If only more people listen to the facts.
Is that intelligent, moral, thoughtful, internal, individual, Mob Rule, or is that merely Common Sense?
From the book of secrets:
The Genuine Information, delivered to the legislature of the State of Maryland, relative to the proceedings of the General Convention, held at Philadelphia, in 1787, by Luther Martin, Esquire, Attorney-General of Maryland, and one of the delegates in that said Convention.
Mr. Martin, when called upon, addressed the House nearly as follows:
Jumping to page 13
…; but it may be proper to inform you, that, on our meeting in convention, it was soon found there were among us three parties, of very different sentiments and views.
One party, whose object and wish it was to abolish and annihilate al State governments, over this extensive continent, of a monarchical nature, under certain restrictions and limitations. Those who openly avowed this sentiment were, it is true, but few; yet it is equally true, Sir, that there was a considerable number, who did not openly avow it, who were by myself, and many others of the convention, considered as being in reality favorers of that sentiment; and, acting upon those principles, covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished.
The second party was not for the abolition of the State governments, nor for the introduction of a monarchical government under any form; but they wished to establish a system, as could give their own States undue power and influence in the government over the other States.
A third party was what I considered truly federal and republican; this party was nearly equal in number with the other two, and was composed of the delegations from Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and in part from Maryland; …
Now, please, I’m cutting out some text that is relevant but wordy, and moving ahead some to this:
But,Sir, the favorers of monarchy, and those who wished the total abolition of State governments, well knowing, that a government founded on truly federal principles, the basis of which were the thirteen State governments, preserved in full force and energy, would be destructive of their views; and knowing they were too weak in numbers openly to bring forward their system; conscious also that the people of America would reject it if proposed to them, - joined their interest with that party, who wished a system, giving particular States the power and influence over the others, procuring in return mutual sacrifices from them, in giving the government great and undefined powers as to its legislative and executive; well knowing, that, by departing from a federal system, they paved the way for their favorite object, the destruction of State governments, and the introduction of monarchy. And hence, Mr. Speaker, I apprehend, in a great measure, arose the objections of those honorable members, Mr. Mason and Mr. Gerry. In every thing that tended to give the large States power over the smaller, the first of those gentlemen could notforget he belonged ot the Ancient Dominion, nor could the latter forget, that he represented Old Massachusetts. That part of the system, which tended to give those States power over the others, met with their perfect approbations; but, when they viewed it charged with such powers, as would destroy all State governments, their own as well as the rest, - when they saw a president so constitute4d as to differ from a monarch scarcely but in name, and having it in his power to become such in reality when he pleased; they being republicans and federalists, as far as an attachment to their own States would permit them, they warmly and zealously opposed those parts of the system.
So...the Monarchists, or Nationalists, were faking like they were Federalists, and the Federalists (Republicans) who called out the false Federalists were falsely named Anti-Federalists and the false names stuck.
Abject belief in falsehood without question.
Says so right here:
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
It is official
OK, so, what is the bill now?
How much is owed?
Is that the official lie now?
They (criminals who stole government) borrow from us, so how is it that we owe them?
Abject belief in falsehood without question.