I am having a discussion with Sergey on the topic of my one known absolute truth, and this is to me like a prize fight.
I have not just fallen off the turnip boat on the subject of philosophy, in my mind, but I hope to be schooled, and I think I will be able to recognize where I may have stepped off the path of firm reasoning.
This may be off-topic at the moment, but it comes around eventually.
You wrote about it being to late, and I think now to ask for an explanation of this lateness threshold. We may have all the time in eternity for all I know, so what happens when it is too late?
Sergey is not buying my absolute truth about perception, for some reason, yet the proof is what it is, and so what is the point of arguing?
If someone thinks that perception stops, ever, then they know something I don't know, since as far as I know perception exists, I can imagine that perception does not exist when asleep, but I dream, so that is a baseless claim. I can also claim that perception did not exist before I was born, but that claim is based upon my capacity to remember, and I already know that I can't remember very well, so that claim is based upon something less solid than the fact that I do perceive right now.
Before it is too late, may persist for eternity, for all I know.
"Today I had the thought that you are like the big brother I never had."
That is fantastic since I did not have a little sister until now. I feel adopted well now.
"Joe, you have a very special gift to be able to use correct words. Like Legal Criminals. I forget what you call using correct language."
Having some experience in machine work I can access that experience and come up with the concept of accuracy in a way that you are probably not familiar with; as to how accuracy works in machine work.
Language can be accurate or inaccurate. I prefer accurate language.
If I did not prefer accurate language what is my goal in the use of language?
Accuracy in machine work is measured as tolerance. This may be a new concept to you. It should not be a new concept to you. When one part is made to fit another part the machinist has the tools to make both parts. How much is one millimeter?
How much is one millimeter?
Is your millimeter, if you make the part in America the same millimeter as the part made in China?
If not, how will you know, and will you pay for a part that does not fit, and will you argue with the producer in China concerning which part is the one that was made wrong?
There are devices called Jo Blocks, and I hope you have a much fun with the term used as I do.
Here is a link to a Jo Block:
"That is a collection of gage blocks put together using its natural tendency of surface tension to create a stack a specific length that is accurate to a relatively high level of accuracy."
Note: "relatively high level of accuracy"
Compared to what?
Why do the Legal Criminals want "elastic" legal monopoly money?
We are going to find out, the hard way, after World War III when "China" begins, in earnest, to collect on the National Debt?
"I remember the first time I used the word “we” loosely. You called me out on that. You have helped me separate myself from the “we” that is doing things that I don’t do. I suppose I could go on and on."
Yes, that is one of the Frauds in progress, to collectively punish all the targets for the thoughts and actions done by the few Legal Criminals who actually command the POWER stolen through False Government with the False Money.
We are made to believe that we are spreading democracy, and that we are Extraordinarily Rendering Torture Victims to Torture Chambers to be Tortured for years on end, just like they did in Russia.
We are not nice, yet you have how many torture victims in your garage?
So where is this "we" stuff other than the fact that you keep paying your "taxes", and you keep using that one "money"?
We are not up to speed, and that goes for almost everyone, including the Legal Criminals who are led by their own deceptions, going somewhere fast, working to get there before it is too late?
"Today I read them again and understand them better."
I understand them better too, with your help, and we may clear up some remaining confusions as to those specific words.
"So they threaten anarchy and slavery when in fact slavery is what they were offering and I am going to add the words…without anarchy. Nice peaceful tame slavery. Sign on the dotted line slavery. Not gun point slavery."
The term anarchy then, in those words, is not the genuine use of the word anarchy, tracing back the word to the Greek Stoics.
"Zeno urged the need to lay down a basis for Logic because the wise person must know how to avoid deception."
That is not the same Zeno as Zeno of Elea who is famous for the lost (presumed to be known) Zeno Paradoxes.
The point here is to point out that the word "anarchy" is used in the counterfeit form, as if saying there is no organized crime, but everyone is a criminal, that is what they mean in that context of using the false version of the word anarchy.
