Finished:
The original intentions of our Founding Fathers was to bind government in marriage to the people. Indeed, rather than they discard it as corrupt, useless, and evil, our Founders chose to utilize government as a necessary tyranny for the purpose of advancing our Civil Purpose. In order for this salvaged government to be part with our Founders ideal of a more perfect Union, the greatest part making up the Union, with these being the majority of the people themselves, had to be empowered. It was for this reason that our Founders included within the U.S. Constitution the articles of the Bill of Rights, better known as our empowered natural rights.
As we should all be made aware of today and in full agreement upon, just as absolute power is powerless absolutely, the endeavor of government lacks the ability to control itself by the vain doings of endless legislated laws. Yet, if tyranny has been at one time controlled in the past, then it must have been for the reason that it was somehow made to perceive its conscience.
In its infancy, our government was kept fairly sober and in check simply by the inborn empowered rights of the people, with these being declared willfully so by our Founders as the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution.
Indeed, the significance of the articles of the Bill of Rights went beyond just legal precedence, as John Locke took the trouble to have it all figured out for us beforehand, because natural rights during that time weren't at all about those insidious legal things concerning the mind and the cognitive level, as no such subject as the cognitive sciences had yet to develop during that time. Instead, these natural rights reduced on the literal level of the physical, much like DNA is said to do so today, all the way to the core of the heart or of the collective Soul.
In other words, to violate a natural right is contempt beyond that of a legal offense as such a serious transgression amounts to a violation committed knowingly against the Soul.
The Greek reason being that as all men have a soul which is part from the one Soul itself, then, likewise, we all are part of a collective Soul.
Ironically, as a government drunk on the false powers of manipulation have been pushing an agenda of late that is against the existence of God, the only true way to sober up and make government officials act and serve the best interest of the people is by holding their consciences under the Light of the Truth.
Again, government has never in the past nor will it ever in the future be able to control itself by the vain process of legislating endless laws. Indeed, the only way tyranny has ever been controlled in the past was when the people somehow managed to hold the consciences of their ruling officials under the Light of the Truth.
In the process of dividing itself up into a two party system, the government has managed over many years a reconstitution of the prior legal precedence the same that was once held by the old tyranny our Founders managed to abolished, leading to a slow erosion away from the ideal Union our Founders originally intended. Indeed, the people today have been divided against themselves. As the antagonist was once thought to be anything divisive, we are fast eroding away from a protagonist state of a Union between a necessary tyranny and the people -- with both of these entities being empowered within the U.S. Constitution, to a system that now protects the lessor of us legally from ourselves - now exclusive of those officials who work for the government - with this situation being the exact same evil as tyranny.
Yet, as was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the empowered people were to make up the greatest part of the governmental process. In contrast, the smaller part of this "more perfect Union" involved a necessary tyranny - as such is necessary to advance our Civil Purpose - with this necessary authority being the institution of an ideal three part government.
A congress of lawyers could not have over time excluded the people's empowerment from the powers of government without a supreme court of lawyers also ordaining such contempt as an official legal opinion.
Again, it was when Congress legislated away our empowered natural rights deeming them as mere civil rights that government began to no longer feel accountable to the Truth. This is why government has returned to its drunken state of tyranny today the effects of their contempt being both to usurp the people of their of authority and to rob them of their American souls.
So, here is how I view the slow fall of our Union:
1) Our Founders presented our Bill of Rights as the people's empowerment warning those in government that they would be held accountable for their actions. During this time, the empowered natural rights of the people took precedence over legal rights.
2) The government usurped us of our empowerment, of our role in government, by legislating away our natural rights to that of mere legal or civil rights. During this time, the legal rights rose to take precedence over what were once known to be our empowered natural rights.
3) As our Founders once declared our Bill of Rights willfully as the people's empowerment, we the people today need to reintroduce those Bill of Rights by way of proclamation of sovereignty. In our doing so, we will hold government beyond just being accountable for their actions, with this being a subtle point, but to holding them to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of the Truth. In doing so, our empowered rights will, once again, take precedence over our legal rights.
Here is the justification for adding step number three:
When asked by the Son of Man to confess who he thought Jesus to be, Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” For, you see, Peter did not have to give this answer as he could have pleased Jesus by confessing that He was the true Son of Man. In other words, Jesus was quite surprised by Peter's answer. As Peter chose to confess that the very lowest one born from the most worthless of all was the actual Son of God, so the people today can confess that the very least among us is the king of kings.
In this way, the people possess the sovereign right of proclamation!
Again, as the designation of the Son of Man would denote the very least born out from the most worthless, meaning that such an offspring would be rated even less than the worthless ones that he was born out from, much to the contrary, the designation of Son of God denotes the very highest born from the greatest, meaning that such an offspring would be rated higher than the greatest ones that he was born out from.
As the classification of a son of man is a stranger without a face of authority, the classification of a Son of God is intimate in comparison and one with authority. If given a choice between taking the life of one or the other, one would take the life of a stranger before taking the life of blood.
As our Founders once acted on our behalf, so the people of the United States today can rise to become a collective representative of this very least of us. Indeed, as our society today is eroding back quickly to a state of tyranny, so the people today are eroding back quickly into a state of prostitution.
As every soul has the liberty to choose for themselves, so the people themselves do declare the least one among us to be the ultimate authority, to be the king of kings.
Therefore, we the people today are justified in our willfulness to take power over tyranny, not for the intentions of destroying it, but to simply control it for the purpose of advancing our Civil Purpose. Indeed, we the people today possess the sovereign right of authority to hold our government officials to a higher standard and to a great penalty under judgement of the Truth.
viernes, 28 de junio de 2013
jueves, 27 de junio de 2013
Rewrite #2
The original intentions for including the Bill of Rights as articles within the U.S. Constitution was to bind the government to the people in marriage, creating a more perfect Union, by holding them accountable under judgement. Indeed, the significance of these added articles went beyond the establishment of legal precedence, as John Locke beforehand had already worked it out, because natural rights did not manifest themselves on the cognitive level, no such science existed during that time. So, they reduced on the literal physical level much like DNA to the point of the collective heart or Soul.
In the process of dividing itself into a two party system, the government likewise divided the people. They then stripped from the people their empowered Bill of Rights by making them legal, or civil rights. In other words, the legality of civil rights took precedence over the empowerment natural rights had in holding the government accountable.
Yet, as was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the empowered people were to make up the greatest part of the governmental process. In contrast, the smaller part of this "more perfect Union" involved a necessary tyranny, with this being the institution of an ideal three part government.
Again, it was when Congress legislated away our empowered natural rights deeming them as mere civil rights that government began to no longer feel accountable to the Truth. This is why government has returned to a drunken state of tyranny today the effects which have usurped from us our face of authority and robbed from us our American souls.
So, here is how I view the slow fall of our Union:
1) Our Founders presented our Bill of Rights as the people's empowerment warning those in government that they would be held accountable for their actions.
2) The government usurped us of our empowerment, of our role in government, by legislating away our natural rights as legal or civil rights.
3) As our Founders declared our Bill of Rights as an empowerment, we the people need to reintroduce them by way of proclamation of sovereignty. In our doing so, we hold government beyond just being accountable for their actions, but to that of holding them to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
Here is the justification for adding step number three:
When asked by the Son of Man to confess who he thought Jesus was, Peter answered eventually, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Peter did not have to give this answer however for he could have just confessed that Jesus was the true Son of Man.
Again, as the designation of the Son of Man denotes the very least born from the least, meaning that such an offspring would be rated even less than the worthless ones he came out from, much to the contrary, the designation of Son of God denotes the greatest born from the greatest, meaning that such an offspring is rated even greater than the royalty he came out from.
As our Founders acted on our behalf, so the people of the United States today have become representative of the very least of us. As our government is eroding back to that of a tyranny, so the people are eroding back into a state of prostitution.
As every soul has the liberty to choose for themselves, so the people have the right to declare the least one among us to be the ultimate authority, to be the king of kings.
Therefore, we the people are justified in our will to take power over tyranny, again, not to destroy it, but to control it. Indeed, we the people possess the sovereign right of authority to hold our government officials to a higher standard and to a great penalty under judgement of the Truth.
The original intentions for including the Bill of Rights as articles within the U.S. Constitution was to bind the government to the people in marriage, creating a more perfect Union, by holding them accountable under judgement. Indeed, the significance of these added articles went beyond the establishment of legal precedence, as John Locke beforehand had already worked it out, because natural rights did not manifest themselves on the cognitive level, no such science existed during that time. So, they reduced on the literal physical level much like DNA to the point of the collective heart or Soul.
In the process of dividing itself into a two party system, the government likewise divided the people. They then stripped from the people their empowered Bill of Rights by making them legal, or civil rights. In other words, the legality of civil rights took precedence over the empowerment natural rights had in holding the government accountable.
Yet, as was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the empowered people were to make up the greatest part of the governmental process. In contrast, the smaller part of this "more perfect Union" involved a necessary tyranny, with this being the institution of an ideal three part government.
Again, it was when Congress legislated away our empowered natural rights deeming them as mere civil rights that government began to no longer feel accountable to the Truth. This is why government has returned to a drunken state of tyranny today the effects which have usurped from us our face of authority and robbed from us our American souls.
So, here is how I view the slow fall of our Union:
1) Our Founders presented our Bill of Rights as the people's empowerment warning those in government that they would be held accountable for their actions.
2) The government usurped us of our empowerment, of our role in government, by legislating away our natural rights as legal or civil rights.
3) As our Founders declared our Bill of Rights as an empowerment, we the people need to reintroduce them by way of proclamation of sovereignty. In our doing so, we hold government beyond just being accountable for their actions, but to that of holding them to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
Here is the justification for adding step number three:
When asked by the Son of Man to confess who he thought Jesus was, Peter answered eventually, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Peter did not have to give this answer however for he could have just confessed that Jesus was the true Son of Man.
Again, as the designation of the Son of Man denotes the very least born from the least, meaning that such an offspring would be rated even less than the worthless ones he came out from, much to the contrary, the designation of Son of God denotes the greatest born from the greatest, meaning that such an offspring is rated even greater than the royalty he came out from.
