A lie has no ground for support. Therefore, in order to propagate itself in society, the lie must reproduce itself both through the tactics of terrorism, one who profits by scaremongering, and through the tactics of racism, one who prospers by stirring up hatred, manipulating division, and instigating conflict.
In the end, the originator of terrorism and racism into society was the tyrant himself, perpetuated for the sake of maintaining his tyranny over the disadvantaged, and for the sake of those loyal minions residing within the security of his aristocracy who, in exchange for the wages of counterfeit, all stand in support of him.
sábado, 27 de julio de 2013
domingo, 21 de julio de 2013
Tyranny is utilizing the mass media to instigate division and strife more than ever today twisting public opinion and creating mass confusion by a process referred to as "the manufacturing of consent." While this idea originated from Walter Lippman, the concept has been further polished and spot-lighted extensively by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman. Being a southern man myself, I dare say that I feel the pressure from this traditional scaremongering to hinder and alter my openness and honesty.
In other words, as the fundamental character of the Arab person has been successfully smeared into that of a white terrorist by tyranny and the media corporations they control, likewise, so has the southerner man in the United States also been portrayed negatively as a equally fundamental, white Christian racist. This type of manufacturing of consent stirs, stumbles up, and divides the people to accepting reasons benefiting of tyranny. Indeed, these ongoing policies involving the media corporations are happening for ominous reasons that have yet to be manifested.
Yet, our Founders understood in the past how it was in fact tyranny, for the purpose of dividing and conquering, that propagated terror and manipulated the divisions of racism among the people. After all, it was the official version at the times of both The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution that each of the documents were subversive.
In other words, at the time they were being written up, both documents of The Declaration of Independence and of the U.S. Constitution were deemed illegal, unofficial, and subversive.
Anyway, I have felt threatened by these dark and mysterious authorities posing as our government of late. As usual, I have tried internalizing these fears of mine by using a new political spectrum of my own creation. This model shuns that Old World left / right dichotomy of Aristotle replacing it with a fresher line of reasoning the scale similar in how it depicts a blessed king enthroned at one far end of the scale, with his location being at either side at the far left or far right. Meanwhile, to balance him out, a cursed prostitute, with her amounting to the inverse or perverse of the king, is a condemned trespasser in his kingdom and she sits at the other opposite end of the linear scale.
Being a non-conforming customer and a typical American, I have decided on becoming even more extremist and subversive as a result of this latest offenses being committed against the people, contempt that is being perpetuated by tyranny and its use of the media corporations.
There are deep rooted secular reasons perpetuating the mass confusion in the United States today.
To start off, during her time on earth, the person of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, was rated less by those in power than even a lowly prostitute. Simply put, she was a wretched outcast.
Many Christians have long known this aspect about Mary too afraid to voice their objections to how the Catholic church has, over time, deified her as a goddess for the purpose of attracting new members into the congregation. This act allowed paganism to seep in and poison the Christian Faith.
As it is still taught today, the tyrannies of the past were made up of two parts with these being a master and a slave class. In actuality, there were always three classes of people within every tyranny: 1) A master class exploiting 2) a slave class. Both of these together, in turn, then rejected 3) a wretched class of outcasts.
In realizing this, I am able to shine further light on the dark character of the prostitute in my political model giving her added dimension. Altogether, there are three levels to her condition with the highest being a woman worthy enough for the king to sleep with, the second highest being a woman worthy enough to spare her life just as long as she is willing to kneel before him, and the third being beyond saving having been condemned by him to a sentence of death.
In other words, an outcast wretch is the lowest level of womanhood as a king would neither find her life worthy enough to sleep next to, nor worthy enough to spare it even if she were to kneel before him for mercy.
In turn, Joseph, the husband of Mary, was the first convert over to the side of the most wretched. He was the first Christian in the sense that he remained faithfully at her side persevering not for the sake of his own blood.
In other words, as the fundamental character of the Arab person has been successfully smeared into that of a white terrorist by tyranny and the media corporations they control, likewise, so has the southerner man in the United States also been portrayed negatively as a equally fundamental, white Christian racist. This type of manufacturing of consent stirs, stumbles up, and divides the people to accepting reasons benefiting of tyranny. Indeed, these ongoing policies involving the media corporations are happening for ominous reasons that have yet to be manifested.