Anarchy means everyone commits whatever crime they want whenever they want because there is no power used to stop them.
Anarchy means that there is no FALSE power where criminals organize into a false government that is falsely advertized as "helping" fight crime, when in fact that organized group of criminals are merely the highest paid criminals in that area.
If you don't understand that, or if I'm wrong, then we are not being accurate in perception.
Also in those words of yours, these words:
No one is offering anarchy in that sense of the word anarchy. The situation was such that the actual Federalists (Henry, Mason, etc.) were rejecting the offer for False Federalism, and they were repeating the same sentiments offered by Thomas Paine, as in: it is worse to have a false government then no government at all.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer."
We are inspecting these words written by Luther Martin, from page 25 and 26 of my copy of the notes taken during the Secret Proceedings in Philadelphia in 1787, here:
“That we would risk every possible consequence. That from anarchy and confusion, order might arise. That slavery was the worst that could ensue, and we considered the system proposed to be the most complete, most abject system of slavery that the wit of man ever devised, under pretense of forming a government for free States.”
They had in operation a Voluntary Government that already proved at least 2 very important design features for that government.
Enough Defensive Power to drive off the largest criminal army of aggression on the planet Earth.
Off the productive people sanctuary from Slavery
The first proof was called The Revolutionary War, which is false name, since the criminals write the history, and it is not at all "revolutionary" to be good, moral, people.
The second proof was Shays's Rebellion, which was another case of good, moral, people defending Liberty, but in that State, that Legal Crime State of Massachusetts, being good was a crime, and the good people lost that battle, but they fled to Vermont where they found other good people, people who did not make Slavery Legal.
So these words again:
That was good people being offered a deal with the devil, so to speak, and they said anarchy (the counterfeit not the genuine anarchy) would be better than a criminal government. They said no, in no uncertain terms; save for the misuse of the word anarchy, and only if anarchy can be genuinely associated with the Stoics in Ancient Greece, and with guys like Martin Luther, Daniel Shays, Luther Martin, George Mason, Patrick Henry, Josiah Warren, Stephen Pearl Andrews, Benjamin Tucker, Ludwig Von Mises, Karl Hess, Hans Hermann Hoppe, etc.
"But Joe, do you know who is talking in those quotes?"
I was not sure, but I wanted to be as precise as I can be, so I got out my copy of the source, and I found the relevant quote.
From that Secret Proceedings book:
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 the said convention.
"They could see so clearly the problem, why did they let it pass?"
Mass Media was relatively Monopolized even in those days. The Federalist Papers were broadcast as a False Advertizement Campaign in the same way as we see Presidential Campaigns today, and the Luther Martins, George Masons, and Patrick Henry people were then called Anti-Federalists. How does that work?
That works the same way now as it did then, since you and I have no way of reaching anyone who is led to believe that a Conspiracy Theorist is anything but what they think you are I are in fact.
Who carried the day in the last election and why?
Who carried the day in the election process in those days when Ratification of that Abomination occurred in 1788?
The POWER of mass media has to be accurately measured in any case.
Who held that power then? Who holds that power now?
Stepping stones on the way toward absolute despotism are not that hard to find. If I can find them, then an Alexander Hamilton can.
You can too. Who holds the power to reach enough minds to then control those minds and lead those minds astray?
Why do criminals aim to create false versions of Christianity?
Is this not as easy to see as the nose on your face? You may not have as big a nose as mine, but there are these things called mirrors.
You are playing the part of a vital discussion partner, and I don't mean to target you for some of these elaborations or embellishments on my soap box. I look in the mirror and ask myself how I could have been so stupid, and why am I still failing to see a better way out.
I’d like to know the list of the names that make up the “they” and the list of the names that make up the “we.”
See? Those words above are a fundamental requirement for survival in a world where lethal beings exist. Are we in a world where there are no longer any lethal beings ready to do what they do so well?
