from inevitable necessity, which human prudence could not foresee or prevent. (Black1)

ACT OF STATE An act done by the sovereign power of a COUNTRY, or by its delegate, within the limits of the power vested in him. An act of state cannot be questioned or made the subject of legal proceedings in a court of law.(Black1)

ACT OF LAWThe operation of fixed LEGAL rules upon given FACTS or occurrences, producing consequences independent of the design or will of the parties concerned; as distinguished fromact of parties.” (Black1)

–=–

Stop for a moment and imagine the evil grin upon the face of any judge (false god) towards any fool that stands before him, literally praying (pleading) to him, while claiming at the same time to be an atheist. LOL! Imagine contacting an insurance agency only to be told that an “Act of God” isn’t covered because it’s not a legally sanctioned act of man. To then claim the non-Existence of God would be like dying of thirst because you believe your body needs no water. The author asks not here for the reader to suddenly grasp religion, for religion is not of God (Nature). Religion is a creation of man alone. I simply warn you that only a fool would go down the path of claiming a negative, that God doesn’t Exist, knowing that a negative cannot ever be proven, while at the same time subscribing to a government that not only believes in and acknowledges the power and authority of a God that’s higher than it, but also directly tells you that your only True rights come from God, and that giving up those rights is a necessity to be a citizen in its district.

If it isn’t clear by now, all these things aren’t an effort to attempt to vainly prove that God Exists or does not Exist, but instead to establish the foundation of the entire fiction that is the legal system, which clearly admits of and legislates based on said Existence (God). To participate in such a system while denying the Existence of the very concept and definition of “God” as the source of all things in and as the Universe, in and as Nature (the Universe), and of course the source of all “natural rights” is about as stupid an action as anyone can possibly take. To deny Source is to deny ones own Existence, and that borders on insanity. To deny God is to deny Existence Itself, as nihilism, which in the eyes of any government that bases its entire law and foundational superstructure on the God (verb/action/Existence/Being) of Nature, The Law of God, on self-Existence in self-responsibility, is to necessarily deny the Law of Nature and instead embrace its opposite, the legal law system (doctrine) of man. To declare “atheism” publicly is to declare publicly the need to be enslaved, which is why those that did in recent history were shunned, banished and imprisoned.

Even if this is all fiction, and God doesn’t Exist, I want you to consider that this entire legal, governmental and non-governmental system and its insurances is still based on the fiction, and you are still under that fictional story. It makes no sense whatsoever either way to deny “God” when government elevates “God” as Source and the reason for its existence (opposition). In fact, its really the dumbest “public” thing you can espouse.

I am not spouting my own opinion here, but giving you the definition of God (Jehovah) as it was intended to be read in the Bible and other scriptural (Truthful) sources, and as can be found in the concordances, lexicons, Bible dictionaries, and all other sources. To read the Bible without the definition of God is perhaps the most idiotic thing anyone can do. But then, that’s exactly what we’ve been taught to do, and then to actually debate with each other on whether or not Existence Itself exists? LOL! Brilliant. Oh, the idiocracy we have become…

But then, isn’t that congenial with the whole point of this essay, the mostly unwitting and often purposeful ignorance and irrationality of the public mindset, which can be tricked into actually and publicly not believing in Self-Existence, in what is the self-evident Truth, which is the very definition of God used in the Bible? Not a man in the clouds or a burning bush as used metaphorically to tell a story, but in Nature and all the Universe as a “Living God…” What is God. Its simple. All that is not man-made, including words. Thus “God is Truth.”

Inversely and really quite amazingly, at the same time we have also been completely stupefied and have lost all contemplation that our rulers are our acting replacement gods, or even that as replacement (anti) gods this must necessarily mean that a Higher God must be acknowledge even by them. There is no replacement (anti) without some Source to be opposed to or in the stead of. There can be no alternative immoral (anti-moral), legal law unless first and Highest there is a foundational moral Law. Are these Truths not as well self-evident? We pretend that the current queens (kings), popes, and other rulers are descended from those Kings, Pharaohs and Caesars of old, that nothing has changed accept the ridiculous delusion of active democracy. We are tricked quite handily into voting, or not voting, a wonderfully deceiving false choice. For there is never a choice to vote no. To not vote is a just to abstain, which members of congress do all the time, though the bills the abstain from voting on still get passed. It’s all a trick designed to manufacture at least the illusion of mass consent. And as we now see, the real voting that actually counts — votes for boards of directors and for millions of unelected Executive offices and agency employees in the federal government, which the president appoints — happens behind closed doors without public consent. For the only consent needed is volunteerism. The entirely useless public vote only strengthens the delusion of servitude to these gods. To vote yes or no is to constant to that which you are voting for, no matter the outcome. Thus, a no vote or not voting at all is always counted as a consensual yes vote.

Perhaps the greatest tomfoolery we still suffer to day is the illusion that the public vote ever actually elects the president of the United States. I spent many months dissecting the electoral college process as implemented by the constitution, and attempted to explain it in a short and what I thought would be fun and entertaining documentary with a bit of facial recognition software, which today is all the rage. But, to my chagrin, I mostly received the ultimate fallacy, the ad hominem, a bad case of shoot the messenger. Try something new or different in this crowd, be prepared to be attacked. For there is little brotherly love or organization in the alternative media, just continuous insult and disorganization, the hallmark of any losing side. Try and tell those who believe they have a choice that in reality they don’t, and prepare to be pummeled with belief (faith) based nonsense and insults. But for educational purposes, and if you want to prove to anyone, including yourself, the entire fraud that is our voting system, here it is for better of for worse. This is very important to understand, for it proves without a doubt that the public vote does not count and is never used in federal elections for president. It proves not only our collective idiocracy, but also our idolatry towards candidates (men):

–=–

–=–

We are so dumbed down that we don’t even realize that political parties are private, non-governmental associations (artificial persons), which steal our choice away from us.

POLITICAL PARTY – A number of persons united in opinion and organized in the manner usual to the then existing political parties. An unincorporated, voluntary association of persons sponsoring certain ideas of government or maintaining certain political principles or beliefs in public policies of government, not a governmental agency or instrumentality. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

Anyone that actually goes to vote for president that has seen and understands this documentary can only be called a complete fool!

Anyone that is still a member of any political party after seeing this documentary and reading this definition should be institutionalized — oh wait, that’s what US public citizenship is! Open-air internment (prison). Political parties, not voters, decide who will be the candidates, and then the electoral college actually elects one of those party members, not you. Does this really make sense to you? Is this what you thought happens? Did you really think your vote was counted? Think again. You are not “the People,” dude! You are a common subject (plebe), not an elector (elite).

Do you actually think that President Donald Trump is not your god as a US citizenship? Silly rabbits… tricks really are for infants (wards). If you use the money and credit (property) and name and number of another, then by default you agree to and accept such a false god (creator) and its legal (false) law governing the use of that property. Like it or not, you’ve already volunteered to be a Trump supporter as a “democrat,” or for that matter, any and everyone and every party member that is president, even “socialists” or “communists.” Remember, no is yes! It is not the man but the office that is a false god, the flattering legal title (mask). It’s all fiction, remember. But you’re actions and participation make it your own virtual reality. It thus controls your actions and keeps you in the legal mindset of this legal matrix and its amoral code.

Perhaps you think that change in your pocket actually belongs to you, that you are not just a user of another’s property?

Perhaps you think that money (mammon) is not the ultimate tool of false judgement, rewarding the criminal element while obfuscating the meek and the charitable? You think the fact that everything Real and artificial being estimated into a fictional, monetary value happened naturally, as if God has a price-gun and marks all things in Nature as commercial products for sale and domination through false valuation (mammon) and inflation in man-made currency?

You think any of this is an Act of the God of Nature? If it was, then government could not control it or tax it, you fool!

You think that government controls us all, including banks, by any other tool than its own persona and money creation and retraction system to create a total welfare state? You think welfare (including pensions) are designed as anything else than to keep you exactly where you are at — middle class or abject poverty, without the power of God’s Law or self-government, and thus in complete and utter dependence and subservience to the government gods that give you your greedy allowance each month because you are to irresponsible to self-govern and do it yourself?

CAPTIO – In old English law and practice. A taking or seizure; arrest; receiving; holding of court.(Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition)

CLERIC – noun – A clerk or clergyman. (Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

CLERICUS – In old English law. A clerk or priest; a person in holy orders; a secular priesta clerk of a court. An officer of the royal household, having charge of the receipt and payment of moneys, etc… In Roman law. A minister of religion in the Christian church; an ecclesiastic or priest. A general term, including bishops, priests, deacons, and others of inferior order. Also of the amanuenses of the judges or courts of the king.(Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition)

–=–

Congress, to be exact, is the creator and controller of all these functions regarding the established monetary and financial network. Contrary to the conspiratorial diatribe that floats around the alternative wavelengths and literature like a never-dissipating fart, there is no evil set of “bankers” that control government or its money. If you believe this propaganda, then the real banker that is government can easily get away with its organized crime schemes while you spend all your time looking for that which does not exist. To be clear, by law and even by reason alone, no bank or “banker” (agent) is higher in authority than government (principal), nor is such a status even possible, since that which creates a legal status cannot create such a status that is higher than itself. This is a maxim of law and again self-evident. What is lower cannot create what is higher.

Of course, it was Congress that created the “Securities and Exchange Commission” as an independent agency of government, just as it did the “Federal Reserved System.” All agencies are but government corporations created as congressional aids in the day-to-day business of government (organized crime). One simply cannot be a “banker” unless one receives permissive licensure from government to use that title and benefit to participate in the funny money (fiat) monopoly scheme that is the banking, securities, and stock exchange scam. Again, no person or man may have a status higher than government, than that which creates statuses, for government cannot grant to any man or corporation anything higher than itself. This is a self-evident limitation of all gods and magistrates, though lost on most people. And all maxims of law certainly agree, for the law never requires or allows what is impossible. In more simple terms, the creation can never be higher in status or authority than the creator/inventor. The part is never higher than the whole. The image (idol) cannot actually be greater than the Source.

But the propaganda that some shadowy bankers rule the world is sure a handy cover for the real bankers (world government congresses/legislators) to operate under the cover of public idiocracy, for without even trying they hide their operation under that which cannot exist by their own law!

I bet right now many readers are defending these so-called enemy “bankers” like they defend the central enemy called “the Fed” as they cling to their needed lies and fallacies, for it is much easier to create fictional villains that operate outside of the system than to admit that the true villains are those we ourselves pretend to vote into authority as our gods within the system. And it’s certainly much easier to elect false gods and be subject to the legal law as debt slaves than to follow the Law of Nature and be free from such monetary devices and traps. The self-governing Free man under God — the very concept this country was built upon — is today few and far between.

Just what do you think a banker is?

BANKER – noun – One who keeps a bank; one who trafficks in money, receives and remits money, negotiates bills of exchange, etc. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

ARGENTARIUS (plural, Argentarii) – In the Roman law, a money lender or broker; a dealer in moneya banker. Argentarium, the instrument of the loan, similar to the modern word “bond” or “note.” (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ARGENTEUS – An old French coin, answering nearly to the English shilling. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ARGENTUM – Silver; money. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ARGENTUM ALBUM – Bullion; uncoined silver; common silver coin; silver coin worn smooth. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ARGENTUM DEI – God’s money; God’s penny; money given as earnest in making a bargain. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

The corruption of money and bankers is not new, and have never been separate from the church and state. They operate with license from state and forgiveness from church. Ridiculous! There is nothing new under the sun... We are still under the Roman Law as national citizens under Caesar, a word/title that also means district. Again, history hasn’t repeated, for history has no end. History is merely something we talk about as we walk upon its never-ending timeline. Today is tomorrows history. Time is money. As the Eagle’s sang, you can spend all your time making money, or you can spend all your money making time. In the end, they’re the same thing — fiction. Poor and middle class serve time for their crimes, while the wealthy elite pay money instead of giving their time. Time is a creation of man, not God (Nature), for Nature is the unchanging Existence, the God of (Existing as) the permanence of All things. Nature is priceless and timeless. And only in this timeless, priceless garden may men find peace and tranquility.

Government keeps the Fed while the Fed is designated by government to keeps all banks.

Government traffics in money, for the word traffic simply means commerce, trade, and buying and selling of market commodities, and it does so through its independent agency, the Fed, which is and always has been under the authority and law of congress without exception. Any freedoms or independence the Fed or any other agency of government has is because congress made it so. It is ridiculous to believe anything else when all the facts are presented and the shock-jocks and false profit authors are shown to be frauds.

Government is the great negotiator of bills of exchange, being the very creator of the Securities and Exchange system, the stock market, whose corporations are also creations of and under the laws of government.

You will not find a definition for banker that refers to anything but this. The only difference between a “private banker” and an “individual banker” is that the private banker (legal person) is not incorporated as a bank, and is thus merely a trafficker (commercial agent) in mammon by license of government. Both operate within the system and UNDER its laws, and both are required to report their taxable operations to government. And yes, the government is god (creator and lawmaker) of the Fed. There is no mystery here. They are not higher than that which regulates their trade. Government is the only banker (creator), and all other “bankers” fall under its purview and authority. Again, this is self-evident if for no other reason than the very financial reporting requirements we are unveiling here. All so-called “bankers” report to government in one way or the other.

Even the financial and political god “Donald Trump” files tax returns to government, for the name “Donald Trump” and its incorporated conglomerates by that same legal surname only exist inside of government (jurisdiction, corporate limit), not outside. Donald Trump, the person (legal status), simply does not exist in Nature, and neither does your person (legal status). But remember, this is all fiction. None of it is real. It just a trick. It is designed to control you. For there is only one entity in the world that is not controlled by money, and that is its creator, which is government. Money is strictly a tool to bind all men under one false, incorporated god (as a body politic). Money is debt.

The point here is that if you invest in the stock market, stop calling it anything that what it is: gambling. Quit pretending to know what you are doing, and quit pretending that if you happen to do the right thing by chance or even by strategic planning in the markets, you are doing nothing more than supporting this massive scheme to take over the entire corporate structure of the world, especially if you are a pensioner (dependent). For while you may gain some profits in money temporarily, we all lose when in the near-term future the end of these financial schemes comes to fruition and the entire world economy and all its corporation are majority owned by government and thus completely controlled by government in absolute communist style, all the while masquerading as artificial freedom and democracy (i.e. volunteerism).

In essence, pensioners are colloquially like lemmings collectively running while blindfolded towards the edge of a cliff with the rest of us commoners caught in the way, with no other place to go than down. But then, this has always been the goal of implementing a democracy into an other wise self-governing, moral nation.

Don’t like the truth?

Well, don’t shoot this messenger unless you shoot these as well:

—=—

Democracy is the road to socialism.

—Karl Marx

—=—

Democracy is indispensable to socialism.

Socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people…”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, (seperate quotes), excerpted from the pamphlet ‘The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat it, September 1917’ as Lenin’s Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1977, Moscow, Volume 25, from Lenin Internet Archive. 

—=—

Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty.”

—Plato

—=—

A pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth; for a multitude is often rash, and will not hear reason.”

—Noah Webster

—=—

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

—John Adams

—=—

“The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

There are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them in parliament.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

—Winston Churchill

—=—

What is the pension fund system? Democracy in action. For it is when the government and the populace figures out they can vote for themselves personal, vast riches from the public coffers that the true nature of democracy rears its ugly head. And we are watching the consequences even now, as it wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. Yet the average pensioner will sink with the ship rather than repent from that public pension welfare check, as any scoundrel would be expected to do. United we stand MY ASS!

Now, getting back to our subject at hand…

Predicting the stock market, of course, is like predicting a hurricane. Like helpless weathermen with their inept technology designed to somehow fathom the nature of what they call “chaos” (i.e. the unknowable Design of God), these self-proclaimed market gurus report with confidence bleeding into arrogance that which they have no idea is true or false information (the unknowable design of the legal gods in government finance). They attempt to analyze this completely planned, organized, and loosely controlled chaotic system as if they are on the inside — as if they are or at least somehow theosophically have the perspective of its gods. But in reality they are as caught up in the winds of random change in that storm as anyone of us that put our faith (trust) in their apparently magical, even theosophical (god-like) ability to know the direction of the unknown. Yet the chaotic flareups caused by that giant hemorrhoid of a market that keeps growing and shrinking when we least expect it has no readily apparent (public) rhyme or reason, anymore than the Wizard of Oz’s true grand master plan can be understood without revealing the man behind the curtain. Predicting that the stock market will go down (crash) or go up (boom) is like predicting that a tree will eventually grow and die. The guru uses no date, no time, and no reasoning, merely empty time frames and publicly disclosed connections smothered in fallacious logic with no apologies for being wrong in their vague forethoughts or vague timeframes, instead continuously putting forward new possibilities upon the commercial time-line presented on behalf of the latest rhetoric (and now tweets) of market propagandists, who are legally justified, protected, and encouraged to lie to the public.

To this end, we have seemingly trapped ourselves inside our own bubble of shared belief in these publicly disclosed lies. By first respecting the lies by treating them as facts, and then by publicly spreading those lies to others while promoting them as facts, the master plan behind those lies is allowed to come to fruition despite being built upon provable lies and through omission of neutralizing facts. In other words, our mutual lie factories called the mainstream and alternative media feed us not opposing lies, but lies created to suit the disposition and apparent helplessness of the audience. The logical fallacy may go something like this: the mainstream media lies, therefore the alternative media must be true, or, the puppet acting as criminal manager of a pension fund said it publicly, therefore it must be true. It’s not so much that the lie is accepted as truth as much as it is accepted as an excuse. And yet the whole concept behind these audited financial statements is very much to eliminate such public excuses. The CAFR is simply a report of the audited facts and the stated reasons behind those facts. Thus, as we will see, while this pension fund manager of CalPERS is publicly declaring near insolvency for his managed fund through omission of the comparison of any contrary fact, the CAFR says quite the opposite.

But the most horrific part about this is that the rest of us are not really surprised with each new epoch of criminal activity, extortion, and outright pilferage of what was the taxes we paid collectively for what we expected to be taxpayer services. A quick look at just the “non-governmental” investment fund totals for all governments out there, and it’s easy to feel the giant, perfectly designed screw burrowing all the way up our collective, dumb asses.

For now, let us count down the so-called “facts” as publicly presented so far…

  1. CalPERS is somehow near insolvency.
  2. A “pension fund crisis” (future doom) is apparent and seemingly inevitable.
  3. Therefore, CalPERS pension fund (and others) may need a taxpayer reform or bailout soon.
  4. This is apparently true and “confirmed” because of the public heresy spoken by a board member of CalPERS on a tweet and from other publicly spun rhetoric.

You see, while you believe that the public is merely made to bail out banks as private institutions from government when they are caught making bad investments, the truth is that the public is made to bail out government-held and proxy-vote controlled institutions of its own. It is the principal bailing out its agents through public debt, for the sole purposes of continued corporate existence (continuity of government) and to keep the shareholders (mostly government and elite) happy. Now you have the full picture. You are bailing out government’s stock position, not just those corporations, for it is law to make the shareholders profit. Can you say conflict of interest?

Before we address these fallacious fear-porn talking points as completely falsified, designed nonsense, let’s get a little more information about the reasons behind such unverified, veiled public heresy and this all around bad reporting of it. Why lie?

Continuing with the ZeroHedge publicly parroted report:

“Westly was referring to an editorial laying out “the essence” of California’s pension crisis, exposed last week when the $350 billion California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) made arelatively small changein its amortization policy

Specifically, the CalPERS board voted to change the period for recouping future investment losses from 30 years to 20 years. While this may not sound like much, the bottom line is that it would require the California state government and thousands of local government agencies and school districtsto ramp up their mandatory contributions to the huge trust fund.”

As author Dan Walters observes, with client agencies – cities, particularly – already complaining that double-digit annual increases in CalPERS payments are driving some of them towards insolvency, the new policy – which kicks in next year – will raise those payments even more.

What we are trying to avoid is a situation where we have a city that is already on the brink, and applying a 20-year amortization schedule would put them over the edge,” a representative of the League of California Cities, Dane Hutchings, told the CalPERS board before its vote.”

–=–

I dare anyone to find me a city that is actually “on the brink…” not by its public commentary (propaganda) and yearly budgetary nonsense and lack of disclosure, but based on its CAFR audit report? Anyone?

Amazingly, the whole scheme is plotted here in just a couple of sentences, and yet the public seems unable to put the pieces together…

If the reader has not put two and two together yet, you should know that when this article states that the “California state government and thousands of local government agencies and school districts” must “ramp up their mandatory contributions to the huge trust fund,” you must realize that there is only one source of funding for all of these governments — and that’s you. And me. And all other public taxes and fees paid by everyone else in every state and the nation. Yes, that’s right, your taxpayer money is placed into investment funds like this instead of being used for what you imagined it would be used for. But then, who really needs taxpayer services anyway, right? Who doesn’t want nothing for something, after all? Who doesn’t like paying for what you don’t get? And who doesn’t think it’s perfectly reasonable that local governments should bail out a pension fund when it takes a temporary loss on its gambling habits, even if it will cause them to go bankrupt?

It’s the American way…

At this point though, one would think that even the pensioners themselves, those taking benefits, money, insurance, etc. from this fund, would realize the insanity behind such a plan. But then, in the free wage-slave capitalist system, one doesn’t bite the hand that both feeds them and chokes them and their family, neighbors, and friends at the same time. The pensioner is first in line, of course, to support any excuse (public lie) that comes along so that government can extort from the rest of us to support themselves. This is the curse of mammon.

If only the pensioners themselves understood that insolvency means reorganization, and that reorganization means pension fund cuts and the decrease or death of their meager benefits. This lot of loosely organized pensioners is like a parasite that starts eating itself once all the meat and organs of the host are devoured! Not ironically, the pensioner sees him or her self no longer as a taxpayer but as a government-employed pensioner, exactly as a unionized laborer imaginarily sees him or her self as part of that communistically designed, semi-elitist club that artificially raises ones status in commercial society and feeds the ego with flattery of title and benefits unequal to all others not in or allowed to be in the club. We forget, collectively, that we are all in the same boat, paying the same taxes as subjects and hoping for a responsible, honest, and dependable government in exchange for voluntarily extorted taxes. Instead, we are turned against each other and made completely irrational, competitive, and cold-hearted, caught up in whatever mutual excuse the party, union, or group publicly supports to justify our artificial existence as its member. Their continuous flow of money-for-nothing at the expense of all others in their regular and “early” retirement is apparently more important than their support of a stable and mutually beneficial local government.

I pay taxes for potholes to be repaired. They pay taxes to support their own pensions while potholes continue to grow unchecked due to lack of taxpayer money that is instead exacted into keeping the pension fund’s appearance of future solvency based on false actuarial projections in 20-30 years.

The greatest delusion of all here is that pension funds are funded by and strictly for the employees that are members. They are not. They are globalist, governmental investment schemes that are responsible more than any other financial tool in existence for globalism and for unprecedented corporate funding of the worst possible corporations by government-controlled investments. They are a constant flow of required taxpayer money being invested into the future state of global, centralized governance of all corporations, on stock purchase at a time. The pensioner has no stake whatsoever in the funds, which is why what they invest into the pension fund is called a “contribution.” Once a contribution (gift) is made, it is not retainable. The pensioner can only hope they die before the ultimate end-game happens — the sacking of the fund due to military or corporate takeover or bankruptcy reorganization. PENSIONERS HAVE NO EQUITY IN THESE FUNDS.

To be clear, contributions to these funds are an imposition, not a right. The problem with the collective delusion of pensioners is that they don’t realize they are themselves considered as unable to care for themselves, and thus completely dependent on the system the contribute to. Dependence is certainly not in any way freedom, though they’ll sell you that it is.

IMPOSE – To levy or exact as by authority; to lay as a burden, tax, duty or charge. (–Blacks Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

IMPOSITION – An impost; tax; contribution(–Blacks Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

CONTRIBUTORYnounA person liable to contribute to the assets of a company which is being wound up, as being a member or (in some cases) a past member thereof. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

CONTRIBUTORYadjectiveJoining in the promotion of a given purpose; lending assistance to the production of a given result. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

CONTRIBUTION – In the civil law. A partition by which the creditors of an insolvent debtor divide among themselves the proceeds of his property proportionably to the amount of their respective credits. Division which is made among the heirs of the succession of the debts with which the succession is charged, according to the proportion which each is bound to bear. In common law. The sharing of a loss or payment among several. The act of any one or several of a number of co-debtors, co-sureties, etc., in reimbursing one of their number who has paid the whole debt or suffered the whole liability, each to the extent of his proportionate share(–Blacks Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

They take your contribution and divide it among themselves (between persons, for corporations are persons too), and in return for your blind support of their combination of globalist corporate empire, they give you a return on your blanket share and according to its value. But this return is secondary in every way to the plan itself, being only the excuse that allows them to exact from you and from I and all other taxpayers to support globalization and one world “corporate governance.” The pensioner is made to feel as a beneficiary, when in reality he or she is a victim of his or her own blind greed and unreasonable consideration of just what there pension funds really are — tools of total corporate globalization and centralization of all corporations into and under government control through stock ownership and collective shareholder proxy voting. In other words, the main collective shareholder gets to vote for whom is elected as boards of directors for all corporations worldwide. It gets to vote on whether mergers and acquisitions will or will not be allowed. And most importantly, the board it elects then appoints the CEO (president) of the company.

And so your millions and millions of individual little contributions matched and tripled by taxpayer (government-funded) contributions have indeed created such a monster that one cannot even imagine its size, for like The Matrix simulation, it represents the entire corporate structure of the world. It represents every chain-store you shop at, every bank on every corner, every investment firm, every pharmaceutical conglomerate, every car brand and dealer out there, and every war and weapons manufacturer in existence, everywhere. This mix of government and commercial corporations essentially places all citizens into a company store, where government prints the money we earn, taxes and imposes upon us what it desires, allows us to spend what’s left of that money in one of its investment-held corporations as they legally engross us all (charge outrageously high prices/commit legal usury by license), and then allow us to deposit, save, and invest any leftovers in their stock-owned and completely controlled system of international banks.

In other words, we are workers that spend our corporate-earned money in the collective company store, since all companies are not government held and governed. Thus, we are engrossed, extorted, and made to suffer all sorts of usury by such a monopoly.

If you are not familiar with how government agencies like CalPERS proxy votes in corporations, either watch my over 4 hour documentary, The Great Pension Fund Hoax, or just let CalPERS explain from its own website (active links):

Proxy Voting

As a long-term share ownerCalPERS sees voting our proxies as the primary way we can influence a company’s operations and corporate governance. This is why it’s important for shareowners to vote and make their decisions based on a full understanding of publicly available information.

For more information on CalPERS proxy voting, read the CalPERS Governance & Sustainability Principles (PDF).

Proxy Voting Decisions

To view a record of all CalPERS global proxy voting activity, visit Global Proxy Voting Decisions.

CalPERS also publishes additional voting information for high profile votes and company-specific shareowner campaigns. Visit Key Decisions for additional details. All votes are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice.

For more information, read the related article Proxy Access Gains Ground as Companies Reach Pacts with Shareholder Proponents.

–=–

NOTE: IF YOU UNDERSTAND THIS PROXY VOTING SYSTEM OF CORPORATE SHAREHOLDERS LIKE CALPERS, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, COLLECTIVELY, ALL GOVERNMENTS ARE THE COLLECTIVE MAJORITY SHAREHOLDERS THROUGH PENSIONS AND MUTUAL FUND INVESTMENTS IN ALL CORPORATIONS, THEN YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE ACTUAL FINANCIAL WORLD REALLY WORKS.

While no one government is a majority shareholder, when all governments pool their votes collectively through private, non-governmental associations, then as a single force governments (share-holders) become as one voice, and are when combined as shareholder proxy voters the largest by far of all institutional holders of corporate stock.  E Pluribus Unum, out of many one. So the next time you hear that congress is colloquially owned by corporations as some mainstream or alternative idiot-box news outlet talking point, you’ll laugh as you are one of the few who actually know that the opposite is true, that congress has no ownership stock to be owned, and that all corporations are staffed and operated through collective, organized, government shareholders. And so if you haven’t figured it out yet, through the illusion of competition, corporations are part of (majority share owned by) government. In other words, this spells organized crime to the fullest degree. Some might go a step further and call it socialism, or fascism. But then, this is always the hidden goal of instilling a democracy – total ownership of the commercial world by government. It’s even a plank of the Communist Manifesto, of which all ten planks have been made law in some form in the United States.

For more information, watch The Great Pension Fund Hoax, always free on Youtube and at TheCorporationNation.com

But again, I digress…

Let’s address the first glaringly obvious lie listed in the above publicly claimed list of supposedly fearful facts and talking points, at least obvious to any thinking, reasonable man (male or female) that picks up an audited financial statement to verify such publicly reported rhetoric and is able therefore to neutrally put the pieces together. First, let’s find the un-hidable truth. I’d like to point out right here that when they say that the CalPERS investment fund is currently managing $350 billion in assets, we are talking about 350,000 individual bundles of $1 million dollars. One trillion equals a million million. Can you even imagine what that would look like in your head? And so this notion of being on the brink of insolvency is almost laughable when this alone is considered. I mean, seriously, they are saying $350 billion in continuous, overall gains for the life of the fund and also insolvency in the same sentence here!