Yet, our Founders understood in the past how it was in fact tyranny, for the purpose of dividing and conquering, that propagated terror and manipulated the divisions of racism among the people. After all, it was the official version at the times of both The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution that each of the documents were subversive.
In other words, at the time they were being written up, both documents of The Declaration of Independence and of the U.S. Constitution were deemed illegal, unofficial, and subversive.
Anyway, I have felt threatened by these dark and mysterious authorities posing as our government of late. As usual, I have tried internalizing these fears of mine by using a new political spectrum of my own creation. This model shuns that Old World left / right dichotomy of Aristotle replacing it with a fresher line of reasoning the scale similar in how it depicts a blessed king enthroned at one far end of the scale, with his location being at either side at the far left or far right. Meanwhile, to balance him out, a cursed prostitute, with her amounting to the inverse or perverse of the king, is a condemned trespasser in his kingdom and she sits at the other opposite end of the linear scale.
Being a non-conforming customer and a typical American, I have decided on becoming even more extremist and subversive as a result of this latest offenses being committed against the people, contempt that is being perpetuated by tyranny and its use of the media corporations.
There are deep rooted secular reasons perpetuating the mass confusion in the United States today.
To start off, during her time on earth, the person of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, was rated less by those in power than even a lowly prostitute. Simply put, she was a wretched outcast.
Many Christians have long known this aspect about Mary too afraid to voice their objections to how the Catholic church has, over time, deified her as a goddess for the purpose of attracting new members into the congregation. This act allowed paganism to seep in and poison the Christian Faith.
As it is still taught today, the tyrannies of the past were made up of two parts with these being a master and a slave class. In actuality, there were always three classes of people within every tyranny: 1) A master class exploiting 2) a slave class. Both of these together, in turn, then rejected 3) a wretched class of outcasts.
In realizing this, I am able to shine further light on the dark character of the prostitute in my political model giving her added dimension. Altogether, there are three levels to her condition with the highest being a woman worthy enough for the king to sleep with, the second highest being a woman worthy enough to spare her life just as long as she is willing to kneel before him, and the third being beyond saving having been condemned by him to a sentence of death.
In other words, an outcast wretch is the lowest level of womanhood as a king would neither find her life worthy enough to sleep next to, nor worthy enough to spare it even if she were to kneel before him for mercy.
In turn, Joseph, the husband of Mary, was the first convert over to the side of the most wretched. He was the first Christian in the sense that he remained faithfully at her side persevering not for the sake of his own blood.
jueves, 11 de julio de 2013
John Locke wrote subversively for posterity's sake
And why does the mighty grizzly bear exist? Well, the answer is hidden deep in the wilderness as his power exists because of the caring ferocity within the mother grizzly bear. Don't underestimate the ferocity behind why the American people exist today.
Any time the Supreme Court of the United States is wayward serving in contempt of the people's Civil Purpose, which is the situation today, the Prime Minister of these United States should take up the role of holding Congress to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under Light of the Truth.
However, when the actions of the Supreme Court are in support of the disadvantaged majority concerning their advancement, the Prime Minister should then revert back to working subversively with the fifty states in order to maintain an authoritative balance between federal and state forces.
In other words, a lie has two different definitions concerning the king who sits enthroned at one end of the New World political spectrum and the contrasting trespassing prostitute who is homeless at the other end of it. As the Prince of Light thrives by deceiving the prostitute causing her much confusion by twisting the meaning of virtues together in improper strings of order, thus stumbling up her offspring from ever venturing out into the light, in contrast, the princess of darkness fights fiercely for the survival of her offspring by working subversively in the background.
I am defining two different kinds of power here. As one kind views power as a two party competition with one side trying its best to sue the other out of business in a court of law, with this legal process being a perpetual process fueled by endless counterfeit, the other views power as a limited government made up of a delicate balance between state and federal forces.
In other words, the ferocity within the people to care for others needs not be fabricated by acts of political manipulation.
Any time the Supreme Court of the United States is wayward serving in contempt of the people's Civil Purpose, which is the situation today, the Prime Minister of these United States should take up the role of holding Congress to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under Light of the Truth.
However, when the actions of the Supreme Court are in support of the disadvantaged majority concerning their advancement, the Prime Minister should then revert back to working subversively with the fifty states in order to maintain an authoritative balance between federal and state forces.