As our Founders acted on our behalf, so the people of the United States today have become representative of the very least of us. As our government is eroding back to that of a tyranny, so the people are eroding back into a state of prostitution.
As every soul has the liberty to choose for themselves, so the people have the right to declare the least one among us to be the ultimate authority, to be the king of kings.
Therefore, we the people are justified in our will to take power over tyranny, again, not to destroy it, but to control it. Indeed, we the people possess the sovereign right of authority to hold our government officials to a higher standard and to a great penalty under judgement of the Truth.
Rewrite number one:
The inclusion of the Bill of Rights as articles within the U.S. Constitution were intended originally to hold our government accountable under judgement of the Truth. Indeed, their significance went beyond mere legal precedence because, as John Locke had it figured, natural rights reduced literally on the physical level to be utilized by a disadvantaged majority in their controlling of a tyranny of a few.
Later on in the fourteenth amendment, congress divided the people, stripping them of their empowered Bill of Rights by legislating them as legal, or as civil rights. This alteration has worked over many years in favor of tyranny and to the detriment of the people as rather than the emphasis remain on a tyranny of a few persecuting a disadvantaged majority as our Founders envisioned the conflict, the legal precedent lawyers stepped in to distract the people away from our Founder's original vision, to divide the people into classifications exclusive of government itself, and to confuse them with false dichotomies.
As was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the people were to be empowered as the greatest part of the governmental process. In contrast to them, the smaller part of the more Perfect Union they envisioned was to be the involvement of a necessary tyranny, with this being the institution of an ideal three part government.
Again, it was when congress legislated our empowered natural rights away as mere civil rights that government no longer felt accountable to the Truth and tyranny returned to rear its ugly head usurping from us of our authority and robbing from us of our American souls.
The inclusion of the Bill of Rights as articles within the U.S. Constitution were intended originally to hold our government accountable under judgement of the Truth. Indeed, their significance went beyond mere legal precedence because, as John Locke had it figured, natural rights reduced literally on the physical level to be utilized by a disadvantaged majority in their controlling of a tyranny of a few.
Later on in the fourteenth amendment, congress divided the people, stripping them of their empowered Bill of Rights by legislating them as legal, or as civil rights. This alteration has worked over many years in favor of tyranny and to the detriment of the people as rather than the emphasis remain on a tyranny of a few persecuting a disadvantaged majority as our Founders envisioned the conflict, the legal precedent lawyers stepped in to distract the people away from our Founder's original vision, to divide the people into classifications exclusive of government itself, and to confuse them with false dichotomies.
As was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the people were to be empowered as the greatest part of the governmental process. In contrast to them, the smaller part of the more Perfect Union they envisioned was to be the involvement of a necessary tyranny, with this being the institution of an ideal three part government.
Again, it was when congress legislated our empowered natural rights away as mere civil rights that government no longer felt accountable to the Truth and tyranny returned to rear its ugly head usurping from us of our authority and robbing from us of our American souls.
miércoles, 26 de junio de 2013
The original intentions of the Bill of Rights was as a declaration of the people's empowerment. These empowered rights were included within the U.S. Constitution by a majority of the people in an effort to control a tyranny of a few.
Later in the fourteenth amendment, congress demeaned the Bill of Rights by legislating them legal or civil rights. This alteration worked in favor of tyranny and to the detriment of the people, as rather than the emphasis being placed on a minority taking advantage of a majority - with this being tyranny - the focus was altered to that of a majority taking advantage of minorities. As a result of this, the people's empowerment became usurped.
In other words, back when the Bill of Rights were interpreted as they were originally intended, the people were part of the government possessing the greatest part of it.
Later in the fourteenth amendment, congress demeaned the Bill of Rights by legislating them legal or civil rights. This alteration worked in favor of tyranny and to the detriment of the people, as rather than the emphasis being placed on a minority taking advantage of a majority - with this being tyranny - the focus was altered to that of a majority taking advantage of minorities. As a result of this, the people's empowerment became usurped.
In other words, back when the Bill of Rights were interpreted as they were originally intended, the people were part of the government possessing the greatest part of it.
martes, 25 de junio de 2013
(In the finished letter to the Supreme Court holding them in contempt of the people's Civil Purpose, the Bill of Rights, with these being the people's empowered rights, need to be reintroduced yet again by way of proclamation.)
On this day of the 26th, in the month of June, in the year 2013,
I William M. Jones II., alias Uncle Emanuel Watkins, am the First Attorney in the defense of our Founding Fathers, the acting Representative of the very least One among the people, and the Prime Minister of these United States:
Indeed, that they might have acted in our best interest, our Founding Fathers once forfeited their statuses as rightful gentlemen in high society. In like manner, so do we the people of the United States today reject our collective status by declaring ourselves representative of the very least One among us.
As the very least One among us is indeed the king of kings, the right of proclamation resides within the hearts of the people.
A natural right is a born empowerment greater in significance than a mere legal civil right. Indeed, the people are empowered today, just as a mother will always be consumed with concern for her children - even starving herself for their sake, and just as a father will be consumed with going to battle against tyranny for the sake of his family - even forfeiting his own life also for their sake.
Therefore, I hold every government of these United States of America in contempt of the people and their Civil Purpose. Not only is there a clear forewarning given by our Founders given within the U.S. Constitution about how the people possess natural rights as empowerment, but laws were also legislated deeming such empowered rights also to be legal civil rights.
Stop stumbling up the Children of God! These empowered rights were declared unalienable meaning that any contempt committed against their special meaning shall be considered a serious offense against the people's Civil Purpose.
Again, here is a proclamation of these empowered rights:
Beyond the prior Order once given by our Founders holding those members of our government accountable for their actions, we the people of today now hold the members of our government to an even higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
On this day of the 26th, in the month of June, in the year 2013,
I William M. Jones II., alias Uncle Emanuel Watkins, am the First Attorney in the defense of our Founding Fathers, the acting Representative of the very least One among the people, and the Prime Minister of these United States:
Indeed, that they might have acted in our best interest, our Founding Fathers once forfeited their statuses as rightful gentlemen in high society. In like manner, so do we the people of the United States today reject our collective status by declaring ourselves representative of the very least One among us.
As the very least One among us is indeed the king of kings, the right of proclamation resides within the hearts of the people.
A natural right is a born empowerment greater in significance than a mere legal civil right. Indeed, the people are empowered today, just as a mother will always be consumed with concern for her children - even starving herself for their sake, and just as a father will be consumed with going to battle against tyranny for the sake of his family - even forfeiting his own life also for their sake.
Therefore, I hold every government of these United States of America in contempt of the people and their Civil Purpose. Not only is there a clear forewarning given by our Founders given within the U.S. Constitution about how the people possess natural rights as empowerment, but laws were also legislated deeming such empowered rights also to be legal civil rights.
Stop stumbling up the Children of God! These empowered rights were declared unalienable meaning that any contempt committed against their special meaning shall be considered a serious offense against the people's Civil Purpose.
Again, here is a proclamation of these empowered rights:
Article 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.
Article II.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Article III.
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Article IV.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Article 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.
Article VI.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Article VII.
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Article VIII.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Article IX.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Article X.
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.
Beyond the prior Order once given by our Founders holding those members of our government accountable for their actions, we the people of today now hold the members of our government to an even higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
domingo, 23 de junio de 2013
I have come to the realization recently how the documentation of the U.S. Constitution isn't what the lawyers of legal precedence claim that it is. This deceit perpetuated by these opportunistic loyalists is the main reason our Union has been on a fast track back to the old tyranny. In actuality, according to a friend I've been speaking with, the U.S. Constitution is actually two documents with one being the empowered will of the people in the Bill of Rights and the other being a legal article concerning the instituting of a more perfect government among men.
In other words, our Founders didn't intend for our nation to be ruled solely by lawyers of legal precedence. To the contrary, in establishing our new nation, they gathered not for the purpose of elaborating endless laws, but to reduce towards the new order of a natural law. This declared Civil Purpose of the people divorced us out from under tyranny and, during the process, abolished every prior legal precedence of the old tyranny. Rather than lawyers of legal precedence ruling over our nation, our Founders desired lawyers of formal precedence.
The differences between a formal precedence lawyer and a legal precedence lawyer is the first type serves the people by utilizing his or her authority to remove whatever obstacles might be in the way that hinder them. In other words, our government, with this being the necessary tyranny our Founders instituted as a more perfect Union, shouldn't be in the business of doing anything; but, they should be serving to remove those obstacles stumbling up the people. In contrast, by the "manufacturing of consent" from the people, the second type of lawyer of legal precedence makes his or her living working for the interests of lobbyists. As the old high priests in the Jewish temples and the Catholic churches would make fabulous livings for themselves receiving payments for the forgiveness of future indulgences, with these being future sins that the people had yet to commit, so do lawyers of legal precedence also make a fabulous living working for tyranny.
Rather than removing the hindrances blocking the paths towards advancement, these lawyers of legal precedence, these workers of inequity, gather to scheme ways to benefit tyranny by stumbling up the people.
In other words, our Founders didn't intend for our nation to be ruled solely by lawyers of legal precedence. To the contrary, in establishing our new nation, they gathered not for the purpose of elaborating endless laws, but to reduce towards the new order of a natural law. This declared Civil Purpose of the people divorced us out from under tyranny and, during the process, abolished every prior legal precedence of the old tyranny. Rather than lawyers of legal precedence ruling over our nation, our Founders desired lawyers of formal precedence.
The differences between a formal precedence lawyer and a legal precedence lawyer is the first type serves the people by utilizing his or her authority to remove whatever obstacles might be in the way that hinder them. In other words, our government, with this being the necessary tyranny our Founders instituted as a more perfect Union, shouldn't be in the business of doing anything; but, they should be serving to remove those obstacles stumbling up the people. In contrast, by the "manufacturing of consent" from the people, the second type of lawyer of legal precedence makes his or her living working for the interests of lobbyists. As the old high priests in the Jewish temples and the Catholic churches would make fabulous livings for themselves receiving payments for the forgiveness of future indulgences, with these being future sins that the people had yet to commit, so do lawyers of legal precedence also make a fabulous living working for tyranny.