But perhaps the reader won’t comprehend the laughable obfuscation here until we uncover all the facts as to why this lie is so hilarious. Moving on…

If CalPERS has 2 million members, then at $350 billion in current assets, that means it has $175,000 extra for each member already invested, aside from its yearly costs and pension plan obligations. In other words, these funds are completely separate and have nothing to do with the budgetary requirements of this pension fund and the “contributions” it receives from members and from governments (taxpayers) shown on the budget report. And remember, this is the figure after all expenses and obligations are payed each year to each member. And this gain balance keeps getting exponentially larger each year (on average), while at the same time this board member is claiming the fund is somehow also near insolvency.

In order to understand the gross magnitude of this particular public (unofficial) lie, we must have a look at what this fund’s investment value was less than 5 short years ago before passing any judgements on its performance and possible insolvency. Again, while we can plainly see in the CAFR audit that the fund balance and valuation of the CalPERS portfolio of assets are in truth skyrocketing up and up and up on an overall yearly average, these propagandists are at the same time publicly claiming the opposite is true, that the fund is somehow insolvent. One of these facts is true, documented, and reported in the audited CAFR. One is complete heresy, backed only by artificially projected, actuarial predictions created by attorneys and accountants designed with the purpose to deceive the public and cause an excuse and justification of financial bailouts with taxpayer money. One is in an actual audited accounting while one is certainly not. Yet in the same breath, we find that this fund is being said to contain an increase in investment assets that currently stands at $350 billion while also being close to insolvency.

If you understand this, then you understand the difference between the yearly budget and the comprehensive (from the beginning) audit called the CAFR. The budget is merely an incomplete, dumbed down (public) version of the CAFR. The budget cannot be fully understood, in fact, without the CAFR, and the budget refers to the CAFR when full public disclosures are undesired. In short, the budget is in no way comprehensive, just as most publicly disclosed information is generally incomplete and designed to deceive through obfuscation and omission of all facts involved. But this is not illegal in any way, for what is comprehensive, the audit itself, is made “publicly available.” The lawmakers are the organized crime syndicate (congress) and its legion of non-governmental organizations, like the private Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB). In other words, the beneficiaries of the crime and of the fees and tax-extortion makes the rules.

But what use is published information in a dumbed down society? The constitution of the United States and of each state are also publicly available, as is the entirety of the US Code and state laws. Does that mean that most people actually know the full, comprehensive law? Does that mean the common citizenry has any idea what the constitution actually states and intends in its rhetoric? Absolutely not, as I have harshly and painfully uncovered in past endeavors. For if they (we) did, they (we) would not voluntarily be contracted in surety to a United States citizenship unless they (we) were actually insane or inept, which not ironically is exactly what such a national citizenship represents — idiocy, wardship, dependence, and a total lack of the ability to self-govern. This is not so different than membership in a pension fund — dependency on government and its law, benefits and restrictions, due to the lack of ability to self-govern ones own financial situation, which is seen by government agencies as the same form of idiocy. Like children, pensioners and employees are given monthly allowances because they could not possibly handle or responsibly manage their own full estate. Even the state lottery schemes are set up to pay its slave-minded winners in default yearly stipends while each lottery fund run by and benefiting government invests for itself the unpaid remainder (lump sum), taking for itself what would be the interest and investment returns that would have gone to the winner if he or she could handle such a  responsibility!

But they don’t teach this stuff in public school, now do they?

And yes, again, this multifaceted, duplicitous lie is perfectly legal on the public front. It is your fault if you believe the propaganda without verifying its source documentation and audit. You have no excuse, and neither do those re-reporting this crap and thus inevitably, often unwittingly and unintentionally supporting the oppositional plan behind it all.

The truth hurts… I get it. But at the same time the Truth is the only Real thing that can set anyone free. For the truth may only harm or offend those living in or protected by a lie. Is the pain worth it? In Truth, this is all nothing if not the very self-evident nature and consequence of mammon, and why this love of money (belief in the artificial valuation in money of all things) is the root of all this evil. At this point in this essay, one either accepts their own disposition as accurate (as devised by government through trickery and temptation) or one shoots the messenger for telling the Truth. The ill-informed, extorted, and victimized taxpayer or the ill-informed, exacted from, but also monetarily (artificially) rewarded pensioner… which one are you?

Or are you both? You can’t be one (a pensioner) without being the other (a taxpayer) it seems.

Now, let’s add to our list of ever growing fear-based, unsubstantiated concerns here — some true, some not so much:

  1. CalPERS is somehow publicly stated to be near insolvency.
  2. A “pension fund crisis” (doom) is apparent and seemingly inevitable.
  3. Therefore, CalPERS pension fund may need a taxpayer reform or bailout soon.
  4. This is true and “confirmed” by the public heresy spoken by a board member of CalPERS while not under oath.
  5. CapPERS investment fund value is up to around $350 billion in current assets as of this copied  tweet at , an increase from the previous fiscal year CAFR reported and audited earnings of about $25 billion so far for this fiscal year. (Note: the fiscal year for CalPERS ends June 30 each year, so that’s a $25 billion gain in less than 8 months, with four more months of performance gains to go, placing it well over or even double the projected actuarially needed investment gain expectations for the year.)
  6. Despite this, its manager claims the need to possibly recoup from previous years the investment losses from taxpayers (as government funded bailouts for bad investments), ignoring completely the good years that not only make up for it, like this current one, but completely ignoring the fact that the fund is solvent and growing by multi-billions on average every year. The goal is to never publicly reveal these positive, over-expected averages by hiding the CAFR through utter silence about its existence.
  7. Taxpayers already pay for (fund) these pensions with their taxpayer money, called as “government contributions,” listed here as “mandatory contributions,” and now they want more, even if it bankrupts local governments to do so.
  8. Because taxpayer money must be collected and used to pay for these pensions, and despite the fact that these pensions are strictly for government employees and do not benefit the vast majority (around 40 million Californians) as average, common, non-pensioned taxpayers in any way whatsoever, the local governments of all common people may go insolvent because these governments (corporations) cannot pay for their other obligations to those other 38 million or so taxpayers.
  9. To be clear, cities, counties, school districts, etc. may declare a special bankruptcy for municipal corporations because they cannot pay for pension fund contributions using taxpayer money, because the rules of the congress of the United States and of the corporate states require pre-funding of pension funds based on artificial, completely unreasonable actuarial reports by corrupt pension fund managers themselves, which are the cause of any appearance (lie) of any shortage offuture funding.

–=–

If this last part is not clear, I would point you to my previous exposure of this idiocracy of an investment scam from several years ago, which will bring not only clarity but allow you to do the same simple research into your own local governments within their sourced CAFR audits. You can obtain a city or county CAFR online or at your local library along with the budget report, usually at the resource desk, or as a digital copy online. The amount of assets hidden from each of us by the purposefully obfuscating and inadequate yearly budget report when put in comparison to this full and comprehensive report each year is staggering to say the least. There is literally no such thing as an insolvent government in the United States, including Detroit and Stockton, when considering each governments legally required and CAFR-audited investment funds. But you won’t discover this by reading only the yearly budget, which ignores such accumulated investments returns and interest. There are instead congressional and state laws that purposefully prevent your taxpayer money from being used for taxpayer purposes, even when they are needed. Instead, our taxpayer collections are labeled as “restricted” (for limited use only) by being placed in specialized investment funds, often labeled specifically as “non-governmental” and as “enterprise” funds. The existence of these reserved investment funds is strictly for the purpose of keeping them from being used for any other taxpayer services — to keep them out of the “general fund” (used for “unrestricted” taxpayer use). There is no excuse to not use what is in the general fund, and so these many schemes, pension funds, and other non-governmental (non-taxpayer) and enterprise funds are created to cause funds in the general fund to be transferred out and into those funds that, by law, cannot be used for general purposes (i.e. taxpayer services).

Learn how to quickly spot this “legal” scheme here:

Link–>https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/02/27/unmasking-the-cafr-scam-in-every-city-usa/

And if you wonder whether this author, that is, myself, is qualified to speak of such things, you can see all of my CAFR research here (many links), including my over 6 hours of documentaries on the subject entitled as The Corporation Nation Part 1 and Part 2: The Great Pension Fund Hoax:

Link–> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/cafr-school-week-on-the-corporation-nation-radio/

For our purposes, note here that the budget is in no way an official or full audit. The big difference between a basic yearly budget report and this full or “comprehensive” annual report (audit) is that while the CAFR shows everything for every past year as one continuous fund, the budget report shows only assets and liabilities and gains or losses for that particular year. And so one may use that one bad year as an artificially presented and singular public spectacle while ignoring all other average, good, or even extremely great and over-profitable years in between, in order to show falsely that, while over all the fund is incredibly successful and meeting its long-term goals, that one bad year is all they want you to see. If they can focus you on that bad year, and maybe the expected, cyclical bad year from seven years ago due to bad market conditions, thus causing you (the public) to ignore the CAFR report of all good and bad years in balanced combination, then I can cause a fear-based reaction so as to extort even more taxpayer funds while putting forward the scary publictruth (lie) that the fund is in danger of a false-insolvency in the future. Ignore that $350 billion in investments, for you see, through our trickery, it is already somehow pretended to be spent 30 years from now. Nothing to see here…

So that you may see exactly what amounts to the burden for California taxpayers to fund not only these 2 million or so members of the CalPERS system, but the 2,945 CalPERS employees and the over $1 billion paid just as “commissions and fees” to the many, many banks and fund managers involved in this globalist pension investment scheme whether this CalPERS fund wins or loses, let’s take a look at the CAFR (Audit) for both the 2012 and the 2017 fiscal year, and using the currently stated figure above, showing $350 billion in current CalPERS assets.

Firstly, here is an excerpt from one of my older blog entries. In this CAFR-verified report we read:

Press Release
July 16, 2012
External Affairs Branch

CalPERS Reports Preliminary 2011-12 Fiscal Year Performance of 1 Percent.

Real estate portfolio earns nearly 16 percent exceeding benchmark

SACRAMENTO, CA – The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) today reported a 1 PERCENT RETURN on investments for the 12 MONTHS that ended June 30, 2012, falling SHORT of its benchmark that returned 1.7 percent.CalPERS assets at the end of the fiscal year stood at more than $233 BILLION.

–=–

You see, this was labeled as a “bad year,” for the fund only because it was a bad year for the never-ending stock market. This is of course on the surface a seemingly logical though completely fallacious conclusion. For let’s be clear that this CalPERS fund admittedly still gained a 1% profit after all obligations were met! That’s 1% on the over 220 billion they already possess! So they only gained in profit 2.2 billion that year. How sad for them… And so it’s not that the fund lost money or even really did poorly considering the market conditions and over $2 billion of profit it made after all expenses and obligations were paid. No, it’s only that the fund didn’t reach its actuarially (artificially) projected goal set out by purposefully deceitful accountants, attorneys, and politicians, in order to completely deceive the public and raise contributory taxes collected from all local and state governments. It made a profit, but not according to its goals. Thus they report to the public they did not meet their margins, though still gaining a fortune after all benefits and obligations are paid. So the fund publicly lost, even though it privately gained. See how that works? Imagine if you reported a loss to the IRS when in fact you obviously and without question made such a huge profit?

And trust me, the taxpayers or pensioners never get a refund for these extra gains because of the next great or outstanding year in returns, say when the gains are in the 10’s of billions. In fact, if you do the math, this fund literally has enough value listed here that it could pay benefits for 30 years as it stands, and more when considering the death statistics for current employees and retirees.

Meanwhile, on the back page of the news, thousands of California children are starving in the streets.

And so we can see that a gain is being cleverly reported as somehow being a loss. This, again, is done through the magic trick of actuarial prediction (projection). The con goes like this… Our gain is a loss because in the very far off future we predict without proof that we will use that gain of today for expenses in 30 or 40 years. Why? Because we say so. Our paid, corrupt, professional consensus of accountants and attorneys agree and have gave their paid for and therefore completely biased OPINION that within this fiscal year, in fact, instead of making an over $2 billion dollar gain in reality, the fund in fact had an imaginary future loss, which means we must consider actual gains in asset value as a current loss based on future, imaginary projections made by us. Get it?

This is the organized criminal lie called actuarial predictions. And it is what government uses in every case to hide any surplus of taxpayer monies, by sticking it all into investment funds that will pay for projected but often non-existent or revokable future expenses or bond issues, thereby declaring that those funds are unusable today for taxpayer purposes. It’s a brilliant scheme, which is why pension and other government funds are literally called as “schemes.” And this future liability compared to current asset scheme is the sole reason used to declare that governments and government pension funds are “insolvent.” It’s not just a lie, its an incredibly well laid out plan to “legally” (by their own law and license) defraud and steal from all of us while at the same time first building and then depleting these funds for their own globalist gains and total control of the majority stock and thus shareholder votes in all corporations across the globe.

This 2013 report continues by stating something very important… something that seems to be lost on or purposefully ignored by any and everyone victimized by this con game:

CalPERS 1 percent return is below the fund’s discount rate of 7.5 percent,a long-term hurdle lowered recently in response to a steady decline in inflation and as part of CalPERS routine evaluation of economic assumptions. CalPERS 20-year investment return is 7.7 percent.”

It’s important to remember that CalPERS is a long-term investor and one year of performance should not be interpreted as a signal about our ability to achieve our investment goals over the long-term,” said Henry Jones, Chair of CalPERS Investment Committee…”

–=–

And therein lies the very root of all these fear tactics and lies. This is not a publicly made statement, for the public is not supposed to be aware of let alone read the CAFR, let alone be able to understand it and its mystery of schema and terminology. Here we can see that over 20 years, CalPERS is exactly on track with its projected earnings, attaining a 7.7 percent long-term investment return over that time period, which is .7% more than it projects as its goal for total success and indeed sweet, sweet solvency. In other words, as of this 2013 report, there is absolutely no problem whatsoever with the fund itself regarding its entire, long-term or short-term existence. The fund’s criminal mismanagement, on the other hand, is a totally different topic.

Please understand that this is the essential difference between the CAFR and the budget report. The CAFR is the audit for the life (long-term) of the fund, while the budget is merely a yearly report that excludes long-term information such as this. And it is this distinction, this exclusion of vital information, that allows them to lie and raise taxes while hoarding and hiding taxpayer monies (government funds). Obfuscation of facts is everything. As such, here we show conclusive proof in the CAFR that the fund is over-performing beyond actuarial projections, the opposite of what is being publicly reported in a public (global) con to not only raise taxes but cause insolvency in local governments, an act that will inevitably, even necessarily effect the contracts between those local governments and the CalPERS fund, meaning that contracts will be canceled or rewritten so that the pension fund can renege on its promised obligations — the very benefits paid to contributing and non-contributing retirees. The goal is not to save the pension fund, but to cause it even more profits by lowering its obligations through renegotiations with the very cities, districts, counties and other local governments the fund-board is causing to go insolvent. And you wonder why it’s called pension scheme? Same old ponzi under a different name, folks. This is the very essence of “legal” organized crime by government.

To show the purposeful and sometimes even legally (federally) required mismanagement of this pension investment fund, we need not look into the daily routines of its management team, we only need verify whether or not the actual, stated goals of CalPERS investment returns are being met on a long-term basis. If they are, and we find that this fund is still in 2018 holding on to its long-term (20 year) goal of a 7% return on investment, then we know instantly that all of this fear porn and fallacious rhetoric is a big fat budgetary (public) lie designed to cause chaos at the local and state level – a scam to raise and exact more taxpayer money for government investment funds. For remember, if a city, county, district, or other government municipal corporation declares bankruptcy (insolvency), only then can CalPERS and that local government break with its pension contracts and obligations to its members, lowering or cancelling altogether any retirement payments in the interest of becoming a solvent corporation once again.

It’s a scam, folks. It’s a scam I’ve been uncovering for 7 years! I’m going to write a whole book on the subject, perhaps including this essay. In fact, here is a primer for that book, a look at Stockton, Ca and its artificial crisis and fear of bankruptcy, as an in depth examination of the whole scene and public lies accompanying municipal bankruptcy declarations. The municipal world is indeed by a stage for actors to professionally lie.

Link:https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/04/07/the-stockton-bankruptcy-lie/

If you want to understand the game, this is a very long and detailed look into the lie being perpetrated on us all, using pensions and other non-governmental funding means to declare insolvency and renege on contractual obligations to taxpayers and tax-paying pensioners. And all of this is reported every year right in the CAFR (audit) of the Stockton municipal corporation government. They don’t hide their organized crime, they report it openly. They merely don’t speak of the CAFR, so no one bothers to look. It’s the great open secret, the holy grail of government accounting, and no politician lasts long when he either discovers or speaks honestly about it in public forums.

But let’s get back to our artificial California pension problem, shall we? For we have some new facts to compare.

Here’s our list again, which we will expose as a blatant stack of lies:

  1. CalPERS is near insolvency.
  2. A “pension crisis” is apparent.
  3. CalPERS pension fund may need a reform or bailout soon.
  4. This is “confirmed” by the heresy spoken by a board member of CalPERS.
  5. CapPERS investment fund value is up to around $350 billion
  6. Despite this, it recoups investment losses from taxpayers (as government funded bailouts for bad investments).
  7. Taxpayers already pay for (fund) these pensions with taxpayer money, called as government contributions, and listed here as mandatory contributions.
  8. Because taxpayer money must be collected and used to pay for these pensions, and though these pensions for government employees benefit the vast majority (30 million) average non-pensioned taxpayers in no way whatsoever, local governments may go insolvent because they cannot pay for their other obligations to those same taxpayers.
  9. To be clear, cities, counties, school districts, etc. may go bankrupt because they cannot pay for pension fund contributions using taxpayer money.

Now let’s start a new list of that which we can confirm from the CAFR as the audited facts that completely dispute what has been lied to us in the public and parroted in the so-called news of mainstream and alternative rags:

1. CalPERS assets at the end of the fiscal year (in the 2012 CAFR) stood at more than $233 billion.
2. The CalPERS fund’s discount rate or target rate of return is  over 7.5% over a long-term or 20 year time period.
3. As of 2012, CalPERS 20-year investment return was reported in the 2012 CAFR at 7.7 percent, .2% higher than needed to meet its future obligations of today.
4. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this fund as of 2012…

At this point we should be able to take this acquired data and compare it to the most recently published CAFR (audit report) in 2017 (five years later) and according to its currently reported assets ($350 billion in 2018) so as to verify whether or not CalPERS itself is having any problems, as loosely reported by ZeroHedge and based only on quotes from its managers, whom by the way it serves well to have a misinformed public not only ignorant of the actual performance of the fund and its management, but also of the very CAFR (Audit) that would expose their blatant lies and purposeful trickery and misrepresentations.

Hint: The fund has grown by over $117 billion in its asset valuation in only 5 and a half years!

Here is a quote directly from the 2013 CAFR:

CalPERS investments rebounded with a solid net return of 13.2 percent in the 2012-13 Fiscal Year, which is WELL ABOVE our long-term annual average assumption of 7.5 percentOur 20-year average annual return is 7 6 percent, and our 30-year average is 9.4 percent.

As of June 30, 2013, net position for the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) was $262 billion,A GAIN OF $25 BILLION over the previous 12 months.”

Hold up just a minute!

So the 30-year return is actually a whole 1.9% higher than your projected long-term goals? Holy Cow! This thing’s running smoother than a baby’s butt! Obviously this “good” year more than made up for the previous “bad” year, eh? But in the interests of obfuscation towards a public idiocracy, they only publicly used the “bad” year’s temporary results, pretending that the fund is not reaching its long-term goals by focusing attention like a magician on their left hand, only the short-term goal and losses for that one “bad” year while stealing us blind with your right hand, a fully and in fact well over-funded pension plan?

Very clever…

Yet ZeroHedge.com parrots the following “public” (unaudited) information, which stand completely opposite to and absolutely discredited by what is shown in the easy to verify CAFR audit report, if only a bit of due diligence was done before reporting such blatant lies as truths:

“Ironically, it was just a decade ago that CalPERS’ lofty equity allocation resulted in a staggering losses, and the current dead end. The trust fund lost about $100 billion in the Great Recession and never has fully recovered

Never fully recovered…? (Insert LOL here)

And what exactly does that mean? What is recovery defined as, anyway? Is the fund short a penny or billions of dollars? Or is this just absolute hogwash? What is that loss based on, exactly? Reality or fiction (actuarial predictions)? Or is this like marking up a resale product only to put it on sale for the same price it already was before its markup? Is this just the grand illusion of future liabilities erasing actual, current assets again? Of course it is…

We just read that this fund is in fact officially reported and audited to be standing far above its short and long-term targeted goals, being completely solvent. So what gives?  Something smells very fishy here, and I am confident that I need not hedge my bet that that smell is coming from the empty, unverified yet arrogantly confident rhetoric over at ZeroHedge.com and all other “news” outlets while calling it the facts.

This one’s easy. Let’s test the theory, this empty and ridiculous proposition, that the CalPERS fund lost and has not recovered 100 billion in its portfolio. For we already know that the scene is above target with its long term goals, a fact that alone disproves this lie.

But let’s simply look at the totals again…

To be clear, the fund has indeed risen since 2006, a year or two before this so-called “Great Recession” where the market was drained, monetized, and rewarded to the financial elite (organized criminals). But a “good” that more than makes up for a “bad” year or “recession” they simply don’t like to talk about. This empty statement of the CalPERS fund not being able to recover from the “Great Recession” is just a flat out lie, completely unable to be substantiated in any way, and therefore absolutely ridiculous in every way. But don’t take my word for it. Remember, look at the audit (CAFR), not the public news and dime-a-dozen websites that parrot each other as if they are primarily sourced. These sites are the very reason there is no truth in the truth movement!

From the 2006 CAFR we read:

“Fiscal year 2005-06 was a year of progress for our organization. In November 2005, we reached a milestone of $200 billion in assets. This remarkable achievement reflects our diversified investment strategy and the diligence of our investment staff…”

CalPERS in 2010 – 13.3 % increase with a $23.2 billion gain in net assets after all benefits paid.

“The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the largest U.S. public pension, earned a 12.5 percent return in 2010, led by gains in private equity and U.S. stocks, Chief Investment Officer John Dear said.

The $228 billion pension fund earned 17.3 percent from domestic equity and 21.5 percent in alternative investments such as private equity, Dear said today. Its real-estate portfolio lost 5 percent while its fixed-income investments gained 12 percent.

(Source –> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-20/calpers-earned-12-5-return-in-2010-chief-investment-officer-dear-says.html)

To be clear, in 2010, just 2 years after the so-called “Great Recession,” the CalPERS pension fund is showing a $28 Billion dollar gain in its asset portfolio. Yet the ZeroHedge.com report states clearly that “The trust fund lost about $100 billion in the Great Recession and never has fully recovered,” even though ZeroHedge.com in the same report shows the funds current assets for 2018 standing at #350 Billion, a well over $120 billion gain since then. What gives? How can such irresponsible reporting be accepted by these ZeroHedge.com “fans,” when such an obvious and blatant contradiction is reported in the same article? Amazing…

CalPERS  in 2011 – $41.1 billion gain in net assets after all benefits paid in just this one year.

CalPERS reports 20.7% investment return for fiscal year

“The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) reported a 20.7 percent return on investments in preliminary estimates for the one-year period that ended June 30, 2011.

This is our best annual performance in 14 years, said Rob Feckner, CalPERS Board President. For the second straight fiscal year, the Pension Fund exceeded its long-term annualized earnings target of 7.75 percent.

(Source–> http://www.opalesque.com/IndustryUpdates/1880/CalPERS_reports_investment_return_for_fiscal_year188.html)

In the 2016 CAFR, we read also that:

CalPERS investments rebounded with a solid net return of 13.2 percent in the 2012-13 Fiscal Year, which is WELL ABOVE our long-term annual average assumption of 7.5 percent.–Page 4

It’s all about balance, you see? Little reported good years are the cure for over-reported bad years, and there are many more good years than bad years. In fact, it’s so good that CalPERS nest egg has met and overreached all of its long-term goals, despite the open lies (public statements) it tells the public. All one needs to understand is within these audited CAFRs FOR EVERY GOVERNMENT CORPORATION!

But let’s go a step farther here. Let’s look at the 2017 result for the CalPERS fund as quoted in its CAFR (required audit). Here’s the opening statement by its controller to its corporate board:

“November 16, 2017

“Members of the CalPERS Board of Administration:

“I am pleased to present the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS or the System) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

“Since coming to CalPERS as the new CEO in October 2016, I have focused on ensuring the LONG-TERM sustainability of the System. During this past fiscal year, we took a number of important steps to strengthen the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) and move toward our overall goal of fully funding pension benefits promised to members.

With that goal in mind, I’m pleased to report that as the financial markets have improved, so have our assets. Our investment assets increased by more than $24 billion and stood at $326 billion as of June 30, 2017, compared with $302 billion as of June 30, 2016. The PERF realized a strong 11.2 percent overall net return on investments in Fiscal Year 2016-17 primarily due to the strong performance of financial markets. Our public equity investments had a 19.6 percent net return, followed by a double-digit return of 13.9 percent for private equity investments, and a 7.4 percent return in real assets.”

Oops! That sounds like a good year! Shhhhh! Don’t talk about it to the plebes…

At this point, the reader of this should be extremely pissed off. I mean out of control, torches and pitchforks pissed. But for some reason all I see is calm. Unfortunately, I cannot explain this phenomenon within the confines of this essay, other than to say the Music Man has sold us instruments without teaching us to play them, though we continue to believe we know. Perhaps if we get band uniforms?

Let’s not forget that the beginning of this so-called “news” report (above) shows current totals for 2018 standing at over $350 billion. I remind you that this is up about $48 billion in profit from just 2016 totals, which is less than 2 years. Does that sound like insolvency to you? Where’s the crisis? Where’s the source of all this fear?

Oh, right. There isn’t any. But the board can use government-only accounting principles and future actuarial projections of artificial debt to cause todays profits to just disappear from the balance sheet, which is what we then see on the stripped-down, dumbed-down, yearly budget report. But remember, the individual year means nothing. Just like all of you, at least I hope, you have some savings and/or investments, even your precious gold and silver, to offset these few bad years. The very fact that you have a surplus is the whole point here.

Because so does government! A massive one. And that’s why it invests in so much debt. Debt is not liquid. It can’t be used for taxpayer services. It’s restricted, as are its returns. To invest in debt is to invest in future assets not ready-at-hand today. Thus, as I’ve reported so often in the past, each government invests in each others’ debts, carries loans, and buys up all the toxic debt both public and private it can. To the average goyim citizen, this sounds insane. But ask most billionaires what they invested in to become the billionaires they are, and the answer will most often be “debt.” Government is a collective debt broker, debt investor, and debt forgiver all in one, running debt prisons under private-contract management for all of us credit-hungry morons in the public purview.

But don’t take my word for it, listen to the Donald himself, here with author of Rich Dad Poor Dad, where Trump says it like it is and hints to you how he made his fortune, just like the scheme that all government agencies and elite continue to practice:

–=–


“Debt is a great thing, and to be big and to be very successful,
debt is a very useful weapon.”
–Donald Trump, 2010

–=–

Yep, that’s your hero president showing his true, cowardly, feudalistic colors, a false god of gods. That hair must contain magic properties or something…

This form of passive income, the income earned by interest on future debt payments, is what makes or breaks these tycoons and sycophants both in and out of government. Debt is of course a massive tool and hiding place for taxpayer money for pension funds and other government investments on a global scale.

Why? Because investments stuck in future debt cannot be spent today, not until the payments are made on each debt contract, which often barely covers the interest charged. Liquidity is avoided so as to obfuscate taxpayer liabilities. Meanwhile, the interest payments keep pouring in, some even interest only, to the holder of all these loans and debt instruments. And the main holder of debt is government. Perhaps you’ve heard that most of the Social Security fund investments are held through debt instruments? And perhaps you think this is a bad thing? Silly debtor, tricks aren’t just for kids! They’re G-R-E-A-T! Just not for you…

To put this into perspective, while the wealthy elite and government fund managers teach the public through education, entertainment, and outrageously immoral custom to pay our debts at any cost, even towards our own financial well-being, these guys are getting stinking rich off being the holders of the public’s debt. Conflict of interest, perhaps? Of course it is. The entire financial system and its players are a cornucopia of conflicting interests. What exactly do you think organized crime is but the working hand in hand of those who have conflicting interest, hidden behind the publicly displayed illusion of competition?

And all they have to do is passively wait for the payments to come in every month from a completely illiterate, indebted public while they play the moral agents instructing us from birth to be good debt-slaves, to pay our debts, and to respect the authority behind those debts. While they greedily love, purchase, and worship all other’s debt, we the debt-slaves are indoctrinated to despise it and believe that our morality depends upon continuing to struggle to pay the ultimately un-payable interest and fees, as if this will bring financial freedom. We forget that as part of the public, we are under the collective burden of public debt and required to perform accordingly as citizens, while at the same time we are convinced that no personal debt equals freedom. It’s a cosmic, global joke on each of us, since we never seem to understand that we are the punchline. Yet the real version of such personally debt-free financial freedom literally requires exactly what they have created, a completely indebted public brainwashed to pay perpetual (passive) interest payments to fat cats that do nothing but purchase debt contracts (as financial instruments) for profit and passively reap that interest over many years. This is so-called financial freedom (franchise) — the financial enslavement of as many others as possible, sold to the public with a bit of hope that one day (probably in old age) you too can  be personally debt free. But your public (performance) debt can never be paid any more than a puppet can perform without its strings.

