A blessed King and his cursed inverse of a wretch.

<====================l==================>

I abstracted (altered) the images of the two above statues into a single image.  By then adding the arrows and bar as a political scale below it, I've integrated them into a new American political spectrum.  This model improves slightly upon Aristotle's ancient model of the golden-mean by doing away with the left and the right dichotomy. In place of what has long been a false dichotomy deceiving the people, I've inserted in its place both a worthless wretch on one far side on one side of eternity (which can be either side) and a priceless king on the other.

With the above model in mind, the Tea Party Movement isn't an agenda nor a legacy as the shallow media might postulate in order to arouse romantic imagery within the minds of their feeling listeners and readers.  There is one movement only and that is the American Movement.  This movement awakens on occasion to challenge the two party system any time that necessary evil becomes defunct.  Indeed, the American Movement returns the people to revering our Founding Fathers, to honoring of the new laws they instituted within the U.S. Constitution, and to cherishing the natural law our Founders declared - the whole new order apart from the Old World in which those new laws are now erected.

   

Now having Christ the Holy Fullness as a foundation, we can proceed to complete Aristotle's political spectrum, with this being his golden mean, replacing the left and right extremes of it with a model of two inverted figures one being a blessed enthroned king sitting at one far end of it and the other being a cursed condemned prostitute at the opposite end.

As the king and those few making up his ruling aristocracy have the high ground in the conflict, those in support of the prostitute's equal business agenda for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should always expect to be and should never complain about being at a disadvantage.

As the king and those supporting him enjoy a certain amount of diplomatic immunity from prosecution, the prostitute and those supporting her equal business agenda for life should be expected to be condemned to death and to receive the harshest of penalties.



        

  

I attempted to revise and rewrite the last post; but, after taking a lot of time to do so, it failed to publish for some reason.  So, I'm just going to attempt to elaborate with another example.

First off, diversity for the sake of diversity alone isn't any better than chaos.  For, as Socrates once reasoned, "an unexamined life isn't worth living."  Indeed, as dogs will tend to bark along with other barking dogs, so will people also bark along with all the other barking in quite stupid fashion without giving much thought to the noise they are making.  They behave so out of fear of tyranny.  To rise above this barking nonsense, one needs to develop the definition to what diversity is as both an informal culture and as a formal one.

Let's say that a tragedy happened to a diverse class of boys as they were on their way to a field-trip from school as the bus they were riding within crashed, flipped over, caught fire, and killed all on board.  Quite upset, all the mothers of the boys later agreed to meet in therapy in an attempt to help each other.

Now, during the therapy session, these diverse mothers will surely discuss matters concerning their own informal culture with this being individual traits they loved about their sons.  However, on occasion, the mothers will also discuss matters concerning the common formal culture they all share together.  In other words, there are traits in every culture which each of the mothers will appreciate in a deeper sense.  These formal traits become more meaningful than the informal traits of their individual cultures .

For example, there is a lot of difference between a particular mother's son exhibiting the odd characteristic of dividing up his food into two separate portions so that he can shake salt on one half of it and then pepper on the other half - though this action by him would still be precious - and that of every mother sharing how their sons would try following after and emulating their fathers.

Indeed, diversity today is being defined in a superficial way in relationship to race, religion, politics, sexuality, wealth, and so on.  However, these kinds of false dichotomies become harmful to society.  To arrive at the answer of what is diversity, one needs to arrive at the one true formal dichotomy itself with this being the one true conflict concerning every culture.  This level of advanced realization will require lots of hard work.  Indeed, such development is an uphill process requiring lots of effort and many years of dedicated education to achieve.

                      


      



 

American Sophistication Versus the American Movement

Back during the time of ancient Greece, Sophist performers such as Protagoras and Gorgias would play the part of the oral intelligentsia.  Mostly downhill in effort, they would avoid the difficult process of definition by arguing on the more convenient side that no such virtue as definition can exist as one can never arrive at the conclusion of an absolute truth.  To prove their point, they would put on shows charging the wealthy Greeks good money to watch them first argue one side of the truth and then later argue the other side of it equally well.

Understand, there was a serious lack of paper during this time.  For example, Homer the Greek poet during the 8th century BCE had to be an oral composer as there did not exist enough paper to print books for people to read his stories.  Instead, troubadours would venture about Greece as traveling actors.  Indeed, having set the literary works of Homer and other "Cyclic" authors to memory, they would travel around the three continents of the Greek world to give performances actually acting them out in front of Greek audiences.