Rather than removing the hindrances blocking the paths towards advancement, these lawyers of legal precedence, these workers of inequity, gather to scheme ways to benefit tyranny by stumbling up the people.
viernes, 21 de junio de 2013
Jesus Himself admitted that He spoke in parables not with the intentions of mystifying, but to preserve Himself until the time was right.
Before the time of Jesus, Like Him, Confucius also spoke in parables.
During about the same time as Confucius, within the confines of his palace, The Buddha was lied to all his life about a paradise that never existed until one day, much by accident, he ventured to walk out an unguarded door into a real world of the sick, the freak, the elderly, and the malnourished. Because of the trauma he suffered, he insisted on being retaught everything! As a result, The Buddha concluded that one should remain unborn. For you see, in this way, the people could then avoid being reincarnated back into life as the sick, the freak, the elderly, and the malnourished. Problem is, as the Buddha was reincarnated from a man into a man, the words spoken by The Buddha were supposed to be held as coming straight from God Himself. The implications being, as it stood back then, the Hindu religion should have been put to death by being placed back into the womb. But the Hindu religion rebelled and, thus, still remains today.
Later in ancient Greece, as the incredibly brave Socrates hid his subversive intentions by rarely ever elaborating on them, choosing to ask endless inductive questions instead, Plato achieved a level of subversiveness himself by writing dialogues which never concluded. Instead, he included the "dialectic" teaching method of Socrates and his own truth engine he referred to as "the theory of the forms" as always being the main ideas, the hidden thesis statements, and conclusions in every dialogue.
Ponder on that for a second.
Aristotle himself was later accused of impiety just as Socrates had also been accused of it, with the latter choosing death over banishment from Athens.
In the past, the big beat up the small just as, in the business of meanness, knowing was the same as beating you.
As the Apostle Paul had to minister while running for his life, writing letters to the local churches in the process, later on, the Apostle John had to write the Book of Revelation in code so as to hide its true meaning so that it wouldn't be altered or scrapped altogether by the pagan Romans.
To give one example, when he wrote Holy, Holy, Holy, the Apostle John actually meant the Trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
As we all know, as Galileo was persecuted by the Catholic Church in committing blasphemy against, not the books of the Holy bible, but against Aristotle, the same was true of the Protestant Catholic Martin Luther in his efforts to allow the bible to be read in another language other than Latin.
Sir Isaac Newton had to hide the fact that he was an alchemist as well as a physicist. For, you see, alchemy played the part of chemistry of that time as alchemists searched for and threatened to find out a way to turn other minerals into gold. For in finding out how to do so, the increase in the amount of gold would have brought down its price for those who held it in abundance.
Later, the early Puritans had to be subversive to the State Church of England.
John Locke had to write his two treatises in secret admitting to them in his will only after his death.
Even when they were gathering together to write the Declaration of Independence to create a whole new order in order that they could rightfully divorce the people out from under tyranny, our Founding Fathers had to do so subversively.
The point I am making here is that true education has always been subversive, exists today as subversive, and has to be subversive. What stands against this subversive education is legal precedence which amounts to nothing. Or, meditate on it again. If lawyers are the ones who certify, sanction, and deem official every expertise, as they only know about the law, and as law for the sake of the law amounts to nothing, then, over time, our expertise will become less than nothing as there will surely have been a law past against them.
Again, the one and only mandate for the American people has, is, and will always be for limited government.
If lawyers have to be the ones who deem our expertise as official, then the less government of them we have, the more true expertise we will possess.
Before the time of Jesus, Like Him, Confucius also spoke in parables.
During about the same time as Confucius, within the confines of his palace, The Buddha was lied to all his life about a paradise that never existed until one day, much by accident, he ventured to walk out an unguarded door into a real world of the sick, the freak, the elderly, and the malnourished. Because of the trauma he suffered, he insisted on being retaught everything! As a result, The Buddha concluded that one should remain unborn. For you see, in this way, the people could then avoid being reincarnated back into life as the sick, the freak, the elderly, and the malnourished. Problem is, as the Buddha was reincarnated from a man into a man, the words spoken by The Buddha were supposed to be held as coming straight from God Himself. The implications being, as it stood back then, the Hindu religion should have been put to death by being placed back into the womb. But the Hindu religion rebelled and, thus, still remains today.
Later in ancient Greece, as the incredibly brave Socrates hid his subversive intentions by rarely ever elaborating on them, choosing to ask endless inductive questions instead, Plato achieved a level of subversiveness himself by writing dialogues which never concluded. Instead, he included the "dialectic" teaching method of Socrates and his own truth engine he referred to as "the theory of the forms" as always being the main ideas, the hidden thesis statements, and conclusions in every dialogue.
Ponder on that for a second.
Aristotle himself was later accused of impiety just as Socrates had also been accused of it, with the latter choosing death over banishment from Athens.
In the past, the big beat up the small just as, in the business of meanness, knowing was the same as beating you.
As the Apostle Paul had to minister while running for his life, writing letters to the local churches in the process, later on, the Apostle John had to write the Book of Revelation in code so as to hide its true meaning so that it wouldn't be altered or scrapped altogether by the pagan Romans.
To give one example, when he wrote Holy, Holy, Holy, the Apostle John actually meant the Trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
As we all know, as Galileo was persecuted by the Catholic Church in committing blasphemy against, not the books of the Holy bible, but against Aristotle, the same was true of the Protestant Catholic Martin Luther in his efforts to allow the bible to be read in another language other than Latin.
Sir Isaac Newton had to hide the fact that he was an alchemist as well as a physicist. For, you see, alchemy played the part of chemistry of that time as alchemists searched for and threatened to find out a way to turn other minerals into gold. For in finding out how to do so, the increase in the amount of gold would have brought down its price for those who held it in abundance.
Later, the early Puritans had to be subversive to the State Church of England.
John Locke had to write his two treatises in secret admitting to them in his will only after his death.
Even when they were gathering together to write the Declaration of Independence to create a whole new order in order that they could rightfully divorce the people out from under tyranny, our Founding Fathers had to do so subversively.
The point I am making here is that true education has always been subversive, exists today as subversive, and has to be subversive. What stands against this subversive education is legal precedence which amounts to nothing. Or, meditate on it again. If lawyers are the ones who certify, sanction, and deem official every expertise, as they only know about the law, and as law for the sake of the law amounts to nothing, then, over time, our expertise will become less than nothing as there will surely have been a law past against them.
Again, the one and only mandate for the American people has, is, and will always be for limited government.
If lawyers have to be the ones who deem our expertise as official, then the less government of them we have, the more true expertise we will possess.
jueves, 20 de junio de 2013
Forth Meditation
Circumcision cuts away reducing towards that of an ideal man. When they spoke of all men having been born endowed with the same exact business agenda for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, our Founding Fathers weren't elaborating.
No, they were reducing towards a whole new order by the utilization of the scientific method of natural law.
Again, I would like to symbolically place along a political spectrum both a blessed king at one end of eternity and a cursed prostitute at the other end of it, utilizing their characters as a model to better demonstrate the point of our Founding Fathers, that although each of their souls are permanently separated from the other they are still a part of one formal Soul meaning that the trespassing prostitute possesses within her the same exact will for fulfillment as does her land-lording king.
In this romance, while he is still in charge, when as an immature prince, his authority had to be reduced and narrowed. After all, marriage is more than the business of pimping and prostituting as it is a sharing of authority by both the bride and the bridegroom.
Understand the subtle point I am making here, that while the king will tend to make the best decisions regarding himself, the prostitute will tend to make decisions against her own best interest. It isn't that she isn't exactly equal to him, but that she is distracted by a Great Burden inwardly. In other words, evil is manifesting itself in two different ways here. As the prince of light needs to have his authority rebuked towards that situation which is ideal, the princess of darkness needs her authority encouraged in order to express her part.
Surprisingly, when given a chance at stopping her prostituting, the prostitute, having no other course of action, will usually turn to pimping herself. Why are prostitutes in bondage to their prostitution? It isn't because of the pimp, but because of the other prostitutes she is competing with. If prostituting is the business of death, then pimping is the parasitic fly attracted to it.
Like the prostitute, the people have no enemy other than the best friend they have standing next to them. Love thy neighbor as thyself and tyranny will surely run off with its tail between its legs like a whimpering puppy.
So, the expressing of proper authority is a very subtle trick and is why people end up spending thousands of years in the outer darkness of tyranny (a perpetual dynasty). Once again, as government cannot control itself by the implementation of new laws, the people can control tyranny by sobering it up and making it perceive its conscience.
In the old Jewish temple, in order to best prosper within the economy of the Ten Commandments, the authority of the wife had to remain hidden behind a veil. In the new covenant of marriage brought about as a gift from the Lord's resurrection from "death, both the wife and the husband, as is expressed in the book of Acts, were judged as separate authorities.
There exists nothing that we can give to the prostitute to help her as she, as the body, is already the owner of all property and possessions. So, the only possession that the king has to give her, as the head, is his tolerance.
When I was once within the worthless multitude, the Lord commanded that we do nothing, that we not go down to the market to tend for ourselves. Instead, He instructed us to recline back where we stood, as saintly kings would have tended to do - His act willing over to us the possession of all the property. He then made His disciples serve us, with t0hese being the future Apostles - with this act of His willing over to us every possession as well.
If the prostitute feels that she needs to do anything for her betterment, she herself will need to stand in faith and walk in faith. In the end, her only hope will be the converts she meets up with along the way.
And in here lies the real battle. As a potential groom would have to steal such a lowly bride out from under the lucrative business of her pimp, so would a potential ideal government have to steal the people subversively out from under the lucrative business of tyranny.
In making decisions on which way to go, we need to be very careful in our determinations. As odd as it might sound, it is always better to decide to be spoken to from a distance as a lowly Gentile than to be intimately touched as a Jew. This would also mean that those of us most rejected as untouchables are the most cherished, those of us most ashamed are the most vindicated, and those of us most spoken to wrathfully are the most loved.
*Women were thought to be spiritually dead and were traditionally the ones left to bury the dead. Thus, "let the dead bury the dead." So, when Jesus was resurrected, He went in with the dead and was resurrected among them. This gave the dead authority. But this is a very subtle mystery.