The income potential here as a debt-contract holder has no limits, except of course what government itself, as the main investor in these same debt securities and other financial instruments, loans, bonds, and mortgages, set and regulate for itself. This, of course, is the ultimate conflict of interest. And public and private pension funds as well as these collective governments in general, are in fact the main investors in all of these toxic and non-toxic debt instruments. They then “legally” combine them, bundle them, sell them, bet on them, use them as collateral, and even give them fancy names. But most important to our topic… they use them exactly as Trump described — as great, financial weapons against all of us.

Perhaps that’s why the call them mortgages. Mort (dead) engagement (pledge). A mortgage is defined as a dead pledge. Of course it is, because the mort-gage is not actually attached to the home. It’s a promise to pay, nothing more. And guess who is the largest investor in mortgage debt and toxic mortgage securities? You got it. Collective government through pension fund and other investment schemes.

If you’d like to see what CalPERS invests in this category, take a look at its investment report again. You’ll be amazed…

And you wonder why Trump is president? The United States is a business, man. It’s just commerce, silly! And your very civil life is an actuarial commercial projection in a fictional commercial district that cons, extorts, exacts, engrosses, taxes, and uses (employs) you at every step.

Now, let us do some quick calculations to see what the numbers above actually represent, when these last few years are accounted for as one continuous fund balance, as shown in the CAFR, where the good years and the bad years are balanced over the total, long-term existence (legal life) of the fund.

In essence, the fund has gained in value from 2013 (a good year), when it stood at $262 billion, and in 2018 the CalPERS portfolio now reportedly stands at $350 billion in its investment value. A bit of simple math means that this fund has had an increase in value since 2013 fiscal year of approximately $88 billion dollars and counting in just this five year period. That works out to be an average of about $17.6 billion gain per year! And remember, this is the amount after all obligations, fees, salaries, and all the other organized criminal activity is paid off.

But does $17.6 billion a year average from this starting point of 2013 cover the goal of a 7.0 growth rate in investment return to meet the long-term (20-year) artificial goals?

Well, 7.0% of the 2013 valuation of the fund ($262 billion) would be, according to my basic, handy-dandy calculator, exactly $18.34 billion. In other words, every year, the stock of corporations and valuation (in mammon) of other combined investments has to magically create an extra revaluation out of thin air of over $18.34 billion dollars in order for CalPERS to meet its artificially projected, actuarial-based (i.e. out of thin air, bullshit) goals.

OMG! This means that the actuarial (out of thin air) projections are off by over 700 million dollars! The sky must certainly be falling!

But wait a minute. This is just a snapshot of 5 years, not 20, or 30 years.

If I look again, I can see that the fund made a $24 billion gain just in 2017, which represents, as the report clearly states: “a strong 11.2 percent overall net return on investments in Fiscal Year 2016-17 primarily due to the strong performance of financial markets.”

  • “The Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) realized a money-weighted rate of return (MWRR) of 11.2 percent in Fiscal Year 2016-17 resulting from positive performance across most globally diversified asset classes. Drivers of the PERF’s investment return include strong performances from public equity, private equity and real assets investments. Additionally, fixed income and liquidity asset classes outperformed their respective benchmarks.–Page 20
  • Net investment income increased from $1.4 billion in Fiscal Year 2015-16 to $33.0 billion in Fiscal Year 2016-17, as returns were higher due to strengthened market conditions.” –Page 22
  • The PERF net position increased by $27.8 billion or 9.3 percent compared with the prior year primarily due to favorable market conditions.”  –Page 22

–=–

Well now, that’s a whole 4.2% over the target year goal, now isn’t it? So this was apparently one of those extra good years we aren’t supposed to talk about in the news, right? It messes up the fear equation of only looking at the bad ones.

As a side note, I want people to understand what is happening here. The entire success or failure of these pension funds around the world relies on the stock market. Therefore, they rely on the continuous growth of that stock market worldwide. This means ALL SECTORS must grow, inducing military weapons manufacturing for the profitable war machine and illegal arms sales by our government to its enemies. This means Monsanto and other companies must grow, which means all food must be patented through genetic reorganization and modification, so that the stock can have some legitimate avenue to also artificially grow and cause inflation and other side effects of patenting and monopolization of basic, God-given necessities. And the list goes on. For this pension to grow, so too must corporations, at what is approaching an exponential rate that, while sustainable for the growing pension fund, is wholly unnatural for this polluted earth and its poisoned people. This means more pointless pollution, more waste, more consumption, more credit (debt), and thus more poverty and class division — all in the name of profiteering from corporate investments. This means an unfathomable expansion in the valuation of the money supply — not just the worship of it, but the incremental construction and reinforcement of this system of mammon.

Oh, and by the way, it is actuarially speaking in the best interest of the “plan” that you die at an early age, so that you don’t collect on your retirement benefits. Not ironically, pension funds of course hold huge investments in the pharmaceutical, medical, and food production corporations that will very likely get that actuarially projected job of murder by injection and poisoned food and water intake done, through what these fund managers call and keep as its non-industrial death statistics. It’s sorta like racially motivated genocide, but for age-related funding liability purposes. So it’s pretty much like we are all “contributing” to your own necessarily planned and organized, unnatural demise.

Incidentally though, you’ll be happy to know that “industrial deaths” are extremely low. After all, we don’t want our wage slaves dying until after they retire or get too old to work. It’s not ironic at all that the word retire is a synonym for death, now is it?

To be clear, this thing was designed to fail and thus doomed to fail from the beginning, as any such uncontrollable cancer that grows to live will eventually deplete its resources like a parasite and finally outgrow and kill its host’s ability to keep it alive — just like any ponzi scheme is so designed.

At the very least ZeroHedge.com has figured this part of the game out:

“Last In December we also reported that the increasingly panicked fund, decided to boost its stock allocation to 50% in order to raise its FUTURE LIABILITY discount rate to 7%, as any reduction in stock allocations would also lead to a lower discount rate which in turn which would require more contributions from cities, towns, school districts, etc. and could bring the whole ponzi crashing down. Amusingly, one Calpers board member argued to raise the equity allocation even higher, to 60%, so that the discount rate was greater than the current 7% in order to make the books appears “better.”

–=–

No comment on the grammar, since I self-edit. But come on!

You see, the pieces are all there, but the author of this report just hasn’t put them together because he isn’t looking at the source (CAFR). It’s all about appearances. Form without substance, as any lie is built upon. It sounds good. It causes fear, and that’s all that matters. But think about it, if they can raise the discount rate by just manually altering the actuarial projections of what will be future liabilities, and can cause the books appear better than they are by the same method, then we instantly know the whole thing is a lie. We know instantly that they are fudging the actuarial numbers in an effort to hide current assets and massive gains for the fund for the sole purpose of extracting even more “contributions” from taxpayers, through mandatory funding of governmental pensions by cities, counties, districts, states, etc.

The ZeroHedge.com author at least gets it right here when he refers to the psychopathy and sophistry of the average pensioner in defense of that which feeds or will feed their passive lives and incomes based on bankrupting their own local and state governments, where he states:

“However, the CalPERS board, dominated by public employee organizations and sympathetic politicians, has spurned such pleas: it is almost as if, once promised generous retirement benefitspublic workers would rather take the entire system down, than see their own pensions reduced, even modestly.

–=–

Again, this attitude of the average pensioner is a parasitic, even narcasistic mentality. It is best described as the opinion of a completely dependent wage-slave that knows not or callously dismisses the burden he puts on others to fulfill  his goals. The hardest thing for a pensioner to hear is that pensions are nothing but welfare for the middle class, and that to fulfill these pension schemes just for federal employees, cost taxpayers nationally over $1 trillion dollars, more than even the taxes for education.

For the harsh truth, see my essay on the welfare system itself as compared to pensioners, whom even as they receive their taxpayer funded, passive retirement (welfare) checks each month, are the loudest criers of “foul” towards the extremely underfunded and relatively tiny public taxpayer funds used to support the actual “Welfare system” in the United States. It’s shocking to see and compare these statistics, and is certainly a destruction of any egotistic, fallacious arguments made by pensioners and fund managers:

Link–>https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/public-pensions-welfare-for-the-middle-class/

It’s a simple equation, really, that anything that must grow to survive will eventually overgrow its available resources, and thus must be destroyed or allowed to destroy that which feeds it. It’s your basic parasite/host model, really, with accountants, attorneys, and brokers leading the charge. And so the fear porn we are seeing now is more to nip this exponential, actuarially projected growth in the butt before it actually begins to cause a serious problem and expose pensions for the scam (scheme) they are. And so they will suck this fund dry and leave all of us out to dry, pensioners and taxpayers alike. We are all the unwitting victims of this ponzi scheme, and bankruptcy is the most logical and “legally” legitimate move they can make. But remember, de facto means illegitimate, and that’s what our United States and State governments are as municipal corporations. So we shouldn’t be at all surprised.

And that makes me wonder if the CAFR tells us wether or not the 20-year goal is still over its projected target, which would mean all of this fear is for nought!

Well of course it does:

SOLVENCY TEST

“Exhibit B, Funding Progress — Solvency Test, demonstrates System solvency as measured using the System’s own assumptions and liability calculation methods.–Page 119

So the fund is quite solvent after all. What a shocker…

Where’s this information in your many fearful reports and warnings, Mr. Zero Hedge, and for that matter every other news outlet that supports this artificial, nihilistic pension scheme propaganda?

But how does this possibly compute, considering our CalPERS board member is blathering and waxing philosophically quite the opposite in his public account (lies), that the fund is inexplicably, dangerously close to insolvency and that we should all be very, very afraid?

What kind of test is this inside, system-wide “solvency test” anyway?

From the CAFR:

“A short-term solvency test is one means of checking a system’s funding progress. In a short-term solvency test, the plan’s present assets (investments and cash) are compared with 1) member contributions on deposit, 2) the liabilities for future benefits to persons who have retired or terminated, and 3) the liabilities for projected benefits for service already rendered by active members. In a system that employs level contribution rate financing, the liabilities for member contributions on deposit (liability 1) and the liabilities for future benefits to present retirees (liability 2) will be fully covered by present assets, except in rare circumstances.”

“In addition, the liabilities for service already rendered by members (liability 3) will be partially covered by the remainder of present assets. Generally, if the System has been using level contribution rate financing, the funded portion of liability 3 will increase over time.” –Page 121

So according to the audited reporting of current assets, that is, when current assets are taken into consideration instead of being magically ignored, then suddenly everything is right as rain.

For the 10 or so years I’ve been following this particular pension fund, I now can report that I have seen it grow by over $120 billion dollars. And yet all the while its agents have stated time and again that somehow the fund is also, at the same time it grows, dangerously close to being a problem. As I uncovered above and in my previous research on this blog, it’s actually a really simple concept. Just hide what assets you have today by claiming that they magically disappear when considering the debts of tomorrow. But only government can do this type of quirky accounting. Imagine if you told the IRS that the $60,000 dollars you earned as your paycheck couldn’t be counted as assets today because of all your future payments you’ll have to make on your home, car, and kids college fund over the next twenty or thirty years. Well, that’s exactly what government gets to do with its actuarial projective nonsense. Its law is its own. It’s all about balance… that is balancing billions and billions of dollars today by pre-spending them as future liabilities.

You can read all about this little trick here:

It’s not like this is the first time, nor will it be the last, that the accounting gurus at CalPERS use the bad year scenario to try and ramrod even more mandatory contributions and the false flag fear of insolvency down the publics throat.

In fact, I started my article out with exactly this same scenario back in 2013, when the newspaper rags were reporting exactly what this present article is demonstrating. This is called predictive programming. There is no surprise. They did exactly what they warned they would do, using these same fear tactics back then.

Here’s my blog from 2013:

USA Today put out the following story in 2012, which was of course originally printed from the false-news clearing house, Associated Press (AP):

“SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The nation’s largest public pension fund collected a dismal 1% annual return on its investments, a figure far short of projections that will likely bring pressure on California’s state and local governments to contribute more money, officials said Monday.

The return reported by the California Public Employees’ Retirement System was well below its projected return of 7.5% for the fiscal year that ended June 30.

The investment returns are critical BECAUSE TAXPAYERS ARE ON THE HOOK FOR THE DIFFERENCE if the pension funds fail to meet their performance targets.

The last 12 months were a challenging period for all investors as the ongoing European debt crisis and slowing global economic growth increased market volatility and reduced equity returns,” said chief investment officer Joe Dear. “It’s a clear reminder that we must remain focused on performance, risk and internal controls in today’s financial environment.”

The fund was most impacted by a negative -7% return on global equities. Half the pension’s assets are in equities, Dear said.

The fund, known as CalPERS, runs a $234 billion pension system for more than 1.6 million state employees, school employees and local government workers…”

–=–

In this first three paragraphs we can see the entire scam (scheme) spelled out in front of us, as told from a master story-teller who is trying to sell sunglasses to a blind man. But even a blind man should be able to read between the lines here…

So far, we have learned that the CalPERS Pension fund has earned a 1% increase in its investment portfolio, which for this now past year would have been over $2.2 billion dollar in gains on investments. Yes, that’s $2,200,000,000 when spelled out properly. And this is of course reported as bad news!

–=–

Sound familiar? Same scary pig, different scary lipstick. Same rhetoric, same threats, same lies.

And gee, look what happened. Exactly what they predictively programmed us would happen. Local governments ended up paying more taxpayer money to the pensions instead of to taxpayer services as it should. All this because pensioners don’t fund their own retirement, and instead rely on all of us to keep them comfy as they do nothing but expect more salary in retirement than most taxpayers make while working. Isn’t that nice.

Hey, dummy, it was planned this way from the beginning!

Never forget, this is organized crime, disguised as legitimate government.

When you lose they win. When you win, they win.

In another 5 or 6 years we will look back at this “news” report and have a good laugh again at how we were predictively programmed as to what would happen and did nothing to stop it. And the fund will probably be up to over $400 billion by then, even as we will find board its members still claim to be in fear of insolvency, while we find ourselves in the middle of the largest collective local governments bankruptcy scheme in history, while these pensioners find themselves up shit creak without a paddle or toilet paper.

What was it that Samuel Johnson defined pensioners as back in the pre-United States corporation 1700’s?

PENSIONAn allowance made to any one without an equivalent. In England, it is generally understood to mean pay given to a state hireling for treason to his country. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1755)

–=–

Could extortion and exaction of taxpayer money from all the resident, common people in each territorial State as citizenships of the nation to pay for all state hireling pensioners retirement benefits be considered as treason to ones country? I’ll leave you to decide that one. {Hint: your country is your State (land) and people thereof, not your nation (district), though they call the nation colloquially as “the state.” And all local and state governments are under federal (national) law and funding. You do the math.}

In the notes to financial statements section we find some pieces of the root cause of what in public appears to be some issues with the fund, but in reality (when audited) we find they are all just made up actuarial projections and unnecessary contractual obligations.

USE OF ESTIMATES IN THE PREPARATION OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make significant estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates

RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES

…The total pension liabilities and net pension liabilities disclosed in Note 8 to the Basic Financial Statements for the cost-sharing multiple-employer and single-employer defined benefit pension plans are measured based on certain assumptions, including the long-term rate of return on pension investmentsinflation ratesand employee demographicsall of which are subject to change

Due to uncertainties inherent in the estimations and assumptions processes described in this section, it is at least reasonably possible that changes in these estimates and assumptions in the near term would be material to the financial statements

Upon initial investment with a general partnerCalPERS commits to a certain funding level for the duration of the contract. At will, partners may request that CalPERS fund a portion of this amount.

TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES — ALL FUNDS: $818,667,000

Total Management Fees: $513,556,000

Total Management and Performance Fees: $598,795,000

Total Consultant and Professional Services Expenses $331,645

–=–

Did I mention that all these banks, brokerage houses, and other “administrative” and “management” corporations are also stock-owned corporations held by this very pension fund? This gets ridiculous after a while… and predictable.

So let’s put this into the proper long-term perspective, which is the whole point of this integral CAFR auditing report system:

In 2017, local and state governments paid $12.4 billion in “mandatory contributions” from taxpayer money into just the fiduciary funds of this one government pension scheme (Page 40 of 2017 CalPERS CAFR), which was increased around $10 billion from just the previous year!

Now lets compare this number, which represents non-pensioner taxpayer money from ALL Californian residents (taxpayers) as government contributions to this one fund, to the reported budget deficit (another lie when researched in the CAFR) reportedly suffered by California taxpayer base. Could there possibly be a correlation? LOL!

How can taxpayers sit back and watch as the same amounts they are paying to fund pension funds are causing, at the same time, the budget report to be short by that same amount or more? This is group insanity.

Here is yet another very recent example of this completely fallacious and unchecked, unverified fear porn being pushed to support this false flag bankruptcy scam and bailout of a well-over-funded pension plans. Nowhere, of course, is the CAFR mentioned within this article. Notice right off that it states pensions are under water by $1.4 trillion, even while our CalPERS alone reports assets that equal almost 30% of 1.4 trillion. There are thousands of public pension plans across the United States, big and small, and all of them are as successful as CalPERS because they all are essentially required to invest the same. So where is this great flood and crisis? It simply does’t exist.

America’s Sinking Public Pension Plans Are Now $1.4 Trillion Underwater

Taxpayer contributions to pension plans have doubled in the past decade, but pension debt continues to increase.

After several years of steady investment growth and higher contributions from taxpayers,most of America’s public sector pension plans are still awash in red ink.

(**Authors note: this is a totally contradicting statement! We are highly successful but also a failure. LOL!)

According to a new reportfrom the Pew Charitable Trusts, the states collectively carry more than $1.4 trillion in pension debt—and only four states have at least 90 percent of the assets necessary to meet their long-term obligations to retirees. The Pew paper, which is based on states’ 2016 financial reports, shows that pension debt increased by about $295 billion since the previous year, making 2016 the 15th consecutive year in which state-level pension debt increased.

(**Authors note: Yet according to those CAFR’s this is a completely impossible statement… unless the problem isn’t the massive profits and gains, but that the actuarial reporting and projections are where the whole scam exists. It matters not how much they make, the accountants can always make their projections higher than their profit model. In this way, we will never see any recovery, because even though it has already fully recovered, they can change their actuaries to show the opposite. In other words, you, the taxpayers, can’t win. This is ultimate corruption.)

The really scary part is that pension debt keeps increasing despite the fact that taxpayers’ contributions to state-level pension plans have doubled as a share of state revenue in the past decade. Also worrisome: Pension plans are chasing increasingly risky investments. The gap between returns on safe investments and state pension plan investment assumptions was the highest in decades, the Pew researchers note, leaving pensions more vulnerable to market volatility and raising concerns that another downturn could drive already deeply indebted systems over a cliff.

(**Authors note: Key word: SCARY! But untrue, just the same. Pension debt does not keep increasing, obviously, because these profits reported in the CAFR are after all obligations are paid. There is only actuarial false projections that cannot be met, made completely out of thin air without reference to reality, that causes the appearance of debt 30 years in the future. Today, however, there is absolutely zero debt, or there would be no profits and gains over that which the fund is obligated to pay out as liabilities each year. This is all a big fat lie based on creative accounting tricks — the hiding of current, tangible assets with the projection of future debts that do not exist today and that will not be paid (amortization schedule) for 30 years! Now imagine again if you told the IRS that you cannot pay them today because you will have to pay them way in the future, which counts against your assets today? You’d be put in jail for fraud! To be clear, the system is not indebted, but the opposite, it is the holder of others debt instruments as a profit model.)

Higher contributions from taxpayers and good returns in the market should bring well-structured pension plans back to good health. But only four states—New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin—have at least 90 percent of the necessary assets to cover their retirement liabilities, Pew says.

(**Authors note: At this point, they are just talking out of their ass, with nothing backing up their statements but the lies they create.)

There are two problems here. One is embedded in the very design of public sector pension plans. The other involves the politicians who are trusted to keep those plans funded properly….

(**Authors note: Finally, something everyone can agree on!)

The systemic problem is that pension plans generally assume unrealistic investment returns…

Of course, every dollar spend on public pensions is a dollar that state’s can’t spend on roads, schools, or anything else

Removing politicians from the equation is a major benefit of transitioning away from traditional defined benefit pension plans and into 401(k)-style plans where individual workers control their retirement accounts. That also helps get taxpayers off the hook for having to make up the difference when markets or political will falls short of pension plans’ expectations.

But for now, taxpayers will continue to pay more to finance public sector workers’ retirements—and another recession could be a catastrophic blow for all involved.

Link–>https://reason.com/r/1vvc

 

–=–

The Pew Research Center was founded originally as the Times Mirror Company, a newspaper conglomerate, and thus a corporation that is majority owned by stock investment by government. Round and round… you get the picture.

There is a maxim of law that applies to each of us, at every moment of every day, and especially to this scheme happening right out in the open.

–=–

“Let him who wishes to be deceived, be deceived.”

–Qui vult decipi, decipiatur. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

“One cannot complain of having been deceived when he knew the fact and gave his consent.”

–Nemo videtur fraudare eos qui sciunt, et consentiunt. Dig. 50, 17, 145. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

 “He is not deceived who knows himself to be deceived.”

–Non decipitur qui scit se decipi. 5 co. 60. (–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

Now you know, but knowing is only half the battle, as G. I. Joe reminds us.

We are deceived not merely through trickery and word (and number) magic, but because most of us are happy in our deceit — happy because we have not foreseen the consequences of our purposeful ignorance and inaction.

Now I could go on and on rehashing what I’ve already reported in my countless CAFR articles, movies, and radio shows, but there is really no point. If you don’t get it after this, then you simply won’t ever get it.

Here at the end is where people ask for solutions. I tell them time and again there is no such thing in the legal world, and that the word solution means one and only one thing — the end of contract. This global takeover will not be fixed from within their own system that they control and make the law over, and it will not be solved by you or any other contracted citizenship acting in the property (person) of government. It will only stop when you stop respecting it, stop contracting with its agents, stop using its money (property) and relishing in its debt, stop preforming under its contractual law of citizenship, and start self-governing without such artificial means, the only means that governments can provide.

Globalism is upon us, and I have just laid out its financial and control-grid blueprint and why each of us is personally responsible for making it happen. It cannot be defeated, for it is not ours to defeat or change. But it can be avoided, as can national and global citizenship, the digital ID in the virtual world of this coming Beast system. One thing is for sure, their network of financial enslavement will never die until the common citizenry stop allowing themselves to be deceived by it, stop participating in it, and most importantly, stop respecting any value whatsoever in its currencies, stocks, and instruments.

I won’t hold my breath…

Hell, I can’t even get an interview anymore, for no-one wants to hear the truth.

And so I leave this wealth of knowledge and collective research is here for posterity, so that someone may know that at least there were some that tried to change the course of these gods. But alas, Huxley’s Brave New World model shines true, so I think I’ll just grab a bong and a lawn chair and watch the shitshow play out.

See you on the other side, if you figure out the code.

.

–Clint < richard-son (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Friday, May 11th, 2018

.

.

.

.

Previously left comments copied here:

  1. Everything is backwards

    /  April 21, 2018  /  Edit

    What a fantastic article! Scary as hell. I have know about the retirement scheme for some time (CalPers). Anyone who doesn’t take this seriously and protect themselves are fools. Thank you for your research and time. I will post of FB, and send email in Sacramento.

    Reply

  2. Wonder Ann

    /  April 21, 2018  /  Edit

    thank you for this document which shows more of the fraud and theft against the government employees of CA. There is a video on youtube about the actual way that the CalPERS is rigged to hid the excess money from the pensioners. It is about 3-4 hours of detailed evidence of the fraud.

  3. Maxx

    /  April 23, 2018  /  Edit

    After much reflection on over 25 years of “trying to wake people up” Ive decided that %90 of Americans, of all races are “autistic” (too medically/neurologically damaged) and will never understand the predicament they are in. In other words we are talking to brick walls.

    • Everything is backwards

      /  April 23, 2018  /  Edit

      Thank you for your comment. You are absolutely correct. I’m seeing it, but didn’t know quite how to say it.

  4. tonyj1947@gmail.com

    /  April 24, 2018  /  Edit

    What I mentioned a little while ago. Have a look when you’ve some time to use up

    From me

  5. Randy

    /  May 8, 2018  /  Edit

    http://gasb.org/cs/ContentServer?c=Page&cid=1176156669308&d=&pagename=GASB%2FPage%2FGASBSectionPage

    Hey Clint I was just reading some of this and one thing for sure the proof of the coverup or hiding of the our money is all laid out for us. we just got to figure out how to get the zombified people of this country to do anything! you’ve probably already seen this stuff, but please keep up the good work. and man I know you got to be burnt out on this stuff, it is exhausting Ive been into this “truth” crap for about 25 years now and it can kinda make’s you numb. thank you.

    • Randy

      /  May 8, 2018  /  Edit

      sorry i forgot to title that comment , history of the accounting standards to help cover up and hide the theft of our money in cafr’s

  • GET THE BOOK! CLICK HERE:

    Click here to download Strawman Story for free!

Advertisements

STRAWMAN: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person


Apologies for my absence lately in the blogosphere, and for those comments I have not read and managed yet. I am also catching up on emails and wish to thank everyone who has made donations to keep me alive, researching, writing, and hosting the daily radio show (Mon-Fri, 7pm Eastern, on republicbroadcasting.org).

That being said, I’d like to introduce my new website and that which has been taking most of my attention these days:

http://www.strawmanstory.info/

I’ve been writing this work in book-form for several years off and on, building it bit by bit, until this year when I made it my full-time project. As I have been researching and writing I am continuously learning while pouring over legal dictionaries, U.S. Code, international law, etymology sources, scripture, concordances, and other sources of ancient and hidden knowledge, from Plato to Bastiat. This fact has not and certainly will not change.

There is a point in which a researcher must bravely and with uncertain confidence finalize his writings into a utilizable form, though when this point is supposed to happen is beyond my own comprehension. For I wish not to be bound by my own misunderstandings and set-in-word errors in logic and rhetoric due to so much faulty grammar out there, as so many (most) authors certainly have. Perhaps this notion of perfection is as much an impossibility as the idea of attaining all knowledge is. Only time will tell…

Of this work I can only say one thing… that it has never been attempted before. It is being compiled so as to teach a new language, the legal language, to those who seek to comprehend that which enslaves them. The magic of words is the invisible web that entraps and enjoins us to a legal matrix of fictional things. But we are not shown or taught this authoritative, “higher” language in which true knowledge has been hidden. Instead, we are taught the common words of illiteracy. This is called public education. And it keeps us public, stealing all privacy.

One cannot simply pick up a Bible, for instance, and read it in the common tongue. It’s meaning will remain a mystery even while its Law remains highest. The common words are often quite opposite in meaning from their legal counterparts, though they appear to be the same. But the symptom of this disease causes the victims of this “vulgar” form of common communication to remain subject not only to man, but specifically to man’s creation of language terms of art. For the word common also means “goyim.”

The illusion is steadily shattered with every word uncovered, with every maxim revealed, with every Bible verse clarified, and with every lie demystified.

For the reader and as disclaimer, there will be no turning back. No more turning away from reality. No more living in ignorance. No more convenient lies. No more shirking of responsibility by blaming a fictional persona. And therefore no more legal excuses.

What is legal is not what is right.

This work will be offered in (non-commercial) book form in exchange for gifts in private donation and barter. I will be offering it in advance soon as well so that I can raise the funds to have it created (printed) in that “book” format. But it will always be offered for free as well, for no one should be without the knowledge of their own enslavement. A (.pdf) will be available to anyone unable or unwilling to offer trade or gift. The only difference between these two formats will be that the physical book-form will be indexed. At over 1,000 pages, this will be a reference book as much as anything.

Yes, 1,000+ pages… If there is one thing I have learned for certain in my many years of laboring for knowledge, it is that nothing worth learning or doing is easy. The path is narrow, and only a few will walk it. This work is designed to help light that path.

The website is temporary for now, and will be updated in the next few months as I begin to organize my tome of notes and research into a final collection. Again, thanks to those who have supported me with love and kindness, and the ability to continue this work.

If you’d like to hear what’s been happening in “The Corporation Nation” radio show, you can check out any of my 375+ shows from the last 20 months for free here:

https://corporationnationradioarchives.wordpress.com/

(Note: Search tool at bottom of page, looks like a magnifying glass)

I hope to have the “book” finished in the next few months, and I’ll set up a unique email for that purpose. I will rely on merely word of mouth and radio promotion, so please help to spread the word and share freely. Just remember I can only continue this effort with your support.

Be well…

.

Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Wednesday, June 3rd, 2015

On Modern Mechanics Of Taxation


In days of old, the object of taxation was the physical plunder of intrinsic personal possessions such as money, foodstuffs, or other valuable considerations forcibly taken in support of the kingdom. The plunderers were known as tax-collectors; though by their plundered, public victims they were more commonly labeled by nicknames of reproach. The common opinion of the villages and townsfolk that paid this tribute to kings and dictators of tyrannical despotism was disdain and controlled rage – a will for freedom lacking way and means.

