Slavery TO THE STATE is alive and well, despite the 13th amendment.

I had a professor in law school who wasted untold time because he took the Socratic method to a "whole nother level". always calling me with ridiculous questions out of the blue.

I had a professor in law school who took the Socratic method to a “whole nother level”.  He was always calling me with ridiculous questions at inconvenient times.  But hey, if you want the grade you have to play the game.

Millions upon millions of men over the years have literally been forced to “serve” the machinations of those controlling this country.  100,000’s of them have been killed and many more maimed or permanently damaged.  Think about that.  That is a big deal.  The power to conscript a citizen into service is the power to enslave that person.  How in the world is this consistent with the notion of a “free country” and of Liberty? 

And if you’re thinking, we don’t have a draft and they would “never use it again”, then please tell me why we STILL have mandatory selective service registration for men when they turn 18?    Do you think that is an oversight? an accident? If so, then all I can say to you is good luck my friend, you are truly lost in the maze.

So exactly where in the constitution does the federal government get this incredible power to turn you into the personal slave of the power structure and to order you to either kill or be killed?  Nowhere, that’s where. They made it up like most everything else they claim to have the power to do.

Let’s get one thing straight up front.  The idea of the feds being able to draft you was not something that was contemplated at the time of the constitution.  It was NOT even debated when forming the constitution. The issue that was debated was whether the federal government would even be given the power to keep and raise an army AT ALL during PEACE TIME. Read anything you want, federalist papers, anti-federalist papers, writings by any of the holy founders. The issue was, should the feds have the power, the very dangerous power, to keep a “standing army”? Even just getting that power put into the constitution was not easy.

NOW THINK, HOW FAR AWAY THE IDEA OF KEEPING A PEACE TIME ARMY IS FROM WHETHER THE FEDS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DRAFT YOU?

The compromise reached to even get the power to keep a peace time army was that they couldn’t pass financing for more than 2 years. Here’s the language. Congress shall have the power:

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years

Nothing about the language, “ to raise and support”, means a right to draft the citizens. The army can be “raised and supported” just like it is today, by volunteers. Period. No more analysis needed. There is no draft power. Thank you and goodnight. Don’t forget to tip your servers.

 I had no idea we weren't allowed to personalize our uniforms. I thought that he would be excited about my "pledge pin" . I thought it was extra "flare".

Hey, say it don’t spray it.  It’s my bad… I had no idea we weren’t allowed to personalize our uniforms with “pledge pins” . I thought it would be a good thing to add some more “flair” to my uniform.

The “power” to draft was well known and existed in many state constitutions. So if they intended to give the feds the power, then why wasn’t language permitting congress to draft people INCLUDED in the constitution? Why wasn’t it debated? What was the point of continuing to discuss “militias” in the constitution if all this power was going to the feds from the mere word “raise”?  The reason there are no satisfactory answers to those questions, is because the constitution does no grant the feds the power.  And thus, those types of questions are not allowed to be asked in public.  Understand?

We all remember our basic history. During the time of the constitution, the militia was the MAIN SOURCE of manpower. And guess what, the constitution quite clearly delineates the control and financing etc of the militias. The powers were divided between the feds and the states. But once again it doesn’t say anything about the power to draft being transferred or shared by the feds!

It is a BASIC rule of contract interpretation that if the TERM is left out, then it was left out for a REASON.

The men of each state were all part of the militia OF THAT STATE. When the feds needed an “army” they would have their small professional army, and they could call upon the states to produce additional men from their militias to swell the army’s ranks if need be. If a state needed to draft men to meet its quota, well, each state had that power. That is how the army was to be RAISED.

There is simply ZERO evidence that the word “raised” granted the feds the unlimited authority to draft the citizens for whatever military venture it cared to, that is absurd.

The federal gov is a government of LIMITED powers. It MUST find a constitutional grant for every power it exercises IN the constitution.  And the 9th and 10 amendments EMPHASIZE that the powers that are not granted are retained by the states and the people!!

The army of course has a long and glorious history of many great leaders. Here the famous Sargent Morgan O'Rourke demonstrates the proper way to take cover from the savages who questioned our great country's LEGAL RIGHT to take their lands.

