Comment: I trust

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: None of that answered the question (see in situ)

I trust

I trust that anything I say to you will be used by you against me.

Having that as a defensive declaration, without bells and whistles that you may require before you officially recognized my offer to you of my viewpoint, aside, for the record that is what it is, a discussion of relative importance to me, putting that aside, having that aside, I can move onto answering a question that may or may not take seriously, and you may or may not try to use my words against me by your willful employment of your time and your power deceptively; whatever you deem to be profitable to you, at my expense, if my trust in my judgment of you is on the mark.

I may very well be wrong.

My intention to offer my viewpoints to others in an official legal capacity according to declarations made on the Declaration of Independence, whereby government is authoritative, and valid, when government is consensual; which is expressly, specifically, opposite of government by fiat, or government by decree, or government by tyrants operating tyranny, on and on, transpiring daily, as I type.

Consensual, or voluntary, government being validated by the authorities volunteering to be authorities in 1776 setting one of many reinforcing standards of excellence in offering words in defense of the innocent against the crimes perpetrated by criminals hiding behind a thin veil of false authority.

Criminals perpetrating crimes upon the innocent while the criminals are hiding behind a thin, and rapidly thinning, veil of false authority.

My intentions to do A transpire daily, without your permission.

My personal, whereabouts, at any given time, on any give day, in any given place, are offered to those who share A with me, even if we may meet at point A or point B.

You can degrade, discredit, foment, deride, destroy, bemoan, decree, your judgments concerning which place I go, who I meet, what we do when we meet, at your own cost, and at which time I am no longer able to defend against your degrading, discrediting, fomenting, derision, destruction, on and on, that will be the moment that I can no longer be a part of A, but I still won't be, if I have anything to do with it, part of your B routine.

"...those people sitting around the table at the barbecue joint..."

I've attended National Liberty Alliance Monday Meetups. I've joined that which I call A (offered as a definition in defense against your unwelcome attacks that obviously intend to be used against me, with your forensic choice of words aimed at discrediting that which deserves no discredit whatsoever) since well before I ran for congress in 1996, as a part of A I held myself accountable for the responsibilities I see my life to be, whereby I read, learn, become informed, and improve my viewpoint so as to be a better part of A, in defense against B.

When dealing with B, as often is the case, B decrees (actually those who join B, each in turn, decrees) that this be done that way, or this be done this way, according to their exclusive power to dictate what must be done, when it must be done, without question.

I learned how that works, and I learned well, when I ran for congress.

I learned how that works, and I learned well, when I read a list of books that bears repeating, but not right now.

If person A wishes to join A, according to those who have joined B, those who join A must do this and that with this or that specific process, or those who join B won't accept the validity of those who join A. In other words those who dictate into being an involuntary association, or organized crime ring, dictate the rules governing everyone without exception; while those who agree to avoid such nonsense are often encountering the minions of group B, the liars, or those who threaten, if not there being a meeting of one in group A with the actual dictators who resort to terrifying and horrifying aggressive violence upon the innocent.

Case in point:

Joiners of B lend moral and material support to the English monarchy and they are known as Tories and Loyalists.

Joiners of A lend moral and material support to their own sacred honor as defenders of Liberty against criminals hiding behind a thin, and rapidly thinning, veil of false authority.

Joiners of B claim that those who have join A must join B instead, or die.

The B members kill those who refuse to accept blind obedience to falsehood without question.

Hence the words:

"I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

Those in B are apt to skip past all the other words, zero in on the words that can be used against those who join A, and use those words against that individual who said those words, and do so by twisting those words.

A false claim by the individual using those words against the individual who is quoted as having said those words might attempt to discredit that person by claiming that that person who had joined A has, by his own words, a death wish.

The false law, in the B group, offers death for the crime of failing obey the B group, and so the counter offer, offered back to the B group is no thanks, I'll take option A, not B.

Patrick Henry did not get B, Patrick Henry insisted upon A. Patrick Henry was one of those who were instrumental in making sure that the following stood as the law of this land after the B group was temporarily bottled up, or chained down with the following:

Amendment V

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 offence 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.