Circumcision cuts away reducing towards that of an ideal man. When they spoke of all men having been born endowed with the same exact business agenda for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, our Founding Fathers weren't elaborating.
No, they were reducing towards a whole new order by the utilization of the scientific method of natural law.
Again, I would like to symbolically place along a political spectrum both a blessed king at one end of eternity and a cursed prostitute at the other end of it, utilizing their characters as a model to better demonstrate the point of our Founding Fathers, that although each of their souls are permanently separated from the other they are still a part of one formal Soul meaning that the trespassing prostitute possesses within her the same exact will for fulfillment as does her land-lording king.
In this romance, while he is still in charge, when as an immature prince, his authority had to be reduced and narrowed. After all, marriage is more than the business of pimping and prostituting as it is a sharing of authority by both the bride and the bridegroom.
Understand the subtle point I am making here, that while the king will tend to make the best decisions regarding himself, the prostitute will tend to make decisions against her own best interest. It isn't that she isn't exactly equal to him, but that she is distracted by a Great Burden inwardly. In other words, evil is manifesting itself in two different ways here. As the prince of light needs to have his authority rebuked towards that situation which is ideal, the princess of darkness needs her authority encouraged in order to express her part.
Surprisingly, when given a chance at stopping her prostituting, the prostitute, having no other course of action, will usually turn to pimping herself. Why are prostitutes in bondage to their prostitution? It isn't because of the pimp, but because of the other prostitutes she is competing with. If prostituting is the business of death, then pimping is the parasitic fly attracted to it.
Like the prostitute, the people have no enemy other than the best friend they have standing next to them. Love thy neighbor as thyself and tyranny will surely run off with its tail between its legs like a whimpering puppy.
So, the expressing of proper authority is a very subtle trick and is why people end up spending thousands of years in the outer darkness of tyranny (a perpetual dynasty). Once again, as government cannot control itself by the implementation of new laws, the people can control tyranny by sobering it up and making it perceive its conscience.
In the old Jewish temple, in order to best prosper within the economy of the Ten Commandments, the authority of the wife had to remain hidden behind a veil. In the new covenant of marriage brought about as a gift from the Lord's resurrection from "death, both the wife and the husband, as is expressed in the book of Acts, were judged as separate authorities.
There exists nothing that we can give to the prostitute to help her as she, as the body, is already the owner of all property and possessions. So, the only possession that the king has to give her, as the head, is his tolerance.
When I was once within the worthless multitude, the Lord commanded that we do nothing, that we not go down to the market to tend for ourselves. Instead, He instructed us to recline back where we stood, as saintly kings would have tended to do - His act willing over to us the possession of all the property. He then made His disciples serve us, with t0hese being the future Apostles - with this act of His willing over to us every possession as well.
If the prostitute feels that she needs to do anything for her betterment, she herself will need to stand in faith and walk in faith. In the end, her only hope will be the converts she meets up with along the way.
And in here lies the real battle. As a potential groom would have to steal such a lowly bride out from under the lucrative business of her pimp, so would a potential ideal government have to steal the people subversively out from under the lucrative business of tyranny.
In making decisions on which way to go, we need to be very careful in our determinations. As odd as it might sound, it is always better to decide to be spoken to from a distance as a lowly Gentile than to be intimately touched as a Jew. This would also mean that those of us most rejected as untouchables are the most cherished, those of us most ashamed are the most vindicated, and those of us most spoken to wrathfully are the most loved.
*Women were thought to be spiritually dead and were traditionally the ones left to bury the dead. Thus, "let the dead bury the dead." So, when Jesus was resurrected, He went in with the dead and was resurrected among them. This gave the dead authority. But this is a very subtle mystery.
martes, 18 de junio de 2013
Third Meditation
Other than Ron Paul, another person who in my opinion would make an excellent Prime Minister of these United States is Noam Chomsky. I was listening to him have a discussion with Alex Jones and he would roll over agreeing with everything Alex had to say just so that he could get the chance at inserting some wisdom.
One of the points he tried making was how it has been a rather long established and casual tendency of tyranny to manipulate the majority through the "manufacturing of consent." In other words, the concept of fooling the people for their consent has existed probably forever and certainly before the time of our Founding Fathers. As there has always existed media corporations and intelligence agencies working to propagate the king's press, such entities still work for tyranny in the same fashion today.
Therefore, the media corporations speak more than just lies today as they are willfully allowing themselves to be utilized by tyranny for the purpose of manufacturing consent. Or, as they are expert at making it appear to us, because we wish for it, we get what we deserve.
Again, as the mandate of the tyrant will always be towards the reconstituting of young women and boys into secret harems for his enjoyment, the true unchanging mandate of the disadvantaged people will always be a limitation put on the size of his government. And I think that is one of my main challenges to the norm today. Our Founders married the disadvantaged majority to a more perfect Union. When the wife loses her authority as the people, she slowly sinks to becoming a whore - just as the people of the United States treated no better by their government than any other people of the world. When, as a prostitute on the street, she sees how terrible the people are being neglected by tyranny, and that she herself is the one who represents the American people, she will then become envisioned and empowered to stand and walk in faith out of her darkness.
Along with Noam Chomsky, William F. Buckley too would have made a great Prime Minister of these United States.
I find it very interesting listening to the recorded discussions of the great late William F. Buckley and Noam Chomsky because they were more likely during that time to reduce towards saying something that might offend the audience. Indeed, that is a subtle point concerning any discussion as elaborations made upon a preset political platform, a ploy of the sophists, will always tend to sell more cookies than would the more rational and philosophical approach of both involve in the discussion reducing towards a mutual common ground, or towards a bipartisan platform.
For those of you who think William F. Buckley lost in his discussions with Noam Chomsky, understand, he was at a severe disadvantage to his guest in that, as the interviewer, he always had to play the part of the submissive Socrates. In contrast, Noam Chomsky already had a preset platform in which to elaborate upon.
This relationship between great American thinkers, between both the liberal Chomsky and the conservative Buckley, is an important point to focus on. Supposedly, when Socrates himself was instructing his students, utilizing a whole new teaching method in the process, he would rarely ever elaborate. Instead, he would constantly reduce by inductive questioning keeping his own elaborated theories a secret so that he could reveal them eventually as a prize for his student's good work. When he did elaborate, it caused much marveling among his students as he would be demonstrating to them that he actually knew the best-principled answer all along.
A subtle point is how the legal world has come to appear to accept the virtues of ancient Greece. But, causing a shadow in our conscience, the use of our serpent eye should reveal to us that that is not how tyranny works. Neither Socrates, Plato, nor Aristotle were ever accepted officially by the all-knowers of their time. Likewise, the all-knowers in power today still live in the same legal world as the all-knowers of ancient time. In actuality, as their lives depended on it, the ancient philosophers had to work from a position of subversiveness or else!
Again, an all-knower is someone who is born knowing all things. He or she knows all things because of their birth name. They are not qualified because of any grade given to them, but because of born empowerment. Simply put, if you happen to disagree with them, they have the power to beat you down.
In the end, concerning the New World political spectrum, virtue only becomes meaningful to the prostitute, to the disadvantaged majority she represents, and to those subversive ones within society who have decided to convert over to her side. Concerning tyranny, virtue is only important as a tool for manufacturing consent as Noam Chomsky quoted another as saying. In other words, as manipulation of the people by tyranny has become a problem today, so it was the same exact problem during the times of ancient Greece.
If I were a tyrant with absolute power, the best way for me to manufacture consent of the public would be to limit their state indoctrination to that of the defining of individual terms. After all, true virtue needs more than just definition, as terms have to be put in perspective in how each relates to the other. In other words, while there does exist a true lawful definition for each term, to retain their validness, there also exists a true orderly way in which the many lawful virtues have to follow after the other in a sentence. As the people are taught now, speech writers can so easily deceive them by the "manufacturing of consent," by the muddling up of the message by twisting it up into an improper reorganization of virtues. Using this deceitful process, my message would seem valid to the public as the string of virtues I would be speaking to them would be in correct complete sentences while constructed in proper and so undeniable grammatical context.
In the end, a more proper education isn't going to alter the deceit in my messages. Again, the best-principled way to limit my tyranny is going to be limiting the size of government.
So, I applaud Noam Chomsky in the way he constantly and mutually agreed with Alex Jones so that he could convey for those of us smaller people out here his understanding on the "manufacturing of consent."
Again, what we are beginning to realize in this world is how what is in the best interest of the people and their Civil Purpose will always be a constant mandate written in stone. As the mandates of tyranny are for the enjoyment of a leisure life that is wholly downhill, for the reconstituting of young women and boys into the harems, and for the acquiring of ample amounts of free time so as to enjoy them, the unchanging mandate of the homeless prostitute and those who have converted over to her side will always be for limitations to be put on government.
Other than Ron Paul, another person who in my opinion would make an excellent Prime Minister of these United States is Noam Chomsky. I was listening to him have a discussion with Alex Jones and he would roll over agreeing with everything Alex had to say just so that he could get the chance at inserting some wisdom.
One of the points he tried making was how it has been a rather long established and casual tendency of tyranny to manipulate the majority through the "manufacturing of consent." In other words, the concept of fooling the people for their consent has existed probably forever and certainly before the time of our Founding Fathers. As there has always existed media corporations and intelligence agencies working to propagate the king's press, such entities still work for tyranny in the same fashion today.
Therefore, the media corporations speak more than just lies today as they are willfully allowing themselves to be utilized by tyranny for the purpose of manufacturing consent. Or, as they are expert at making it appear to us, because we wish for it, we get what we deserve.
Again, as the mandate of the tyrant will always be towards the reconstituting of young women and boys into secret harems for his enjoyment, the true unchanging mandate of the disadvantaged people will always be a limitation put on the size of his government. And I think that is one of my main challenges to the norm today. Our Founders married the disadvantaged majority to a more perfect Union. When the wife loses her authority as the people, she slowly sinks to becoming a whore - just as the people of the United States treated no better by their government than any other people of the world. When, as a prostitute on the street, she sees how terrible the people are being neglected by tyranny, and that she herself is the one who represents the American people, she will then become envisioned and empowered to stand and walk in faith out of her darkness.