In our modern taxation stratagem, the rules of the game have changed dramatically. In fact, the very comprehension of tax-plunder has morphed into a custom whereby most people have no idea they are being taxed. Indeed, it is ridiculously parroted by the children of parents of great grand parents that death and taxes are the only certainties in life. For the children of indentured debtor parents have no rational idea what liberty from despotism might look or feel like. Taxation has not only become customized and normalized into the social meme, but the plunderers have actually trained the children of despotism to root for the taxman over their fellow citizens.

To even attempt to imagine the people of old cheering the kings’ tax-collectors as they razed each hut in the village to satisfy the kings’ court is a preposterous notion. For it was well-known that these collections agents of the crown were backed by the full military force and sword of the king!

Though nothing has changed (except perhaps that the kings crest and sword is now a badge and gun), we now have reality television shows appealing to the mass delusion as they depict debt-collectors, repossession agents, pawn shops, and bail-bondsmen as the modern day champions of the people. In this absurdity of an attempt to manufacture public opinion in favor of legal plunder for the kingdom, cognitive dissonance has been shrouded over the intellect of the plundered majority class of “tax-payers” so as to create a Colosseum of bread and circus entertainment as the reinforcement of very bad behavior. In short, plunder has been woven seamlessly into the political process while the mass of victims have been generation-ally bamboozled (educated) into cheering on the plunderers while their fellow debt-slaves are put in pain and suffering at the hand of tyrants – a virtual public display representative of those antithetical Christian’s of antiquity being fed to the lions.

Today, taxation has been streamlined in such a way that most citizens have no idea they are being taxed, for the government doesn’t ever have to go into the realm to actually and physically “collect” taxes. This modern method of unlimited plunder through the false dialectic of and name of taxation could only be accomplished through the creation of a fiat currency; one with unlimited creation potential, where the collateral does not define the value of the note. In the case of United States Federal Reserve “dollars,” most of which are created in ledger or digital form with no actual substance, we see the potential for not only unlimited creation, but in turn for unlimited taxation. Even the wasting, spending, or cancellation of creation does not equate to a cancellation of the taxation assumed by the creation.

So how does this compare to the historical collection of real assets by force as tax and tribute to the king and his dominion (king-dom)?

Oh, it’s much more profitable for the dictators (lawgivers of government) today.

We have no tax-collectors today. Taxation (tribute) then was an obligation of servitude and subjection to the kings’ realm and privileges. It was obviously fraud, and those who suffered it made no mistake to ever think differently.

Today, we only have debt-collectors. They do not collect tax, they extort false debt. For the tax is collected without anybody even realizing it, and no collector is needed. Let me explain…

When the lawgivers of the kingdom (congress) wish to generate wealth through what used to be called tax-collection, they simply write some official legal words down on a paper and place a stamp of approval upon it featuring the seal of the nation (king-dom). While kings and despots had to send agents into the communities to collect real assets, this congressional act or “bill” is an instrument of exchange, where congress literally appropriates money into existence. They then place that “bill” into the legal records of the United States, a bank account known by name as the state of “national debt”, where the citizenry (loyal subjects) of the king-dom’s dictators agree through manufactured consent to be responsible obligators of that debt. Another word for this is constitutor, which means debtor, as a constitution is merely a compact of debt and obligation in exchange for privileges and immunities and is always designed to be against (immune from) the laws of nature and the personal responsibilities of individuals.

Within this ingenious device, the lawgivers are able to create unlimited taxation to financially support their plans in artifice. With unlimited taxation power comes unlimited authoritative power. How else could they fund the military industrial complex every year that protects their king-dom from us without appropriating new debt upon the taxpaying public with each new appropriations bill?

Check please!

The taxation methods we have become accustomed to today as schemes ranging from income to sales tax and any one of hundreds of clever extraction, extortion, and exaction methods, not the least of which is false inflation derived from false market fixing and illusions of supply and demand shortages, are merely devises of debt collection. Whereas before the sword was obvious and in your face for refusal to pay, appropriations cannot not be paid. They are automatic. The tax is collected the minute it is created as a credit to government’s coffers. And the credit represents a debt that must be paid by the people of the nation.

Unlimited credit, in other words, is the most important tool of a money system that has no limit. For the creditors are never the debtors, and these lawgivers as plunderers don’t mind being part of the plundered society, for they simply exempt themselves from debt collection by their own military force or they pay their taxes with the plundered money to give the illusion that they too are good little citizens as debtors.

As I explained in an earlier post, located here: your current taxes are already spent! They are spent the moment they are created out of thin air! For any taxes you pay today are only paying for the national debt of former appropriations by congress. The lawgivers don’t spend tax money, they create it as debt. They spend their bill before it is even monetized by appropriating the new debts to specific government functions in their appropriations bill. And the new total is simply added on to the ever-expanding check that is perpetually handed to the collective of tax-payers.

The moral of this story?

By consent, we have given total authoritative power via the power of the purse to the most corrupt of men, for the cream of corruption always rises to the top. The salt of the earth always sink to the bottom of the mix, paying for the debts of the cream by way of innocence to the designs used against them. The salt continues to flavor the combination from their own labor and through taxation on that labor, while the cream never mixes with the lower class. They stay at the top where they belong, the cream of the crop of the criminally insane.

When the bill collectors come a knocking your door down or blowing your house away, remember that it was congress that created this concoction of acrid evil in the first place, and that it only continues to have authority because you consent to it as a voluntary citizen and taxpayer.

At least the men of old knew they were being burned and eventually would fight to keep what was theirs as products of their own labor. They could and did fight back physically, or even tar and feather the king’s agent in boycott.

Modern man is absolutely blind to his own, self-aggrandized, patriotic responsibility to his master, and has nothing to keep because the money and possessions he holds are already the property of his master. The money is fake, and so is the king-dom. The city is a debtor. The county is a debtor. The district is a debtor. The State is a debtor. So what is left to fight? You cannot tar and feather a digital transaction. And police are security guards ensuring protection of these corporations from the tax-payers.

It’s a perfect system of chattel slavery, a fiefdom of clueless subjects that in the end worship and pay tribute to nothing but fiction, from the money to the offices that create it.

We are a defeated people who quicken in our perishing due to a strict lack of contemplation and knowledge of our own enslavement.

That is just another way of saying we deserve exactly what we beget.

But never mind… go about purchasing Christmas gifts with government’s debt instruments, even though each and every dollar represents the embodiment of your own debt-slavery to its creators in the Treasury. Pretend that a billion kids aren’t starving around the world. Be the empire of greed and artificiality we were manufactured and determined to be. For it’s not that christ is missing from Christmas, it’s that the teachings of the christ is missing from self-proclaimed christians, who would never celebrate the twelve pagan-zodiac days of corporate Christmas and the imagery and majesty of Saint Nick if they weren’t worshiping mammon.

We must be governed by our own consenting hand, for we are apparently not capable of resistance to unfettered tyranny and greed or to the false reality of this matrix.

Checkmate.

.

–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Monday, December 22nd, 2014

Tyranny Requires Equality


Question: What is required for a set of uniform codes and regulations to apply to all the persons of the United States?

Answer: Uniformity of legal equality under the law. In other words, equal rights.

It is an ultra-common misconception amongst the subjected people of the United States in their thought that “rights” are always a good thing, and that “rights” are always somehow a protection against the erosion and encroachment of government and corporations (persons) into the people’s personal liberties. To be even more clear, the general thought is that rights are always in place to prevent things like crime, extortion, tyranny, foreclosure, unlawful searches and seizures, incarceration, and so on from happening to the people.

For instance, one might arrogantly say that they have the right to a “fair trial”. And yet not once does the consideration dawn upon men of good conscious that the trial itself is literally forced upon them by government. Thus, the “right” to a “fair” or “speedy” trial is in actuality a direct consequence of an oppressive government in the first place. In other words, the fact that the trial is forced upon a person is the actual “right”, and the ability to receive the qualities of “fair” and “speedy” in that trial are not the root of that right. In this way, we begin to understand that rights are not voluntary at all, and these governmental rights are indeed forced upon the people. The government sells this tyranny to the people by baiting us like snake oil salesman with positive sounding diatribe such as fair and speedy. This is like me offering you (forcing upon you) my services to get hit with a hammer upon your head, but the impact will be “quick” and “painless”. Your right, you see, is to get hit upon the head with a hammer, with the beneficial service of the impact of that hammer being quick and painless.

Or you might believe in the “right” to free speech and the ability to freely assemble. Yet hate speech laws proclaim your speech must be nice and politically correct. Some cities require you to get a permit for free speech and to protest or assemble peacefully – but only in small, roped off , designated areas. The police even tell you that “anything you say may be used against you” when they read you your “rights”. But how can this be your right? If you don’t have a choice about these rights, are they really rights?

The real question you must ask is: Can a right be violently forced upon you?

Today we are going to be talking about a concept that is very difficult to understand. In legal code, we find what is called positive law. But we often forget that where there is a positive there is usually also a negative – an opposite and equal reaction, if you will. Positive law and “positive rights” are put into place in purposeful and direct violation or opposition to natural law and “negative rights”. A right is either positive or negative, and never-ever in between. Positive laws are laws assigning temporary and are revokable governmental rights placed upon legal persons, which usually create a direct violation of a man’s natural rights under God – the natural laws outside of governmental code.

The difference between these two types of law or “rights” is paramount to understand.

The problem is that all legal codes are positive, including the very misunderstood U.S. constitution itself.

Let’s use as an example the constitutional (positive) right known as the “freedom of religion”. This is one of the most deceptive phrases in legal code (positive law) that I can imagine. For in order to comprehend what it is to have the “freedom of religion,” we must first have a legal definition of these two legal words. All terms and phrases in the legal language have very specific meanings, and are often quite opposite to what we generally think of as conversational words – the words generally defined in an English general language dictionary. The word “freedom” is perhaps the best example of a legal word used to fool the unwitting public. We must realize that there is a very good reason why the legal dictionary is completely separate from the regular English dictionary, and why general dictionary definitions specifically tell you when referring to the same legal definitions within. English and Legal are two completely different languages, no different than English and Chinese. And every word in government must be a legal one, for government only deals in the legal construct, in the legal language.

Would it surprise you to learn that government is acting constitutionally when it requires you to get a permit for exercising “free speech”? To understand why this is so, we must define the legal terms involved, and you must stop thinking of the constitution as anything other than a legal language document.

So what is “freedom”, and what is “speech”?

The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

First, let’s get it into our heads what the word “freedom” means as used in this legal constitution.

While the natural or negative right to free participation in any religion is unalienable, the governmental or positive constitutional right to freedom of religion or freedom of speech is most certainly alienable. To understand this, we must understand the legal meaning of this legal term called freedom. In the Merriam Webster or any other normal English dictionary, you will see that the word freedom is defined in two distinctly different ways. Let’s take a look…

FREEDOM:

(1) The quality or state of being free: as

(a) the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action

(b) liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another: independence

(c) the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous <freedom from care>

(h) unrestricted use <gave him the freedom of their home>

FREEDOM:

(2)   (a) A political right

(b) franchise, privilege

(Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freedom)

And so we can see here that there are without a doubt two distinctly different definitions of the word freedom, and that the legal definition is indeed a political or “positive” right.

The truth about freedom is this…

There is but one freedom under government rule enjoyed by citizens (subjects): freedom is the revokable political positive right (privilege) to be free to act as you will as long as you obey the laws of government. This is not the state of actually being free in an unrestricted way to do what you please while being responsible for your actions, but rather a literal legal enslavement to government law to act under government rule. It is a truism to state that free men must have responsibility for their own actions, lest government become the master and punisher of those who are its servants (subjects). United States citizens are not free men, but instead they live within invisible legal chains called “freedom”.

The right to bear arms as a natural/negative right must go unchallenged by government by its very nature of being a negative right – the natural right of non-interference. But the positive governmental rights which are assigned to citizens to carry legalfire-arms” is certainly being challenged in government right now – as we speak. The trick with government you see, in order for its tyranny to prevail, is to make all its equal people as citizens accept positive rights by government so that the people turn their backs on their natural, God-given, negative, unalienable rights the rights of men against government intrusion into those rights. Indeed, government actually requires a lien on all people’s natural/negative rights for them to enjoy citizenship within the United States under government’s strictly positive law, for we must remember that negative rights cancel out positive rights. So government must find legal ways to circumvent the peoples liberties (negative rights) and assign restrict-able political (positive) rights. Government does this via the contractual relationship offered to the people called “citizenship”, which carries with it the contractual benefit of positive rights, often called “civil rights” and/or “constitutional rights”. While it calls these liberties, they are far from it…

–=–

The Laws Of Attraction

–=–

So that we do not get confused here, let’s see just how one form of “right” is cancelled out by the other form. The job of an attorney as an “officer of the court” is to keep you within the legal language, so that the court never has to talk in plain English. The legal language of the law society within government is meant to keep you always in the artificial person-hood of your citizenship – never speaking the language of mankind. The following list shows the difference between the laws of man (natural) and the laws of government (legal):

Negative ……………………………………………………… Positive

Man …………………………………………………………….. Person

Free …………………………………………………………. Freedom

Free Man ………………………………………………………. Citizen

Natural ………………………………………………………. Political

Liberty ………………………………………………….. Entitlement

God-given ………………… Man-made (government granted)

Right (natural) …………………………… Privilege (revokable)

Right (natural) ……………………….. Duty (moral obligation)

Duty (responsibility, trust)…………. Contractual obligation

Responsibility ……………… Limited liability (incorporated)

Unalienable (inherent) ………… Alienable (not permanent)

De Jure ……………………………………………………… De Facto

Lawful …………………………………………………… Color of law

The words unalienable and inherent can be defined as essential and intrinsic . These words apply to ideals rather than to actual living beings. While life itself is not unalienable in any way (as is apparent throughout all of nature and its food-chain) the idea that life is an unalienable right is a negative concept in that it refers to the negative right of men to not be subject to the will of other men. This is the moral obligation of honor and duty that men should not kill other men… or as it is more commonly known: “Thou Shall Not Kill”.

On the contrary, cows, pigs, and chickens live under the positive rights granted by ranchers and farmers, in that they are subjects of that farm and its positive laws. These animal’s natural rights are only valid in as much as the farmer or rancher grants the same positive right to mirror their natural/negative rights. But when slaughter-season comes around and the market-price for bacon goes up, the cows, pigs, and chickens learn real quick that any rights they may perceive as livestock (citizens) of that farm are certainly alienable and in no way inherent or permanent. The cows only eat because the government (farmer) feeds them hey – thus the cows believe it is their natural right to have food brought to them every day by the farmer. But the farmer is only acting under his own positive law, and in reality the cows have no natural rights. But they still believe… The chickens may only have children (chicks) if the government (farmer) allows the hens to keep their eggs and hatch them. Parenthood is a legal term under contract with the state (farm). But the farmer, under the positive law of his farm (his rules), overpowers the natural rights of the chickens and allows those unborn children of the chickens to be collected for sale to others.

The only difference between the cows, pigs, and chickens and that of the humans within the United States farm is that the humans contractually volunteer and agree to be livestock under positive rights and laws, whereas these animals never had a choice.

And people think animals are dumb?

The difficult aspect here is to make people understand that as citizens they are not free, but are also livestock under the United States farm which grants the alienable privilege of “freedom”. Breaking through the “it’s a free country” paradox and fallacy of the American people seems to be the biggest challenge of our modern life and times.

Perhaps the most difficult of these opposite terms is the way in which a right creates an opposite duty. The individual natural right of “liberty” creates an opposite natural duty for all other individuals to respect the right of each others’ individual liberties. It would be the duty, for instance, for the people to use arms against government for violating their natural negative rights, no differently than if it was just a neighbor. For a natural right is something to be cherished and protected to the death. And it is a man’s duty to protect his own rights and that of others. It is a man’s duty to not interfere or trespass upon others rights – the duty to protect each others’ negative rights.

But when government offers political rights to citizens (artificial persons), the moral duty changes into a contractual obligation under legal law. The obligation of legal duty is no longer a choice, but rather a forced positive right – a right that forces you to conduct yourself in an activity that may be against your own interests or those of other individuals’ interests. The negative right requires only the opposite negative duty – a moral obligation to do no harm to others or yourself and to defend your negative rights with your life if necessary. But the contractual relationship of citizenship stifles negative rights (the right to not have your own rights trampled) so that positive rights are agreed to by the persons under contract. In other words, citizens agree to abandon their natural (negative) rights and accept under contract with government or corporations a replacement to their natural rights with the political (positive) rights offered by government, and accepted through contract by citizens. Thus, while in the natural realm government has no power over a man. But in the political realm government has total control over the person/citizen. For a positive law to be acceptable to natural men, that positive law must not be in violation of any negative right.

Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, defines a the word Duty:

DUTY, natural law. A human action which is, exactly conformable to the laws which require us to obey them. 2. It differs from a legal obligation, because a duty cannot always be enforced by the law; it is our duty, for example, to be temperate in eating, but we are under no legal obligation to be so; we ought to love our neighbors, but no law obliges us to love them. 3. Duties may be considered in the relation of man towards God, towards himself, and towards mankind… 4. A man has a duty to perform towards himself; he is bound by the law of nature to protect his life and his limbs; it is his duty, too, to avoid all intemperance in eating and drinking, and in the unlawful gratification of all his other appetites. 5. He has duties to perform towards others. He is bound to do to others the same justice which he would have a right to expect them to do to him.

To live under natural law is to follow the laws of non-interference, responsibility of ones own actions, and honor to fulfill one’s moral obligations under promise and private contract.

On the contrary, the magnetic opposite of this natural law called duty is offered by government through contract, as a political or positive right:

DUTIES. In its most enlarged sense, this word is nearly equivalent to taxes, embracing all impositions or charges levied on persons or things; in its more restrained sense, it is often used as equivalent to customs, (q. v.) or imposts. (q. v.) Vide, for the rate of duties payable on goods and merchandise…

When the services of government are forced upon the people, the people must pay duties (taxes) on those services whether they enjoy or require those services or not. The right to pay taxes is a positive right, and the right to be punished for not paying those taxes is also a positive right. Punishment is an artificial duty created upon the positive right to be taxed – extortion being the right granted by government to persons. You, as a citizen/person, have the positive right to be taxed without the negative right to say no. The imprisonment you may enjoy as punishment for not paying mandatory taxes is also your positive right and duty. And most importantly, the right to pay more and more taxes on more and more things and accept more and more government services with more and more duties, as well as the right to allow government to raise those taxes at its own whim, is also your positive right.

Again, a right is not voluntary in the positive legal realm. So unfortunately, tyranny through extortion is certainly your right if government says it is so, and creates the positive law declaring it as such.

Positive law is involuntary service at the barrel of a gun…

It is perhaps easiest to comprehend these two completely opposite kinds of “rights” by using an analogy of magnets. Most people have played with magnets in their lifetime, attempting to push together two equal magnets that are opposed to each other in their polarities. A positive and a negative are diametrically opposed to each other. The harder we push those magnets together, the harder it becomes to push them, until the negative magnet throws off the positive magnet with a protective shield. And so the only way to make those magnets stick to each other is to turn one magnet around so that the polarities are equal, allowing them to join together. When speaking of God’s law and natural rights (negative rights), our opposing magnet in this case is government code and legality (positive rights). In essence, we must turn our back on law and our natural rights in order to function within government and its legal law and codes. The natural law is magnetically opposed to the positive (legal) law, just as negative rights are magnetically opposed to positive rights.

The first thing to consider whenever attempting to discern the legal language is to remember that emotion must be left out of the equation; that morals and ethics happen in men, not in legal codes. The legal language is just words, with a specific meaning, and with no humanity or consideration of morals or ethics. A contract, for instance, is just an agreement as written in this legal language. It has no moral obligations in an of itself to do anything, but instead establishes the specific positive rights and counterpart duties that will be followed. The moral and ethical parts of the fulfillment of that contract happen outside of the contract, in the hearts, minds, and actions of the men who signed that contract. The contract itself is a bridge between the moral realm and the legal realm, allowing what would otherwise be a natural duty to become an enforceable positive right. For instance, the right to be paid in exchange for an already delivered service or thing as agreed to within a private contract is a positive right, enforceable by law if one party to that contract doesn’t fulfill. Multiply this by 1 million and you have a government contract with men to be citizens, and in exchange the men as citizens must accept the services of government’s legal codes as a forced legal duty to accept. This is also positive law, the difference being that the former contract between men is done in good faith, where no legal recourse is needed, while the contract of citizenship is done without understanding, intention, comprehension, or good faith. A contract steeped in fraud is not enforceable by law, unless the law has been replaced by the positive laws created by government that allow that fraud to be law. This is government.

Just remember that rights are a double-edged sword, which can be positive or negative. In defining what this means, the term positive should not be misconstrued to mean good, no more than the word negative should be misunderstood as a bad thing. They are legal terms, and so attaching an emotional meaning to these words will only lead to confusion.

–=–

Equality – Ladies Acting As Men

–=–

A woman reading this may have an emotional response and espouse that women may sign contracts too, so why only mention “men” here? The confusing answer to this question is that in law, women are men. This is not my opinion, it is just legal law. All people are part of mankind, regardless of sex.  The legal language sees no sex and feels no emotion or obligation to appease the feminist or male perspective, unless specifically written into that code as an artificial construct. The word “men” simply refers to the species man, regardless of color, race, creed, or sex. In this way, the basic legal language itself is a higher language, not weighted down with petty intricacies and debates about whether women and men are equal, or whether all men are created equal. In actuality, the legal language has no ability in and of itself to make such a discernment, and is only concerned with defining the artificiality of mankind as “persons”. It is just a tool. Thus it does not recognize sex unless it is specifically told to, and then does so only in terms of a legal “status”. Legal code cannot be prejudiced, for it has no emotion or predisposition. A natural (real female) woman has equal rights with a natural man only if that natural woman has the legal status assigned to her as a legal fictional man called a legal “woman”. The legal term “Woman” is a status, not a natural state of a living being – not a living man (mankind). For legal does not recognize a natural living man or woman, only the artificial persons of these living people – which have no sex unless specifically defined that way in the code for legal separation purposes (rape, etc.). But this is no different legally than separating different species of ants for research and classification. There is no realization of feminism or masculinity in legal code, because a piece of paper has not the ability to make such distinctions or realizations. Paper has no emotions, any more than the legal words written on that paper. And so any sexual or other emotional or physical distinction between these two artificial persons is solely a construct of science and legal status, no different than distinguishing between garbage and recyclables. To the legal language, garbage and recyclables are the same thing – trash. Only when the legal codes are changed to recognize a certain type of trash as recyclable will a legal status be created allowing certain rights, restrictions, and benefits to be placed upon certain trash legally defined as “recyclables”. Though all garbage is created equal, certain garbage has a status. But that status can only be granted if all trash is first made equal under the legal law. Similarly, women have equal rights with men in law only because they take upon themselves the artificial person-hood status called “woman”, creating this status in positive law which states that persons shall be equally protected and punished under the law and shall have equal rights under the legal law known as “positive rights” but called “Equal Protection Under The Law”.

The reality for women is that their legal status is detrimental to their natural rights as men (mankind), and they become whatever the legal codes say they are as artificial constructs. Equal rights for “women” in law makes them no better or no worse than men, but instead makes them “equal” – removing any sexual differences unless specifically enumerated within that code and how it applies to that particular status of “woman” in opposite to men. Once this equality is established, then special positive rights can be assigned to the legal status of “women”. Thus, a “woman” can have unequal rights giving them special privileges over their supposed equal citizens of the male persuasion. The same goes for “African American” or other ethnicity’s – who are given a special status of “minority”, which then allows them to claim certain positive rights which trample all other citizen’s natural rights or lesser positive rights. In this way, it is the lesser status citizens who have inequality forced upon them, of which it is their contractual duty to accept that positive right and give up their right to sue for what would otherwise be blatant discrimination based on race. Affirmative Action is an example of this. Protected rights of a certain status of citizens requires unfair and unequal treatment of all other citizens. Equality steals away the individualism of a human (regardless of sex, color, race, etc.) and makes everyone not special in any way. It peals away the sex, the color, the race, the religion, and the humanity of each individual living man and woman and places them all in one giant legal blender – a melting pot of unwarranted equality. The end result of this multicultural duel-sexed cornucopia of persons is called legal “U.S. citizens”, whom in the end are in no way equal under law due to the assigned legal status’ called entitlements. If one person is entitled to a positive right that other persons are not entitled to, then the negative right of liberty does not exist in that legal system.

This is not to say that the legal language doesn’t neutrally define these unique traits of mankind in a scientific and unemotional way, it is just to say that it treats them no different than any other legal concept (like the trash example), and its basis is not founded on anything but simply defining these terms without the hindrance of human emotional traits. In short, the legal language only deals with artificiality in the form of corporations, contracts, and persons (i.e. citizens). These citizens are artificial things, not living people. Thus, when defining legality, emotion and humanity really has no place, race becomes a legal weapon, and equality exists only when considering positive rights and punishment for not obeying the forced contractual obligation of legal codes.

Back in 1856, this was the definition of “Sex” in Bouvier’s and other dictionaries, which shows that “women” is a status:

SEX. The physical difference between male and female in animals. 2. In the human species (of animals) the male is called man, (q. v.) and the female, woman. (q. v.) Some human beings whose sexual organs are somewhat imperfect, have acquired the name of hermaphrodite. (q. v.) 3. In the civil state the sex creates a difference among individuals. Women cannot generally be elected or appointed to offices or service in public capa-cities. In this our law agrees with that of other nations. The civil law excluded women from all offices civil or public: Faemintae ab omnibus officiis civilibus vel publicis remotae sunt. Dig. 50, 17, 2. The principal reason of this exclusion is to encourage that modesty which is natural to the female sex, and which renders them unqualified to mix and contend with men; the pretended weakness of the sex is not probably the true reason. Poth. Des Personnes, tit. Vide Gender; Male; Man; Women; Worthiest of blood.

A mature and thinking natural female human should be able to see that though this legal definition has changed over the years, the status is still the same. Legal persons called “women” have now been made to have equal status with legal persons called “men”. This is to say that the equality established in the legal code is completely artificial with respect to the hearts and minds of men. And though this status seems to benefit the female sex of mankind, you as a woman must remember that government defines you first as an “animal” here, and then assigns you a special status of woman-human-animal. So while you may certainly enjoy the positive rights bestowed upon you as “wo-man”, you must accept these positive rights with the knowledge that they create inequality among all natural men. In other words, equality in law is not true natural equality, but is an artificial status granted by a corrupt government that by definition tramples the negative rights of half of the population (male-human-animals). You, as a female of the species human, will only ever know true natural equality when men are not forced by law to treat you as such by positive law. As it is in legal code, men are forced to accept your legal equality, which in the end creates a resentment between sexes in the natural realm. This goes for creed, race, sex, and any other status that is “protected”. And in this way, citizens are forced to accept the most deviant and sinister of persons as equal, even when those persons act completely against the morals and values of others’ negative rights, and even as organizations of these persons legally extort from others. These persons are equal under punishment of legal law. Ironically, the struggle for equal rights for women, slaves, blacks, homosexuals, and other minority groups necessarily requires the unequal state of equality and status for certain individuals, but in no way creates equality among mankind.

If you are emotionally angry right now, then you are speaking a different language than the legal one, and your emotions are getting in the way of understanding your own enslavement.

As a woman, you are a legal fiction.

As a man, you are a beautiful creature of emotion, love, and flesh and blood.

Here is how these legal terms are defined in Bouvier’s Law Dict, 1856:

MAN. A human being. This definition includes not only the adult male sex of the human species, but women and children… 2. In a more confined sense, man means a person of the male sex; and sometimes it signifies a male of the human species above the age of puberty. Vide Rape. It was considered in the civil or Roman law, that although man and person are synonymous in grammar, they had a different acceptation in law; all persons were men, but all men, for example, slaves, were not persons, but things.

–=–

MANKIND. Persons of the male sex; but in a more general sense, it includes persons of both sexes; for example, the statute of 25 Hen. VIII., c. 6, makes it felony to commit, sodomy with mankind or beast. Females as well as males are included under the term mankind. See Gender.

–=–

GENDER. That which designates the sexes. 2. As a general rule, when the masculine is used it includes the feminine, as, man sometimes includes women. This is the general rule, unless a contrary intention appears. But in penal statutes, which must be construed strictly, when the masculine is used and not the feminine, the latter is not in general included… 3. Pothier says that the masculine often includes the feminine, but the feminine never includes the masculine; that according to this rule if a man were to bequeath to another all his horses, his mares would pass by the legacy; but if he were to give all his mares, the horses would not be included.

–=–

WOMEN, persons. In its most enlarged sense, this word signifies all the females of the human species; but in a more restricted sense, it means all such females who have arrived at the age of puberty. 2. Women are either single or married. 1. Single or unmarried women have all the civil rights of men; they may therefore enter into contracts or engagements; sue and be sued; be trustees or guardians, they may be witnesses, and may for that purpose attest all papers; but they are generally, not possessed of any political power; hence they cannot be elected representatives of the people, nor be appointed to the offices of judge, attorney at law, sheriff, constable, or any other office, unless expressly authorized by law; instances occur of their being appointed post-mistresses nor can they vote at any election. 3. The existence of a married woman being merged, by a fiction of law, in the being of her husband, she is rendered incapable, during the coverture, of entering into any contract, or of suing or being sued, except she be joined with her husband; and she labors under all the incapacities above mentioned, to which single women are subject.