In other words, a lie has two different definitions concerning the king who sits enthroned at one end of the New World political spectrum and the contrasting trespassing prostitute who is homeless at the other end of it. As the Prince of Light thrives by deceiving the prostitute causing her much confusion by twisting the meaning of virtues together in improper strings of order, thus stumbling up her offspring from ever venturing out into the light, in contrast, the princess of darkness fights fiercely for the survival of her offspring by working subversively in the background.
I am defining two different kinds of power here. As one kind views power as a two party competition with one side trying its best to sue the other out of business in a court of law, with this legal process being a perpetual process fueled by endless counterfeit, the other views power as a limited government made up of a delicate balance between state and federal forces.
In other words, the ferocity within the people to care for others needs not be fabricated by acts of political manipulation.
miércoles, 10 de julio de 2013
Finished copy:
The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed long ago by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social conflict between two sophisticated males of eloquent rhetoric, one depicting the progressive liberal end of the scale and the other the opposite never altering conservative end of it. Instead, as our Founding Fathers demonstrated the justification for divorcing the American people out from under the rightful rule of a king with the formal document of The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing his majestic character today at one far end of a New World spectrum while, at the other end left vacant, we should be inserting his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as the tyrant king would be blessed at one end of the spectrum, the prostitute would be equally cursed at the other; furthermore, as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be abandoned as a homeless trespasser; moreover, as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him as his property; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would certainly be lost forever. Fortunately, our Bill of (natural) Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
In contrast to a legal civil right, a natural right reduces on the physical level to that of the heart of the collective Soul the effect of it working to empower the nameless and faceless.
Again, in referencing "instituted among men," our Founders were emphasizing the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and that of the positive government we have today. While the first making up the tyranny were once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage forever over a disadvantaged majority, the second making up a government instituted among men were a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided that it would be best to preserve the threat of tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to further advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
It isn't only those laws written down within the U.S. Constitution by our Founders that empowers, but also those natural laws written down by them as the willful empowerment of the collective Soul of the people.
If ever chosen to serve as the leader of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write definitively and conclusively as a figurehead of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity (to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship), the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my lessors in order to warn those greater in opposition with them of a further oral declaration of what had just been written under the Light of the Truth - with this being justification for divine intervention by the Almighty Himself.
The second of the two leaders I just depicted would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, as power is given only to serve, true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of a possible divine intervention into the matter by the Almighty, this latter pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they would need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time blow away and whither unto becoming ineffective. However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who are lessor than me with the further threat of orally declaring them such as a right under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural law upon the conscience of tyranny.
Ironically, while the people will always bicker among themselves as both friend and foe, their true enemy will always be that of the evil of tyranny. While policies dividing the people against themselves are false dichotomies perpetuated in tempting the involvement of higher authority into the matter, the threat of tyranny alone whether foreign or domestic is the only justification for government involvement.
After all, the reason for marriage isn't to exploit, but to share by lifting the veil off the bride to shine upon her a face of authority. As it is with the bride, so are the people to be so empowered.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being a relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny that they have established over themselves in order to advance their Civil Purpose - with this being a warning by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny whether domestic or abroad concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection. This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people, the children of God, from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders willful writing down of the Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed long ago by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social conflict between two sophisticated males of eloquent rhetoric, one depicting the progressive liberal end of the scale and the other the opposite never altering conservative end of it. Instead, as our Founding Fathers demonstrated the justification for divorcing the American people out from under the rightful rule of a king with the formal document of The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing his majestic character today at one far end of a New World spectrum while, at the other end left vacant, we should be inserting his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as the tyrant king would be blessed at one end of the spectrum, the prostitute would be equally cursed at the other; furthermore, as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be abandoned as a homeless trespasser; moreover, as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him as his property; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would certainly be lost forever. Fortunately, our Bill of (natural) Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
In contrast to a legal civil right, a natural right reduces on the physical level to that of the heart of the collective Soul the effect of it working to empower the nameless and faceless.
Again, in referencing "instituted among men," our Founders were emphasizing the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and that of the positive government we have today. While the first making up the tyranny were once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage forever over a disadvantaged majority, the second making up a government instituted among men were a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided that it would be best to preserve the threat of tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to further advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
It isn't only those laws written down within the U.S. Constitution by our Founders that empowers, but also those natural laws written down by them as the willful empowerment of the collective Soul of the people.