The army has a long and glorious history with many great leaders. Here the highly decorated Sargent Morgan O’Rourke from “F-Troop” is shown defending our “country” from the savages who questioned our  LEGAL RIGHT to take their lands.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. (9th amendment)

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. (10th amendment)

Certainly granting a power as great as the draft, which can cost you your LIFE and which was already a STATE power would be very clearly spelled out as a grant of authority to the feds. But it is not in there. So it really couldn’t have been made any clearer. The feds don’t have it.  Despite what “experts” and “scholars” would have you believe. This is ALL there is to constitutional analysis in a case like this.

But there is so much more. What about the 5th amendment? It says that NO PERSON SHALL BE:  deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

So they have to pay you “just compensation” for your property, but they can take your life for whatever reason they care and for whatever pay scale they decide to set? I don’t think so.

And what about the 14th amendment’s supposed protection of “equal rights”? The only people drafted are men of a certain age. Gender and age are both “protected classes” subject to 14th amendment. So are disabilities. If there is a “draft” it must apply to EVERYONE EQUALLY, not just men of a certain age.

And don’t forget that once you’re in the military all sorts of your rights are limited. You are also subject to what is called the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is NOT the same as civilian justice. YOU DON’T GET YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS under it. They GIVE you whatever you get.

So they claim they can draft you in and then subject you to whatever “crimes” they care to put on the books in the military, which you have ZERO input into as a voter, and then impose them on you under whatever rules they care to put into a code of “rights”? How does this pass constitutional “muster”?

Further, the military has all sorts of criminal laws that say you can’t criticize “your commander”, i.e. the president. So they can draft you in and then you are not allowed to complain about the government itself? You lose your right to basic political speech? Think of how absurd this situation is.

Our new and improved 14th amendment "equal protection" draftees shown here training for urban warfare in the Jade Helm 15 exercise. Remember, if they can marry, they can CARRY baby! USA USA USA!! long live freedom..

Our new and improved 14th amendment “equal protection” draftees are shown here training for urban warfare in the Jade Helm 15 exercise. Remember, if they can marry, they can CARRY baby! USA USA USA!! long live freedom.

And I didn’t even mention the 13th amendment which says you cannot be held to involuntary servitude unless convicted of a crime. But what is forced conscription to “serve” if not that?

These are just some quick off the cuff constitutional problems with the whole concept. God knows what I could find if I really LOOKED. But the problems aren’t just limited to clear constitutional issues. There are so so many more issues that must be answered. Here are a few.

1. Can they draft me in for a term of 5 years? How about 10? How about 25? If not, where does it say they can’t since it doesn’t say anything about it at all?

2. What do they have to pay me? Do they have to pay me at all? Could they pay me 1 dollar? If not why not? Where does it say they can’t?

3. Can they send me overseas to fight?

4. Can they draft me during peace time?

5. What prevents them from drafting me to do a civilian job while “serving” in the military?

ON and ON the questions go without answer.

If the constitution actually authorized a draft, then it would have addressed at least SOME of the issues I just raised. The issues would have been DEBATED as well. But it doesn’t address them and they weren’t debated because the constitution doesn’t AUTHORIZE a draft.

So the question arises,

WHAT HAS THE SUPREME COURT SAID ABOUT WHERE THE RIGHT TO DRAFT CAN BE FOUND IN THE CONSTITUTION?

Well, there is a case right on point, Arver v. U.S., from 1918.  Right at the end of that big banker war of murder on a mass scale.  The court’s opinion is typical double speak. The upshot, governments all over the world and throughout time have regularly done it, therefore it is a “basic right of government”, a “fundamental power” so to speak.  But that reasoning turns the issue on its head because the federal government is a limited government of express powers, not a general government with inherent powers.  So it is NOT entitled to such a “inherent power” argument.  Do you see? Unless you’re paying VERY close attention, the court’s “reasoning” sounds sophisticated and impressive.  But it is just garbage.  Utter garbage. Let me show you. 

Here is how the court sets out the basic question.  

People constantly ask me what we can do to fix the problems I talk about. So I went ahead and penciled out a list. off the top of my head this weekend. You're welcome.

People constantly ask me what we can do to fix the problems I talk about. So I went ahead and penciled out a list off the top of my head this weekend. You’re welcome.