No, and as it happens We The People are paying them everything we can earn to make them feel good about how well they torture and murder so many innocent victims.
I'm not even reporting the full measure of the facts, yet as absurd as it sounds, it is unrecognizable to most people. Like saying hey, look, that round thing up in the sky is something you should not stare at, it will burn out your eyes, and yet most people are ready to fight me for suggesting such nonsense, so they keep staring.
Is it an absurd illustration or precisely accurate?
"Yes, as sign on the dotted line, hamster-wheel slaves."
All for lack of competition, but that is being remedied as we speak, with many States working back toward Independence from The Legal Money Power: what can happen? World War III can happen, another False Flag like 911 can happen, but aside from those investments, what can happen if those things are no longer funded by enough people in enough Independent Constitutionally Limited States?
Joe, I take issue you with the word “everyone.”
Thanks, I need someone to help me from repeating those errors too often.
"I think Anarchists think that government cannot work."
Here again is the effective employment of duplicitous language as the capacity (power) to convey precise meaning accurately is destroyed. Do you mean anarchist A or anarchist B?
Anarchist A = Voluntary Associations are forms of government that work voluntarily and are much preferred by honest people compared to Involuntary Associations which are false governments, actual crimes made legal, and therefore NOT at all government in the true, genuine, moral, productive, sense.
Anarchist B = I want to do whatever I want whenever I want without ever being held accountable for my actions, and I want to pass on all the negative costs of my actions to whomever picks up the bill, and I care not who picks up the bill, so long as it isn't me.
A duplicitous word turns into collective punishment?
Federalists who turn out to be liars and thieves prove how bad federalism is in fact?
No, the actual Federalists were called Anti-Federalists by the Nationalists who hid behind the False Front of Federalism.
Here is an example:
But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "n countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter.
Let me tell you a little story about that book. I knew all that stuff before I read that book. That book was recommended to me by the guy who I worked with, and the guy who helped me decide to run for Congress, and it wasn't until a number of years later, after he recommended that book to me, that I actually ordered, received, and read my copy. What do you think I did when I read those words quoted above?
I remembered where they were, what they were, and I can find them, even without a bookmark, despite my very bad memory. My head has suffered 3 major concussions, at least, as if resetting a computer, and yet I can remember these things I somehow feel a driving need to understand and communicate to anyone caring enough to listen.
That quote has almost all you need to know to understand what happened to America. Why this place was a sanctuary for runaway slaves and why it is now a Nation State of DEBT SLAVES.
Liars get paid very well for their lies.
Do I knock on your door demanding payments to protect you from me?
I cannot understand these words: “because they lost the battle to MOLD the behavior of the people they represented.”
I am happy to find out that you want to understand those words better. We all try to affect each other and the proof is that we connect to each other. Some of us target others to gain at their expense, to pass on costs, to enslave, to create victims out of them, but we all try to MOLD each others behavior.
In context of those words I have reported to you that the Criminals took over the Secret Meetings in Philadelphia, they wanted a Nation State, and a National Debt, they wanted absolute POWER, and they took the steps necessary to get that POWER. Call them the Nationalists hiding behind False Federalism.
On the other side of the FENCE that was created by the Domestic Threat, the Invaders and Occupiers of this Country hiding behind Benevolent Dictator Clothing, the other side of that Fence that was being created by those Nationalists hiding behind a False Federalism, the other side of that fence, were the defenders.
Nationalists hiding behind False Federalism worked to MOLD public opinion in such a way as to secure The ONE Constitution replacing the State Constitutions as the Supreme Law of the Land, which was basically taking out Common Law and replacing Common Law with Admiralty Law, or law by foreign occupiers.
Nationalists worked the crowd to get the crowd on their side, which was a false side created by Nationalists hiding behind a false Federalism.