So, by the time of the advent of the Greek Zenith of ancient philosophy, while there was huge amounts of knowledge in the form of raw data, very little of it was defined.  In fact, the oral tradition so took center stage among the Greek elite that such abilities as reading and writing were not considered intelligent endeavors.  For example, after finishing the writing of his dialogues to a formal status, Plato felt the need to orally perform them in front of an audience.  Aristotle, the only student of Plato who could often read and write would then record the dialogues onto paper.

It has been said that after the delivery of a very boring dialogue, often the the only two members left in the audience after the performance were Plato and Aristotle.

With this established, I'd like to make a subtle distinction between what was a Greek Sophist and what was a Greek philosopher.  As a Greek Sophist would utilize eloquence to establish his own natural abilities as the foundation he stood upon, the ancient Greek philosophers stood upon a foundation that was already established by their Presocratic ancestors.

Let's use these modern sophisticated times as an example to better explain the relationship between the Sophists and the Greek philosophers.  Today, the term "diversity" is often used without much thought.  However, during the time of Socrates, he would never have allowed  such thoughlessness.  After all, he was the one who created inductive reasoning as a rational process of definition, what he would often refer to as the Dialectic, or what professors often call the Socratic Teaching Method today.

In response to someone utilizing the term "diversity," Socrates would have asked the question, "What is diversity?"

In responding back, Plato his student might say:  Well, diversity is created by the mingling of different cultures.

Socrates would then respond back by asking:  What is a culture?

And so on.

Now, understand, as Plato expressed exhaustingly in his dialogues, this type of questioning by Socrates would go on and on extensively in order to reduce inductively towards the best answer. After many years of answering these endless kinds of questions, Plato felt he had developed a short cut!

For example, when Socrates might ask a question like, "What is clothing fashion, Plato?"  Plato would stop to reason to himself, "Okay, as informal wear can be anything from under garments, to pajamas, to going totally naked by wearing nothing at all, formal wear can be outer wear, the adorning of a silk robe, or the wearing of a suit and a tie.

In this way, Plato quickened the process advancing the slow inductive Socratic Teaching Method to that of his own method of "The Theory of the Forms."

But, then again, the Sophists weren't wrong in what they were arguing.  Let's say, for example, that it isn't possible to walk on the golden path of the ultimate Truth.  Plato's argument wasn't against this virtue of the Truth being unapproachable, but that certain Best-Principled Statements could provide quality truths in a direction towards that ultimate one.  There could be a path made of rubies for example.  There could be other paths made of silver, precious gems, and pearls.

In this way, the Greek philosophers created truth engines, factories in which raw data were inputted in order to manufacture the output of quality truths.  

So, to answer Socrates question of "What is cutlure?," Plato would have asked himself the questions "what is informal culture?" and "what is formal culture?"

Well, he might reason, in an informal culture, the poorly advanced people live mostly by laws.  In contrast, in a formal culture, the advanced people live more by a higher order.  

To cut to the chase, what was the answer our Founding Fathers provided to the question of what is formal-culture?

The Unanimous Declaration of the 

Thirteen United States of America

In Congress, July 4, 1776

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that 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; . . ..

In their declaration of a new natural law, our Founding Fathers established a whole new order - a new economy so to speak - divorcing the people in the process from the prior order of the Old World.  Upon this base of a new order, they then erected new laws within the United States Constitution.  To bind both this new order and these new laws together, our Founders also established for the people a proclamation of a Bill of ten natural rights - unalienable rights - as they were greater in power, according to John Locke, than the absolute power the king once declared for himself and his royal family.

Fd. Uncle Emanuel Watkins
Prime Minister of these united States
And Acting Supreme Court over these united States  




    
     

  

As we are all born militia members acting in the defense of the People in their homes, we should always remember that, in best protecting and preserving the lives of our children, we need to advance the fight to the protection of our dogs.

Who died during the battle at Ruby Ridge?  Again, we are talking about an ongoing conflict which was been taking place between the Civil Purpose of the people of these united States against a mysterious best interest of a few within the federal government. This is what happened according to www.hstory.com:

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/incident-at-ruby-ridge

Randy Weaver, a white separatist, had been targeted by the federal government after failing to appear in court to face charges related to his selling of two illegal sawed-off shotguns to an Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) informant. On August 21, 1992, after a period of surveillance, U.S. marshals came upon Harrison; Weaver; Weaver's 14-year-old son, Sammy; and the family dog, Striker, on a road near the Weaver property. A marshal shot and killed the dog, prompting Sammy to fire at the marshal. In the ensuing gun battle, Sammy and U.S. Marshal Michael Degan were shot and killed. A tense standoff ensued, and on August 22 the FBI joined the marshals besieging Ruby Ridge.