It is argued, [that]… compelled military service is repugnant to a free government and in conflict with all the great guarantees of the Constitution as to individual liberty, it must be assumed that the authority to raise armies was intended to be limited to the right to call an army into existence counting alone upon the willingness of the citizen to do his duty in time of public need, that is, in time of war.

So there is no question that the key issue was decided. And here is how they deal with it.

But the premise of this proposition is so devoid of foundation that it leaves not even a shadow of ground upon which to base the conclusion. It may not be doubted that the very conception of a just government and its duty to the citizen includes the reciprocal obligation of the citizen to render military service in case of need, and the right to compel it. To do more than state the proposition is absolutely unnecessary in view of the practical illustration afforded by the almost universal legislation to that effect now in force.

See how they basically assume there is such a “power” in any “just government”?  That is the OPPOSITE of what the actual analysis is supposed to be.  This should be insulting to any thinking person. And why can’t that issue be doubted? I doubt it. And what duty? What “just” government? Their “reasoning” begs the WHOLE QUESTION. Do you see how none of this is constitutional argument. It isn’t even an attempt at an actual argumentAnd remember, their “support” in the form of what other governments may do is IRRELEVANT to determining what the constitution permits!! You have to be able to point to a provision in the constitution that grants the authority, not show me a list of other despots and tyrants and criminal enterprises who engage in the conduct!

Could there be a more important power that needs to be expressly spelled out than the power to draft someone into a situation where they might have to kill or be killed? Of course not. But there is NOTHING in the constitution giving that power to the feds. It is just read in by the court. The court is a DISGRACE to the entire concept of justice.

The country is transfixed as an anxious citizen awaits the supreme court's decision on her case. Monty is about to tell her whether she will be getting the justice she has been hoping for, or whether she should have just kept what "Jay had in the box".

The country is transfixed as an anxious citizen awaits the supreme court’s decision on her case. Monty is about to tell her whether she will be getting the justice she has been hoping for, or whether she should have just kept what “Jay had in the box”.

I want you to understand something very important now. The concept is a bit subtle, so think about it. By finding that the draft is “authorized” by language that does not even mention the draft, the court has found a power that has NO constitutional limits because it has no constitutional basis. Do you see how that works? Since there is nothing we can look to in the constitution to understand the scope of the “power”, the power has no definable constitutional limits. Does that sound like something the people agreed to without any debate? Of course not. It is absurd.

I tell you all the time, if the powers that be want something and it isn’t in the constitution they read it in. If something is in there that prevents something they want, then they read that part out. Simple as that. The constitution is dangerous to your freedom because you imagine it protects you when in fact it does the opposite.  Let’s continue with the case.

To further “support” its holding the court also makes a big deal about the fact that the feds had created or attempted to create a draft in the past. So? If proposing or passing a law is evidence that the law is constitutional, then what the heck do we need a supreme court for? This type of “analysis” cannot even be called reasoning!! It makes absolutely NO SENSE. It sounds like something my ex girlfriend might say to try and make me do something. lol

I have pretty much given up dating judges. Just not worth it.

I was trying to explain to my friend why I just had to give up dating judges entirely.  Too complicated. 

The simple fact is the entire opinion is a just a convoluted way of “justifying” their predetermined outcome. Nothing more. What people don’t understand is that the purpose of the SUPREME COURT is to run this type of cover and to “legitimize” the violations of their buddies and the executive and legislative branches. That is what they DO. It isn’t the nonsense you are taught in government indoctrination centers about “guarding your rights”. People in power laugh at you for believing that.

Now I’m not going to go through the whole opinion, the article is already long by necessity. But let me give you just a little more flavor and you will see what the reality is of this opinion. Here is how they dealt with the very problematic first amendment violations.

And we pass without anything but statement the proposition that an establishment of a religion or an interference with the free exercise thereof repugnant to the First Amendment resulted from the exemption clauses of the act to which we at the outset referred, because we think its unsoundness is too apparent to require us to do more.

Just swept them away. NO analysis at ALL! Do you understand why I literally LAUGH at people who try and tell me about the great freedoms in this country. Or how we need to “get back to the constitution”. This is the FACE of the constitution. It is a TYRANNY.