Nationalists accessed the same MOB that those Nationalists hiding behind a false federalism claimed to be "Mob Rule" and not worthy of authority or power because they said the MOB was dangerous, yet they, those Nationalists hiding behind a false federalism endeavored to MOLD that MOB, and they succeeded.
Now my sentence:
“because they lost the battle to MOLD the behavior of the people they represented.”
Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a national government, and no longer a Confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the general government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes does, of itself, entirely change the confederation of the states into one consolidated government. This power, being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of control, must carry every thing before it. The very idea of converting what was formerly a confederation to a consolidated government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the state governments. Will the people of this great community submit to be individually taxed by two different and distinct powers? Will they suffer themselves to be doubly harassed? These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the one will destroy the other: the general government being paramount to, and in every respect more powerful than the state governments, the latter must give way to the former. Is it to be supposed that one national government will suit so extensive a country, embracing so many climates, and containing inhabitants so very different in manners, habits, and customs? It is ascertained, by history, that there never was a government over a very extensive country without destroying the liberties of the people: history also, supported by the opinions of the best writers, shows us that monarchy may suit a large territory, and despotic governments ever so extensive a country, but that popular governments can only exist in small territories. Is there a single example, on the face of the earth, to support a contrary opinion? Where is there one exception to this general rule? Was there ever an instance of a general national government extending over so extensive a country, abounding in such a variety of climates, &c., where the people retained their liberty? I solemnly declare that no man is a greater friend to a firm union of the American states than I am; but, sir, if this great end can be obtained without hazarding the rights of the people, why should we recur to such dangerous principles? Requisitions have been often refused, sometimes from an impossibility of complying with them; often from that great variety of circumstances which retards the collection of moneys; and perhaps sometimes from a wilful design of procrastinating. But why shall we give up to the national government this power, so dangerous in its nature, and for which its members will not have sufficient information? Is it not well known that what would be a proper tax in one state would be grievous in another? The gentleman who hath favored us with a eulogium in favor of this system, must, after all the encomiums he has been pleased to bestow upon it, acknowledge that our federal representatives must be unacquainted with the situation of their constituents. Sixty-five members cannot possibly know the situation and circumstances of all the inhabitants of this immense continent. When a certain sum comes to be taxed, and the mode of levying to be fixed, they will lay the tax on that article which will be most productive and easiest in the collection, without consulting the real circumstances or convenience of a country, with which, in fact, they cannot be sufficiently acquainted.
“because they lost the battle to MOLD the behavior of the people they represented.”
The False Federalists or Nationalists hiding behind a false federalism went to the MOB through the Federalist Papers to MOLD the behavior of The People they targeted. The actual Federalists, who were called Anti-Federalists in "The News Papers" (not all of them but a "swing vote" of them), those actual Federalists spoke out against the Usurpation, clearly, precisely, and accurately, to MOLD the behavior of the people they represented.
That we would not labor under the imputation of being unwilling to form a strong and energetic federal government; but we would publish the system which we approved, and also that which we opposed, and leave it to our country, and the world at large, to judge between us, who best understood the rights of free men and free States, and who best advocated them; and to the same tribunal we could submit, who ought to be answerable for all the consequences, which might arise to the Union from the convention breaking up, without proposing any system to their constituents.
Who won the battle to take down the fence built by the Nationalists hiding behind a false federalism?
You have seen the National Debt Clock. I link it often enough.
You have read the words concerning Hamilton promising "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," and what Hamilton actually did which was: "In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
What was PayPal?
What was The Liberty Dollar?
What was Hemp Paper?
What was Electric Cars?
What was Alcohol used in Model T Fords just before Prohibition?
What is Bitcoin now?
What is Utah now creating Gold backed legal money?
It is the many inventive producers of economic power being targeted and crushed, or "INCORPORATED", into the MONOPOLY POWER.
"And the people don’t even know it…a case of abject belief in falsehood?"
I add the word absolute.