Along with Noam Chomsky, William F. Buckley too would have made a great Prime Minister of these United States.
I find it very interesting listening to the recorded discussions of the great late William F. Buckley and Noam Chomsky because they were more likely during that time to reduce towards saying something that might offend the audience. Indeed, that is a subtle point concerning any discussion as elaborations made upon a preset political platform, a ploy of the sophists, will always tend to sell more cookies than would the more rational and philosophical approach of both involve in the discussion reducing towards a mutual common ground, or towards a bipartisan platform.
For those of you who think William F. Buckley lost in his discussions with Noam Chomsky, understand, he was at a severe disadvantage to his guest in that, as the interviewer, he always had to play the part of the submissive Socrates. In contrast, Noam Chomsky already had a preset platform in which to elaborate upon.
This relationship between great American thinkers, between both the liberal Chomsky and the conservative Buckley, is an important point to focus on. Supposedly, when Socrates himself was instructing his students, utilizing a whole new teaching method in the process, he would rarely ever elaborate. Instead, he would constantly reduce by inductive questioning keeping his own elaborated theories a secret so that he could reveal them eventually as a prize for his student's good work. When he did elaborate, it caused much marveling among his students as he would be demonstrating to them that he actually knew the best-principled answer all along.
A subtle point is how the legal world has come to appear to accept the virtues of ancient Greece. But, causing a shadow in our conscience, the use of our serpent eye should reveal to us that that is not how tyranny works. Neither Socrates, Plato, nor Aristotle were ever accepted officially by the all-knowers of their time. Likewise, the all-knowers in power today still live in the same legal world as the all-knowers of ancient time. In actuality, as their lives depended on it, the ancient philosophers had to work from a position of subversiveness or else!
Again, an all-knower is someone who is born knowing all things. He or she knows all things because of their birth name. They are not qualified because of any grade given to them, but because of born empowerment. Simply put, if you happen to disagree with them, they have the power to beat you down.
In the end, concerning the New World political spectrum, virtue only becomes meaningful to the prostitute, to the disadvantaged majority she represents, and to those subversive ones within society who have decided to convert over to her side. Concerning tyranny, virtue is only important as a tool for manufacturing consent as Noam Chomsky quoted another as saying. In other words, as manipulation of the people by tyranny has become a problem today, so it was the same exact problem during the times of ancient Greece.
If I were a tyrant with absolute power, the best way for me to manufacture consent of the public would be to limit their state indoctrination to that of the defining of individual terms. After all, true virtue needs more than just definition, as terms have to be put in perspective in how each relates to the other. In other words, while there does exist a true lawful definition for each term, to retain their validness, there also exists a true orderly way in which the many lawful virtues have to follow after the other in a sentence. As the people are taught now, speech writers can so easily deceive them by the "manufacturing of consent," by the muddling up of the message by twisting it up into an improper reorganization of virtues. Using this deceitful process, my message would seem valid to the public as the string of virtues I would be speaking to them would be in correct complete sentences while constructed in proper and so undeniable grammatical context.
In the end, a more proper education isn't going to alter the deceit in my messages. Again, the best-principled way to limit my tyranny is going to be limiting the size of government.
So, I applaud Noam Chomsky in the way he constantly and mutually agreed with Alex Jones so that he could convey for those of us smaller people out here his understanding on the "manufacturing of consent."
Again, what we are beginning to realize in this world is how what is in the best interest of the people and their Civil Purpose will always be a constant mandate written in stone. As the mandates of tyranny are for the enjoyment of a leisure life that is wholly downhill, for the reconstituting of young women and boys into the harems, and for the acquiring of ample amounts of free time so as to enjoy them, the unchanging mandate of the homeless prostitute and those who have converted over to her side will always be for limitations to be put on government.
jueves, 13 de junio de 2013
Second Meditation:
Stumbling up the people by dividing them into the classifications of realists and idealists is a subtle trick of tyranny. In the end, we are all idealists in how our consciences abide by a political spectrum.
Indeed, while opportunistic realists believe the impotent multitude have to be made to live by the law, with this being the common held belief of those in tyranny who once ruled over a disadvantaged majority, the idealist believes that all have the ability to live by their consciences, with this being the justification for advancing beyond tyranny to the instituting of governments among men.
The advent of "positive government" happened when the utilization of government for the improvement of the lives of the many took precedence over the utilization of tyranny for the maintaining of leisure for just a few.
Tyranny is the cruel business of pimping and prostituting souls, a means of marketing those nameless and faceless ones who, because of both the limited time frame and environment they live, are not deemed able to thrive, advance, or exhibit any authority, but are thought only to be able to subsist submissively. Rather than they receive a training that is in their best interest, they receive an education indoctrinating them into a homo-social drama, an affair between two males fighting a desperate battle, both well-versed, eloquent, and elaborating men, each a gentleman representing an extreme end of the political spectrum, one being of the liberal persuasion and the other of the conservative. In this futile conflict, each alpha male prospers fabulously in society as they go about battling to win control over the commoner people.
Somehow, this conflict is supposed to be fruitful in serving the best interest of the disadvantaged majority.
In actuality, these so-called realists are drunkards intoxicated by the false powers of manipulation. Indeed, being as they truly have consciences, it is the political spectrum they observe which makes them feel justified in the corruption and contempt they commit against the people's Civil Purpose.
To combat this tyranny, I have already introduced prior, utilized in the defense of our Founding Fathers under judgement of the Truth, a new kind of political spectrum to challenge the old one created by Aristotle. I designated at one end of this new spectrum a blessed king, a character already created within the Declaration of Independence by our Founding Fathers. In order to advance slightly upon what they have already established for us as a foundation, I then introduced a cursed prostitute as an unmentionable minor character, with her representing the king's inverse or perverse. As he would sit at one end of the spectrum as enthroned, she would kneel at the other end of it as homeless.
Using this new American Political Spectrum to better define what is government, the empowered king would certainly utilize his authority in an attempt to maintain his tyranny to that of a state of stasis, or to that which is often referred to as a perpetual dynasty. As the true mandate of tyranny, his ultimate quest will always be for furthering his enjoyment, for the instituting of harems of more and more young ladies and small boys, and for an ever increasing amount of leisure time to spend with them. To accomplish this mission, this tyrant and his cohorts will incorporate both their secret agencies and their controlled media corporations to stumble up the people, deceiving them with skillful elaborations by twisting and reorganizing virtue.
In contrast, from the point of view of the homeless prostitute, government will always be something one has to be submissive towards. In order to give birth to her offspring, to advance them to a possible life of contentment, and to keep them from falling into the harems of tyranny, she will need to work on a subversive level. Indeed, she will need to lie and to resort to petty crime in order to survive. And she will need to learn to keep her mouth shut in order to survive as any complaint made by her will only serve to get her beaten down on every level.
Stumbling up the people by dividing them into the classifications of realists and idealists is a subtle trick of tyranny. In the end, we are all idealists in how our consciences abide by a political spectrum.
Indeed, while opportunistic realists believe the impotent multitude have to be made to live by the law, with this being the common held belief of those in tyranny who once ruled over a disadvantaged majority, the idealist believes that all have the ability to live by their consciences, with this being the justification for advancing beyond tyranny to the instituting of governments among men.
The advent of "positive government" happened when the utilization of government for the improvement of the lives of the many took precedence over the utilization of tyranny for the maintaining of leisure for just a few.
Tyranny is the cruel business of pimping and prostituting souls, a means of marketing those nameless and faceless ones who, because of both the limited time frame and environment they live, are not deemed able to thrive, advance, or exhibit any authority, but are thought only to be able to subsist submissively. Rather than they receive a training that is in their best interest, they receive an education indoctrinating them into a homo-social drama, an affair between two males fighting a desperate battle, both well-versed, eloquent, and elaborating men, each a gentleman representing an extreme end of the political spectrum, one being of the liberal persuasion and the other of the conservative. In this futile conflict, each alpha male prospers fabulously in society as they go about battling to win control over the commoner people.
Somehow, this conflict is supposed to be fruitful in serving the best interest of the disadvantaged majority.
In actuality, these so-called realists are drunkards intoxicated by the false powers of manipulation. Indeed, being as they truly have consciences, it is the political spectrum they observe which makes them feel justified in the corruption and contempt they commit against the people's Civil Purpose.
To combat this tyranny, I have already introduced prior, utilized in the defense of our Founding Fathers under judgement of the Truth, a new kind of political spectrum to challenge the old one created by Aristotle. I designated at one end of this new spectrum a blessed king, a character already created within the Declaration of Independence by our Founding Fathers. In order to advance slightly upon what they have already established for us as a foundation, I then introduced a cursed prostitute as an unmentionable minor character, with her representing the king's inverse or perverse. As he would sit at one end of the spectrum as enthroned, she would kneel at the other end of it as homeless.
Using this new American Political Spectrum to better define what is government, the empowered king would certainly utilize his authority in an attempt to maintain his tyranny to that of a state of stasis, or to that which is often referred to as a perpetual dynasty. As the true mandate of tyranny, his ultimate quest will always be for furthering his enjoyment, for the instituting of harems of more and more young ladies and small boys, and for an ever increasing amount of leisure time to spend with them. To accomplish this mission, this tyrant and his cohorts will incorporate both their secret agencies and their controlled media corporations to stumble up the people, deceiving them with skillful elaborations by twisting and reorganizing virtue.
In contrast, from the point of view of the homeless prostitute, government will always be something one has to be submissive towards. In order to give birth to her offspring, to advance them to a possible life of contentment, and to keep them from falling into the harems of tyranny, she will need to work on a subversive level. Indeed, she will need to lie and to resort to petty crime in order to survive. And she will need to learn to keep her mouth shut in order to survive as any complaint made by her will only serve to get her beaten down on every level.
miércoles, 12 de junio de 2013
First Meditation:
As the purpose of a tyranny is to maintain itself, in contrast, a government of wise men, with these being both male and female, will preserve tyranny as an included necessary part for the advancement of all men.