And I have saved the best for last. Here is the holy court’s reasoning about why the 13th amendment’s “involuntary servitude” provision is not violated.

Finally, as we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation, as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement.

Please take a moment to read that last quote again. Think about the utter CONTEMPT for their supposed obligation to protect your rights that the court has in order to write something like that.

That type of reasoning is the reality of what the supreme court actually IS and DOES. And because nobody can CHALLENGE it, all of this transparent BULLS**T magically “becomes settled law”. And “scholars” and “courts” and law professors all quote it as though it IS what the constitution SAYS! Do you see how it actually works now? That is the system.

Ahh, "Be all you can be" baby. Army strong. Oh, wait, is this the army? Sure it is, you just have to get your mind right. Ahh, "Be all you can be" baby. Army strong. Oh, wait, is this the army or a chain gang? Frankly... it all depends on your perspective... you just have to get your mind right in order to see it.

Ahh, “Be all you can be” baby. Army strong. Oh, wait, is this the army or a chain gang? Frankly… it all depends on your perspective… you just have to get your mind right in order to see it.

My friend, it is simple. If this really was a government “of by and for” the people, then what in the world could ever be a better TEST of whether the PEOPLE think that a war is worth fighting than whether the people are willing to volunteer to go fight? Nothing. It is the ultimate ongoing REAL TIME plebiscite.

If the people don’t care to voluntarily go fight to “defend” the government or whatever the government claims needs to be “defended” well, then the people HAVE SPOKEN.

You cannot have a free country and at the same time have a government that claims to have the right to force its own people to fight, especially when the people never GAVE the government that power. The government has NO right to survive or to force people to fight.  To insist otherwise turns the entire idea of freedom and a government based on the consent of the people on its head.  BUT THAT, my friend, is the reality of the country you live in.

The government is not your servant it is your master. A master who can send you to your death whenever it cares to do so. That is what this country actually is.  As long as the people continue to imagine that the constitution somehow protects them, well, the people will continue to get whatever those in power care to stuff down their throats.

I hope I have been able to show you how the constitutional STRUCTURE of the federal government works to enslave you. This case is not an accident or a “one off”, or bungling. It is an insight into what THE SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO DO.

I am done for today. I honestly can’t stand to keep thinking about those brainwashed fools running around talking about our freedom and the supreme court and our “rights” and getting back to the constitution and on and on. Anyone who reads this and continues to cling to those ideas is either blind or in on the scam. One or the other.

Take care my brainwashed Brethren, live in the light, and tell someone the truth about the law.

Oh, and do me a favor and take a second to hit the darned “like” button and share it with someone.  We have to play the game by the rules they have set up if we want to get the info out there. Thanks,

And the truth shall set you free.

And the truth shall set you free.

40 thoughts on “Slavery TO THE STATE is alive and well, despite the 13th amendment.

  1. sully

    LM, I certainly agree with you in re the draft. I never filled out those stupid cards (late 70s) and nothing ever happened.

    Where I think of the same concept now is regarding the federal income tax scheme. They tell you right on the forms how many hours each one is estimated to take to fill out and calculate. Why am I required to do slave labor for the federal govt? It’s there job, not mine to collect taxes. They offer no compensation schedule…

    Reply
    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Sully the compensation they offer is that they let you continue to live outside a cage. Which of course is the same business model offer the mob uses when offering insurance against unexpected business calamity. — L

      Reply
  2. Kram

    As much as I would prefer to avoid any interaction with the PTB’s I hear the sound of inevitability. So, when one is invited to answer a complaint, by Government, is an immediate challenge to the jurisdiction a fair starting place? I would at this juncture in my experience prefer to learn to stand upon the fact that I choose to not be a slave, and that I am of good courage in dealings with her majesty. My, more often taken stance is, I have nothing to loose, only more to learn. Thanks for your input. Peace.
    Here is a blog of one man’s process… mine has some similarities just much younger. https://supremecourtcase.wordpress.com/author/supremecourtcase/