In the modern definition, Webster’s English Dictionary defines the word woman not as a natural being, but as an artificial person. Most people will not realize what is being defined here:

WOMAN-

a : an adult female person
b : a woman (person) belonging to a particular category (as by birth, residence, membership, or occupation) —usually used in combination <councilwoman>

In the legal language, the term woman is never used in legal code to describe the natural state of a female, but only to issue a legal status.

However, the word female is used:

FEMALE. This term denotes the sex which bears young. 2. It is a general rule, that the young of female animals which belong to us, are ours, nam fetus ventrem sequitur. The rule is, in general, the same with regard to slaves; but when a female slave comes into a free state, even without the consent of her master, and is there delivered of a child, the latter is free.

If right now, while claiming to be a “woman”, you wish to call me sexist, a chauvinist, racist, or other false paradigm, you could be no further from the truth than I can possibly imagine – and you need to reread this section. In fact, I may be one of the few men in existence who actually recognize your natural/negative equality without the threat or need of being punished by the positive legal system if I don’t!!!

For those who can separate the legal and English languages with logic and reason, we can move on…

–=–

Love And Marriage

–=–

Love and hate are not considered in this legal language when speaking of the contract of legal marriage. Marriage is nothing but a contractual state of being between (as persons) the man, the woman, and the State. It is paper with legal words written on it, and signed by all parties involved. It has no emotion, ethics, morals, values, etc.

Children produced by this marriage contract are not treated as living breathing humans, because the legal language does not deal with living breathing humans. Rather, it treats children as artificial things that are State property – things which are disputed due to the avoidance or negation of a contract by the artificial persons contracted in that legal marriage. Children are no less fictitious persons than the persons who birthed them, when considering the legal nature of human animals.

Again, judging or discussing the legal language with emotion is foolish, since it has no emotion when it defines you. It does not understand love any more than that for which it may necessarily define love as a legal concept. Like an android, the legal language may sometimes simulate the emotions of living man, but will never actually feel them. And like an android with its humanoid appearing synthetic skin and outer shell, our own artificial persons may appear to be living men and women; but are in fact made up of nothing but the wires and circuitry of this legal language.

Love and marriage are distinctly different concepts. One is an emotion and one is a legal arrangement through contract. Love is for the most part incredibly outside of our control while marriage is a legal set of rules and regulations defining a state of contract controlled by government. Love is not in any way dependent upon the contract of marriage, nor is love required in a contract of marriage – for the legal language knows not love! But this does not mean that attempts by modern society, religions, and the courts have not presupposed the conjoining of these two concepts. But love is an emotion, and marriage is a thing (a signed paper contract). But most importantly, love is not controllable by law while marriage is.

Therefore love is a negative right whereas marriage is a positive right.

Love has no limits, whereas marriage is nothing but limits.

So now we may begin to personally see and feel the difference between positive and negative rights – like feeling the difference between heat and cold. When it comes to love, it is safe to say that our natural or God-given right is that we should be able to love any man or woman we choose, and that in fact it is not even a controllable choice – as love is an emotional feeling that, as most of us have certainly felt, is way outside of our emotional control. So love is not something that can be controlled by government with regards to law.

But the government deals especially well in the creation and enforcement of contracts. And marriage is nothing but a legal contract, which has nothing to do with love or emotion in the eyes of legal law. Therefore, marriage is indeed something that can be controlled by government with regards to positive law.

This again makes love a negative right and marriage a positive right.

I imagine right about now your emotion has kicked in again and you are feeling something that is causing you to perhaps forget that legality has no hindrance of emotion. This disposition may be getting in the way of your understanding of why or how love can ever be considered a negative thing. And some folks may musingly be thinking the opposite about marriage being a positive thing! But the confusion is only there because you are assigning emotion to the equation of the definitions of a legal construct. You must never do this. And one of the most difficult aspects of truly understanding the law and how it applies to living man is to be able to switch back and forth between the conversational and the legal language. For while we express our emotions through our interjectional conversations among other living humans, we must assume an unemotional state of person-hood when we switch over to the legal language. For the legal language is nothing if not a perversion of the natural state of man. Thus, we must recognize this perversion and imitate it in order to succeed in legal dealings and communications. If I am going to speak to an android, I would not expect that machine to contemplate morals or ethics other than what is written into its software and codes as a simulation. So why should I do anything different when speaking the legal language to an attorney or a judge? To them, you are nothing but an artificial person, and they are speaking the legal language without the limitations of human emotion if indeed they are doing their jobs correctly. They, in their capacities and regulations as officers of the court, are perversions of man that can only act within the scope of their written code and court procedures. They are legal automatons working in a fictional legal world that in my opinion no man should ever lay his natural rights or trust within. Doing so creates a contract of acceptance of the moral perversions of the legal language, the giving up of negative rights for positive ones, and acquiescence to all of the codes that are created and opinion-ed by such legal automatons in government.

And so your confusion about why a negative right is actually a good thing can be compared to traveling to another country and attempting to speak a new language there. In China, a horse may have the same name as a pig does in America. Thus, confusion may stem in conversations with the Chinese people when they call a horse a pig. But after a while, one becomes accustomed to switching back and forth between ones natural or “1st” language and that of the foreign language.

To most people, the legal language is certainly a foreign one. And so for now, simply realize that any confusion that you may be experiencing is just a loss in translation from your normal every-day conversational language to the foreign legal language.

A negative right is very much a good thing. Sometimes negative rights are referred to as “liberties”. Negative rights are also stated to be “unalienable” – which in legal language means that a legal lien cannot be taken out against that negative right. The constitution lays out some of these unalienable rights in a legal context, but is certainly no guarantee of such an unalienable status upon those constitutional (positive) rights. The thought that any legal document can ever guarantee another legal thing or right as unalienable is pure fallacy. For remember, a legal right is a positive right. And a legal positive right can be revoked at any time by its creator. Perhaps this is why God’s law in its permanence over man’s law is so important. We will talk about that in a moment.

Instead, the constitution as a legal document contradicts the very essence of protecting negative or “unalienable” rights as it boldly describes the ways in which such supposedly unalienable rights may indeed have liens put upon them or against them through legal means. And because of this, you will continuously hear me state loudly and fervently that my “rights” are absolutely not derived from the constitution or any other man-made law or legal code.

I have stated many times before that the 5th Amendment of the “BILL OF RIGHTS” in the U.S. constitution is perhaps the worst example of the deceptive nature of the legal language I have ever encountered. Perhaps in understanding what a “liberty” is as a negative (natural) right can help us to understand why the constitution in no way whatsoever gives individuals unalienable (negative) rights.

The 5th Amendment states:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Geez, the constitution uses longer run-on sentences than I do!

Firstly, this is the right of persons, not men. A fictional person cannot have unalienable rights. A person can only be granted political positive rights.

Secondly, we must know what a “bill” is:

BILL, legislation. An instrument drawn or presented by a member or committee to a legislative body for its approbation and enactment. After it has gone through both houses and received the constitutional sanction of the chief magistrate, where such approbation is requisite, it becomes a law.

This nickname given to the first ten amendments to the constitution is not an official legal term, but instead borrows from the original English term of the “Bill Of Rights”, which was a declaration granted by Royals William and Mary who reigned England. But this was not a declaration of natural rights of the British people, but was instead a declaration of the rights bestowed upon the SUBJECTS of the crown. Again, this can be compared to a farmer declaring positive rights of a bail of hey to be fed to his cows (subjects) twice a day. But with these seemingly wonderful rights also come the duties to submit as subjects to all other rights forced upon the subjects.

And what is the legal definition of “subject”?

SUBJECT, contracts. The thing which is the object of an agreement.

–=–

SUBJECT, persons, government. An individual member of a nation, who is subject to the laws; this term is used in contradistinction to citizen, which is applied to the same individual when considering his political rights. 2. In monarchical governments, by subject is meant one who owes permanent allegiance to the monarch.

–=–

SUBJECTION. The obligation of one or more persons to act at the discretion, or according to the judgment and will of others. 2. Subjection is either private or public. By the former is meant the subjection to the authority of private persons; as, of children to their parents, of apprentices to their masters, and the like. By the latter is understood the subjection to the authority of public persons.

–=–

CITIZEN, persons. One who, under the constitution and laws of the United States, has a right to vote for representatives in congress, and other public officers, and who is qualified to fill offices in the gift of the people. In a more extended sense, under the word citizen, are included all white persons born in the United States, and naturalized persons born out of the same, who have not lost their right as such. This includes men, women, and children. 2. Citizens are either native born or naturalized. Native citizens may fill any office; naturalized citizens may be elected or appointed to any office under the constitution of the United States, except the office of president and vice-president. The constitution provides, that ” the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.” Art. 4, s. 2. 3. All natives are not citizens of the United States; the descendants of the aborigines, and those of African origin, are not entitled to the rights of citizens. Anterior to the adoption of the constitution of the United States, each state had the right to make citizens of such persons as it pleased. That constitution does not authorize any but white persons to become citizens of the United States; and it must therefore be presumed that no one is a citizen who is not white.

Now, you should be wondering how a “right” can ever be “lost”. Of course, only political (positive law) rights can be taken away by government. Natural rights must be voluntarily given up to government.

But you may also be wondering why I am including these antiquated definitions within this essay.

The answer is an important realization about rights in general. For to declare that all men are created equal, and then to claim citizenship only for white persons should be a big clue to you that the legal law sees no equity but that for which is written by the hands of privileged men. And the preponderance by 100’s of millions of U.S. citizens that the constitution ever granted equal rights in natural men is the greatest fallacy of our time. Instead, the constitution literally and clearly states that only certain individuals (persons) are equally privileged and have the right to entitlements as positive rights that trample on the negative rights of all other colored or female persons.

And if you are not a citizen… let’s face it folks, then you are just an animal without government granted privileges and positive rights.

But even more importantly to comprehend here is that just because the constitution and other legislation has been changed over time to reflect “equality” in all persons regardless of sex or color, this if anything proves that nothing in the constitution or civil rights is in anyway an unalienable negative right. In other words, as they were changed in the past, so too can they be changed in the future.

Just ask the Japanese American citizens who were imprisoned during World War II if all citizens are equal regardless of race or color?

Here in this Bill Of Rights we have a listing of 10 positive entitlements that people mistakenly refer to as unalienable negative rights or liberties. But these are not in any way negative rights. They are instead listed here as positive rights that can be aliened upon through what is called “due process of law“.

This is why I call these an “exception clause”… and the constitution and all of legal code is riddled with them.

If your protections from double jeopardy and self-incrimination, and your protections of the rights of life, liberty, and property are indeed absolute and unalienable, then there would be no need to write them down in the first place, let alone place an exception clause within this statement (bill) of rights that allowed “due process of law” to deny you those very rights. In this way, these listed constitutional positive rights are not at all unalienable, and the constitution states clearly the “process” of how a lien can indeed be placed upon these listed positive rights – with due process of law.

Just ask anyone whose had their land stolen by government for “public use” through “eminent domain”; having watched in horror and helplessness as that land was then sold off to private corporate developers for a parking garage, a strip mall, or housing projects. Then ask that person whether they feel that their rights to property and liberty are secure and unalienable?

The 5th Amendment is the entire basis of the positive right of eminent domain claimed by government. In eminent domain cases, the 5th Amendment is noted as being the “takings clause“. This refers to the “exception clause” as noted within the 5th Amendment that property can be “taken” for public use by government with due process of law and “just compensation“. It is a fallacy to mistake the term “due process of law” with the “protection of natural rights”. Law and legal code can only protect legal or positive rights without exception.

If property rights were truly negative in nature for citizens, then government would be forced to respect the nature of that negative right without the ability to apply its right of positive law to nullify that individual persons’ negative right. In other words, the negative or natural right would not be able to be tread upon by a legal concoction of codes and concepts. A positive right by true republican idealism and rules of ethics can never trump a negative right.

In the case of eminent domain, with the backing and righteousness of the constitution itself, the government claims that it is your political “positive” right to literally have your land and home stolen by providing a remedy of what it terms to be “just compensation” for the imposing of that positive right upon you. We know this is a positive right when government won’t take no for an answer…

Imagine if I came up to your front door and handed you a check for $10,000 for the forceful purchase of your home that has a market value of $200,000 – me being just some guy with no government or militarized police force to back me up. Your first inclination would likely be to tell me to go stick my check where the sun don’t shine. But when government comes-a-knocking, our knees quiver and our head spins; for we know not how to tell government to stick its positive law where the sun doth not shineth.

So what’s the difference between when an average every day Joe “offers” you the contract of his version of “just compensation” in exchange for your home and when government makes you the same legal contractual offer?

Ah, this is where positive and negative rights truly come into play…

When the man approaches you to purchase your home, you use your negative right to say no to the contract offered by this individual man. You did not recognize his person, and refused the right of contract – acting in a negative capacity. This means that you have imposed the consequence of your negative right upon the man and expect him to fulfill his natural duty to uphold your right to say no. The abeyance and non-retaliation against your own negative rights by others with similar negative rights is called a “duty”. Thus, when average Joe made the offer for your home at a ridiculously low price, well below the market value of what you might sell that same house to another individual, it was your negative right to deny that offer of contract. It is now the duty of average Joe to respect your negative right to say no by walking away from the offer without force, retaliation, or theft of your property.

Duty has a direct association with negative rights. The consequence of a man declaring his natural, God-given, negative rights means that all other men of good conscious have the duty to respect that negative right. Thus, a negative right creates a duty in others to refrain from taking action against another. So a negative right is best explained as the right to not have “due process of law”, violence, or coercion forced against you. Therefore, a negative right is the right to be left alone. So Joe would respect your negative right to say no to his offer by fulfilling his natural or negative duty to not coerce you to sell your house to him. When this process is complete, the natural or unalienable right has been fully implemented and respected.

Under this system of respect and integrity between men, a lawful society without government can be imagined.  But since we live in and except the artificial world of fictional persons we must understand how this mutually respectful system of trust and integrity-based law has been perverted by government legal codes and its courts – which claim the very power of “due process of law” as listed in the Bill of Rights. In this regard, the constitution is in direct violation of all of man’s natural rights.

Before we can go on, this realization must be acknowledged: that the constitution does not give inalienable rights to individuals. Without this conscious admission, we cannot proceed. And we must fully realize and appreciate that the difference between a negative right and a positive right is that a negative right will never be written down as a legal right. Only a positive right must be written down, for this is the only way that a positive right may be enforced through due process of law to have power over a negative right. A positive right is adjudicated under positive law. And through the perversion of the legal code and its contractual nature, men are tricked into accepting positive rights that are in direct conflict with their natural/negative rights. They voluntarily relinquish the right to utilize negative rights against legal positive rights. Without the contractual nature of legal codes, no positive right of men could ever overshadow a negative right of God. In other words, the duty of men to respect and acknowledge the natural rights of their fellow man would never be excusable under color of law just because that man has a government ID, a police uniform, or a judges robe. The acceptance of a voluntary contractual obligation of positive rights by “citizens” allows other men to act as perverted beasts – artificial persons that trample upon any semblance of another man’s natural/negative right to not to be trampled on in the first place, with the excuse that their duty to respect man’s negative rights do not exist in legal code and are justified through due process of law, which is forcibly served upon that person/citizen for the benefit of the collective “public”. And in doing so, any recompense or remedy for their actions is applied not to the man himself for committing these acts of violence, coercion, and theft (taking) of property against the natural rights of another man, but are instead considered legal actions by an artificial person against another artificial person and its estate. You might say that no man was harmed, but only his dead or artificial person. This is referred to as acting under the “color of law”. Thus, the man doing the taking is not responsible for his own actions – actions taken by an artificial person (an incorporated entity with limited liability) on behalf of the due process of law of government. Positive rights then really equate to moral corruption of the living man in lieu of legal protections granted to the artificial person for which that man carries – the veil of artificial and limited liability corporation status called person-hood. And with this disposition; as in the art and atrocities of war where men kill men while claiming the positive right to do so as their perverted legal “duty” in the following of orders; men avoid their true and natural duties to protect the sanctity, integrity, freedom, and livelihood of the rest of their fellow man by claiming that due process of law allows constitutional and legal authority to do so. And government protects that positive right.

And so we now take for our example the constitutionally proclaimed power by government to at any time, through due process of law  and with just compensation, “take” your property through this process of eminent domain. To do this, the government exercises the true nature of your constitutional “rights” by utilizing the legal system of which government created in the first place. Thus, the taking of your property is justified by these artificial persons in government with the disclaimer that they as men are not responsible for the theft of your property because the due process of law allows such perversion of responsibility to be delegated to an artificial construct within the protection of legal code. Government officers are not men, but instead an incorporated group of persons. They have the positive (government granted and protected) right to ignore their duties to uphold and respect your negative rights because you agreed through contract to consent and be subject to these positive rights granted by government. They claim this positive right for one and only one reason: because you unwittingly told them they could. You gave up your natural rights when you became a citizen, accepting positive rights through contract. And every time that you state a pledge of allegiance to the “flag” of this artificial corporation called the United States (not a pledge to the other people within these united states of America and their natural rights, mind you), and every time you check the box that states you are a “citizen of the United States”, and every time you claim legal constitutional rights instead of negative natural rights, you are literally giving your consent and permission for government to tread on you and your negative rights via contractual obligations and duties to government’s provided positive rights and services.

Understanding and proving to government that you are alive 100% of your life seems like a ridiculous notion. But the truth is that government requires you to be dead for any transaction in commerce or contract with itself, and assigns you an artificial person for such commerce and communication. Proving that you are alive every minute of every day of your life while claiming only natural rights is the only true defense against government tyranny. Any other right provided by government and claimed by you in court is of a contractual nature, meaning it is by default a revokable and enforceable positive right – the validity of which will be decided by an artificial person known as a judge.

A negative right is the right not to be subjected to the actions and coercion of another man, person, or government.

A positive right is the right to be subjected to the actions and coercions of another man, person, or government.

A free man has the right not to be subjected to the actions and coercion of another man, person, or government.

A citizen has the right to be subjected to the actions and coercions of another man, person, or government.

A free man enjoys the negative right to be free under God and nature, deriving his rights as such.

A citizen enjoys the positive right (privilege) to be free under government, as long as and only if he obeys the law (legal codes) of that government no matter how tyrannical and inhumane they become.

The perversion of the words positive and negative is just one example of how the legal language harms man’s natural state of being by perverting even the basic definition of natural words. However, legal words only apply in the fictional legal realm, which is why of course living men must be attached to an artificial person.

But I digress, for the title of this writing is “Tyranny Requires Equality”.

And so I had better now qualify why I believe that this is so…

Just as the words negative and positive have been perverted into different meanings than we are accustomed to in our everyday speech, so too have the words equality and rights.

It is important to understand that as with all legal terms, when the legal language uses the word equality it does not predispose that such equality is espoused by living men. Remember, the legal code does not deal in living beings. It can only define legal terms for artificial persons attached to human animals. Thus, when the government states that all men are created equal, it doesn’t really mean that in literal terms. It is referring to persons. And it is referring to the way in which the law punishes equally that of all persons under the law.

Let’s face the hard truth… When the constitution and Declaration of Independence was penned over two centuries ago, the term men combined with the term equal only applied to white male land-owners. As much as it pains us to admit that the constitution did not in any way make all men equal, and in fact made some men 3/5 a person (not a man) for political purposes, we must admit that the constitution was only a legal document granting subjects of the government certain entitlements. It did not deal in men as flesh and blood human animals, it dealt strictly with artificial persons. A statement of equality as is laid down in the constitution does not necessitate the conversational meaning of that word when describing flesh and blood men, race, or color. In fact, since the constitution only applies to persons as citizens, its privileges also only apply to persons as citizens. Remember, a legal government document only applies to men who have taken the perversion of artificial person-hood. The constitution promoted slavery and entitled only the privileged class to “freedom” – which again means the requirement to obey the law. And it can only be considered a document of freedom for those who contractually accepted the legal definition of freedom to “obey the government’s laws”. The constitution, if anything, made all men un-free, but gave the privileged class of white male citizens the “freedom” to arbitrarily own other men and be higher in legal status than the female half of the species. Of course, the contract of marriage created the STRAWMAN Dominus name change that allowed women to obtain some of the rights of their husbands via a legal contractual nature.

This ownership of people was without question or doubt the “original intent” of the constitution. Just read the damn thing! And remember that slavery was outlawed in England long before it was in the United States.

Over the decades, incremental change began to be seen, amendments passed, and legislation created that allowed for all “persons” to obtain “equal rights” under the law. But remember that these were certainly not natural rights granted by the government, but were instead positive rights. And slowly but surely all persons were made civilly equal. But what this really meant was that all men were allowed to accept the perversion of their natural state of being men and were allowed to become persons. And so again, I cannot stress enough that the constitution only makes contractual obligations of men as persons for which it calls “equal” and “civil” rights. Again, any natural man, woman, or child who wonders into the fictional borders of the United States will know immediately that all men are not equal, but that equality requires the voluntary agreement and contract of tyranny of citizenship. An illegal alien is simply a man who has not sold his soul for the positive rights and entitlements of citizenship. And the treatment, imprisonment, and exportation of these “human animals” by government and it’s millions of citizens is enough evidence to me to call any woman, black man, or legal immigrant a total and complete hypocrite – one who screams for their equal rights from a government and constitution that for centuries denied their ancestors those same rights that they now deny all other men of the world. Americans are hypocrisy defined – free men enslaved by their own freedom. And the white, property-owning citizen is ironically the only non-hypocrite… but only because his ancestors were born into the privileges of citizenship in the first place that denied all others their own rights and entitlements.

Never again should any United States citizen falsely and hypocritically declare that all men are created equal. For they are not men – as citizens they are not even alive.

This is the oft quoted fallacy that plagues the people of the United States and other governments. For government can not declare all men as equal and free, but can only declare its citizens as equal with freedom. For what happens when one bucks their government and tries to act upon their natural God-given rights in their negative capacity and as protection against the forcibly assigned positive rights violently bestowed by that government upon its people? Why of course the government violates the man’s natural rights claiming that his person’s positive rights come first!

And this is the most difficult thing about law and rights to comprehend. For most people believe that rights are somehow voluntary, and don’t realize that there is such a thing as positive rights that are involuntary. It’s certainly a confusing concept – that there should be in existence a human right that is enforceable by punishment from government, whether you want that right or not. Well… that’s because people think only in terms of humanity, and not in the terms of their artificial person for which those forced rights apply.

Another example I like to use over and over is this one from TITLE 42 of U.S. CODE. This code is in my opinion the perfect examination of how a “positive right” is actually a forced privilege through coercion and violence upon persons and not men:

42 USC § 1981 – Equal rights under the law

(a) Statement of equal rights

All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exaction of every kind, and to no other

(b) “Make and enforce contracts” defined

For purposes of this section, the term “make and enforce contracts” includes the making, performance, modification, and termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and conditions of the contractual relationship.

(c) Protection against impairment

The rights protected by this section are protected against impairment by nongovernmental discrimination and impairment under color of State law.

And so here in one neat little package, the tyranny requires equality concept comes shining through. Remember, as stated here, the nature of “civil rights” is not to make men equal, but to make all persons equally screwed under the law. Government does not define men. It’s legal language simply makes all human animals as equal citizens – which means equal protection of the positive rights that are forced upon those citizens. This is the tyranny of legal equality. True natural equality will only ever happen in the minds of men, not through statute or positive right. It will never happen in all men, and no legal statute will ever succeed in this task. For the acceptance of all men as equal is a negative right, and this type of acceptance can only happen within men, not without. The bottom line is that respect for human and animal rights must be earned and learned, not entitled and forced.

First, in Section (a) of this U.S. CODE we have an explanation of your positive rights as an (artificial) person within the jurisdiction of the United States (federal government) – the federation controlling the “union” of States. It tells you that you have the positive right to enter into contract equally with all other persons, and most importantly into contracts with government. And then it tells you that by committing to such a contractual nature, the positive rights of punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exaction (literally defined as legal extortion) are applied to you under that contract. If you sign a government or other contract, you are subject to positive rights. If you sign a contract, you give up your power of natural negative rights in acceptance of politically assigned privileges called positive rights. And in doing so, as a person and citizen, you are subject to all of the coercive measures that government allows itself to use against you to enforce those positive rights against you, including pain, punishment, and extortion.

Notice here that taxation and extortion are listed here side by side as a your right. There is hardly a difference between the two, and the avoidance of both gives you the positive, forceful, contractual duty to give acceptance to your right to be receive (enjoy) penalties, be punished, and be put in pain.

Now do you understand what a positive right is?

In Section (c) it states something that is also very important. It implies here that State laws, when compared to Federal laws, are subservient to these Federal U.S. CODES. By stating that the laws of the government of the individual States are only assigned to be as authoritative as to the “color of law”, this code is stating that you have no positive State’s rights that will protect you against these stated Federal positive rights. Federal contract law (citizenship), in other words, trumps any state law that may protect any other right you enjoy, either positive or negative. In other words, as a citizen you really have no negative rights!!!

But most important here is the legal right that all persons have to be equal with every other person. The last thing that government wants is for a man to break out of his or her artificial person/cage and be special – and claim to be unequal in the eyes of the legal code. Only with equality can democracy exist. Only with uniform equality can the people be considered a “body politic”. And only in a body politic can the government claim to act with the consent of all the equal people through representative government – representatives of the whole equal citizenry.

Some folks think that by exercising their right not to vote in elections that they are withdrawing consent to the election itself. But not voting is just another political positive right that persons have, in that this duty is not enforced as a requirement. Not voting is technically voting “no contest” to what the majority votes. Government doesn’t mind at all if individuals don’t vote in its public elections, for not voting means nothing at all. Even with less than 50% of the people voting in an election cycle, the majority of those actual votes still creates a majority vote. There is no law stating otherwise. And the president is not elected by the people anyway, but instead by the “electors”. That’s right, the constitution clearly states that the president is not elected by the people (voters) by popular vote, but by appointed electors. Amazingly, the majority of United States citizens believe that they actually elect the president every four years – a laughable psy-op that creates the illusion of authority of that office.

If this is news to you, you’ll be tickled to death to know that migrants who obtain citizenship in the United States know more about our presidential election process than most natural born citizens do!

Here is a link to the questions asked of potential legal immigrants before they become citizens. You’ll notice that question #16 asks: “Who elects the President of the United States?”

Scroll down a ways and you’ll see “The Electoral College” as the official answer.

LINK: http://immigration.findlaw.com/citizenship/typical-citizenship-examination-questions.html?DCMP=ADC-IMMI_Citizenship-NaturalizationTestQuestions&HBX_PK=the+naturalization+test+questions

Elections are a positive, not a negative right. Citizens do not have negative rights, other than those which have not been supplanted YET by positive ones.

What is the definition of the word “negative”?

NEGATIVE. This word has several significations. 1. It is used in contradistinction to giving assent; thus we say the president has put his negative upon such a bill. Vide Veto. 2. It is also used in contradistinction to affirmative; as, a negative does not always admit of the simple and direct proof of which an affirmative is capable. When a party affirms a negative in his pleadings, and without the establishment of which, by evidence, he cannot recover or defend himself, the burden of the proof lies upon him, and he must prove the negative. Although as a general rule the affirmative of every issue must be proved, yet this rule ceases to operate the moment the presumption of law is thrown into the other scale. When the issue is on the legitimacy of a child, therefore, it is incumbent on the party asserting the illegitimacy to prove it. Vide Affirmative Innocence.

NEGATIVE AVERMENT, pleading, evidence. An averment in some of the pleadings in a case in which a negative is asserted. 2. It is a general rule, established for the purpose of shortening and facilitating investigations, that the point in issue is to be proved by the party who asserts the affirmative; but as this rule is not founded on any presumption of law in favor of the party, but is merely a rule of practice and convenience, it, ceases in all cases when the presumption of law is thrown into the opposite scale. For example, when the issue is on the legitimacy of a child born in lawful wedlock, it is, incumbent on the party asserting its illegitimacy to prove it. Upon the same principle, when, the negative averment involves a charge of criminal neglect of duty, whether official or otherwise, it must be proved, for the law presumes every man to perform the duties which it imposes. Vide Onus Probandi.

And from Webster’s 2012 dictionary:

NEGATIVE-

(1) a: marked by denial, prohibition, or refusal <received a negative answer>; also : marked by absence, withholding, or removal of something positive <the negative motivation of shame — Garrett Hardin>

b (1) : denying a predicate of a subject or a part of a subject <“no A is B” is a negative proposition> (2) : denoting the absence or the contradictory of something <nontoxic is a negative term> (3) : expressing negation <negative particles such as no and not>

c : adverse, unfavorable <the reviews were mostly negative>

(5) a : not affirming the presence of a condition, substance, or organism suspected to be present; also : having a test result indicating the absence especially of a condition, substance, or organism <she is HIV negative>

By these definitions we can construct a view of how the word negative applies to and interacts with the word positive in law. A negative right attempts to remove or refuse a positive right, and a man seeks to withhold or remove the positive right with his negative right. Negative rights are a prohibition against positive ones. A living man may deny a positive right exists by denoting the contradiction of that positive right to his negative right. A living man must prove the non-existence of a positive. Positive rights directly contradict negative rights, negating the inherent and replacing it with the artificial, creating an absence of liberty. Positive is adverse and unfavorable to the negative. Men must not affirm the presence of a positive right, unless he is prepared to accept the conditions of its disease.