Absolute Abject Belief in Falsehood Without Question.
It is actually in the constitution.
"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."
"That bill of rights gave the people the “key” to the locked door in a sense."
One key, and that key is well handled by Carl Miller in our time.
We, as in we the honest productive, non-criminal, people, are not yet completely defenseless in mind, spirit, and actions.
There is hope, and it is past time to nurture it where it does exist.
"But now the criminals are taking the key and as soon as they take the guns they will throw away the key, IMO."
That has to be a very serious concern for the most powerful Legal Criminals and their minions, no doubt, but that is what World War is for, so the real power is still in between our ears.
"But Joe, in the civil war people were not lined up and shot like they were in Germany."
That is a sentence written from a perspective that is missing a whole lot of inculpatory evidence. Suffice to say that you are probably wrong in more ways than one.
Look into the exploits of two people before and after the Final Solution (War) in question (the falsely named Civil War):
"The leaders of the confederate army were not strung up at the end of the war."
I don't think your information is comprehensive enough to make such a statement. The WACO "survivors" illustrate the point. Among the combatants on both sides are those who work for Legal Crime and those who are misled. Which ones do you think are spared once the fighting is over? Which ones disappear from the History books, or disappear and are never seen again by their families?
"So it is hard for me to place the united States in the same category with other places where The Routine has been exercised. I think though, that we may be seeing that shortly, here?"
I have a hard time forgetting about Waco.
Heads were missing. Explain that too me.
“It is an inside Joke, and even Ron Paul may be the mark, the victim, the one who is subject to the Joke, as if by some magic the targets can't see the truth despite ample warnings.”
I cannot understand those words. Can you please explain them to me?
Ron Paul may be someone who thinks that The Federalists were the good guys in our Founding History. His education in that (or mine) may be insufficient to get past the Joke being played upon us by those few people I call Legal Criminals.
"But Joe, who is going to keep the wolves in sheep’s clothing from showing up at a new con con and making the situation worse."
If not you?
What is the meaning of the term self-government?
"How do you think the Criminals would ever allow a peaceful con con?"
A genuine constitutional convention happened and the result was The Articles of Confederation. The Con JOB was the event reported in that quoted book on Secret Proceedings.
A second genuine constitutional convention would be the result of many people in many states regaining power of their own thoughts and actions, and their own competitive Legal Money, such as the example now being set by Utah, and then those States have a reason to Voluntarily Combine their Sovereign Legal POWER into a Voluntary Union to Defend Liberty against all enemies foreign and domestic.
Which enemies are most threatening now?
Where are the foreign enemies located?
Where are the domestic enemies located?
The Federal Reserve
Those places are where the enemies of Liberty are located and those places are currently here in America.
World War III is the device used to move the most powerful enemies of Liberty from the current location to the next location, or from a risky place to a more secure place.
What must be done to preserve the Involuntary Union?
Those who work to preserve the Involuntary Union must destroy their greatest competitor which is Liberty.
What must be done to preserve Liberty?
Follow the money to Wall Street, The Federal Reserve, and Washington, and what can you find?
Why was the Franklin case of child sex slavery crushed and wiped from history?
If that case was followed any further it would have led to Washington, and to all the pedophiles in office.
Is that not easy to see?
You saw the Discovery Channel Documentary that never saw National Television Currency didn't you?
"They don't even need us anymore for power because the cloak that We the People provided has been shed."
That goes back to your friend or foe question. Last time I talked to my brother Bob on the subject of Persistent Vapor Trails he was schooling me on how natural they are, and what does that tell me?
Brother against brother in another Civil War, or am I blowing things way out of proportion?
I suffered recently from a Deep vein thrombosis and a pulmonary embolism, and the Monopoly Medical Professionals claim that they don't know what causes those things.
I have a brain. I have a computer. I can connect dots.
What does increases in Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium have in common with medical problems?
Can I connect enough precise dots in time?
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions