I went to sleep and woke up thinking about my above answer and the questions that inspired those perspectives offered.
It makes sense to add a few words as to a point of view being what it is and not being mine. I made the mistake of saying "your video" in a sentence as follows:
"So, in context, I think your video of what is happening at the milk farm that was being destroyed by lies despite the defensive efforts of the milk farmers is a case of the milk farmers giving credit to the concept of a Federal Government and The Constitution."
I don't mean that the video is "yours" in any way, so that is very wrong on my part to choose that word. I meant to identify the message that the video you linked as your action linked me to that very valuable video of a message worth knowing.
The faith in God is the powerful thinking that helps these people deal with evil. I see that message, but I also see the message that these victims are victims of the lie perpetrated in Philadelphia too.
1. Faith in God
2. Belief in The Constitution usurpation as if it were a good thing.
One perspective shared by the people in that video message is a very powerful tool that helps those people defend their power to know, to understand, to live in peace, and if I am right then that viewpoint also helps those people fear God (hate evil).
How about this angle:
The fear of God (to hate evil) is an ability to recognize the total cost of all the lies that work to move those "government" employees who are "following orders" that end up destroying so much power (cheese, food, a useful, productive, honest, business run by God fearing people, and benefiting so many needy people) and that same faith keeps those same people from hating the "government" employees.
Why does that same faith fail to uncover the lies of 1787 that brought into force the authorization of evil in 1788?
One works in specific ways to help people realize specific truths, or as I like to say: accurate perceptions, and the other works to make victims of everyone who believes in specific lies.
What makes a lie so powerful?
What makes an accurate perception so powerful?
Who is asking?
What is the goal of the person doing the asking?
The video is exactly what I meant by the immobilizing weapon, which is the truth, and that is happening right now. The factual recording of events that can then be reviewed by other people, spreading the word, is the immobilizing weapon even if the immobilizing weapon does not have a capacity to put someone to sleep for an hour.
How long have the American people been asleep?
Going on 3 Centuries and counting.
No, someone may say, Joe, you are a nutcase.
Here is the official score:
How many people are immobilized into a belief in the good of The Constitution as, supposedly, The Law of The Land?
The truth is an immobilizing weapon that shines the light of accurate accountability upon those who would otherwise profit by crime.
Lies are an immobilizing weapon that darkens the viewpoints of the victims and rendering the victims powerless to defend themselves.
If, for example, those dairy farmers had access to a Non-Union Common Law Non-Lawyer, someone versed in Common Law, then would it be possible for that unlicensed, unauthorized, unanointed Non-Union Non-Lawyer to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court and save the dairy farmers from the evil destruction of so much productive power that is stored in the form of cheese?
I don't know. I think the answer is yes. I think that the Law of the Land is the good of the people who live here, and if We The People are still able to produce productive power such a cheese, then we can produce the ways in which we can keep the criminals from making crime pay so well.
What went wrong in the case of the great cheese crime of 2013 in Missouri?
Failure to know how to use the weapon of choice invented by the Legal Criminals against them, a failure to know how to use that usurpation (The Constitution) in defense of usurpers?
I think the answer is yes, that is the failure here, whereby the victims of Legal Crime failed to know enough about Legal Crime to then have the POWER (of knowledge) required to use that same power in defense of Liberty.
More to the point:
The Constitution was a usurpation, but it was not ratified without The Bill of Rights.
The Constitution, therefore, does limit the power of the usurpers, the tyrants, if the targeted victims know how to use that system in defense of Liberty.
If not, then not.
If the case in question, this case of so much wanton destruction of very powerful economic power, this cheese tonnage, this competition in Raw Dairy Products, this higher quality, and lower cost competitor to the Monopoly Counterfeit "Corporate" Dairy "Farmers" Subsidy Union Crime in Progress, if, if, if, if only they had a good Non-Lawyer to help them, then they could save the cheese, save their competitive way of life producing competitive Dairy Products, and force the competition to produce higher quality and lower cost Dairy Products, instead of having the Monopoly Legal Criminals crush all competition everywhere, including the crushing of a viable competitor on a farm in Missouri.
The Non-Union Non-Lawyer, or helpful representative of free people, in a court in this land, could, it seems to me, avoid dictates handed down by dictators from Admiralty Law, and force those dictators to abide by their own set of rules instead, including the set of rules that the dictators, the tyrants, the would be Legal Criminals, had to have attached to their rule book (The Constitution) in order for their usurpation to gain currency (be ratified) and that attachment of true, accurate, defense of Liberty stuff, is called The Bill of Rights.
So, had a knowledgeable Non-Union Non-Lawyer of the type that are members of this Forum been able to help those farmers in Missouri, they may have, the farmers, at some point after the cheese was stolen and destroyed, been paid (in Federal Reserve Notes) a sum of Legal Purchasing Power, that redeemed their loss of Cheese, or the whole mess could have been prevented before it escalated to the point at which a Local "Police" (Military?) person was on the farm stealing cheese: "just following orders" to steal and destroy cheese so as to Monopolize the "Federal" Dairy "Farmers" (LLC).
Note: If those farmers stayed in business for so long without ever having anyone complain about bad cheese, getting sick, or anything like that, then chances are they could continue, or sell, that operation and it could continue to produce good things for a long time. That is evidence, or proof, or reason to defend those farmers and their power to farm in this land.
I like cheese.
Note: If a case of bad cheese was reported, then those farmers would be able to handle it, without claiming "Limited Liability" against sick people who were made sick from bad cheese, as sick people seek remedy if somehow a person was injured by bad cheese produced by those farmers.
How does "subsidized" (legalized fraud and extortion) "Federal" corporation monopoly POWERS deal with cases of sick people seeking remedy when people are made sick as a direct result of actions perpetrated by people "following orders" at the "Company"?
I can offer first hand information concerning such a case right here in Barstow California.
The Legal Criminals have the capacity to add zeros to their FUND at will, so they can pay off anyone, anytime, at will.
Money is no object.
They never seek an accurate accounting of what actually happens in an official, "public access", formal account. They pay hush money.
They (legal criminals) destroy evidence.
I see no stinking cheese.