Therefore, as officials are today preserved as a necessary-tyranny, as they were ideally instituted as a necessary-evil by our Founding Fathers to be part of a more perfect Union, they received their powers not as legal, but as formal powers from the people. In contrast, certifications, entitlements, and diplomas of expertise are deemed legal by lawyers. In other words, as government is the official head who certifies every expertise as legally official - in that our government today has become dominated by lawyers - then the validity of our expertise depends on the expertise of lawyers.
Again, there is no such offense as contempt committed against the law for the sake of the law, in that if all we had to ever eat, drink, and breath was the law, then we would have even less than nothing, as such a law would be instituted against us in our desire to abolish it. In the end, the only true offense is contempt committed against the people's Civil Purpose.
In furthering the people's Civil Purpose, those with expertise are needed as a necessary-evil. However, the further away the officials work who certify, entitle, and deem our expertise as valid, the more invalid and corrupt that expertise becomes favoring a return to tyranny.
In contrast, the more the certifying, entitling,and deeming of expertise is performed intimately on the local level, the more valid the expertise becomes regarding usefulness in advancing the people and their Civil Purpose.
This is one reason for limiting government.
As the purpose of a tyranny is to maintain itself, in contrast, a government of wise men, with these being both male and female, will preserve tyranny as an included necessary part for the advancement of all men.
Therefore, as officials are today preserved as a necessary-tyranny, as they were ideally instituted as a necessary-evil by our Founding Fathers to be part of a more perfect Union, they received their powers not as legal, but as formal powers from the people. In contrast, certifications, entitlements, and diplomas of expertise are deemed legal by lawyers. In other words, as government is the official head who certifies every expertise as legally official - in that our government today has become dominated by lawyers - then the validity of our expertise depends on the expertise of lawyers.
Again, there is no such offense as contempt committed against the law for the sake of the law, in that if all we had to ever eat, drink, and breath was the law, then we would have even less than nothing, as such a law would be instituted against us in our desire to abolish it. In the end, the only true offense is contempt committed against the people's Civil Purpose.
In furthering the people's Civil Purpose, those with expertise are needed as a necessary-evil. However, the further away the officials work who certify, entitle, and deem our expertise as valid, the more invalid and corrupt that expertise becomes favoring a return to tyranny.
In contrast, the more the certifying, entitling,and deeming of expertise is performed intimately on the local level, the more valid the expertise becomes regarding usefulness in advancing the people and their Civil Purpose.
This is one reason for limiting government.
lunes, 10 de junio de 2013
Contrary to the natural tendency of tyrants to believe they possess absolute power, I believe tyranny is not even able to control itself. So grand and noble do our leaders deem themselves nowadays that they have on the agenda a plan for their salvation as heads of states just in case a cataclysm should ever befall the rest of us as the body. Eventually, after successfully preserving themselves as the very best from among us, they would then reseed replanting themselves in fertile soil to be regrown and replicated as an exact reproduction of the United States!
In actuality, if all that was saved from a cataclysm were those from our government, then all that would be left afterwards of the United States would be the worst kind of tyranny.
Any legislation, policy, or judgement perpetuated in a mysterious best interest of a nation or of the United States is the same as tyranny, as tyranny itself was once salvaged by our Founders in order to serve the people in the advancing of our Civil Purpose. Indeed, being wise, our Founding Fathers when they were provided with the chance to do so chose not to abolish this evil from the past, but they decided instead to incorporate such wickedness as a necessary-tyranny into a new form of government, with this smaller of the two parts serving in unison with the governed as a "government instituted among men," or, of what would later be conceptualized as "a more perfect Union."
After all, it is not the primary purpose of the people as the children of God to be responsible and to govern over others; rather, we are here to control tyranny as a necessary part for the advancement of our contentment which is our Civil Purpose.
A sober man would not take pleasure in the stumbling up of children just as full grown soldiers wouldn't take pleasure in the defeating of immature boys in the endeavor of war. So, then we have to stop and ask ourselves, as we all have a conscience, just how at one time did young women and small boys find their way to be included into the harems of the Roman emperors, the kings, and even a few popes?
As an American myself, as I don't believe our government can, by the abuse of its full power, manage to do anything positive, I also don't believe our government can control itself by the implementation of laws. Indeed, at best, it can only be controlled, as odd as this paradox might sound, by the people holding their leaders to their consciences.
After all, it was never tyranny who showed up early and on time; but, rather, it was the hopeful people who demanded it of themselves! For tyranny itself never even had to show! Likewise, it wasn't tyranny that demanded quality; but, rather, it was the people who demanded of themselves that such be the case!
Therefore, I have decided to take up the role of Prime Minister of these United States in order to deliver to our government these letters holding them not just accountable, but to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of the Truth.
As I've already stated, as our Founders created a more perfect Union while acting on the behalf of the people; similarly, I have become the rightful Prime Minister of these United States by proclaiming the people today as representative of the very least one among us. In standing as such today, the people have the rightful power of proclamation.
In reducing further towards these letters, I feel the need to turn my attention to writing some meditations concerning the advancement of the people's Civil Purpose with my primary focus being on what amounts to our one and only true American quest: The one and only mandate is for the achievement of a limited government.
Again, from this day onward, I hope to steal back the souls of the American People by forging indelibly onto their hearts this one and only mandate: The one and only mandate is for the achievement of a limited government.
Therefore, as the people's quest for achieving limited government shall never change, then from this time onward, any further talk of other mandates should be ignored as vanity perpetuated in contempt of our Civil Purpose.
In actuality, if all that was saved from a cataclysm were those from our government, then all that would be left afterwards of the United States would be the worst kind of tyranny.
Any legislation, policy, or judgement perpetuated in a mysterious best interest of a nation or of the United States is the same as tyranny, as tyranny itself was once salvaged by our Founders in order to serve the people in the advancing of our Civil Purpose. Indeed, being wise, our Founding Fathers when they were provided with the chance to do so chose not to abolish this evil from the past, but they decided instead to incorporate such wickedness as a necessary-tyranny into a new form of government, with this smaller of the two parts serving in unison with the governed as a "government instituted among men," or, of what would later be conceptualized as "a more perfect Union."
After all, it is not the primary purpose of the people as the children of God to be responsible and to govern over others; rather, we are here to control tyranny as a necessary part for the advancement of our contentment which is our Civil Purpose.
A sober man would not take pleasure in the stumbling up of children just as full grown soldiers wouldn't take pleasure in the defeating of immature boys in the endeavor of war. So, then we have to stop and ask ourselves, as we all have a conscience, just how at one time did young women and small boys find their way to be included into the harems of the Roman emperors, the kings, and even a few popes?
As an American myself, as I don't believe our government can, by the abuse of its full power, manage to do anything positive, I also don't believe our government can control itself by the implementation of laws. Indeed, at best, it can only be controlled, as odd as this paradox might sound, by the people holding their leaders to their consciences.
After all, it was never tyranny who showed up early and on time; but, rather, it was the hopeful people who demanded it of themselves! For tyranny itself never even had to show! Likewise, it wasn't tyranny that demanded quality; but, rather, it was the people who demanded of themselves that such be the case!
Therefore, I have decided to take up the role of Prime Minister of these United States in order to deliver to our government these letters holding them not just accountable, but to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of the Truth.
As I've already stated, as our Founders created a more perfect Union while acting on the behalf of the people; similarly, I have become the rightful Prime Minister of these United States by proclaiming the people today as representative of the very least one among us. In standing as such today, the people have the rightful power of proclamation.
In reducing further towards these letters, I feel the need to turn my attention to writing some meditations concerning the advancement of the people's Civil Purpose with my primary focus being on what amounts to our one and only true American quest: The one and only mandate is for the achievement of a limited government.
Again, from this day onward, I hope to steal back the souls of the American People by forging indelibly onto their hearts this one and only mandate: The one and only mandate is for the achievement of a limited government.
Therefore, as the people's quest for achieving limited government shall never change, then from this time onward, any further talk of other mandates should be ignored as vanity perpetuated in contempt of our Civil Purpose.
viernes, 7 de junio de 2013
Revised and rewritten to finished form:
Outline of a letter that I am writing to the Supreme Court:
I. Introduction
II. A defense of our Founders under judgement of the Truth.
III. Justification for the People's Power of Sovereignty.
IV. Why the U.S. Supreme Court is in Contempt of the people's Civil-Purpose.
V. Holding the three parts of our government to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
First draft of a letter that I am writing to the United States Congress.
Beloved people of the United States through your Representatives and Senators,
A natural law reduces to the extent that it will always exist even if the whole universe itself were to perish. Likewise, natural rights transcend mere legal rights reducing towards the absolute power of the Truth, just as it is the nature of mothers to care for their offspring, and just as it is the same for fathers to fend for their families. Persecute mothers to prevent them from caring and they will still find a way not just to care, but to prosper. Similarly, persecute fathers to prevent them from caring and they too will still find a way not just to go to battle, but to drown the enemy with their very blood.
Therefore, the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution go beyond just thoughtless legal precedence concerning what is law, but they are listed within the documentation as our entitlement as a declaration of our Will to Power to overcome to take control of tyranny.
Here is the people's justification to supreme power: As our Founding Fathers as rightful high ranking gentlemen of English society once discarded their high social statuses to act on the behalf of the lowly people, so do we the people today now discard our roles to act on the behalf of the very least one among us. And as the King of kings Himself, the One Who is the Highest of Authority, confessed to us as Being the Son of the very least among men, so, we the people of these United States today do weld the Sovereign Right of Proclamation.
As such, for the sake of the people, of the least one among us, and of the most supreme of powers she welds within her, from this day, June 6th, 2013, the U.S. Congress will be at the ready to resume the responsibility from the Supreme Court regarding matters concerning constitutionality and the law of the land.
Also from this date onward, consider yourselves both forgiven for all your past offenses, and held to a higher standard and to a greater penalty concerning any future offenses enacted by you in contempt of the people's Civil Purpose.
*FD. Emanuel Watkins (Uncle Emanuel Watkins)
First Attorney to our Founding Fathers
Prime Minister of these United States
FD. means "Founder"- a seeker after an ideal new kind of ruler other than that of a typical legal precedent lawyer.