    Reply
    1. Kram

      LOL I’ve been HOOVERED by Plebiscitisis! Sinking in quite well now. I am fortunate to have avoided the full indoctrination in military “service”. Economics is another variant, for the poor young men and women in many cases military “service” is an only choice, with three squares, a gun, a pay check and a scholarship lol very competitive with the street gangs.
      Is there even a chance for a man in the courts? even if it is merely a cause to avoid? I did not intentionally ask to be center stadium. I have a belief that I can choose “not” to be a slave anymore…. looks like I will be figuring out ‘how’ to do that for a while now. I have definitely made progress. Thanks for the lessons! Knowledge is power. Realizing that the game masters are changing the rules constantly, that the system is inherently corrupt, that interaction with the System is to be done with a calm cynicism while remaining honorable. This will be quite a learning experience. Precepts of right and a more defined and tempered distrust of organized crime called Government are making their home in my head. It is refreshing. Finding firm ground in a game that I have not learned all the rules and that shifts is challenging. Peace comrade.

      Reply
  3. Adam Three

    Slavery was never ended in US. More Black people are enslaved today than in 1800!

    To constitutionally end slavery the 13th amendment must be updated.The 13th Amendment states: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

    “…except as a punishment for crime…”

    This phrase gets ignored in America’s telling of its slavery story. The 13th Amendment does not abolish slavery but rather shifted it from the plantation to the prison. In 2015, the 2 million (disproportionately Black) people incarcerated in America are legally considered slaves under the Constitution. As a result, they can and are forced to work for pennies an hour with the profits going to counties, states and private corporations, like Whole Foods and many other “progressive companies”.

    Reply
    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Amen to that Adam Three. The prison system is a disgrace for many reasons, not the least of which is that it doesn’t work. And of course on top of that, the crimes are unequally prosecuted, the sentences make no sense with the crime, and the entire thing has been turned into a profit center to imprison the citizens. But as usual, as long as the masses imagine they are free and think the gov’t is there to help, well… they will just get more of it. — L

      Reply
    2. Molecule

      Adam Three has discovered the key phrase …

      The key word is “duly.” Why did the drafter of this hideous deception use the phrase “duly convicted,” when the single word “convicted” would have sufficed. When fraudsters try to push a scam, they usually try too hard. Thus, it’s a case of “me thinks thou dost protest too much …” Duly should already be presumed within convicted.

      And, so that brings us to the next point — how are the federal slaves and peons “duly convicted/” Why they are convicted in Article IV courts, which are chartered in Peurto Rico. They are the federal courts that Congress can set up to administer crimes in the territories and possessions of the “United States.” And the Congress sets them up as Article IV “district courts.”

      And what kind of law do they administer, when they duly convict a slave — it’s called Admiralty Law, which is the law of marque and reprisal, which in turn is the law of hte trafficker in slaves, drugs and contraband. Admiralty law is the law of the pirate. The Article III “inferior courts” are founded on principles of English common law, which we inherited from their civil courts, thanks to Henry II.

      So these ignorant defendants are “duly convicted” in fraudulent courts, exercising Admiralty Law in the territories of the states, which are not federal territories, and over which the federal Article IV courts have no jurisdiction. So, it’s a real mess.

      The 13th amendment is by far the most hideous and most deceptive piece of … (arghhh) crap ever!

      dooly convicted, in a article iv court, using the laws of piracy — that’s dooly convicted??

      So thanks to the 13th Amendment we now have the Prisons-and-Slavery Industrial Complex.

      Reply
      1. Adam Three

        Your phrase Prisons-and-Slavery Industrial Complex deserves to go viral. Says it perfectly.

        Is it right to say that theoretically it is possible to be convicted under Common Law without being duly convicted, the difference is duly convicted is under Admiralty Law.

        The 13th amendment needs to be modified into an unqualified context where slavery is outlawed, period. Not exceptions. On this point it seems that private prisons puts the law into contradiction as we have private slavery which is prohibited by the first part of the amendment. This could change the dynamics of the prison system so the inmates would have to be able to earn a competitive wages with good living conditions.

        Reply
  4. Afshin Nejat

    There is no power of mind over mind, whatsoever, except that it is ceded by the latter to the former. Hence, each man is a law unto himself.

    Therefore, in a very exact sense of the words “I AM the Law.”

    By the way, that was a shocking picture… The mind will have to find a way to recover. It is far less shocking than the truths about the world in which we live that people actively avoid facing, however.