If ever chosen to serve as the leader of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write definitively and conclusively as a figurehead of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity (to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship), the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my lessors in order to warn those greater in opposition with them of a further oral declaration of what had just been written under the Light of the Truth - with this being justification for divine intervention by the Almighty Himself.
The second of the two leaders I just depicted would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, as power is given only to serve, true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of a possible divine intervention into the matter by the Almighty, this latter pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they would need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time blow away and whither unto becoming ineffective. However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who are lessor than me with the further threat of orally declaring them such as a right under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural law upon the conscience of tyranny.
Ironically, while the people will always bicker among themselves as both friend and foe, their true enemy will always be that of the evil of tyranny. While policies dividing the people against themselves are false dichotomies perpetuated in tempting the involvement of higher authority into the matter, the threat of tyranny alone whether foreign or domestic is the only justification for government involvement.
After all, the reason for marriage isn't to exploit, but to share by lifting the veil off the bride to shine upon her a face of authority. As it is with the bride, so are the people to be so empowered.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being a relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny that they have established over themselves in order to advance their Civil Purpose - with this being a warning by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny whether domestic or abroad concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection. This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people, the children of God, from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders willful writing down of the Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
lunes, 8 de julio de 2013
Second Rewrite:
The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed long ago by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social romance between two males of eloquent rhetoric, one depicting the far left end of the scale and the other the far right of it. Instead, as our Founding Fathers once addressed a majestic negative character within The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing the same tyrant king at one far end of a New World conflict. Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum left vacant we should be inserting his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as the king would be blessed at one end of the spectrum, the prostitute would be cursed at the other; as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be abandoned as a homeless trespasser; as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever. Fortunately, our natural Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
A natural right is greater than a legal right in how it reduces on the physical level to that of the heart of the collective Soul empowering the nameless and faceless.
Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of government today, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a disadvantaged majority, the second was a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write conclusively as a figure of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn those who would be in opposition with them of a further oral declaration of what was written under the Light of the Truth - justification for divine intervention by the Almighty.
The second of the two leaders depicted above would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective. However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.
Ironically, while the makeup of the people will always be a relationship between both friends and foes, their true enemy will always be the evil of tyranny. While divisions perpetuated among the people are false dichotomies tempting the involvement of higher authority into the matter, the threat of tyranny is the only justification for government involvement.
The reason for marriage isn't to exploit, but to share by lifting the veil off the bride to shine upon her a face of authority. As it is with the bride, so are the people to be so empowered.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being the relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny they have established over themselves to advance their Civil Purpose - this being a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection. This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people, the children of God, from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed long ago by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social romance between two males of eloquent rhetoric, one depicting the far left end of the scale and the other the far right of it. Instead, as our Founding Fathers once addressed a majestic negative character within The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing the same tyrant king at one far end of a New World conflict. Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum left vacant we should be inserting his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as the king would be blessed at one end of the spectrum, the prostitute would be cursed at the other; as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be abandoned as a homeless trespasser; as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever. Fortunately, our natural Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
A natural right is greater than a legal right in how it reduces on the physical level to that of the heart of the collective Soul empowering the nameless and faceless.
Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of government today, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a disadvantaged majority, the second was a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write conclusively as a figure of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn those who would be in opposition with them of a further oral declaration of what was written under the Light of the Truth - justification for divine intervention by the Almighty.
The second of the two leaders depicted above would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective. However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.
Ironically, while the makeup of the people will always be a relationship between both friends and foes, their true enemy will always be the evil of tyranny. While divisions perpetuated among the people are false dichotomies tempting the involvement of higher authority into the matter, the threat of tyranny is the only justification for government involvement.
The reason for marriage isn't to exploit, but to share by lifting the veil off the bride to shine upon her a face of authority. As it is with the bride, so are the people to be so empowered.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being the relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny they have established over themselves to advance their Civil Purpose - this being a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection. This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people, the children of God, from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
Oral versus written declarations
First Rewrite:
The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social romance between two males of rhetoric, one depicting the far left end of the scale and the other the right of it. Instead, as our Founding Fathers once addressed his majestic negative character within The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing a tyrant king at one far end of a New World conflict. Meanwhile, at the other vacant end of the spectrum we should then insert his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as the king would be blessed, the prostitute would be cursed; as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be a homeless trespasser; as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever. Fortunately, our natural Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
A natural right is greater than a legal right in how it reduces on the physical level of the Soul empowering the nameless and faceless.
Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of government today, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a majority, the second was a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write conclusively as a figure of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn those who oppose them of a further oral declaration of them under the Light of the Truth - justification for divine intervention by the Almighty.
The second of the two leaders depicted above would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, the true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective. However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being the relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny they established to advance their Civil Purpose, a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection. This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social romance between two males of rhetoric, one depicting the far left end of the scale and the other the right of it. Instead, as our Founding Fathers once addressed his majestic negative character within The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing a tyrant king at one far end of a New World conflict. Meanwhile, at the other vacant end of the spectrum we should then insert his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as the king would be blessed, the prostitute would be cursed; as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be a homeless trespasser; as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever. Fortunately, our natural Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
A natural right is greater than a legal right in how it reduces on the physical level of the Soul empowering the nameless and faceless.
Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of government today, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a majority, the second was a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write conclusively as a figure of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn those who oppose them of a further oral declaration of them under the Light of the Truth - justification for divine intervention by the Almighty.
The second of the two leaders depicted above would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, the true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective. However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being the relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny they established to advance their Civil Purpose, a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection. This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
domingo, 7 de julio de 2013
Writing versus oral declarations
The United States should no longer be utilizing that old world political spectrum developed by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social romance happening between two males of rhetoric, one depicted on the far left end of the scale and the other on the right. Instead, as our Founding Fathers once wrote a declaration addressing a tyrant king within The Declaration of Independence, as we should be utilizing this negative character depicting him at one far end of a new world American conflict, so the other vacant side of the spectrum should be his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.
In contrasting these two, as he would be blessed, she would be cursed; as he is enthroned as the owner of all property, she is a homeless trespasser; as he is the owner of all things, she is owned by him; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever having nothing. But, fact is, our natural Bill of Rights aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of the government of today we have instituted among men within the United States is, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a majority, the second is a majority of many who, after gathering in fellowship to long consider, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write conclusively in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn of a oral follow up under the Light of the Truth.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, the true power isn't the power itself, but the threat of coming forth to demonstrate power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning for the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective. However, if I write something in the dirt regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs between the more perfect Union, with this being a relationship between a necessary tyranny and a disadvantaged people, as a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether it be domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection: A threat by our Founders against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
In contrasting these two, as he would be blessed, she would be cursed; as he is enthroned as the owner of all property, she is a homeless trespasser; as he is the owner of all things, she is owned by him; and so on.
If this faceless prostitute only had legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever having nothing. But, fact is, our natural Bill of Rights aren't the same as legal or civil rights.
Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of the government of today we have instituted among men within the United States is, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a majority, the second is a majority of many who, after gathering in fellowship to long consider, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.
If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down. While one would be to write conclusively in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn of a oral follow up under the Light of the Truth.
In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, the true power isn't the power itself, but the threat of coming forth to demonstrate power.
While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning for the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.
Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion. The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.
To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective. However, if I write something in the dirt regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.
Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs between the more perfect Union, with this being a relationship between a necessary tyranny and a disadvantaged people, as a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether it be domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection: A threat by our Founders against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people from advancing their Civil Purpose.
The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.
jueves, 4 de julio de 2013
Really Finished
The original intentions of our Founding Fathers were to bind government in a marriage with the people. Indeed, rather than they discard it altogether 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 a part with what our Founders thought ideal, the other greater part who make up the more perfect Union, with these being the majority of the people themselves, had to somehow be made empowered. It was for this reason that our Founders included within the U.S. Constitution the articles of the Bill of Rights 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 is lacking in ability to control itself by the typical vain doings of endless legislated laws. Yet, if tyranny was at one time controlled in the past, then any accomplishment in doing so 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 empowered natural rights inborn within 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 our Bill of Rights went beyond just legal precedence, as John Locke concluded having taken much trouble at the risk of his own life about a century before our Founders to have it all figured out for us. For, you see, being that these were natural rights during his time, they had nothing to do with the insidious legal civil things of today as they did not concern the mind on the cognitive level - as no such subject as the cognitive sciences had yet to be developed during that time. Instead, these natural rights reduced down on the literal physical level, much like DNA is said to do so today, all the way to the core of the collective heart or of the Soul.