According to the new order established within the Declaration of Independence, to the new laws within the U.S. Constitution which were erected upon that new order, and to the ten unalienable natural Bill of Rights of the people, Randy Weaver, at the time of this confrontation, was not guilty.  And, as the federal, state, and local military are a domestic necessary tyranny against the people, and as they themselves utilize sawed off shot guns in battle, so the militia are justified in possessing any and all means of weapons to fight against such a necessary evil.  Continuing on, according to Wikepedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge#

The_incident_at_the_.22Y.22_in_the_trails  On August 21, 1992, six marshals were sent to

scout the area to determine suitable places away from the cabin to ambush and arrest Weaver The 

marshals, dressed in camouflage, were equipped with night-DUSMs Art Roderick, Larry Cooper

and Bill Degan formed the reconnaissance (Recon) team, while DUSMs David Hunt, Joseph

Thomas and Frank Norris formed an observation post (OP) team on the ridge north of the cabin.

At one point, Roderick threw two rocks at the Weaver cabin to test the reaction of the 

dogs.^[32] The dogs became alerted, and Weaver's friend Kevin Harris, and Weaver's 14 year old 

son, Samuel, emerged and followed the dog Striker to investigate.Harris and the younger 

Weaver were hoping that the dog had noticed a game animal since the cabin was out of 

meat.^[33] Sammy Weaver told his father he believed the dogs had sensed either a large animal or a 

man in the woods. The Recon team marshals (Roderick, Cooper and Degan) initially retreated 

through the woods in radio contact with the OP team, but later took up hidden defensive positions.

Later the OP team marshals and the Weavers both claimed the Weaver dogs were alerted to the 

Recon team marshals in the woods after neighbors at the foot of the mountain started their pickup 

truck. The Recon team marshals retreated through the woods to the "Y" juncture in the trails 500 

yards west of the cabin, out of sight of the cabin. Sammy and Harris followed the dog Striker on 

foot through the woods while Randy also on foot took a separate logging trail. Vicki, Sara, Rachel, 

and baby Elisheba remained at the cabin, at first appearing anxious to the OP team, but later 

appearing relaxed. Randy encountered the marshals at the "Y"; Roderick claimed to have yelled, 

"Back off! U.S. Marshal!" upon sighting Weaver, and Cooper said he had shouted, "Stop! U.S. 

Marshal!" Later statements by Roderick, Cooper and Randy agreed that Randy responded by 

cursing and retreating from the marshals. About a minute later the dog and the boys came out of 

the woods and a firefight erupted between the marshals and Sammy and Harris 

Accounts differ at this point as to who first opened fire but agree that DUSM

Roderick shot and killed Weaver's dog and that Samuel Weaver returned fire at

Roderick. After the Federal agents began firing,  14 year old Samuel Weaver was

shot in the back while retreating, and DUSM Degan was shot and killed by Harris.


I'd like to pause here to once again define what is the individual who is an 

official member of the military.  In contrast to a born militia member, which 

includes the likes of you and I, they are sworn to protect the necessary tyranny, a 

necessary evil instituted by our Founding Fathers in order to advance the 

People's Civil Purpose.  Meanwhile, those serving in the militia in the defense of 

the people are unofficial members who upon their births were born to protect 

homes from all forms of tyranny whether that evil be foreign or domestic.  While 

members of the military and those in government are immune by law from

prosecution , they are not immune from the greater offense of violating the 

people's natural rights.  In other words, tyranny should now know better and, 

being now accountable for its actions, may the Lord have mercy upon those 

principalities and powers that commit any future offense against the people 

and the prerequisite advancement of their Civil Purpose. 

If you don't like what I have to say, then go live somewhere else.        

In continuing, Samuel Weaver, a fourteen year old, was shot and killed while protecting his dog.  His dog, by law, was just deemed property by the state.  So, it is the policy today of the police forces, of which have grown ever militant since the end of the cold war,  to destroy dogs by shooting and killing them.   

Meanwhile. a wife and mother was shot and killed while holding her infant child in her arms and while attempting to protect both her family and children.  

Natural law:  As mothers love their children, fathers fight against tyranny.  

So, once again, in regards to our duty in protecting the people, as born members of the militia, we should always remember, the best way to preserve the lives of our wives and their children is to advance forth rallying and fighting for the lives of our dogs.

I would like to note that the same kind of incident happened at the Branch Davidian Church when a military division of the federal government by policy killed a pregnant dog and her five pups.  The rest is history.   

As they should now know better, Lord, hold those principalities and powers who would willfully act in contempt of the people and the prerequisite advancement of their Civil Purpose to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under your Light of Truth.  