Even the word enjoyment has been twisted into a legal perversion, as defined in Bouvier’s:

ENJOYMENT. The right which a man possesses of receiving all the product of a thing for his necessity, his use, or his pleasure.

And Black’s Law Dictionary online defines Enjoyment as:

ENJOYMENT: 1 (a) possession and use <the enjoyment of civic rights>

And from Webster’s:

ENJOYMENT: The exercise of a right; the possession and fruition of a right, privilege, or incorporeal hereditament.

So while you may emotionally enjoy living somewhere, enjoyment is a legal term with no emotional attachments. It is the state of usufruct to which you are a person who enjoys the use of property, but do not legally own that property. Paying off a loan to a bank, it turns out, has absolutely nothing to do with ownership, as the home never belonged to the bank in the first place. A “lien” position is not an ownership position, but rather just a status of legal claim.

Legislative records explain this positive right of equal enjoyment best:

“The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of government, i.e. law, amounting to mere user; and user must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” Senate Document No. 43, 73D Congress, 1st Session, entitled: “Contracts Payable in Gold”, by George Cyrus Thorpe, submitted to the senate: April 17, 1933

“The money will be worth 100 cents on the dollar because it is backed by the credit of the Nation. It will represent a mortgage on all the homes and other property of all the people in the Nation.” –Congressman Patman, speaking from the Congressional Record of March 9, 1933, and referring to the Act of March 9, 1933.

Enjoyment is use, as a user, of government property. Persons are not owners, they are users. Persons enjoy incorporeal use of real estate. The word estate in Latin means “status”. And a status of course is an entitlement – a positive right.

But don’t worry, all property holders have equal rights under the law – which really means that all property holders cannot say no when the government wants to eminent domain (legally steal) their property. Equal rights means equal enjoyment of equal extortion, which means equal victim-hood of the people is equally enjoyed as persons under the contractual nature of citizenship. Does it make you feel better that at any time the government can take anyone’s property, including your own? Does this equate to the disposition we take when our friends and neighbors have their property stolen by government for the public good? You are the “public”, you know.

Is it this equality of the possibility of legal theft upon all citizens that stops us from defending the property of our fellow man?

Have we been artificial for so long that we are becoming emotionless?

Have we grown to love our servitude, as Huxley declared so long ago?

Perhaps we have just lost our ability to do anything but legally enjoy our servitude – and have forgotten how to be free men.

Equality in legal terms is a detriment to all men, for no two men are alike. Under the law, men and women have no sex, except as a mechanical function in science. Their uniqueness is stripped away and replaced by a legal status. Their thoughts and ideas are stunted so that equality can prevail. By accepting the artificial person, the living soul becomes nothing but a user of the body – with enjoyment of the artificial person which interacts with the artificial world. In this way, the man hides away behind the mask of his or her person.

But the person is not the man, it is not created by the man, and it is not owned by the man. The person is a creation of and property of the government, assigned numbers and statistics which define each artificial person. And only the creator of persons can establish forced equality and tyranny among all persons equally.

And so I leave you with these final questions…

If government is the creator of persons, then isn’t it time to stop worshiping these idols of the false god of government and get back to nature’s and God’s law?

Who is your creator?

Isn’t it time to become a man again?

.

–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Why The Supreme Court Claims Obamacare is Constitutional


Did you really think that the Supreme Court would rule against “Obama-care”?

Just what exactly do you think the Supreme Court is?

Perhaps a reality check is in order here. And for that matter, a little history lesson…

–=–

This tome of research was originally planned as an educational-documentary movie script, but with the election process just around the corner and rumors of a major internet “change”, I feel it absolutely necessary to give it my best shot to create a wide-awake, openhearted, non-consenting public. In fact, my whole mock-presidential campaign was to expose the following facts – and that you the people cannot, no matter how much campaigning you do, elect me as president (or for that matter Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, or any alternative 3rd party or non-two-party candidate) because you don’t get to vote for president.

Perhaps this all was dreaming too big on my part; that I can wake up an entire nation, but here it goes anyway…

We will now delve extensively into the Department Of Justice as well as the electoral college, and we will learn exactly what the role of the Attorney General is – and I guarantee you that none of these things are anything close to what you might think you know or have been taught in your public (government) school system. In short, we will learn the actual law, and that the law and the entirety of the United States does not exist without your contractual consent to it.

Sit back and hold on, for it is my hope that this is going to be a serious wake up call. I recommend that you read and re-read this entire presentation several times, until these definitions and concepts are familiar and completely understood, for you cannot be free without the knowledge of what enslaves you, especially if you do not know the hidden legal language of the Law Society. Certain words and phrases are underlined, highlighted, and emboldened. Do not take this lightly. Give these your special attention. And by the end, be sure you know the legal meanings of all these words.

If you read nothing else before you cast your vote for the office of president this year, I beg of you to take the time to learn why your vote absolutely does not, never has, and never will count towards the actual official election process of the president of the United States. This is the law. It is more accurate to say that your vote as a registered United States voter is not officially counted in the actual election process for the office of the president of the United States.

So why do you vote?

Why does the government waste our time allowing us to go through the charade of voting for the popular fake-election of president by the “people”?

Why will going through the process of “voting” to replace Obama not do anything to actually officially or legally replace Obama?

And why is Obama-care absolutely constitutional according to the Supreme Court?

Let’s find out…

–=–

What Was The Original Supreme Court?

–=–

The so-called “Founding Fathers” have become the stuff of legend.

They are credited as being radical new thinkers whose ideals were original in their context, and that these ideas created the first free country and a modern republic. And yet, the entire structure of government for the Federal United States, as well as the concepts of individual and state’s rights, liberty, and social contracts, date back not only to the Mayflower Compact, but to the roots of British history and common law, as well as Roman law in the Roman “Republic” and in the Magna Carta, created in 1215. In fact, as it turns out, everything that our “Founding Fathers” did in their declaration of independence was specifically to preserve their “natural-born rights as Englishmen“, which was in fact a perfectly legal pursuit as a crown colony. The Crown of England, in fact, had the same reaction to this declaration and the following constitution as the Northern “States” did when the Southern “States” seceded from the corrupt central government of the United States in the 1860’s – in order to form their own more perfect union and constitution in the South… which was for the Crown to unlawfully call it treason and to take its control back through occupation and military rule.

Why were the colonists of America always, and even to this day, so interested in retaining their English-born rights?

Samuel Adams wrote:

“All persons born in the British American Colonies are, by the laws of God and nature and by the common law of England, exclusive of all charters from the Crown, well entitled, and by acts of the British Parliament are declared to be entitled, to all the natural, essential, inherent, and inseparable rights, liberties, and privileges of subjects born in Great Britain or within the realm. — The Rights of the Colonists: The Report of the Committee of Correspondence to the Boston Town Meeting, Nov. 20, 1772.

John Allen also stated:

For the rights of the people, which is the supreme glory of the crown and the kingdom of Britain, is the Magna Charta of the king as well as of the people; it is as much his previledge, as it is his glory, to maintain their rights; and he is as much under a law (I mean the law of the rights of the people), as the people are under the oath of allegiance to him… And therefore whatever power destroys their rights, destroys at the same time, his right to reign, or any right to his kingdom, crown, or glory; nay, his right to the name of a king among the people… Shall a man be deem’d a rebel that supports his own rights?Excerpts from the sermon, “ORATION, upon the Beauties of LIBERTY, OR the Essential RIGHTS of the AMERICANS” preached to the Second Baptist Church in Boston Dec. 3, 1772.

Resolution #2 of the Declaration of Rights of the Stamp Act Congress on October 19, 1765, was written:

“That His Majesty’s liege subjects in these colonies are entitled to all the inherent rights and privileges of his natural born subjects within the kingdom of Great Britain.

The “Charter of Massachusetts Bay (colony)” issued by the king in 1629 proclaimed that the people of the colony:

…shall have and enjoy all liberties and Immunities of free and naturall Subjects within any of the Domynions of Us, our Heires or Successors, to all Intents, Constructions, and Purposes whatsoever, as if they and everie of them were borne within the Realme of England.

The colonists wanted nothing more than and insisted upon being treated as natural-born Englishmen with all rights and privileges thereof. This was reflected in every facet of the New America. And it is part of the basis of the term God-given natural rights, as the “king” was considered to be of “God” – the “divine” right of kings…

Thomas Jefferson himself, in a letter to Henry Lee on May 8, 1825, wrote about the Declaration of Independence that it was:

“…with respect to our rights, and the acts of the British government contravening those rights, there was but one opinion on this side of the water. All American Whigs thought alike on these subjects. When forced, therefore, to resort to arms for redress, an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c..”

One could translate this as the freedom of the press, where that declaration was written as an appeal to pity by the rest of the world – an appeal to the court of popular opinion – and a reminder of the already historically established philosophies that were re-worded in the constitution and declaration.

It is also important to make the distinction between natural and political (contractual) “independence”. Independence, as a legal description or term, does not automatically mean free and clear of something as it might be perceived or misconstrued in every day conversation:

INDEPENDENCE. A state of perfect irresponsibility to any superior; the United States are free and independent of all earthly power. 2. Independence may be divided into political and natural independence. By the former (political independence) is to be understood that we have contracted no tie except those which flow from the three great natural rights of safety, liberty and property. The latter (natural independence) consists in the power of being able to enjoy a permanent well-being, whatever may be the disposition of those from whom we call ourselves independent. In that sense a nation may be independent with regard to most people, but not independent of the whole world. Vide on of Independence. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

And just what does the 5th Amendment to the Constitution actually say about this?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

So the constitution states quite clearly that your natural rights of life (safety), liberty, and property can in fact be taken away from you with “due process of law and just compensation”. This is because these are actually your political rights enumerated, not your natural ones. This is not a protection from tyranny of government, but is instead tyranny defined! And this “right” – to have your life, liberty, and property taken away from you – is literally in the hands of the government created federal judicial system. As we will see, this is extremely deceptive and problematic with regards to the “justice” doled out by the “justice system”. Thus, the Bouvier’s Law Dictionary definition of “independence” above perfectly describes the illusion that we all have of our constitutional (political) “independence”. As contracted citizens of this government, natural independence is forfeited and political independence does not exist…

We must also understand that the “Judicial Branch” of this constitution was not in any way new as either the highest court of jurisdiction or of being a so-called “check and balance” of the other government entities. A government creation is not really in a position to monitor another government creation. This fallacy is why we are in the mess we are in today – government supervision and regulation of itself!

Within the British Empire, the highest court within a colony was often called the “Supreme Court”.

Most importantly to the Federal government and to any government who uses this structure of legal precedent, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court cannot be challenged once the government appointed Court members decide on what “justice” is. Therefore, once the Supreme Court decides that something is constitutional – like war, capital punishment, crime and punishment, fines, taxes, incarceration, eminent domain, and other government intrusions into the life (safety), liberty, and property of the people of the United States, the people have no recourse for the taking of their life, liberty, and property. In this way, the Judicial branch serves as a “check and balance” that ensures the tyranny of government is never challenged.

This hierarchy of jurisdiction is called stare decisis.

 STARE DECISIS – To abide or adhere to decided cases. 2. It is a general maxim that when a point has been settled by decision, it forms a precedent which is not afterwards to be departed from. The doctrine of stare decisis is not always to be relied upon, for the courts find it necessary to overrule cases which have been hastily decided, or contrary to principle. Many hundreds of such overruled cases may be found in the American and English books of reports. Mr. Greenleaf has made a collection of such cases, to which the reader is referred. Vide 1 Kent, Com. 477; Livingst. Syst. of Pen. Law, 104, 5. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

Supreme Court decisions are deemed to be binding upon lower courts. Importantly, this is to ensure uniformity in the legal functioning of the United States and its corporate structure. This uniformity is further ensured by requiring BAR certification for the “practice” of the now copyrighted public policy that is called “law” in the United States. Civil law jurisdictions, however, are not generally considered to apply, and so supreme court decisions are not necessarily binding. But the decisions of the supreme court are meant to provide a very strong precedent (jurisprudence constante) for both itself and all lower courts.

So what does jurisdiction mean?

JURISDICTION – Practice. A power constitutionally conferred upon a judge or magistrate, to take cognizance of, and decide causes according to law, and to carry his sentence into execution. 6 Pet. 591; 9 John. 239. The tract of land or district within which a judge or magistrate has jurisdiction, is called his territory, and his power in relation to his territory is called his territorial jurisdiction. 2. Every act of jurisdiction exercised by a judge without (outside of) his territory, either by pronouncing sentence or carrying it into execution, is null. An inferior court has no jurisdiction beyond what is expressly delegated. 1 Salk. 404, n.; Gilb. C. P. 188; 1 Saund. 73; 2 Lord Raym. 1311; and see Bac. Ab. Courts, &c., C, et seq; Bac. Ab. Pleas, E 2. 3. Jurisdiction is original, when it is conferred on the court in the first instance, which is called original jurisdiction; (q. v.) or it is appellate, which is when an appeal is given from the judgment of another court. Jurisdiction is also civil, where the subject-matter to be tried is not of a criminal nature; or criminal, where the court is to punish crimes. Some courts and magistrates have both civil and criminal jurisdiction… 4. It is the law which gives jurisdiction; the consent of, parties, cannot, therefore, confer it, in a matter which the law excludes. 1 N. & M. 192; 3 M’Cord, 280; 1 Call. 55; 1 J. S. Marsh. 476; 1 Bibb, 263; Cooke, 27; Minor, 65; 3 Litt. 332; 6 Litt. 303; Kirby, 111; 1 Breese, 32; 2 Yerg. 441; 1 Const. R. 478. But where the court has jurisdiction of the matter, and the defendant has some privilege which exempts him from the jurisdiction, he may waive the privilege. 5 Cranch, 288; 1 Pet. 449; 8 Wheat. 699; 4 W. C. C. R. 84; 4 M’Cord, 79; 4 Mass. 593; Wright, 484. See Hardin, 448; 2 Wash. 213. 5. Courts of inferior jurisdiction must act within their jurisdiction, and so it must appear upon the record. 5 Cranch, 172 Pet. C. C. R. 36; 4 Dall. 11; 2 Mass. 213; 4 Mass. 122; 8 Mass. 86; 11 Mass. 513; Pr. Dec. 380; 2 Verm. 329; 3 Verm. 114; 10 Conn. 514; 4 John. 292; 3 Yerg. 355; Walker, 75; 9 Cowen, 227; 5 Har. & John. 36; 1 Bailey, 459; 2 Bailey, 267. But the legislature may, by a general or special law, provide otherwise. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

JURISPRUDENCE – The science of the law. By science here, is understood that connection of truths which is founded on principles either evident in themselves, or capable of demonstration; a collection of truths of the same kind, arranged in methodical order. In a more confined sense, jurisprudence is the practical science of giving a wise interpretation to the laws, and making a just application of them to all cases as they arise. In this sense, it is the habit of judging the same questions in the same manner, and by this course of judgments forming precedents. 1 Ayl. Pand. 3 Toull. Dr. Civ. Fr. tit. prel. s. 1, n. 1, 12, 99; Merl. Rep. h. t.; 19 Amer. Jurist, 3. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

The original Federal United States Supreme Court was created within the jurisprudence of the “organic” constitution “for” the united states of America via Article 3, as the third lawful “branch” of government – a check and balance for the Executive and Legislative branches. This organic constitution was very specific, and was meant to be the permanent structure of the three branches of government.

“The term “organic” statute originated from the French term Reglement Organique, which means regulations for an organization or governmental body. 

Organic statute is a statute that establishes an administrative agency or local government and defines its authorities and responsibilities.

An organic statute forms the foundation of a government, corporation or other organization’s body of rules. A constitution is a particular from of organic law for a sovereign state.”

(Source: http://definitions.uslegal.com/o/organic-statute/)

And so, for the purposes of the original, as-written constitution of 1786, the description of the constitution as “organic” is best understood as “original”. Once it was amended, it was not organic (original) any more. The foundational organic nature of the constitution is broken with every amendment added, for a foundation is not meant to be altered, just as food is either organic or altered (non-organic/non-original -vs- as natural law [nature] intended).

But as we are all no doubt aware, everything certainly changes…

On march 27, 1861, the dis-satisfied representative congressmen of seven of the “southern” States decided to leave the “union” as was their right as constitutionally established “sovereign” nation States, according to the very constitution that organically (originally) held that union together, in order to form what many scholars claim to be their own new nation of southern states based on the original intent of that same organic constitution for the united states of America. These elected representatives walked out of Congress, never to return. This was indeed abandonment sine die – (without day – when the court or other body rise at the end of a session or term they adjourn “sine die”). At this critical juncture at the end of true American history, Congress ceased to exist as a lawful (organic, constitutional) body, and could no longer lawfully declare war (without all congressmen present in vote). In the end, 11 states in total lawfully left the union via constitutional succession and declared their sovereignty and independence from the United States (Washington D.C.).

With the union now divided and the lawful (constitutional) congress canceled, drastic measures had to be taken by the remaining elite structure of this defunct “government” corporation. And so on April 15th, 1861 (not so coincidentally the now “national tax day”), Abraham Lincoln – who was no longer a lawful or constitutional president and was now acting under military rule without congress – issued the first Executive Order #1, which placed military rule (martial law) over the entirety of the U.S. territories. This soon became known as the “civil war” against the south by the now unlawful government – a government held together in continuity by the first declared state of emergency and the first declared “Executive Order” (#1) by the first unlawful and unconstitutional president, Abraham Lincoln. This was also referred to as the War of Northern Aggression. But the war was, as we will see, a war to force civil law on all the people of the United States.

These General War Executive Orders were, as they still are today, declared without congressional approval or consent by the Executive:

Proclamation Calling Militia
and
Convening Congress

April 15, 1861

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas the laws of the United States have been for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the Marshals by law,

Now therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed. The details, for this object, will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured.

I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to re-possess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at 12 o’clock, noon, on Thursday, the fourth day of July, next, then and there to consider and determine, such measures, as, in their wisdom, the public safety, and interest may seem to demand.

In Witness Whereof I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington this fifteenth day of April in the year of our Lord One thousand, Eight hundred and Sixtyone, and of the Independence the United States the Eightyfifth.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN

By the President:

WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.

.

(Author’s note: Take note here that in no way could the Congress of the organic united states of America convene together lawfully, as the southern state representatives were purposefully absent in abandonment of the ever-increasing corrupt and unfair legislature. In this Executive Order, the United States and the Constitution are capitalized and are both not followed by the words “of America. Why demonize England when the United States was worse to its own people?)

.

Executive Order 1
January 22, 1862

The purpose of this war is to attack, pursue, and destroy a rebellious enemy and to deliver the country from danger menaced by traitors. Alacrity, daring, courageous spirit, and patriotic zeal on all occasions and under every circumstance are expected from the Army of the United States. In the prompt and spirited movements and daring battle of Mill Springs the nation will realize its hopes, and the people of the United States will rejoice to honor every soldier and officer who proves his courage by charging with the bayonet and storming intrenchments or in the blaze of the enemy’s fire.

By order of the President:

EDWIN M. STANTON,

Secretary of War.

PRESIDENT’S GENERAL WAR ORDER NO. I.

.

(Author’s note: The lawful people acting within their constitutional and God-given natural rights are now considered “rebellious enemies” and “traitors”. In fact, the president himself was the traitor, defiling the organic constitution and the rights it stood for.)

.

Executive Order – General War Order No. 1
January 27, 1862

Ordered, That the 22d day of February, 1862, be the day for a general movement of the land and naval forces of the United States against the insurgent forces; that especially the army at and about Fortress Monroe. the Army of the Potomac, the Army of Western Virginia, the army near Munfordville, Ky., the army and flotilla at Cairo, and a naval force in the Gulf of Mexico be ready to move on that day.

That all other forces, both land and naval, with their respective commanders, obey existing orders for the time and be ready to obey additional orders when duly given.

That the heads of Departments, and especially the Secretaries of War and of the Navy, with all their subordinates, and the General in Chief, with all other commanders and subordinates of land and naval forces, will severally be held to their strict and full responsibilities for prompt execution of this order.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

.

.

Very importantly, this action by and against the southern States by the United States brought out what are referred to as the “Reconstruction Amendments” (13th, 14th, 15th) and later on the 16th, and 17th Amendments – or what I like to refer to as the legal person-ization and incorporation of the “people” of America from free men into indentured debt slaves, from the years 186o-1871. Or we could call this the corporeal enslavement of the people by turning us into own-able and transferable things (chattels), with the presumed consent of our unsuspecting, purposefully deceived and uneducated, incorporeal souls.

The 13th Amendment didn’t end slavery, it made it legal for government to create them by convicting them of a crime. The people alone, not the government, could no longer own or indenture themselves.

13th Amendment:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, EXCEPT as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 2 is ultimately the important clause here, as we will read later. The legislation created by congress allowing private prisons to use prisoners to work for slave wages is just one example of how the 13th Amendment created legalized slavery and indentured servitude in the “United States” jurisdiction.

–=–

What Is A Constitution?

–=–

Should we romanticize the “constitution” as our cherished law of the land that was derived from divine inspiration without question?

Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856 – the only law dictionary officially incorporated by Congress as part of the United States constitution and officially as part of the Supreme Court – let’s us know what the word “constitution” really stands for:

CONSTITUTIONcontracts. The constitution of a contract, is the making of the contract as, the written constitution of a debt. 1 Bell’s Com. 332, 5th ed.

CONSTITUTOR – civil law. He who promised by a simple pact to pay the debt of another; and this is always a principal obligation. Inst. 4, 6, 9.

(That’s you, by the way… you who are reading this as a citizen – you are the “constitutors” of the “constitution”)

TO CONSTITUTEcontracts. To empower, to authorize. In the common form of letters of attorney, these words occur, “I nominate, constitute and appoint.”

CONSTITUENTHe who gives authority to another to act for him. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 893.

CONSTITUIMUS – A Latin word which signifies we constitute. Whenever the king of England is vested with the right of creating a new office, he must use proper words to do so, for example, erigimus, constituimus, c . Bac. Ab. Offices, &c. E.

CHATTELSproperty. A term which includes all kinds of property, except the freehold or things which are parcel of it. It is a more extensive term than goods or effects. Debtors taken in execution, captives, apprentices, are accounted chattels. Godol. Orph. Leg. part 3, chap. 6, 1.

Of course, Article 6 of the constitution states very clearly that the United States is a debtor nation:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.”

There was never independence if this country was founded in debt to England and France.

–=–

What Is The United States?

–=–

It is also important to know the Bouvier’s Law Dictionary definition given in 1856 of the “United States”:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – …5. The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law. 6. The states, individually, retain all the powers which they possessed at the formation of the constitution, and which have not been given to congress. (q. v.)

–=–

***Remember this part, which have not been given to congress. As we saw with the 13th Amendment, this clause is oh so important with regards to the “reconstruction” of the United States and its “constitution” as a new organic (original) debt contract during this period of martial law. It will come as a shock just how much we the people have indeed given to congress…

So, the question becomes: What powers did the individual states retain? And which ones were “given to congress”?

For this, we must consider that a State was nothing more than the government incorporation of certain United States territories. Each territory, for the purposes of becoming a State of the Union, had something very sinister in common. This common element was a contract called the “Enabling Acts”, and were a uniform set of contractual agreements that were pre-determined and agreed to by all territories in order to become States (incorporated Federal Districts) of the United States.

Each Territory agreed to being a Federal District, and to having a Federal Governor and a Federal State District Attorney. These enabling legislation covenants were passed before each territory became a state, as a prerequisite for statehood and before the state constitution could be accepted by the United States.

More importantly, we can read in the following State “Enabling Acts” that all territorial unappropriated and non-deeded land was granted to the United States via these contracts of statehood. Once the people were made to became citizens via the 14th Amendment, they lost their independence and became subject to the UNITED STATES jurisdiction.

Most western states have the following types of verbiage. Read carefully…

Colorado Enabling Acts:

§ 4. Constitutional convention – requirements of constitution. That the members of the convention thus elected shall meet at the capital of said territory, on a day to be fixed by said governor, chief justice, and United States attorney, not more than sixty days subsequent to the day of election, which time of meeting shall be contained in the aforesaid proclamation mentioned in the third section of this act, and after organization, shall declare, on behalf of the people of said territory, that they adopt the constitution of the United States; whereupon the said convention shall be and is hereby authorized to form a constitution and state government for said territory; provided, that the constitution shall be republican in form, and make no distinction in civil or political rights on account of race or color, except Indians not taxed, and not be repugnant to the constitution of the United States and the principles of the declaration of independence; and, provided further, that said convention shall provide by an ordinance irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of said state; first, that perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and no inhabitant of said state shall ever be molested in person or property, (only) on account of his or her mode of religious worship; secondly, that the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States; and that the lands belonging to citizens of the United States residing without (outside of the jurisdiction of) said state shall never be taxed higher than the lands belonging to residents thereof, and that no taxes shall be imposed by the state on lands or property therein belonging to, or which may hereafter be purchased by the United States.

Note the distinction between US citizens that are both within (residents of) and “without” of the declared United States jurisdiction of this new State – meaning those with already appropriated land.

And within the Utah enabling acts for the Utah State constitution, in similar uniform legal language (Commercial CODE), it states:

…Second. That the people inhabiting said proposed State do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof; and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes; and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, and said Indian lands shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the Congress of the United States Third. That the debts and liabilities of said Territory, under authority of the Legislative Assembly thereof, shall be assumed and paid by said State.

Note that the “debts and liabilities” portion of this is a demand that the citizens of the new “State” become “constitutors” of the constitution, which, as with all constitutions, makes this a debt contract. Also note that Indian lands are absolutely in no way independent of the United States Federal corporation.

To put this into perspective: If a state government goes away, the land that the fictional corporation (state government) sat upon is still a territory of the United States. States are not independent either politically or naturally, for a state is not of God. A “State” is a fictional incorporated creation of the United States corporation. Only men can be naturally and completely independent of the United States.

These “Enabling Acts” can be found for most of the non-original States as prerequisites to their State constitutions.

–=–

The Southern States:
A New Organic Constitution Is Created By Conquest

–=–

In August 1866, once the civil war was ended and brothers had killed brothers, president Andrew Johnson moved to restore the former Confederate states back into to the unlawful Union. In March 1867, the First Reconstruction Act placed the South under military occupation within federal military districts. Georgia, Alabama, and Florida for instance, became part of the “Third Military District” under the command of General John Pope. Ex-Confederates (the people) were kept from voting or holding public office under military rule, and were replaced with what were referred to as Freedmen, Carpetbaggers, and Scalawags – the Whigs who originally opposed the succession.

Suddenly, the confederate landowners of these states had lost their land rights, and were now faced with the fact that freedmen had the right of vote. These “freedmen” began to live freely on these lands and plantations against the wishes of these confederate land-owners.

FREEDMEN – The name formerly given by the Romans to those persons who had been released from a State of servitude. Vide Liberti libertini. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

RIGHT – …3. It is that quality in a person by which he can do certain actions, or possess certain things which belong to him by virtue of some title. In this sense, we use it when we say that a man has a right to his estate or a right to defend himself... 2. In this latter sense alone, will this word be here considered. Right is the correlative of duty, for, wherever one has a right due to him, some other must owe him a duty. 1 Toull. n. 96. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

In Georgia, black voters were forcibly registered to vote and now sudenly outnumbered the white voters, which sparked the forming of the KKK and the eventual violence that led to the expelling of the new black senators from the Georgia legislature despite the state constitution’s forbidding of blacks serving in office. From October 29 through November 2, 1867, elections were held for delegates to a new constitutional convention in Atlanta, not in the nations capital, and again did not allow ex-confederates (white land and plantation owners) to participate. Charles Jenkins was the first post-war elected governor, coming to office in January 1868. But he refused to authorize state funds for the state constitutional convention (which would have created a new organic State constitution for Georgia), and this government was yet again unlawfully dissolved by General George Meade and replaced by a military governor under military rule. Georgia was returned to military rule to quell violence after Ulysses S. Grant was “elected” president, being one of only two ex-Confederate states to vote against Grant.

All of this was “unconstitutional”, but only when using that word as it refers to the original organic 1786 constitution, as we will see. The United States is still under military rule, which is the very reason that martial law can still be declared with the stroke of a presidential pen, just as Abraham Lincoln first penned it in 1861. If a state were to attempt to succeed from the “union” today, martial law would be declared and military rule would ensue until the rebellion could be squashed, no different than it was then. And the “civil” law would be forcibly restored. As long as the elected governments cooperate with the United States and its uniform rules and codes, martial law is not declared and military rule is not so obvious – thus the illusion of being a free country is maintained.

In March 1869, the new United States Congress again barred Georgia’s representatives from their seats, causing military rule to resume in December 1869. By January 1870, General Alfred H. Terry as commander of the Third Military District forcibly removed from the legislature all ex-Confederates, replacing them with the Republican runners-up, and reinstated all expelled black legislators. Once again, there was a Republican majority in the legislature friendly to the United States corporation.