In other words, for leaders to violate a natural right during the time of our Founders was a very serious contempt beyond that of a legal offense as such a transgression against the people amounted to a violation committed knowingly against the Soul.
The Greek reason for this being that each and every man and woman has a soul which is a part broken off from the original formal Soul itself. Therefore, we all are a part of a collective Soul.
As a government drunk on the false powers of manipulation has been pushing an agenda of late that is against the existence of God, ironically, the only true way to sober up and make these 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 involving the legislation of 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 ruling officials under the Light of the Truth.
In the process of dividing itself up into a two party system, the governments of the United States have managed over many years to reconstitute the prior legal precedence of the same old tyranny our Founders once managed to abolished, leading to a slow erosion away from the ideal Union our Founders originally intended for us. Indeed, the people today have been divided against themselves. As the antagonist was once thought to be anything divisive, we have been fast tracked away from that of a more perfect Union between the people and a necessary tyranny - with both entities receiving power within the U.S. Constitution, to the situation today of a corrupt tyranny that now praises itself for having taken up the quest of protecting the lessor of us legally from the greater of us - exclusive of any of those high ranking officials who work for the government, of course - with this situation being the exact same evil as the prior tyranny whence we were once liberated from.
Yet, as it was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the empowered people were to make up the greatest part of the governmental process. Indeed, as the purpose of tyranny was to maintain a tyranny, the purpose of government is instituted among men for the purpose of advancement. Again, in order to institute such an ideal government, the people must be somehow be empowered.
A congress of lawyers alone could not have managed over time to eradicate the people's empowerment from the powers of government without a supreme court of lawyers also ordaining their contempt by giving their consent 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 under the Light of the Truth. This is why government has returned to a drunken state of tyranny today the effects of which have both usurped the people of their face of authority and robbed them of their American souls.
So, here is how I view the slow fall and possible lifting back up of our Union:
1) At the beginning of our more perfect Union, our Founders willfully professed our Bill of Rights as the people's empowerment warning those in government that any actions in contempt of our Civil Purpose would be held accountable under the Light of the Truth. During this time, the empowered natural rights of the people took precedence and, though things weren't perfect by any means, were respected
2) Over time, the government has worked around to usurping us of our empowerment, of our role in government, by legislating our natural rights to that of mere legal or civil rights with the intentions of protecting that which did not need any protecting. During this time, these legal rights rose to take precedence over our greater 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 them by way of proclamation of sovereignty. In our doing so, we would be holding our officials beyond accountability for their actions to that of holding them to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of the Truth. In achieving this, our empowered rights would, once again, take precedence over our legal rights.
When our empowered natural rights take precedence over our civil rights, we are then protected by two kinds of rights. However, when legal rights take precedence over our empowered natural rights, over time, we will have no more 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." Peter did not have to give this answer as he could have pleased Jesus by just 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 Himself, so the people today can confess that the very least one 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 one born out from the most worthless - from the nameless and the faceless, meaning that such an offspring would be rated even less than the worthless ones who 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 who, in turn, he was born out from.
As the classification of a "son of man" denotes a stranger without a face of authority, the classification of a Son of God is intimate in comparison and one with a face of authority. If given a choice between taking the life of one or the other, most would take the life of a stranger before taking the life of their own 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 one of us. Indeed, as our society today is eroding back quickly to a state of tyranny, so the people today are likewise eroding back quickly into a state of prostitution.
On this day of July the sixth, 2013, we the people of the United States do declare the very least one among us to be the ultimate authority as the king of kings.
Therefore, we the people today are indeed justified in our proclamation, and in our willfulness to take power over tyranny, not for the intentions of destroying it, but to simply utilize it for the purpose of advancing our Civil Purpose. Indeed, we do possess the sovereign right to hold and to bind all our government officials to a higher standard and to a great penalty under judgement of the Truth.