Outline of a letter that I am writing to the Supreme Court:
I. Introduction
II. A defense of our Founders under judgement of the Truth.
III. Justification for the People's Power of Sovereignty.
IV. Why the U.S. Supreme Court is in Contempt of the people's Civil-Purpose.
V. Holding the three parts of our government to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
First draft of a letter that I am writing to the United States Congress.
Beloved people of the United States through your Representatives and Senators,
A natural law reduces to the extent that it will always exist even if the whole universe itself were to perish. Likewise, natural rights transcend mere legal rights reducing towards the absolute power of the Truth, just as it is the nature of mothers to care for their offspring, and just as it is the same for fathers to fend for their families. Persecute mothers to prevent them from caring and they will still find a way not just to care, but to prosper. Similarly, persecute fathers to prevent them from caring and they too will still find a way not just to go to battle, but to drown the enemy with their very blood.
Therefore, the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution go beyond just thoughtless legal precedence concerning what is law, but they are listed within the documentation as our entitlement as a declaration of our Will to Power to overcome to take control of tyranny.
Here is the people's justification to supreme power: As our Founding Fathers as rightful high ranking gentlemen of English society once discarded their high social statuses to act on the behalf of the lowly people, so do we the people today now discard our roles to act on the behalf of the very least one among us. And as the King of kings Himself, the One Who is the Highest of Authority, confessed to us as Being the Son of the very least among men, so, we the people of these United States today do weld the Sovereign Right of Proclamation.
As such, for the sake of the people, of the least one among us, and of the most supreme of powers she welds within her, from this day, June 6th, 2013, the U.S. Congress will be at the ready to resume the responsibility from the Supreme Court regarding matters concerning constitutionality and the law of the land.
Also from this date onward, consider yourselves both forgiven for all your past offenses, and held to a higher standard and to a greater penalty concerning any future offenses enacted by you in contempt of the people's Civil Purpose.
*FD. Emanuel Watkins (Uncle Emanuel Watkins)
First Attorney to our Founding Fathers
Prime Minister of these United States
FD. means "Founder"- a seeker after an ideal new kind of ruler other than that of a typical legal precedent lawyer.
jueves, 6 de junio de 2013
Outline of letter that I am writing to the Supreme Court:
I. Introduction
II. A defense of our Founders under judgement of the Truth.
III. Justification for the People's Power of Sovereignty.
IV. Why the U.S. Supreme Court is in Contempt of the people's Civil-Purpose.
V. Holding the U.S. Supreme Court to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
First draft of of letter that I am writing to the United States Congress.
To the people of the United States through their Representatives and Senators,
A natural law will always exist even if the whole universe itself were to perish. Indeed, these natural rights transcend mere legal rights reducing in absolute power, just as mothers are sure to care for their offspring, and just as fathers are sure to fend for their families. Persecute the mothers in preventing them from caring and they will still find a way not just to care, but to prosper. Similarly, persecute the fathers in preventing them from caring and they too will still find a way not just to fend for, but to, as brothers, bring about peace.
Therefore, the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution go beyond just the thoughtless legal precedence of law to that of the people's Will to Power (take control) over tyranny.
As our Founders discarded their rightful high social statuses as gentlemen in society to act on the behalf of the lowly people, so do we the people today now discard our roles to similarly act on the behalf of the very least among us, (just as I, Uncle Emanuel Watkins, the Prime Minister of these United States, now acts on the behalf of the very least as well). And as the King of kings Himself, the highest of authority, confessed to being the Son of the very least among men, so, do we the people today weld the sovereign right of proclamation.
For the sake of the people, of the least among us, and of the supreme power she welds within her, as of this day, June 6th, 2013, the U.S. Congress will be at the ready to resume all responsibilities regarding matters concerning constitutionality and the law of the land.
*FD. Emanuel Watkins (Uncle Emanuel Watkins)
First Attorney to our Founding Fathers
Prime Minister of these United States
FD. means "Founder"- a seeker of an ideal new kind of ruler other than that of a typical legal precedent lawyer.
I. Introduction
II. A defense of our Founders under judgement of the Truth.
III. Justification for the People's Power of Sovereignty.
IV. Why the U.S. Supreme Court is in Contempt of the people's Civil-Purpose.
V. Holding the U.S. Supreme Court to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
First draft of of letter that I am writing to the United States Congress.
To the people of the United States through their Representatives and Senators,
A natural law will always exist even if the whole universe itself were to perish. Indeed, these natural rights transcend mere legal rights reducing in absolute power, just as mothers are sure to care for their offspring, and just as fathers are sure to fend for their families. Persecute the mothers in preventing them from caring and they will still find a way not just to care, but to prosper. Similarly, persecute the fathers in preventing them from caring and they too will still find a way not just to fend for, but to, as brothers, bring about peace.
Therefore, the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution go beyond just the thoughtless legal precedence of law to that of the people's Will to Power (take control) over tyranny.
As our Founders discarded their rightful high social statuses as gentlemen in society to act on the behalf of the lowly people, so do we the people today now discard our roles to similarly act on the behalf of the very least among us, (just as I, Uncle Emanuel Watkins, the Prime Minister of these United States, now acts on the behalf of the very least as well). And as the King of kings Himself, the highest of authority, confessed to being the Son of the very least among men, so, do we the people today weld the sovereign right of proclamation.
For the sake of the people, of the least among us, and of the supreme power she welds within her, as of this day, June 6th, 2013, the U.S. Congress will be at the ready to resume all responsibilities regarding matters concerning constitutionality and the law of the land.
*FD. Emanuel Watkins (Uncle Emanuel Watkins)
First Attorney to our Founding Fathers
Prime Minister of these United States
FD. means "Founder"- a seeker of an ideal new kind of ruler other than that of a typical legal precedent lawyer.
miércoles, 5 de junio de 2013
(Finished Work)
Knowing that it still has errors in it, I consider this work to be finished pertaining to what is important regarding a letter I am writing in defense of our Founding Fathers under judgement of the Truth that I am presenting to the Supreme Court. The first part of the letter will be justification for the people's proclamation of sovereignty while the second will be to hold the Supreme Court to a higher standard and greater penalty under judgement of the Truth.
The darkened highlighted parts of this writ are the ones I would like to somehow include within the Finished letter to the Supreme Court.
Developed in Ancient Greece,
Blessed by the Fullness of Christ,
Further Incubated in Western Civilization,
Further Incubated in Western Civilization,
Before Being Provided to Our
Founding Fathers as a Foundation
Founding Fathers as a Foundation
Here would be my response to Aristotle regarding the question of what is so special about the United States:
Aristotle developed the present day political spectrum, referring to the model as The Golden Mean, to represent extremes of opinions as both left and right on opposite ends of a linear scale in hopes that, in understanding it, the democratic people of Athens/ Greece would be encouraged to compromise among themselves back towards the middle as moderates.
But when the people compromise among themselves, they leave themselves open for being compromised by tyranny. So, the people aren't here to compromise. In other words, tyranny is not of, by, and for the people, but are a necessary-evil set apart from the people, not to be destroyed, but preserved by them to serve as part of a more perfect Union, not for the reforming and maintaining of tyranny, but for furthering tyranny as an ideal part of a greater government, a part "instituted among men," as our Founders once stated within the Declaration of Independence, to be utilized for the advancement of our Civil Purpose.
Indeed, when the very least among us cares to feed that lessor one which has been born out from her, she does so not to maintain the offspring, but to advance that most precious part of her that she values as far greater than herself.
Therefore, to combat this insidious problem of being compromised by tyranny, we the people of the United States today need to advance beyond the prior old world Golden Mean to that of a New World political spectrum:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The New World Political Spectrum
_________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enthroned king<>Everyone else in the middle<>homeless prostitute
Or, it may be written just the opposite way like this,
Homeless prostitute<>Everyone else in the middle<>Enthroned king
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other words, when these two inverse characters of an enthroned king and a homeless prostitute are positioned at the far extremes of Aristotle's political spectrum, then the left and right designations he included are no longer necessary.
Here would be my response to both Plato and Aristotle regarding their questions of what is so special about the United States:
Thinking in terms of Plato’s formal knowledge, which was also referred to by him as best-principled statements, (or his “Theory of the Forms"), as, on one hand, the most formal person in society might be an enthroned king, on the other hand, the most informal person, the inverse or perverse of the king, might be a homeless prostitute. As the king would surely be adorned in the very best, the most formal of attire, of a robe, or of a suit and a tie, she would most likely be ragged out in contrast in the most informal of filthy attire. But in here lies the twist, as the formal king would have available to him many informal problems to solve during his typical work day, paradoxically, the informal prostitute would be faced with the having of one constant formal problem within her.
So, as Plato might in his figuring, I am going to rewrite the above statement in lower and higher cases to better contrast them as extremes: As the formal (K)ing would have many informal (p)roblems to solve during his day, paradoxically, the informal (p)rostitute would have one formal (P)roblem to solve within her.
In contrast to the king and his many problems pertaining to the maintaining of his life of leisure, the prostitute is quite desperate in her quest of taking care of the one huge problem that she has within her!
In other words, when the (K)ing of kings Himself came into the world in the flesh as the very least one among us, he referred to Himself as the (S)on of man as one among a multitude of faceless and nameless, or, as the very (L)east one born out from the very least of us.
Here would be my response to all three of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle regarding the question of what is so special about the United States:
In answering Socrates's obvious question of 'what is the United States,' I would first define the subtleties involved with rating both those of us who are deemed the very greatest and those of us who are deemed the very least among us. As a son of a king would be thought highly by a prostitute to be a Son of God, to be a prince rated greater in stature than even his father himself, or else there would be hell to pay, a son of a prostitute would be thought lowly by a king as nameless and faceless scum, as a bastard child rated even lessor in stature than his mother herself.
According to what our Founders declared within The Declaration of Independence, "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness . . ..
Similarly, according to Socrates's theory of recollection, all souls are equal as they are both part of and reduce to the Soul. That means every informal soul within each person is exactly equal to the one formal Soul itself. The reason the individual around each perfect soul grows up to become vastly diverse from another, this according to Socrates, is because each suffered different amounts of trauma during his or her birth. This explains why one soul might be born to grow up to sit upon a throne as a blessed king while another soul might be born to grow up to walk the streets as a homeless prostitute.