That is from the official law of the land that is supposedly followed by the employees.

Sacred Oaths are supposedly honored by Oath Takers taking Oaths that are promises (like campaign promises) to obey that law of this land according to THEM who take those Oaths.

When the volunteers in group A care not to hold the volunteers in group B to account for failures to do as they promise, then those who volunteer to join group B get away with unspeakable crimes while they are under Oath to not do unspeakable crimes.


Amendment I

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.

Call that an opinion offered by those in group A to anyone caring to know better from worse.

Counter offer example from those in group B:

The Sedition Act clearly violated individual protections under the first amendment of the Constitution; however, the practice of "judicial review," whereby the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of laws was not yet well developed. Furthermore, the justices were all strong Federalists. As a result, Madison and Jefferson directed their opposition to the new laws to state legislatures. The Virginia and Kentucky legislatures passed resolutions declaring the federal laws invalid within their states. The bold challenge to the federal government offered by this strong states' rights position seemed to point toward imminent armed conflict within the United States.

What happened to Amendment V?

Those is group B, dictators, criminals, and the like, criminal minds think alike, took Oaths to obey their own rule of law and then broke their own rule of law as if there was no such thing as rule of law, demonstrated in point of fact, demonstrated by those in group B.

Those in group B, apologize for each other, cover each other, with a never ending increase in lies.

Those is group A warn:

How does your trial by jury stand? In civil cases gone not sufficiently secured in criminal this best privilege is gone. But we are told that we need not fear; because those in power, being our representatives, will not abuse the power we put in their hands.

Which trial by jury?

The trial by jury dictated into being by those in group B (the offer of obey or die) or those in group A (the offer of agreement or no longer be recognized as being a part of group A)?

What do I mean by that last answer to the questions being asked by
someone I trust to be someone in group B?

I cannot offer the message intended by me better than this:
From the day on which an accommodation takes place between England and America, on any other terms than as independent States, I shall date the ruin of this country. a politic minister will study to lull us into security by granting us the full extent of our petitions. The warm sunshine of influence would melt down the virtue which the violence of the storm rendered more firm and unyielding. In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny. Ye abandoned minions of an infatuated ministry, if peradventure any should yet remain among us, remember that a Warren and Montgomery are numbered among the dead. Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plow, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom--go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!

The offer is, in my own admittedly pathetic words, join or die because those in group B will kill or enslave.

If that is not the truth, so help me God, then I am unfit as a volunteer in group A, and perhaps I should start licking boots too.

Count on me, anyone, anywhere, I do not lick the boots of those in group B. I never have, I am not now, and I never will, so help me God, or so help me anyone including God.

My parents never licked those dictatorial boots, neither parent, and neither did their parents. Handed down from generation to generation of English, Irish, and German decent, as far back as I know personally.

Please, anyone reading this sword play of trial by jury, do not listen to that song of that siren, parroted by the minions of group B, and take heart in knowing that our numbers in group A are sufficient to defend against those in group B, now.

The tide is turning so long as those in group B are prevented by those in group A from executing further pogroms that they claim to be legal, as World War III does appear to be going off the schedule.

What does "don't listen to the song of that siren mean", from one in group A to another?

Mr. President it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth - and listen to the song of the siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it.

Does it mean listen to those in group B who by routine rule of their involuntary laws they resort to lies as means of gaining for themselves that which someone else has produced?

The siren that says obey and you will be secured by us without you ever having to question a thing little lambs?

What is my reason for my defense right here right now?

If I don't stand up to these liars who will?

Please help, if you will, and if it is worth your time, and worth your effort, then what you will into being will be done by you, at your own cost.

No big deal on my part, I employ these Trolls as a routine practice so as to then be better prepared in my life when I meet higher Trolls who have climbed up their Troll ladders on the backs of their innocent victims that they alone destroy with their lies, their threats, and their aggressive violence INTENDING to destroy the innocent among us.

Take heart, my friends, if I may be so bold in offering, the rules that govern us are swinging rapidly in favor of Liberty, because we are tolerating nothing less and because they, the criminals, have spent all their political capital which was stolen in the first place.