And finally, in July of 1870, Georgia was forcibly readmitted to the Union – a military conquest – and the newly elected but unlawful and (organically) unconstitutional General Assembly ratified the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States. A Republican governor named Rufus Bullock was inaugurated. He was from New York, not Georgia.

Section 1 of Amendment 14 states:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And with the unlawful and unconstitutional passing of this amendment, everything changed, and every man became a person and a citizen under presumed consent.

–=–

What Happened To The Original Supreme Court?
–=–

Under military rule, the courts must of course be recreated into military courts.

In 1870, with the reconstruction of the United States well under way and a new organic constitution established through amendment, Congress passed the “Act to Establish the Department of Justice (DOJ)“, setting this replacement up as an executive department of the government of the United States“, officially coming into existence with the signing of the presidential pen on July 1, 1870. The Attorney General of the United States became the appointed Cabinet level political position in charge of this new department.

Just one problem here… this Act to create the Department of Justice had the tiny little side-effect of all but nullifying what was always considered to be the independent third branch of government as a check and balance – the stuff of legend – the “Judicial Branch”. And so the DOJ became for all intents and purposes the new Judicial Branch of government. But this was not the traditional branch of government we all believe it to be… for it was now a branch of the Executive Department of government (of the president), and in modern times now includes:

Leadership offices

Divisions

Federal Law enforcement agencies

Offices

Other offices and programs

–=–

The BAR Is The Court

–=–

This Executive Department is headed by the appointed Attorney General of the United States – whom is required to be a BAR Association member. The “legal” system in this country has been contracted over to this 100% private association called the American Bar Association (ABA), a representative union and advocacy club for attorneys, which all but monopolizes the entirety of the administration of the law and the legal profession with the help of federal and state laws requiring this trust. Jurisprudence, the science and administration of law, has been fundamentally usurped by this private association. In fact, the Supreme Court wont even hear a case unless it is from a BAR accredited attorney or one who has been approved by another BAR member. In short, the BAR decides what cases will be heard by the Supreme Court, and the court denies cases that aren’t approved by the ABA.

The under-appreciated significance of the BAR Association in the selection of Supreme Court Justices needs to be mentioned here. Of course, the American Bar Association was formed just after the reconstruction process of the United States, in 1878. Since the 1950’s, the ABA has participated in the federal judicial nomination process by vetting nominees and giving them a rating ranging from “not qualified” to “well qualified.” In 2005, the ABA gave John Roberts, George W. Bush’s nomination for Chief Justice of the United States, a unanimous “well-qualified” rating. In 2006, the ABA gave a unanimous “well-qualified” rating to Judge Samuel Alito, Bush’s appointee for Sandra Day O’Connor’s Associate Justice position.

It is also quite important to note that this private association takes an official, purposefully biased stance on certain issues, making the ABA a politically oriented association of more than significant power. For instance, it has an official stance on abortion – the BAR is pro-abortion. The ABA requires collegial programs to offer “Affirmative Action” in their courses which would lead to an ABA accreditation. And it has an official stance on gun control…

From it’s website called the “Standing (ABA) Committee On Gun Violence”:

Assault Weapons
The ABA supports permanent reauthorization of the 1994 enacted ban on assault weapons.

Gun Industry Tort Immunity Legislation
The ABA believes that the gun industry should be held accountable under state civil liability laws, like other industries, businesses, and individuals.

Lawyer’s Role in Addressing Gun Violence
The ABA believes that lawyers share a special responsibility to help create a just and secure society in which firearms are well-regulated.

Regulation of Firearms as Consumer Products
The ABA supports enactment of legislation to provide authority to the Treasury Department to regulate firearms as consumer products, to set minimum mandatory safety standards, to issue recalls of defective products and prohibit sales of firearms failing to meet minimum safety standards, and to disseminate safety information to the public.

(Source –> http://www.americanbar.org/groups/committees/gun_violence.html)

–=–

Again, the significance of having such official political views by such an organization is problematic at the least. This means that in a gun control case, where all attorneys and the judge who sits on the case making the final decision, they will all have the pressure of the official stance of the organization they are forced to be members of when making decisions on such national issues, and in taking away basic “constitutional” and/or natural rights.

Can a gun-owner get a “fair trial” if his defending attorney, the prosecuting attorney, and his presiding judge are all three members of the ABA?

Also notice that the executive office of all U.S. Attorneys, including U.S. State Attorney Generals and Legal Councils are within the DOJ, as well as all things related to law enforcement. Also, another top DOJ official is the Solicitor General, who just happens to represent the federal government in cases heard before the US Supreme Court, and would be doing so against another BAR attorney as the prosecutor.

What is the only thing in the entire court/legal system that is seemingly missing from this list? The Supreme Court itself. So let’s examine this body of supposedly independent justices…

The members (justices) of the supreme court are attorneys… BAR’d attorneys, to be exact. This alone is disturbing to anyone who knows the history of the BAR (British Accreditation Registry). But what is more problematic is the very structure of that court and how these “justices” are appointed to their positions of power – the power to declare legislative and Executive public opinion (positive law) as either constitutional or unconstitutional with the self-proclaimed authority of what it claims to be constitutional “judicial review”.

The inherent problem with this structure? The Executive Branch appoints the Supreme Court Justices with the approval of the Legislative Branch.

Hmmm… who else is part of the Executive branch of government? Oh yeah… President Obama. In fact he’s the head of the entire Executive Branch, which also makes him the true head of the Department of Justice. For while the president has the privilege of appointing non-elected officials to be the “secretaries” or heads of these individual departments like the DOJ with the delegated authority of the Executive, the president is ultimately responsible for everything that happens within the Executive Branch. After all, he is the only person that was  actually “elected” in the whole Executive Branch!

To put this into easily understood terms, the whole Supreme Court is appointed by the office of the president of the United States, who just so happens to also be a BAR attorney this time around. Can you have a separation of powers if the Executive is a member of the judicial BAR? About 56 senators and 36% of congress are also BAR attorneys. The BAR Attorney General was appointed by the BAR president of the United States. The BAR Solicitor General was also appointed by the BAR President of the United States.

You see the problem here?

To call this a conflict of interest is laughable in its underwhelming description of the “judicial” governance as a “check-and-balance” system for this government. And for anyone who is reading this that still entertains the ridiculous notion that there is still any form of “separation of powers” in these “branches” of government – you need your head examined… or you just need to read the following case.

–=–

The Strange But Legal Case Against Eric Holder

–=–

Imagine if an old-time mafia-boss appointed the governor, the chief of police, the mayors, the judges, and the prosecuting attorney of his turf (city/state) where he and his appointed mafia gang members commit daily their organized crime. Well… you don’t have to imagine, because that is exactly what happens every time the president makes his cabinet and judicial appointments. Only instead of turf, they call it his jurisdiction.

As if to help clarify this scenario, a news story just recently broke for your reading pleasure. If nothing else, this article from “The Associated Press” should clear up any misconceptions about the Supreme or any other federal Court (and they’re all federal) with regards to their perceived independence and bias from the legislature and the Executive. My notes are in (Red):

–=–

Justice won’t prosecute Holder for contempt
No grand jury » The department says the A.G.’s decisions don’t constitute a crime.

By LARRY MARGASAK and PETE YOST

| The Associated Press

First Published Jun 29 2012 01:40 pm • Last Updated Jun 29 2012 11:18 pm

Washington • The Justice Department declared Friday that Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to withhold information about a bungled gun-tracking operation from Congress does not constitute a crime and he won’t be prosecuted for contempt of Congress. (Note that this declaration was not made from inside of a courtroom or made by a jury of his peers, and therefore it will never be heard inside of a court room, nor, more importantly, by the people in a grand jury. Here we see that by the act of denying Congress access to the Judicial (DOJ), the Executive has no check or balance. Congress itself cannot prosecute – it must move the case into “judicial review” utilizing the DOJ!)

The House voted Thursday afternoon to find Holder in criminal and civil contempt for refusing to turn over the documents. President Barack Obama invoked his executive privilege authority and ordered Holder not to turn over materials about executive branch deliberations and internal recommendations. (In case you missed that, the president’s appointment was just following the presidents orders. So really, Obama should be on trial for gunrunning, not his minion. Executive privilege is code for the fact that there are no checks and balances but those consented to by the Executive. Executive privilege is what a dictator has who is above his own laws.)

In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, the department (DOJ) said that it will not bring the congressional contempt citation against Holder to a federal grand jury and that it will take no other action to prosecute the attorney general. Dated Thursday, the letter was released Friday. (Note that this decision leaves no one left to prosecute. The Executive Branch has just side-stepped the entire criminal justice system… Of course, that’s because the executive literally IS the entire criminal justice system (DOJ). Get it? Would you prosecute yourself if you had the choice [executive privilege] not to? Think about it… Would a king punish himself in his own “court“?)

Deputy Attorney General James Cole said the decision is in line with long-standing Justice Department practice across administrations of both political parties. (That’s the deputy attorney, who’s employed by the Attorney General and the DOJ, by the way!)

“We will not prosecute an executive branch official under the contempt of Congress statute for withholding subpoenaed documents pursuant to a presidential assertion of executive privilege,” Cole wrote. (Translation: The Executive Branch will not prosecute the Executive Branch!!! We WILL NOT prosecute an executive branch official because we are not a constitutional government, we are a corporation with a charter that we happen to call a constitution. There is no judicial branch of government any more as a check and balance, since all law and justice functions were transferred to the DOJ. And if there was (is), we would never allow it to reach the Judicial Branch in a criminal case because we have the power and privilege to stop it. I mean… we aren’t going to prosecute ourselves, sillies!)

In its letter, the department (DOJ) relied in large part on a Justice Department legal opinion crafted during Republican Ronald Reagan’s presidency. (Did you catch that? The Justice Department relied on a Justice Department legal opinion!!! Double-speak doesn’t just happen in “1984”, and war certainly is peace!)

Although the House voted Thursday to find Holder in criminal and civil contempt, Republicans probably are still a long way from obtaining documents they want for their inquiry into Operation Fast and Furious, a flawed gun-tracking investigation focused on Phoenix-area gun shops by Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. (So Congress is trying to obtain documents about the Justice Department from the accused head of the Justice Department about a Justice Department agency he was in charge of [the ATF]. Ah-ah-ah Congress… Executive Privilege…)

The criminal path is now closed and the civil route through the courts would not be resolved anytime soon.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is leading the effort to get the material related to Operation Fast and Furious.

This is pure politics,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

(Note that the word politics is defined by Bouvier’s Law Dictionary as

POLITICALPertaining to policy, or the administration of the government. Political rights are those which may be exercised in the formation or administration of the government they are distinguished from civil, rights, which are the rights which a man enjoys, as regards other individuals, and not in relation to the government. A political corporation is one which has principally for its object the administration of the government, or to which the powers of government, or a part of such powers, have been delegated. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 182, 197, 198. –

(In other words, Congress has no political rights when it comes to the DOJ. The DOJ is politically independant of Congress.)

–END A.P. ARTICLE–

(Source –> http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/54404909-68/contempt-department-holder-documents.html.csp)

–=–

Now let’s think about this for a moment… Eric Holder is the appointed head of the Executive Justice Department. Obama is the man who appointed him to that Executive office (with an honorable mention to the senate [THE CONGRESS] who approved him). The prosecuting attorney would also be from that Executive office. The Federal court in which that case would be heard would also be part of the Executive DOJ. The defending attorney representing the DOJ head Attorney General in that case would also be assigned by the Executive Department of Justice.

So how could the people possibly have justice against the President’s appointment or against the President himself, when the entire Justice System is completely under the President’s Executive control? How indeed… the only way would be to assemble a people’s grand jury so that the people could decide! But the executive branch that committed the crime (through the protection of the privilege and immunity of the president himself), as well as the ABA, has the power to halt a people’s jury from ever assembling in the Supreme Court to hear the case in the first place!!!

Yeah… it’s a free country! (Que penchant, disturbing laugh again.)

So, what else would you expect from a Supreme Court that was appointed by the president (whose name is publicly attached and associated to the health care bill) – a bill that congress (the house and senate – mostly BAR attorneys) passed through legislation?

Did you actually think that the presidential appointed “Justices” would decide that this bill was “unconstitutional”?

Do you still actually think that these “Branches” of government are in competition with one another?

Corporately and profitably speaking, the “Affordable Health Care For America Act” (A.K.A Obama-care) is very constitutional!!! After all, it contractually forces Americans to be “constitutors” to the insurance companies without forcing the insurance companies to cover all medical conditions… which in the totality of it all are majorly held companies of government through its pension fund and other investment funds. What more could a corporation want out of its constitution as a corporate charter?

–=–

A Shout Out To The Ladies

–=–

There are some very important legal words that we must define here before we can go on, and trust me when I say they definitely apply to you, the reader…

PEOPLEA state; as, the people of the state of New York; a nation in its collective and political capacity. 4 T. R. 783. See 6 Pet. S. C. Rep. 467. 2. The word people occurs in a policy of insurance. The insurer insures against “detainments of all kings, princes and people.” He is not by this understood to insure against any promiscuous or lawless rabble which may be guilty of attacking or detaining a ship. 2 Marsh. Ins. 508. – Vide Body litic; Nation. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

STATE – government. This word is used in various senses. In its most enlarged sense, it signifies a self-sufficient body of persons united together in one community for the defence of their rights, and to do right and justice to foreigners. In this sense, the state means the whole people united into one body politic; (q. v.) and the state, and the people of the state, are equivalent expressions. 1 Pet. Cond. Rep. 37 to 39; 3 Dall. 93; 2 Dall. 425; 2 Wilson’s Lect. 120; Dane’s Appx. §50, p. 63 1 Story, Const. §361. In a more limited sense, the word `state’ expresses merely the positive or actual organization of the legislative, or judicial powers; thus the actual government of the state is designated by the name of the state; hence the expression, the state has passed such a law, or prohibited such an act. State also means the section of territory occupied by a state, as the state of Pennsylvania.

(Author’s note: This means that The “State” of Pennsylvania or any other one of the 50 states in the union is the incorporated body politic governing a territory of (owned by) the United States. The United States is the D.C. corporation that owns the territory for which the individual 50 states (governments) are incorporated within- they are each United States sub-corporations, allowed to exist by the United States corporation. The land is still the claimed constitutional territory of the United States, despite the 50 State corporations residing on it.)

It is important to note that the use in modern day language of this word people is not the legal term that was used for the constitution. Remember, Bouvier’s Law Dictionary was cherished for being the definitive legal dictionary in regards to the language at the signing of and within the constitution. The only “people” who actually signed the constitution were the founding fathers, and they signed merely as legal witnesses for the individual “States”. You are only people (of the State, the Nation) if you as an individual man consent to it through contract with the State (United States) as a person.

Also of equal importance… if you are a woman reading this text you have probably noticed that I keep using the word man and never the word woman. As this is in fact a presentation on legal terminology, I wish to let you know that this has been a purposeful effort on my part. Why? Because you, as a woman, are actually a man – at least in the law society – unless you legally claim to be a woman.

Let’s see what it means to claim yourself to be a registered woman citizen.

First, we must define the root of that word, which is “man”, again from Bouvier’s Law, 1856:

MAN –  A human being. This definition includes not only the adult male sex of the human species, but women and children; examples: “of offenses against man, some are more immediately against the king, other’s more immediately against the subject.” Hawk. P. C. book 1, c. 2, s. 1. Offenses against the life of man come under the general name of homicide, which in our law signifies the killing of a man by a man.” Id. book 1, c. 8, s. 2. – 2. In a more confined sense, man means a person of the male sex; and sometimes it signifies a male of the human species above the age of puberty. Vide Rape. It was considered in the civil or Roman law, that although man and person are synonymous in grammar, they had a different acceptation in law; all persons were men, but all men, for example, slaves, were not persons, but things. Vide Barr. on the Stat. 216, note.

MANKIND. Persons of the male sex; but in a more general sense, it includes persons of both sexes; for example, the statute of 25 Hen. VIII., c. 6, makes it felony to commit, sodomy with mankind or beast. Females as well as males are included under the term mankind. Fortesc. 91; Bac. Ab. Sodomy. See Gender.

WOMEN – persons. In its most enlarged sense, this word signifies all the females of the human species; but in a more restricted sense, it means all such females who have arrived at the age of puberty. Mulieris appellatione etiam virgo viri potens continetur. Dig. 50, 16, 13. – 2. Women are either single or married. 1. Single or unmarried women have all the civil rights of men; they may therefore enter into contracts or engagements; sue and be sued; be trustees or guardians, they may be witnesses, and may for that purpose attest all papers; but they are generally, not possessed of any political power; hence they cannot be elected representatives of the people, nor be appointed to the offices of judge, attorney at law, sheriff, constable, or any other office, unless expressly authorized by law; instances occur of their being appointed post-mistresses nor can they vote at any election. Wooddes. Lect. 31; 4 Inst. 5; but see Callis, Sew. 252; 2 Inst 34; 4 Inst. 311, marg. – 3. The existence of a married woman being merged, by a fiction of law, in the being of her husband, she is rendered incapable, during the coverture, of entering into any contract, or of suing or being sued, except she be joined with her husband; and she labors under all the incapacities above mentioned, to which single women are subject. Vide Abortion; Contract; Divorce; Feminine; Foetus; Gender; Incapacity; Man; Marriage; Masculine; Mother; Necessaries; Parties to Actions Parties to Contracts; Pregnancy; Wife.

Note that man is a human being, and woman is a person.

So you see, being a female of the species human is not only wonderful but necessary for life itself to continue… But being a wo-man is not. Your rights as a woman (person) are civil, meaning they are prescribed and bestowed upon you as a citizen, or person. Ironically, with the advent of woman’s “rights”, this distinction in legal sexual identification erases a mans natural rights and turns her into a woman – which by default is and always has been beneath a male human man unless the civil legal code states otherwise – which it does. This may be difficult to understand, and even more difficult to utilize, but a woman can only be free from the United States as chattel by publicly shedding herself of her womanhood (her corporate person-hood). You, as a female, do not have the right to vote. But by accepting person-hood, you are granted the privilege to vote as a “civil right“, placing you on equal footing through legislation as a male.

Perhaps this will help in your cognition…

A horse can be male or female, and is still called a horse. It is not called a wo-horse. The same goes for pigs, sheep, dogs, cats, lizards, spiders, and every living sentient being on earth. Only in the corrupt minds of men could such a legal distinction of such binding and degrading class structure be brought to bear upon one half of the species of man! (And by the minds of man/men I mean the ladies too! Just look at that woman in Congress Nancy Pelosi! Yuck!!!)

–=–

The Incivility Of Civil Rights

–=–

While we are on the subject of the legal term “civil”, let’s briefly touch on the horrific hoax of what are called “civil rights”.

Knowing that a “right” is always nothing more than a permitted-by-government legal privilege, such privileges as the right to vote are considered “civil rights“.

The claim of civil rights made without legal standing (outside of government and the civil courts) places civility into the natural realm of man. But in legal language, a civil right is a right that can be taken away. A civil liberty is a liberty that can be taken away. And a civil court is a court that can take civil rights and property away.

Of course, we must specifically define this word in its legal context:

CIVIL. This word has various significations. 1. It is used in contradistinction to barbarous or savage, to indicate a state of society reduced to order and regular government; thus we speak of civil life, civil society, civil government, and civil liberty. 2. It is sometimes used in contradistinction to criminal, to indicate the private rights and remedies of men, as members of the community, in contrast to those which are public and relate to the government; thus we speak of civil process and criminal process, civil jurisdiction and criminal jurisdiction.

CIVIL LAW. The municipal code of the Romans is so called. It is a rule of action, adopted by mankind in a state of society. It denotes also the municipal law of the land. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 11. See Law, civil.

CIVIL OBLIGATIONCivil law. One which binds in law, vinculum juris, and which may be enforced in a court of justice. Poth. Obl. 173, and 191. See Obligation.

Trust me when I say that the last thing that a man should wish upon him or her self is to have the government decide what is civil. A jury of peers, maybe. Civil rights, as used in the legal context within the jurisdiction of the United States for women, blacks (freedmen) and whites as equal persons, is the vehicle for which your natural or “private” rights as a man are transferred via citizen contract as a person into “public” legal (civil) rights dictated by government.

The perfect example of what civil rights did to natural rights is this beauty in the U.S. CODE, TITLE 42 – entitled: “THE PUBLIC WELFARE”

TITLE 42 > Chapter 21 > Subchapter 1 > § 1981

(a) Statement of equal rights

“All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States (FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INCORPORATED) shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.”

With citizenship and its forced privilege (right) of civil rights comes not the loss of freedom, for freedom is specifically defined as obeying the law… but instead, a civil right as defined under government code (public policy) takes away the choice of civility and creates a statutory mandate that binds one to mandated statutory civility. And the civil “right” to be punished, put in pain, incur penalties, be taxed, be required to obtain and pay for a license as permission to have freedom to do some thing or act, and to be exacted (extorted) from becomes what the government calls an “equal right“.

So congratulations on being a woman (person) or a black freedman citizen (person) of equal privilege to white citizens (persons), for you are equally enslaved as chattel as the rest of us!

Just what did you really think affirmative action was put into place for? To give you natural civil rights!

Ha, ha ha ha ha…

It made us all equally indebted and extorted, man.

–=–

What Are The Duties Of The Attorney General?

–=–

Now, I’d like to share with you what the government website of the Attorney General of Illinois has to say about this very question.

You can click on the following (.gov) link to verify that this information came from that source (emphasis mine):

(Source–> http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/about/history.html) (This info is about 2/3 the way down that .gov page)

–=–

–Begin Excerpt–

—————————————————————————

“History of the Office of the Illinois Attorney General”

—————————————————————————

“The effect of the establishment of the Office of Attorney General under the 1870 Constitution, not fully recognized for several decades, was the creation of an office with broad powers to represent and safeguard the interests of the People of this State. The Attorney General has been determined, in decisions of the supreme court, to have not just those duties and powers that might be specifically prescribed in statutory enactments, but to have all those duties that appertain to the Office of Attorney General as it was known at common law. The phrase “prescribed by law” was rejected as a limitation on the Attorney General’s powers to those specified by statute. The supreme court stated in Fergus v. Russel (1915), 270 Ill. 304, discussed below, that “[t]he common law is as much a part of the law of this State as the statutes and is included in the meaning of this phrase.” (See, 5 ILCS 50/1.)

(Author’s note: Statutes are not law without the people’s consent. There is no law in the United States Inc, only statute, public policy, and CODE. Prescribed by law is not the same as prescribed by statute, and so this phrase needed editing. Law only happens outside of the United States’ jurisdiction.)

History continued…

In considering the powers of the Attorney General, the supreme court, in Fergus v. Russel, noted:

* * * Under our form of government all of the prerogatives which pertain to the crown in England under the common law are here vested in the people, and if the Attorney General is vested by the constitution with all the common law powers of that officer and it devolves upon him to perform all the common law duties which were imposed upon that officer, then he becomes the law officer of the people, as represented in the State government, and its only legal representative in the courts, unless by the constitution itself or by some constitutional statute he has been divested of some of these powers and duties.”

(Fergus, at 337.)

The court went on to state:

* * * By our Constitution we created this office by the common law designation of Attorney General and thus impressed it with all its common law powers and duties. As the Office of the Attorney General is the only office at common law [exercising legal functions] which is thus created by our Constitution, the Attorney General is the chief law officer of the State, and the only officer empowered to represent the people in any suit or proceeding in which the State is the real party in interest.”

(Fergus, at 342.)

The court noted that it is the Attorney General’s duty “to conduct the law business of the State, both in and out of the courts.” (Fergus, at 342.)

With these pronouncements, the court in Fergus clearly established the Office of Attorney General as one with expansive powers which the General Assembly lacked the power to diminish. While it has frequently been argued that much of the language in Fergus broadly describing the Attorney General’s role is obiter dicta, it is clear that Fergus stands for “the principle that the Attorney General is the sole officer who may conduct litigation in which the People of the State are the real party in interest.” People ex rel. Scott v. Briceland (1976), 65 Ill. 2d 485, 495. Under Fergus and its progeny, any attempt to authorize any other officer to conduct litigation in which the State is the real party in interest would be an impermissible interference with the Attorney General’s constitutional powers and an appropriation to another agency to be used directly for such purposes would be unconstitutional and void.

The powers generally understood to belong to the Attorney General at common law have been summarized as follows:

* * * 1st. To prosecute all actions, necessary for the protection and defense of the property and revenues of the crown.

2d. By information, to bring certain classes of persons accused of crimes and misdemeanors to trial.

[3rd.] By scire facias, to revoke and annul grants made by the crown improperly, or when forfeited by the grantee thereof.

4th. By information, to recover money or other chattels, or damages for wrongs committed on the land, or other possessions of the crown.

5th. By writ of quo warranto, to determine the right of him who claims or usurps any office, franchise or liberty, and to vacate the charter, or annul the existence of a corporation, for violations of its charter, or for omitting to exercise its corporate powers.

6th. By writ of mandamus, to compel the admission of an officer duly chosen to his office, and to compel his restoration when illegally ousted.

7th. By information in chancery, to enforce trusts, and to prevent public nuisances, and the abuse of trust powers.

8th. By proceedings in rem, to recover property to which the crown may be entitled, by forfeiture for treason, and property, for which there is no other legal owner, such as wrecks, treasure trove, &c. (3 Black. Com., 256-7, 260 to 266; id., 427 and 428; 4 id., 308, 312.)

9th. And in certain cases, by information in chancery, for the protection of the rights of lunatics, and others, who are under the protection of the crown. (Mitford’s Pl., 24-30, Adams’ Equity, 301-2.)

* * * “

1919-20 Ill. Att’y Gen. Op. 618, 629-30, quoting from People v. Miner, 3 Lansing (NY) 396 (1868).

–End Excerpt–

Please go to this link for this government site and copy or digitize it, before this little treasure gets taken down.

–=–

The “Crown” Defined

–=–

For the purposes of understanding what the word “crown” means in the above referenced U.S. court case by the Illinois Attorney, here are a few legal definitions that may help, dated from both modern and 1800’s period dictionary perspectives. See if you can put the puzzle pieces together via these legal definitions…

–=–

COURT – n. 3. A palace; the place of residence of a king or sovereign prince. 5. Persons who compose the retinue or council of a king or emperor. 9. The tabernacle had one court; the temple, three. –Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

COURTn. 2 the place where a king or queen lives or meets others. –The Newbury House Dictionary ©1999.

ESQUIRE – n. [L. scutum, a shield; Gr. a hide, of which shields were anciently made.], a shield-bearer or armor-bearer, scutifer; an attendant on a knight. Hence in modern times, a title of dignity next in degree below a knight. In England, this title is given to the younger sons of noblemen, to officers of the king’s courts and of the household, to counselors at law, justices of the peace, while in commission, sheriffs, and other gentlemen. In the United States, the title is given to public officers of all degrees, from governors down to justices and attorneys. –Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

CROWN – n. 4. Imperial or regal power or dominion; sovereignty. There is a power behind the crown greater than the crown itself. Junius. 19. A coin stamped with the image of a crown; hence, a denomination of money; as, the English crown. — Crown land, land belonging to the crown, that is, to the sovereign. — Crown law, the law which governs criminal prosecutions. — Crown lawyer, one employed by the crown, as in criminal cases. v.t. 1. To cover, decorate, or invest with a crown; hence, to invest with royal dignity and power. –1913 Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary.

COLONY – n. 1. A company [i.e. legal corporation] or body of people transplanted from their mother country to a remote province or country to cultivate and inhabit it, and remaining subject to the jurisdiction of the parent state; as the British colonies in America or the Indies; the Spanish colonies in South America. –-Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

LAWFUL – In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal” process however defective. –A Dictionary of Law 1893.

LEGAL – Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual (law). “Legal” looks more to the letter, and “Lawful” to the spirit, of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle. “Legal” imports rather that the forms of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed; “Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral quality is secured. “Legal” is the antithesis of “equitable”, and the equivalent of “constructive”. –2 Abbott’s Law Dict. 24; A Dictionary of Law (1893).

RULE – n. [L. regula, from rego, to govern, that is, to stretch, strain or make straight.] 1. Government; sway; empire; control; supreme command or authority. 6. In monasteries, corporations or societies, a law or regulation to be observed by the society and its particular members. –Webster’s 1828 Dictionary

RULEn. 1 [C] a statement about what must or should be done, (syn.) a regulation.

ATTORN (root of “attorney”) – [etern] Anglo-French aturner to transfer (allegiance of a tenant to another lord), from Old French atorner to turn (to), arrange, from a– to + torner to turn: to agree to be the tenant of a new landlord or owner of the same property. –Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law ©1996.

ATTORN – v.i. [L. ad and torno.] In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another. This is the act of feudatories, vassels or tenants, upon the alienation of the estate. –Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

ESTATE n. [L. status, from sto, to stand. The roots stb, std and stg, have nearly the same signification, to set, to fix. It is probable that the L. sto is contracted from stad, as it forms steti.] 1. In a general sense, fixedness; a fixed condition; 5. Fortune; possessions; property in general. 6. The general business or interest of government; hence, a political body; a commonwealth; a republic. But in this sense, we now use State.

ESTATE – v.t. To settle as a fortune. 1. To establish. –-Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

STATEn. [L., to stand, to be fixed.] 1. Condition; the circumstances of a being or thing at any given time. These circumstances may be internal, constitutional or peculiar to the being, or they may have relation to other beings. 4. Estate; possession. [See Estate.] Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

FREEDOM – Liberty; the right to do what is not forbidden by law. Freedom does not preclude the idea of subjection to law; indeed, it presupposes the existence of some legislative provision, the observance of which insures freedom to us, by securing the like observance from others. 2 Har. Cond. L. R. 208. —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary Revised Sixth Edition, 1856.

FREEMAN – One who is in the enjoyment of the right to do whatever he pleases, not forbidden by law. One in the possession of the civil rights (privilages) enjoyed by, the people generally. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 164. See 6 Watts, 556 –-Bouvier’s Law Dictionary Revised Sixth Edition, 1856.

–=–

An Oath To Uphold The Corporate Charter?

–=–

Each applicant to the Supreme Court must take the following oath as a BAR attorney or approved litigator:

Each applicant shall sign the following oath or affirmation:

I, ……………, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that as an attorney and as a counselor of this Court, I will conduct myself uprightly and according to law, and that I will support the Constitution of the United States.

Yes… that’s the Constitution of the United States (not the United States “of America”).

Note here that the Constitution of the United States is the Corporate Charter for the United States Corporation. This charter, as is the case with all corporations, is re-read into the public record every 20 years – and most people think the “government” is just being patriotic. Note that the word “public” has a very different meaning than what is commonly used in our everyday communicative language. In legalese, the clandestine language of the law society, Public refers to “public policy”. The government, from congress to the Supreme Court decides not on what the law shall be, but instead it sets “public policy”. This statutory law is 100% based on the presumed consent of the governed, and that presumption is all but granted the second we are born into subjugation of the United States. There is no true natural law left in America with regards to what we mistakenly call “government”. In its place, we have public policy. This is 100% contract law. All interactions with this U.S. corporation by men are in contract form as persons – from the signing of a license to drive or to marry to the filing of taxes to being placed in prison. Every single act by the people (persons) as “residents” of Washington D.C. (the City of Columbia) is done so voluntarily. When the people “resister” to vote, they are turning their backs on natural law and on the organic constitution and are instead contracting to the United States (the corporation 10 miles square) as 14th Amendment persons per the 15th Amendment of the private corporate charter that happens to be called a constitution. And in doing so, the people are accepting the contractual offer of government to be considered “persons”, giving up their God-given natural rights to vote in exchange for the privilege (contract) to vote in Washington D.C (where all people within the jurisdiction of the United States [D.C.] corporation “reside” as “residents” – as contracted corporate “persons”).

In fact, the first question on the voting form is, “Are you a United States citizen?”

RESIDENTpersons. A person coming into a place with intention to establish his domicil or permanent residence, and who in consequence actually remains there. Time is not so essential as the intent, executed by making or beginning an actual establishment, though it be abandoned in a longer, or shorter period. See 6 Hall’s Law Journ. 68; 3 Hagg. Eccl. R. 373; 20 John. 211 2 Pet. Ad. R. 450; 2 Scamm. R. 377. (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856)

–=–

Who Really Elects The President Of The United States?

–=–

Hilariously, our consent to this 15th Amendment and to voter registration means that 100 million “public voters” all cast their votes solely in the District of Columbia, not in the state they live – which in the electoral college, D.C. only represents 3 electoral votes out of 538.

17th Amendment:

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.”

The Electoral College consists of these electors, who formally elect the President and Vice President of the United States (this is not the original united states of America, but the United States corporation). Since 1964, there have been 538 electors in each presidential election, as held in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution.

The Electoral College is an indirect election. This means that all registered Untied States “citizens” do not elect their president! Instead, the people elect congressmen, who along with their chosen political party, delegate the power of “elector” to others and thus the president (Chief Executive Officer ) is elected through the electoral college. This is how all major corporations work – the board of directors (congress) elect the CEO (president) of the corporation (United States).

So what happens to the millions upon millions of registered votes from the citizens (registered U.S. “persons”) of the United States?

It’s simple, really… The peoples votes are at best counted and the results may be similar to the 3 electoral college votes of the District of Columbia that are made by the electors (as public opinion) – the corporation that all voters are contractually “registered” to vote in and claim consensual residence in!

Through the electoral college, the constitutional “electors” of each state then vote for who the president and vice president of the corporation will be, each state having a different number of electoral votes based on population.

And the electoral college overrules the popular vote!!!

In other words, for all of the hoopla, pomp and circumstance, and billions and billions of dollars that surround the public vote for the presidential elections every four years, the whole thing is completely for show to fool the people into thinking they are electing the president! Because the popular (persons) vote doesn’t really count for anything…

The bible says that, “My people perish from a lack of knowledge.–Hosea 4: 6 (KJV).

In the case of legal persons, this could not be a more true statement. Men perish and virtually cease to exist because of their lack of knowledge of legalese and because of their own contractual corporate person-hood.

The voters of each state and the District of Columbia, through the political party system, vote for electors to be their authorized constitutional participants (electors) in a presidential election without most voters even knowing this is happening. Electors are free to vote for anyone eligible to be President, but in practice pledge to vote for specific candidates according to their political party, and political parties (not the people) cast ballots for favored presidential and vice presidential candidates by voting for correspondingly pledged electors within the party. Keep in mind that the Democratic and Republican parties, just like the BAR, are 100% private associations that do not represent the people in any way, though that is not what their media ads tell the people (voters) who support them.

What is the legal definition of “elector” from Bouvier’s law dictionary, 1856?

ELECTOR – government. One who has the right to make choice of public officers one, who has a right to vote. – 2. The qualifications of electors are generally the same as those required in the person to be elected; to this, however, there is one exception; a naturalized citizen may be an elector of president of the United States, although he could not constitutionally be elected to that office.

ELECTORS OF PRESIDENT. Persons elected by the people, whose sole duty is to elect a president and vice-president of the U. S. – 2. The Constitution provides, Am. art. 12, that “the electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for president and vice-president, one of whom at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as president, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as vice-president; and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as president, and of all persons voted for as vice-president, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit, sealed, to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the president of the senate; the president of the senate shall, in the presence of the senate and the house of representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted; the person having the greatest number of, votes for president, shall be the president, if such number be the majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no, person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers, not exceeding three, on the list of those voted for as president, the house of representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the president. But in choosing the president, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum, for this purpose, shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the house of representatives shall not choose a president whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the vice-president shall act as president, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the president. – 3. “The person having the greatest number of votes as vice-president shall be vice-president, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed and if no person have a majority, them from the two highest numbers on the list, the senate shall choose the vice-president; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of president, shall be eligible to that of vice-president of the United States.” Vide 3 Story, Const. §1448 to 1470.

–End–

–=–

Who In The Hell Are The Actual “Electors”
Of The President Of This United States?

–=–

I’ll tell you one thing, it ain’t the people!

What we have here in America is what is called “Legislative Democracy”. Authority is delegated by the people to their congressmen, and in turn they make all decisions for the people, and the people never actually vote on any legislation, and therefore never actually vote on the laws that bind them. If that’s not slavery by legislative democracy, I don’t know what is!

This privilege of the electoral college election of the president of the United States is delegated each year by your congressmen (538 house and senate members of each state, who each have one vote per the constitution) and by the political parties themselves – delegated to other citizens of their perspective states called “electors”.

The Twelfth Amendment provides for each “elector” to cast one vote for President and one separate vote for Vice President. It also specifies how a President and Vice President are elected. In practice the pres and vice-pres are always of the same party. But in reality, they are elected separately, and so the United States could technically have a mixed party ticket. But the public would get really confused at this, and so the electors will never vote in that way so as to retain the quite open secret of their elite college.

12th Amendment:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate (the vice president).

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President

To get the full skinny from the Congressional Research Center, read this: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/36762.pdf

–=–

Nowhere here does it mention you, me, or any of the approximately 100 million “registered” voters in the United States. In short, the people do not in any way elect their president – though apparently most have been led to believe they do judging by the media circus that happens every four years costing billions of taxpayer and private campaign dollars. The presidency is really won by which ever political party lobbies the “electors” best, and by which party those electors represent and are members of. This is why someone like me will never be the president of the United States – unless, perhaps, the people actually wake up from their collective dream-state and finally realize that they do not have a choice, and finally revolt against the system that fools and re-enslaves them every four years. Silly persons

Even more disturbing is to actually see a list of who these “electors” are:

So let’s take the 2008 election as an example; where the first black person got elected in a flood of false “hope and change”… Remember how proud the people were that they had elected the first black president? They felt like they had collectively done something together to change the system. They felt so wonderful that they had utilized their “civil rights” and created hope for America. (LOL!!!)

My personal favorite of these 538 “electors” of 2008 is my own Attorney General of Utah, Mr. Mark Shurtleff.

If you are unfamiliar with my own dealings with our corrupt Attorney General, please take a couple of  moments to enjoy my previous confrontation with him at the March, 2010 Tea Party rally at the Utah State Capital in Salt Lake City:


Good times, and I didn’t even know he was an elector back then! Perhaps it’s time to find him again.

Oh, and sorry about the “music”…

When one looks at just a partial list of who gets appointed as electors by political parties, and when one considers the dates of when these people either attain office or get promoted (voted) into higher offices, one cannot help to start digging out the word conspiracy, dusting it off, and ditching the word theory altogether.

CONSPIRACYcriminal, 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.

CONSPIRATORS. Persons guilty of a conspiracy. See 3 Bl. Com. 126-71 Wils. Rep. 210-11. See Conspiracy.

Remember, with no law, all acts are unlawful in America. And with the DOJ in place, no plans between two or more people will ever be brought to the light of “justice”.

Other “electors” from 2008, who were solely and directly responsible for the election of President Obama include:

Harriet Smith Windsor – Delaware Secretary of State (2001-2009; a Democrat currently serving as the Vice Chair of the Delaware Democratic Party. In 2008 Windsor was an elector for  Barack Obama.

Edward E. “Ted” Kaufman  Delaware United States Senator from 2009 to 2010. Since 2010, he has chaired the Congressional Oversight Panel. He is a member of the Democratic Party who was appointed to the Senate to fill the term of long-time Senator Joe Biden, who resigned to become Vice President of the United States in January 2009. Prior to becoming a U.S. Senator, Kaufman had been an adviser to Biden for much of his political career.

(Author’s note: as stated above, the guy who gets APPOINTED to the U.S. Senate was one of 538 persons that was an elector and he voted for Biden. Anyone smell a plan between two or more people here? No? I sure smell something…)

Wellington E. Webb was the first African American Mayor of Denver (1991-2003), after his stints as Denver City Auditor (1987-1991), and as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies (1981-1987).

Muriel Bowser – Washington D.C. Democrat politician and a member of the Council of the District of Columbia representing Ward 4.

Vincent C. Gray – Mayor of the District of Columbia as of January, 2011, and was Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, as Council member for Ward 7. In the 1990s he also served as director of the DC Department of Human Services.

Anthony C. Hill Florida State Senator in the Democratic party (2002-2011). He currently serves as a legislative liaison for Jacksonville mayor, Alvin Brown.

Allan Katz is a writer, producer, actor, and director – with no political career. Katz was hired to be one of the youngest writers on Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In and moved to Los Angeles. While working on Laugh-In, he also wrote episodes of Sanford and Son, All in the Family, and The Mary Tyler Moore Show. He went on to both write and produce other series including M*A*S*H (TV series), The Cher Show, Rhoda, and Roseanne. And now he is an “elector”…???

Rick Minor – Florida policy adviser who is now running for the Florida House of Representatives as a member of the Democratic Party. Previously, he was the Chairman of the Leon County Democratic Party from 2005 to 2009.

Jared E. Moskowitz (born December 18, 1980) Elected to the City Commission of Parkland, Florida in March 2006 at age 25 while a second-year law student.

Francisco (Frank) J. Sánchez – A Florida BAR attorney currently serving as Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade at the Department of Commerce. From 1999 to 2000, he served as a Special Assistant to the President. From 2000 to 2001, he served as Assistant Transportation Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs. In 2001, he founded Cambridge Negotiation Strategies.

Karen L. Thurman Former Democratic U.S. Representative from Florida (1999-2003). In 2005 Thurman was elected Chairman of the Florida Democratic Party, resigning after the election in November 2010.

Carmen Tores – played a character named Margarita Cordova in an American soap opera called “Sunset Beach”. (Author’s note: WTF?)

Frederica Wilson – U.S. Representative for Florida’s 17th congressional district (2011-current). Previously, she was in the Florida State Senate (2003-2010).

James Randolph “Randy” Evans – BAR lawyer and Republican from Georgia, who ironically specializes in government ethics. Evans is a law partner at McKenna Long & Aldridge. He has served as a longtime advisor to the Republican Party of Georgia.

Deborah L. “Debbie” Halvorson – Former U.S. Representative for Illinois’ 11th congressional district (2009-2011). She is a member of the Democratic Party, and formally a state senator.

James Phillip Hoffa – James is the only son of the infamous Jimmy Hoffa. James is a BAR attorney and labor leader and the General President of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Hoffa was first elected during December 1998 and took office on March 19, 1999. He was subsequently re-elected in 2001, 2006 and 2011 to five-year terms. (Author’s note: Again, the irony here is thick enough to cut with a butter-knife.)

Ronald A. Gettelfinger – President of the  United Auto Workers union from 2002 to 2010. (Author’s note: Big surprise!)

Andrew Mark Cuomo – 56th and current Governor of New York, having assumed office on January 1, 2011. A member of the Democratic Party , he was also the 64th New York State Attorney General (2007-2010), and was the 11th United States Federal Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (1997-2001). Andrew is the son of Mario Cuomo, the 52nd Governor of New York (1983–1994).

Thomas P. DiNapoli – 54th Comptroller of the state of New York (also in charge of the state pension system). He is a former state assemblyman in New York, who was appointed as New York State Comptroller on February 7, 2007. Previous State Assemblyman (1987-2007).

Sheldon “Shelly” Silver – BAR lawyer and Democratic politician from New York. He has held the office of Speaker of the New York State Assembly since 1994.

Helen Dianne Foster Currently represents District 16 in the New York City Council. Elected in 2001, she is the current co-chair of the Black, Latino, and Asian Caucus. She currently serves as chairwoman of the Parks & Recreation Committee, and serves as a member of the Aging, Education, Health, Lower Manhattan Redevelopment, and Public Safety Committees. Prior to this she was a BAR Assistant District Attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, subsequent to which she became an Assistant Vice-President for legal affairs at St. Barnabas Hospital.

William Colridge Thompson, Jr. – Known as Bill or Billy, he was the 42nd Comptroller of New York City (2002-2009). He is the son of William C. Thompson, Sr., formerly a prominent Brooklyn Democratic Party leader, City Councilman, State Senator and BAR’d judge on New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division.

David Alexander Paterson – default 55th Governor of New York (2008 to 2010) as lieutenant governor (2007-2008) – heralded in after Eliot Spitzer resigned in the wake of a prostitution scandal. Paterson was sworn in as governor of New York on March 17, 2008. During his tenure he was the first governor of New York of non-European American heritage and also the second legally blind governor of any U.S. state.

Janice McKenzie Cole – BAR attorney who served as the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina (1994–2001) under President Bill Clinton.

TheodoreTedStrickland – 68th Democratic Governor of Ohio (2007-2011). Ted previously served in the United States House of Representatives, representing Ohio’s 6th congressional district (1993-1995). Strickland currently serves as a member of the Governors’ Council at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Bunny Chambers – Has Served As Oklahoma’s Republican National Committeewoman Since 1996. She currently serves on the Executive Committee of the Republican State Committee of Oklahoma. She has also held numerous positions on the grassroots level in her precinct and House District. Chambers has been a delegate to the Republican National Convention in 1988, 1996, 2000 and 2004.

Lynne Abraham – BAR attorney who served as the District Attorney of the City of Philadelphia from May 1991 to January 2010.

Thomas M. McMahon – Mayor of Reading, Pennsylvania from January 5, 2004 to January 2, 2012.

Michael Anthony Nutter – Current Mayor of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (since 2007). He is the third African-American mayor of Philadelphia, the largest city in the United States with an African-American mayor. He was re-elected on November 8, 2011. Nutter is a former councilman of the city’s 4th Council District, and has served as the 52nd Ward Democratic Leader since 1990.

Franco Harris – Former Professional football player. He played his NFL career with the Pittsburgh Steelers and Seattle Seahawks. Harris’ made comments in support of Joe Paterno, his coach while at Penn State, during the Penn State sex abuse scandal. Franco is a paid representative for the Harrah’s/Forest City Enterprises casino plan for downtown Pittsburgh. This association has earned him the nickname, “Franco Harrah’s”. (Author’s note: Again… WTF???)

Jack E. Wagner – Current auditor general of Pennsylvania (since 2005), and former state senator (1994-2005). He is a member of the Democratic Party.

Dennis M. Daugaard – 32nd Governor of South Dakota (since January 2011). BAR attorney. As a lieutenant governor under the South Dakota Constitution, Daugaard served as the President of the South Dakota Senate.

Marion Michael “Mike” Rounds– 31st Governor of South Dakota (2003-2011). Rounds currently serves as a member of the Governors’ Council at the Bipartisan Policy Center. Rounds served as the 2008 Chair of the Midwestern Governors Association (a private association). In its April 2010 report, ethics watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington named Rounds one of 11 “worst governors” in the United States because of various ethics issues throughout Rounds’ term as governor. Rounds is a partner in Fischer Rounds & Associates, an insurance and real estate firm. He placed his ownership interest into a blind trust upon being elected governor.

Bryant Winfield Culberson Dunn  – was the Republican Party 43rd Governor of Tennessee (1971-1975).

James Edward “Jim” Doyle – 44th Democrat Governor of Wisconsin (2003-2011). He is currently a BAR attorney ‘of counsel’ at the law firm of Foley & Lardner. 41st Attorney General of Wisconsin (1991-2003), as well as the Dane County District Attorney (1977-1982). In September 2010, Doyle was one of seven governors to receive a grade of F in the fiscal-policy report card of the Cato Institute.

–=–

To view the entire list of 2008 electors, click here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_electors,_2008

.

–=–

And This Is Constitutional?

–=–

The 23rd Amendment specifies how many “electors” the District of Columbia is entitled to have.

23rd Amendment:

Section 1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Government has just told you that Washington D.C. is definitely not a State. In actuality, it is “THE STATE” when using that word as the ultimate power of the corporate government via contract with persons and according to legal definitions. Section 2 is also very important, as this addition or “clause” about congress having “power to enforce and legislate” is a built in loophole that gives Congress the power to create any legislation – in other words, to do anything it wants. This clause is also found in the 13th, 14th and 15th amendment Amendments, as well as in the wording of the 16th amendment with regards to income tax. Interestingly, the Congress has delegated that authority created by the 16th Amendment over to the Executive Department via the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which means that Congress isn’t really the branch collecting income tax as is stated in Amendment 16. But then, CONGRESS HAS THE POWER TO ENFORCE THE INCOME TAX BY APPROPRIATE LEGISLATION!!! It is very convenient to write the rules that bind you, and then write the rule that lets you write the over-ruling rule to bypass the first rule, effectively rewriting what you have already written. Sound confusing? It’s supposed to!

–=–

Now, remember that I asked you to remember something… what was it…? Oh, yes!

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – …5. The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law. 6. The states, individually, retain all the powers which they possessed at the formation of the constitution, and which have not been given to congress. (q. v.)

Now we can see how important this section is in each of these Amendments.

Because the wording of the original (organic) constitution of the united states of America was not changed with the implementation of the corporate charter that amended the original constitution away, Congress left these little clauses in the reconstruction Amendments and future amendments so as to nullify and make void the power of the individual State’s rights. By stating here that “Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation”, this and the other amendments with this type of clause are not organic, as these amendment’s intent and meaning can at any time be altered or changed; not by another amendment, but by the day to day legislation within the halls of Congress. In other words, amendments to the constitution with this clause are not organic, as they can and are over-ruled by bills of congress, any time it is convenient.

This clause also does something very, very important… It nullifies the protections of the 10th Amendment!

The 10th Amendment states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Oops! The 14th Amendment, states that:

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

For all of you Tenth Amendment advocates out there, you should really pay attention here. By voluntarily consenting to the 14th Amendment and registering as a 14th Amendment person (citizen), you have given up your 10th Amendment protection. You have taken your residence out of the State you live in and contractually become a resident of Washington D.C. And that means that you also contractually agree to the rules and legal codes of the United States! Whereas before the 10th Amendment gave the individual States rights, Section 5 of the 14th Amendments left no one with 10th Amendment State’s rights – because you no longer have primary residence in the your state!

Let’s go back to Bouvier’s Law Dictionary (accepted by Congress as the official law dictionary for the Constitution and the Supreme Court) to get the definition of resident again:

RESIDENT – persons. A person coming into a place with intention to establish his domicil or permanent residence, and who in consequence actually remains there. Time is not so essential as the intent, executed by making or beginning an actual establishment, though it be abandoned in a longer, or shorter period. See 6 Hall’s Law Journ. 68; 3 Hagg. Eccl. R. 373; 20 John. 211 2 Pet. Ad. R. 450; 2 Scamm. R. 377.

RESIDENCE. The place of one’s domicil. (q. v.) There is a difference between a man’s residence and his domicil. He may have his domicil in Philadelphia, and still he may have a residence in New York; for although a man can have but one domicil, he may have several residences. A residence is generally tran-sient in its nature, it becomes a domicil when it is taken up animo manendi. Roberts; Ecc. R. 75. – 2. Residence is prima facie evidence of national character, but this may at all times be explained. When it is for a special purpose and transient in its nature, it does not destroy the national character. – 3. In some cases the law requires that the residence of an officer shall be in the district in which he is required to exercise his functions. (This is the case with Congress). Fixing his residence elsewhere without an intention of returning, would violate such law. Vide the cases cited under the article Domicil; Place of residence.

DOMICIL – 5. – §2. There are two classes of persons who acquire domicil by operation of law. 1st. Those who are under the control of another, and to whom the law gives the domicil of another. Among these are, 1. The wife. 2. The minor. 3. The lunatic, &c. 2d. Those on whom the state affixes a domicil… A party may have two domicils, the one actual, the other legal

–=–

To Vote Or Not To Vote?
That Really Is The Question.

–=–

Now, I used to tell people not to vote – that voting gave legitimacy to the very corporate charter of the United States, and therefore you get exactly what you consent to. But now, as I ponder the consequences of both voting and not voting, I realize that in the end it will make absolutely no difference whatsoever whether you or I vote or don’t vote for the office of president this year. Even if 100% of the eligible people voted legally (via registration) in the presidential primary, the people would only have at best a less than 1% minority say in who will be president with their 3 electoral votes. (I’m literally laughing out loud right now as I’m pulling my hair out in large strands, but I didn’t want to just say LOL because it’s such a sinister and crazy kind of laugh…)

In fact, as I’m writing this, I’m thinking of how much time and effort was put into the election process for the private association election for the Republican Party representative (not a representative of the people, but of the party). The well-intentioned folks who are so desperately trying to prop up Ron Paul as the Republican candidate must not understand how presidential elections work! And for that matter, Ron Paul isn’t telling people about this either as his campaign collects 10’s of millions from people that will have absolutely no say in whether or not he will become president. Hmmm…

Don’t we know that Ron Paul must win the vote of the 538 electors, not the people? Don’t we understand that the people do not elect the president? Don’t we know that the whole presidential media campaign is a hoax, and that they are wasting all of our time and energy on a very profitable practical joke? And every four years we go through this complete act of futility with the “patriot candidate” only to be defeated by our own ignorance of the electoral college. Do we not understand that the Republican and Democratic “parties” are 100% private associations that have nothing to do with the people or our interests? Do we think that our delegate votes will make any difference in whom that private association props up as the representative of their private association?

What gives, America? Are we really such fools that we can be manipulated into believing that our votes make any difference whatsoever in the election of our CEO/president every four years? (Uh-oh… more nutty LOL coming on…)

Do you get it yet? This means that when the election of 2000 between private association members Bush and Gore was decided by the electoral college against the popular vote, the 538 elected house and senate members who make up what we call Congress (the board of directors of U.S. Inc.) and the votes they delegate to the private association political parties who elect the “electors” actually overruled the millions of people in the election of the President of the United States. 100 million “registered” citizen voters were outvoted by 538 voting “representatives” through “electors”. I mean, Hoffa… really?

And the people call this the right to vote?

In the end, there is only one solution to our collective problem: DO NOT CONTRACT, DO NOT CONSENT, AND DEFINITELY DO NOT REGISTER TO VOTE!!!

The tie that binds us all is in fact our contractual citizenship with this foreign corporation in the City of Columbia. The severing of that contract via the severing of our citizenship is literally the only solution. Their rules and laws (statutory public opinion) only apply to 14th Amendment citizens of the United States.

Why?

Because that contract and only that contract is what gives the United States authority and jurisdiction over you as a person. It cannot control you as a living, breathing man, only as a corporate-person-chattel-thing. Citizenship, once again, changes you from an incorporeal free man to an incorporated corporeal body (chattel) – a thing that can be bought and sold and killed; that can be incarcerated with “due process”; and that can be absolutely controlled through contractual obligation (public law). The only way for the United States corporation, whose legal boundaries are those within the ten miles square of Washington D.C – outside of the 50 states united (the union) – the only way that IT can control, imprison, and buy and sell you and your property as a comodity (chattel) to back its Federal Reserve notes is if you never sever the ties that contractually bind you voluntarily to these privileges of servitude that it calls “rights”.

Remember, a right (freedom) is defined as: the privilege to do whatever you want, as long as you follow their laws. This is why 1,000’s of new laws are created every year within the jurisdiction of the United States – to ensure that you will always be breaking one of their civil laws so that they can exercise control over your person. The only way that the United States (federal government) can touch you is if you take residence within that fictional 10 miles square boundary as a U.S. citizen, and subject yourself to the public opinion it creates, that it calls “law”. Like any other corporation, you are only subject to the rules and punishments of that corporation if you are a contractual employee (citizen) of that corporation. It’s time to quit your job as an indentured servant/employee to the United States, and to take back the personal responsibility for ALL of your own actions – the only thing that will ever make you a free man.

Can you live without the privileges of corporate State benefits?

Perhaps a better question is: Will the corporation allow you to live when those benefits require you to die from the benefit and privilege of those new Obama-care death panels and old-age public opinions? After all… it will be your right to die at the hands of the public opinion!

–=–

A Final Note To Self-Proclaimed “Patriots”

–=–

If you label yourself as a “conservative”, that means that legally you want to conserve the current system. Please stop calling yourself that. This word was foisted upon you by the media as a practical joke. They even have you badmouthing the word “liberal” – which just happens to be what the “Founding Fathers” were labeled as back when men were still men and actually used their guns instead of just crying over their regulation and confiscation. You are being laughed at every time you use the word “liberal” to mean the exact opposite of its original intent. And as for the word “Patriot”, those were the men of old who actually fought for life, liberty, and property… you know, those things that you don’t have or own anymore by law of contract.

And as for your “patriotic” incantation of “The Pledge of Allegiance to the United States”…

For your information, this pledge did not exist during our Founding Father’s lifetimes. This becomes obvious when simply reading the Pledge out loud. It states:

“…one nation, indivisible…”

But according to the original constitution, the states are absolutely not indivisible, but very much the opposite. In fact, when ratifying the U.S. Constitution, States like Virginia specifically declared the right to secede from the Union should they feel it necessary just as an extra precaution to make sure that this State-right was clearly understood. The “Pledge” was written over a century after America’s founding in 1892 by a socialist named Francis Bellamy, whose original text was:

“I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

Just imagining my years as a youth in a group of 30 other youths making this pledge every day in public (government) school sends chills down my spine.

Now, I mean no disrespect here… My process of awakening has seen me tread through these same misnomers as everybody else. Only when one has experience in being a useful idiot like I have, can one then criticize others for same and show them a different path. And my path will no doubt diverge with the more knowledge that gets thrown in my way by somebody else who will criticize me.

I know that people who have reached the end here are looking for solutions. And I’m here to tell you that it is my personal opinion that persons, while they may have remedies, they will never have natural rights. Killing the STRAWMAN person and becoming a man again is the way and the light. But I must at the end here tell you that this essay should in no way be misconstrued as legal advice. I’d be quite personally offended if one of you accused me of practicing law. Only BAR attorneys do that, and I will never take on that sleazy foreign TITLE against the original 13th amendment.

I do not promote excommunication, as this is a legal venture. But the U.S. CODE does enumerate this process if you care to find it. I’d be happy to give personal references of people that might be able to help you, free men that are not citizens or persons, who’ve walked the walk and are now talking the talk. Contact me personally for this.

Mine is only to deconstruct and inform…

Happy July 4th to you. While you are out celebrating your non-independence, remember that July 4th was the day that Abe Lincoln declared martial law and military rule on the States that became, for a short time, independent from the United States Corporation, by convening the first illegal unconstitutional Congress of the new military law United States.

Thank you for reading. Now go get a sandwich and repeat!

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Tuesday, July 3, 2012