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 is lacking in ability to control itself by the typical vain doings of endless legislated laws. Yet, if tyranny was at one time controlled in the past, then any accomplishment in doing so 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 empowered natural rights inborn within 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 our Bill of Rights went beyond just legal precedence, as John Locke concluded having taken much trouble at the risk of his own life about a century before our Founders to have it all figured out for us. For, you see, being that these were natural rights during his time, they had nothing to do with the insidious legal civil things of today as they did not concern the mind on the cognitive level - as no such subject as the cognitive sciences had yet to be developed during that time. Instead, these natural rights reduced down on the literal physical level, much like DNA is said to do so today, all the way to the core of the collective heart or of the Soul.
In other words, for leaders to violate a natural right during the time of our Founders was a very serious contempt beyond that of a legal offense as such a transgression against the people amounted to a violation committed knowingly against the Soul.
The Greek reason for this being that each and every man and woman has a soul which is a part broken off from the original formal Soul itself. Therefore, we all are a part of a collective Soul.
As a government drunk on the false powers of manipulation has been pushing an agenda of late that is against the existence of God, ironically, the only true way to sober up and make these 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 involving the legislation of 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 ruling officials under the Light of the Truth.
In the process of dividing itself up into a two party system, the governments of the United States have managed over many years to reconstitute the prior legal precedence of the same old tyranny our Founders once managed to abolished, leading to a slow erosion away from the ideal Union our Founders originally intended for us. Indeed, the people today have been divided against themselves. As the antagonist was once thought to be anything divisive, we have been fast tracked away from that of a more perfect Union between the people and a necessary tyranny - with both entities receiving power within the U.S. Constitution, to the situation today of a corrupt tyranny that now praises itself for having taken up the quest of protecting the lessor of us legally from the greater of us - exclusive of any of those high ranking officials who work for the government, of course - with this situation being the exact same evil as the prior tyranny whence we were once liberated from.
Yet, as it was originally intended by our Founding Fathers, the empowered people were to make up the greatest part of the governmental process. Indeed, as the purpose of tyranny was to maintain a tyranny, the purpose of government is instituted among men for the purpose of advancement. Again, in order to institute such an ideal government, the people must be somehow be empowered.
A congress of lawyers alone could not have managed over time to eradicate the people's empowerment from the powers of government without a supreme court of lawyers also ordaining their contempt by giving their consent 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 under the Light of the Truth. This is why government has returned to a drunken state of tyranny today the effects of which have both usurped the people of their face of authority and robbed them of their American souls.
So, here is how I view the slow fall and possible lifting back up of our Union:
1) At the beginning of our more perfect Union, our Founders willfully professed our Bill of Rights as the people's empowerment warning those in government that any actions in contempt of our Civil Purpose would be held accountable under the Light of the Truth. During this time, the empowered natural rights of the people took precedence and, though things weren't perfect by any means, were respected
2) Over time, the government has worked around to usurping us of our empowerment, of our role in government, by legislating our natural rights to that of mere legal or civil rights with the intentions of protecting that which did not need any protecting. During this time, these legal rights rose to take precedence over our greater 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 them by way of proclamation of sovereignty. In our doing so, we would be holding our officials beyond accountability for their actions to that of holding them to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of the Truth. In achieving this, our empowered rights would, once again, take precedence over our legal rights.
When our empowered natural rights take precedence over our civil rights, we are then protected by two kinds of rights. However, when legal rights take precedence over our empowered natural rights, over time, we will have no more 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." Peter did not have to give this answer as he could have pleased Jesus by just 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 Himself, so the people today can confess that the very least one 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 one born out from the most worthless - from the nameless and the faceless, meaning that such an offspring would be rated even less than the worthless ones who 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 who, in turn, he was born out from.
As the classification of a "son of man" denotes a stranger without a face of authority, the classification of a Son of God is intimate in comparison and one with a face of authority. If given a choice between taking the life of one or the other, most would take the life of a stranger before taking the life of their own 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 one of us. Indeed, as our society today is eroding back quickly to a state of tyranny, so the people today are likewise eroding back quickly into a state of prostitution.
On this day of July the sixth, 2013, we the people of the United States do declare the very least one among us to be the ultimate authority as the king of kings.
Therefore, we the people today are indeed justified in our proclamation, and in our willfulness to take power over tyranny, not for the intentions of destroying it, but to simply utilize it for the purpose of advancing our Civil Purpose. Indeed, we do possess the sovereign right to hold and to bind all our government officials to a higher standard and to a great penalty under judgement of the Truth.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)