Fd. Uncle Emanuel Watkins
First Prime Minister of these united States
And acting Supreme Court Justice 
.  

Organized chaos perpetuated against the people and the prerequisite advancement of their American Civil Purpose.

There is only one movement within these united States with it being the American Movement.

The American Movement process - returns the American people philosophically to the revering of our Founding Fathers, to the cherishing of the new order of a natural law they established within the Declaration of Independence, and to the honoring of the new laws within the U.S. Constitution our Founders would later erect upon that new order.

All other declared political purposes are false movements.  Indeed, sickening and weakening the body, these false movements operate as parasites in the system owing their origins to the perpetuation of false dichotomies.  To perpetuate mass confusion, the "Occupied Movement" stirred up such conflicts as rich against poor, old against young, black against white, male against female, right against left, Democrats against Republicans, and so on.

Therefore, on this date of May the eleventh 2014, as they are in contempt of the People and the prerequisite advancement of their Civil Purpose, I do now hold these false movements to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of Truth.

Fd. Uncle Emanuel Watkins
Prime Minister and acting *Supreme Court Justice of these united States.

*Not in terms of what is the Supreme Court, but of what is the most supreme of all courts.

What have we learned?

As the official military in the United States protected  the head government as it was fleeing for its life from the British army, the militia originated to protect the people in their homes from all forms of tyranny whether that evil be domestic or foreign.

So what have we learned from recent events?  Well, to preserve our children, we need to advance the purpose to protecting the lives of our dogs.  Indeed, the federal government, by policy, first shot the dogs before they commenced to killing citizens in the quest of violating their unalienable natural rights.

In Waco, they first shot a mother dog and her five pups before then attacking the people.  So, by unalienable natural law, as born members of the militia charged with protecting (loving) our neighbors as ourselves, we will be better able to protect the lives of our children by advancing to fight fiercely for the lives of our dogs.

And, thinking back while knowing how tyranny has progressed even further today, figure the Branch Davidian leader David Karesh probably did nothing more back then than accidently spill coffee on a powerful individual in the government.  After all, the Branch Davidian's biggest offense was that they were small as it has been proven that the pedophile laden Catholic Church committed every offense that the government accused the little church of committing.  The difference is that the numerous military "compounds" of the Catholic Church are way too big to fail.    

The Civil Purpose of the many within these United States versus a mysterious best interest of a few within the federal government

First I need to establish a warning.  Jesus the Fullness said that it is better to wrap a millstone around ones head and to caste oneself to the face of the sea than it is to stumble up (offend) a child.  During that time, it was not known whether the ocean or the sea even had a bottom, so the bottom of the sea represented the metaphoric loss of the soul.  A cruel aspect of religions is the unforgiveness it expresses because their members are always worried and anxious about preserving their birthrights over others.  Well, Jesus, during a time of spontaneity towards the end of His ministry, narrowed down towards the Truth regarding this matter.  In the verse below in Mathews, knowing that He was dealing with deceitful predatory minds, He made the worst offense that anyone could ever commit the rather paradoxical offense of just stumbling up a child.  (As the hearts of children are by nature believers, so all children believe in Christ).

This shows that Jesus is the one true Almighty, as He wasn't concerned about children being killed or maimed.  Indeed, Jesus could either touch the child to heal them, which is good, or He could speak to them through the Holy Gospel to heal them, which is even better.  What concerned Jesus more than the sakes of His children was the evil involved in the endeavor of government with stumbling them up.

We are left with two choices here.  We can either volunteer to be willing to lose our souls, our birthrights so to speak, all for the sake of a child: or, we can risk losing our souls outright by stumbling them up.  This action by Christ, from top to bottom, does away with all religion.

Those few operating the federal government today are stumbling up the many within these united States.  In the process, they are justifying a return to old world tyranny back during a time when Emperors were leisure war mongers and they had provided for them secret harems filled with young women and small boys for their pleasure.

As they by nature will reject such abstracts as equality and responsibility in pursuit of better contentment, joy, and happiness for themselves, the children of God are always able to be easily fooled and cheated.

Therefore Mathews 18:6:  But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

This means we should all be willing to sacrifice our birthrights regardless of our religion as it would be better for us to fall to the bottom of the sea and become the lowest form of life than it would be for us to compete against and to stumble up a child.

Now those in the federal government from this time on should know better.  On this day of May the third in the year 2014, Lord, hold those working in the necessary tyranny ruling over us of the federal. state. amd local governments, and to all their Sayers, whether they be the mysterious intelligence agencies working for them or the private media companies under their control, all to a higher standard and to a greater penalty under the Light of the Truth.

Fd. Uncle Emanuel Watkins
First Prime Minister of these United States