Again, according to Socrates, as the two were all-knowing souls prior to being born, they became quite different people when they recollected knowledge in different amounts that they had lost during the trauma of their births.
lunes, 3 de junio de 2013
An Order Born of Eastern Civilization,
Developed in Ancient Greece,
Developed in Ancient Greece,
Blessed by the Fullness of Christ,
Further Incubated in Western Civilization,
Further Incubated in Western Civilization,
Before Given to Our Founding Fathers
Here would be my response to Aristotle regarding the question of what is so special about the United States:
Aristotle developed the present day political spectrum, referring to the model as The Golden Mean, to represent extremes of opinions as both left and right on opposite ends of a linear scale in hopes that, in understanding it, the democratic people of Athens/ Greece would be encouraged to compromise among themselves back towards the middle as moderates.
But when the people compromise among themselves, they leave themselves open for being compromised by tyranny. So, the people aren't here to compromise. In other words, tyranny is not of, by, and for the people, but are a necessary-evil set apart from the people, not destroyed, but preserved by them, to serve as part of a more perfect Union, not for the maintaining of tyranny, but furthering it as the ideal of government, being "instituted among men," as our Founders stated within the Declaration of Independence, to be utilized for the advancement of our Civil Purpose.
Indeed, when the very least among us cares to feed that lessor one which has been born out from her, she does so not to maintain the offspring, but to advance that part of her that she values as far greater than herself.
Therefore, to combat this insidious problem of being compromised by tyranny, we the people of the United States need to advance beyond the Golden Mean to that of a New World political spectrum:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The New World Political Spectrum
_________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enthroned king<>Everyone else in the middle<>homeless prostitute
Or, it may be written just the opposite way like this,
Homeless prostitute<>Everyone else in the middle<>Enthroned king
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other words, when these two inverse characters of an enthroned king and a homeless prostitute are positioned at the far extremes of Aristotle's political spectrum, then the left and right designations he included are no longer necessary.
Here would be my response to both Plato and Aristotle regarding their questions of what is so special about the United States:
Thinking in terms of Plato’s formal knowledge, which was also referred to by him as best-principled statements, (or his “Theory of the Forms"), as, on one hand, the most formal person in society might be an enthroned king, on the other hand, the most informal person, the inverse or perverse of the king, might be a homeless prostitute. As the king would surely be adorned in the very best, the most formal of attire, of a robe, or of a suit and a tie, she would most likely be ragged out in contrast in the most informal of filthy attire. But in here lies the twist, as the formal king would have available to him many informal problems to solve during his typical work day, paradoxically, the informal prostitute would be faced with the having of one constant formal problem within her.
So, as Plato might in his figuring, I am going to rewrite the above statement in lower and higher cases to better contrast them as extremes: As the formal (K)ing would have many informal (p)roblems to solve during his day, paradoxically, the informal (p)rostitute would have one formal (P)roblem to solve within her.
In contrast to the king and his many problems pertaining to the maintaining of his life of leisure, the prostitute is quite desperate in her quest of taking care of the one huge problem that she has within her!
In other words, when the (K)ing of kings Himself came into the world in the flesh as the very least one among us, he referred to Himself as the (S)on of man as one among a multitude of faceless and nameless, or, as the very (L)east one born out from the very least of us.
Here would be my response to all three of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle regarding the question of what is so special about the United States:
In answering Socrates's obvious question of 'what is the United States,' I would first define the subtleties involved with rating both those of us who are deemed the very greatest and those of us who are deemed the very least among us. As a son of a king would be thought highly by the prostitute as a Son of God, as a prince rated even greater in stature than the father himself, or else there would be hell to pay, a son of a prostitute would be thought lowly by the king as nameless and faceless scum, as a bastard child rated even lessor in stature than the prostitute herself.
According to what our Founders declared within The Declaration of Independence, "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness . . ..
Similarly, according to Socrates's theory of recollection, all souls are equal as they are both part of and reduce to the Soul. That means every informal soul within each person is exactly equal to the one formal Soul itself. The reason the individual around each perfect soul grows up to become vastly diverse from another, this according to Socrates, is because each suffered different amounts of trauma during his or her birth. This explains why one soul might be born to grow up to sit upon a throne as a blessed king while another soul might be born to grow up to walk the streets as a homeless prostitute.
Again, according to Socrates, as the two were all-knowing souls prior to being born, they became quite different people when they recollected knowledge in different amounts that they had lost during the trauma of their births.
Once again, I haven't received my authority as Prime Minister of these United States by any legal power that I possess, but by a formal power that I have come around to realizing. As the tyrant has always existed as an official frightened animal, steady advancements towards the idea of positive government have long endured within people who understood the wisdom in keeping tyranny around as a necessary-evil, utilizing it not as an end, which is itself tyranny, but as a variable means towards a greater end - with this being the utilization of government for the advancement of the people's Civil Purpose. Keep a keen awareness and remember forever that, as Americans, and as the Texan I am proud to be, the greatest of benefits will always be derived from the most precious of alterations to that which we already possess as our inheritance.
When our Founders established a new kind of nation as a Democratic Republic, they did so as true representatives of the people much unlike what the British royalty had staged to deceive them as commoners by allowing them to enact representatives within a Parliament. What was so unique about our Founding Fathers was how they truly managed to divorce the people out from under the rightful rule of a king by the utilization of the scientific process of Natural Law. In doing so, they didn't merely act as our representatives, but they were more willing to shed their statuses as rightful gentlemen within high society, willing to endanger their very souls while standing under judgement of the Truth, and willing to risk their necks by suffering humiliating defeat.
While in the old days, such British representatives would still have had someone float out in a boat for them, bait a hook for them, and hold a pole for them, our Founders were true Americans as they were much more willing to do their own fishing.
Ultimately, because of the monumental efforts of these true American Founders, the United States government did not create itself as the United States government; but, rather, we the people did so while under the most severe battlement, and while wholly apart from the figurehead of a king taking care of ourselves for a duration which lasted for some thirteen years.
You know, I would think an ideal person to act as this Democratic Republic's Prime Minister is someone like Ron Paul. He has always seemed to be a desperate thinking on the side of the people in a passionate sort of way. And he has always seemed to be more of an American philosopher than a politician. He was a doctor prior to his becoming a representative. Indeed, the Prime Minister shouldn't be lawyers, but representative of the kinds of leaders we need to replace all the lawyers with in our government.
As our government didn't create itself, likewise, this position of Prime Minister shouldn't be created by our government. This is why I've taken on the role for now.
In the meantime, don't complain. As any little addicted crack whore under a bridge knows only too well, so should the people know just as well, and so should I as the Prime Minister of these United States also know, it does no good to complain about those ruling with the false powers of manipulation. For such a foolish action will only get her beaten down even further on every level.
While individual people like this very least one among us possess no power, the people together as representatives of this very least one have the authority to command by proclamation of sovereignty! This formal truth is sufficient. By formal truth, I mean there is a virtue in its meaning as, in realizing this, we the people have set ourselves upon on a path that is in the best and right direction towards the most ultimate of Truths.
In the end, there is no place for her to go or to hide her shame just as there isn't a place for the people to go or to hide in their shame. We can well imagine what it is like to become trapped under a bridge both in damnation to a drug pusher who has us all addicted to the extent that we will all surely die whether we find means to buy his drugs or not, and in condemnation to a pimp who knows intuitively being trained well by his father in how much he should care for us to keep us pretty and alive, and yet care not quite enough to ever allow us to better ourselves.
When our Founders established a new kind of nation as a Democratic Republic, they did so as true representatives of the people much unlike what the British royalty had staged to deceive them as commoners by allowing them to enact representatives within a Parliament. What was so unique about our Founding Fathers was how they truly managed to divorce the people out from under the rightful rule of a king by the utilization of the scientific process of Natural Law. In doing so, they didn't merely act as our representatives, but they were more willing to shed their statuses as rightful gentlemen within high society, willing to endanger their very souls while standing under judgement of the Truth, and willing to risk their necks by suffering humiliating defeat.
While in the old days, such British representatives would still have had someone float out in a boat for them, bait a hook for them, and hold a pole for them, our Founders were true Americans as they were much more willing to do their own fishing.
Ultimately, because of the monumental efforts of these true American Founders, the United States government did not create itself as the United States government; but, rather, we the people did so while under the most severe battlement, and while wholly apart from the figurehead of a king taking care of ourselves for a duration which lasted for some thirteen years.
You know, I would think an ideal person to act as this Democratic Republic's Prime Minister is someone like Ron Paul. He has always seemed to be a desperate thinking on the side of the people in a passionate sort of way. And he has always seemed to be more of an American philosopher than a politician. He was a doctor prior to his becoming a representative. Indeed, the Prime Minister shouldn't be lawyers, but representative of the kinds of leaders we need to replace all the lawyers with in our government.
As our government didn't create itself, likewise, this position of Prime Minister shouldn't be created by our government. This is why I've taken on the role for now.
In the meantime, don't complain. As any little addicted crack whore under a bridge knows only too well, so should the people know just as well, and so should I as the Prime Minister of these United States also know, it does no good to complain about those ruling with the false powers of manipulation. For such a foolish action will only get her beaten down even further on every level.
While individual people like this very least one among us possess no power, the people together as representatives of this very least one have the authority to command by proclamation of sovereignty! This formal truth is sufficient. By formal truth, I mean there is a virtue in its meaning as, in realizing this, we the people have set ourselves upon on a path that is in the best and right direction towards the most ultimate of Truths.
In the end, there is no place for her to go or to hide her shame just as there isn't a place for the people to go or to hide in their shame. We can well imagine what it is like to become trapped under a bridge both in damnation to a drug pusher who has us all addicted to the extent that we will all surely die whether we find means to buy his drugs or not, and in condemnation to a pimp who knows intuitively being trained well by his father in how much he should care for us to keep us pretty and alive, and yet care not quite enough to ever allow us to better ourselves.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)