    As a minor aside: “Remember, if they can marry, they can CARRY baby!” should be “Remember, if they can marry, they can CARRY, baby!” Because the first sentence means that they can “carry baby”, which strangely almost makes sense in this context (some new “advances” in “medicine”, brought to you by people who have suppressed the cure(s) for cancer while systematically injecting poison into babies).

    Well, legal theory is a serious matter, especially when we discover the covert and not-so-covert means being actively used to suppress the freedom of human will in all manner of decision-making, whether private and moral or public and ethical (not that those don’t criss-cross and overlap). Ever consider attacking the issue of psychotronics being used on the populace, that being done in a way glaringly similar to the 80s movie by John Carpenter called “They Live”?

    I have considered it, but currently my legal acumen is not up to the task. I’m still working on the underlying metaphysical theory which will act as part of the support, logical and empirical, in a case against the perpetrators of the crimes suggested under the phrase “psychotronic assault against the public, and against private citizens in particular”.

    Reply
  5. starman

    I would like to suggest that all of you who have not done so, obtain a copy of a book titled “The Protocols of the meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion. It came to the western world BY way of Russia. It translated the Russian of Nilus by VICTOR E. MARSDEN Late Russian Correspondent of “THE MORNING POST.” You canto contact Emissary Publications,PO Box294, Colton OR 97017- Phone/Fax. (503) 824-2050. I bought as many copies as I could afford and gave them to people who had voiced displeasure over our political situation. This was around 2007-2008. I have read this vile manuscript. It was inspired by Satan himself. If you manage to scrape away the scum and the slime that represents the APPOINTED government. You will find the parasitic, blood suckers that are responsible for the moral and financial decay our country. This book and its contents are so vile that the man who translated the original transcript could only do a couple pages per day before getting sick to his stomach. After completing the translation he died several years later.
    If you manage to obtain a copy of this book, although it came out in 1905, it reads as if if it is happening ! The J-ws claimed it is a forgery but when you read you know right away who the real liars are.
    Starman

    Reply
    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Wow Star man, that is a lot of anger and hate. Lol. I allowed you comment because I really don’t apply editorial controls since I am not responsible for what other people think or say. But let me just say a few things. One I am familiar with the protocols. I do, however, doubt the story of how they came to be. It is my belief that while the general plan described in them is quite compelling, I suspect that they are an elaborate psyopp of sorts. Anytime anything attempts to portray some single group as evil or responsible I am quite sure it is simply a way to drain off energy and to distract. The Jews are no more the problem than the Muslims or the masons et.al. So that being said I would hope, you would rethink the anger and hate you seem to have. It is misplaced in all likelihood and it neither helps you nor whatever cause you have. Unless of course your cause is to stir up hate and or to shock people. Lol And if that is your cause then I only hope that you reconsider. However I will not provide a forum to do that. It is just a very negative thing.

      A discussion of ideas makes sense to me. I am open to radical views as well. But like I said, I am quite familiar with the protocols and agree with you that they are quite an uncanny play book. Where you and I disagree is about their authorship and the way they single out one group as “responsible”. Don’t fall into such an obvious trap my friend. There are always layers to the disinformation and information. You are reacting to them in a predictable way. THAT ALONE should make you rethink your position. Lol.

      Anyway. I think my point is made. All intellectual views are welcome. If you are sincere I hope you think about what I said. I would be happy to debate it. But keep the discussion at a level that people enjoy. Give me something I haven’t thought through. And if you are just looking to get a reaction or you are trolling, well you had your post and I wish you better luck on another site. Lol. Take care. — L

      Reply
      1. Crocodile

        LegalMan, I find it noble from you to keep his post !

        If the Protocols are genuine, they represent only the Oligarchy but not the masses of Jews, who are expendable in the eyes of the Oligarchy. So, everyone who is mixing the Oligarchy with the uninformed masses is wrong.

        I have some thoughts about this conspiracy also.

        Look at how Mafia is structured !
        Nobody knows who the bosses are. Only their lieutenants are known and are the target of “authorities”. You know, just an game of elimination of competition….
        This structure must be even more true for a conspiracy of the magnitude of conquering the whole world – the bosses are not known, their lieutenants MUST be known. This way there will be a supply of scapegoats to protect the bosses.

        If this logic is correct, Jews can not possibly be the “bosses” in this conspiracy. They are too visible.

        But you know, people never think things through 🙂

        Reply
        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          Your point is well made Crocodile. I agree with it as well. Whatever is made public, is not the top. Just like the “forbes 400” and all that other silliness. Anyone can do the check on a very important piece of info. JP Morgan, who was believed to be the “richest most powerful” man in the world. Only controlled 20% of his “fortune” when he died. The documents show he was financed and owned by the Rothschilds. It is just fact. But of course that fact is never taught. And the story is their power has declined down etc. Does that mean they are the top? of course not. For all I know it is shapeshifters or “jayrod” above them or someone else we don’t know.

          Ultimately it DOESN’T matter who is “at the top”. The thing that matters is understanding the STRUCTURE of HOW they manipulate. That way, no matter how many iterations they wheel out, poooof, you can spot it. Of course the masses can’t even get to the point of recognizing they are in a game. And most after that have no conception of how high the game goes. And then the rest get drawn off into believing that some certain “someone” is in charge and they become obsessed with THAT. lol They don’t see that they are still being tricked and played. Oh well, I resigned myself that people just won’t see. And that is fine. I write for my own sake and to simply have a record of what I knew, and what I KNOW. take care and thanks for the up vote on my decision. — L

          Reply
          1. Crocodile

            LegalMan, just now I was reading an article on this issue which may interest you also :
            The Abramic game has been generally framed with great success by the real shepherds, to create the illusion that their first ‘Chosen’ flock (that is, the Jewish people) appear to many others as if they are the foremost sheepdogs, or perhaps even the shepherds themselves. But in a subsequent post we’ll meet a proud representative of some metaphorical werewolves that literally claim to be the rightful and sincerely ‘Good’ shepherds…..
            Here :
            http://postflaviana.org/sheep-sheepdog-werewolfs-shepherd/

        2. Afshin Nejat

          But if your analogy is to hold well, then it means they are very willing and complicit lieutenants, and not merely “passive” scapegoats. It is NOT “just the oligarchy” which is making things happen in the world that the oligarchy wants.

          There are numerous sects of people in Jewish society who back up the plan of their masters, the total of these sects encompassing numerous factors and aspects of the plan of evil control, and which are each in a symbiotic relationship to even the “common” interest of the most ignorant and “uninvolved” person in the street, whether in Hollywood or Tel Aviv, or Paris, or wherever Jews are found.

          Basically if you aren’t useful in one of these ways, then you aren’t one of them at all, and you are expendable. Even if you are useful in one of these many ways, you are expendable because you are replaceable. And if you aren’t useful…. you’re still useful as long as you keep your head down and just be a “good Jew” because you’ll then act as a front for all the rest of your despicable fellows.

          So in some lights, to argue as you have, is almost self-defeating when you look at the organic unity which lies aback these operations.

          Reply
          1. Don

            Maybe a better term for TPTB today would be Plutocracy? Pluto was the Roman god of wealth. What in this world today does not revolve around the FLOW of FIAT PAPER CURRENCY. We can not feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, house ourselves, or travel with out passing paper $$$$. They who issue and control such $$$$ are the gods of this world and our masters??? Which is worse aristocracy, oligarchy, divine right of kings, state worship and on and on!!! The entire history of mankinds governments is a total complete failure!!!
            ALAS SOS SOS

          2. Afshin Nejat

            Yes, plutocracy is the more correct term in one sense, because we see that the concentration of monetary wealth is key to the control of the many by the few. But that IT IS the control of the many by the few makes it an oligarchy.

            The many control the few on the pretext of virtue and achievement, and this is backed up by fraudulent economics and utterly corrupt political practices, but it is not really the wealth that RULES, it is the wealth that is made to accrue to those who rule, and it is made to do so only passively by its own measures (lobbying, bribing more generally, paying better those who one would influence or who obey, getting better stuff than the competition, etc). That is more of a redundant and yet essential feature of the real core of their power, which is the control of information and the secret networking they conduct, combined with credible threats of technologically superior force and harassment, covert assassinations, etc, which will be made to look like accidents, and which the public will not understand properly. JFK is a prime example of how well they can conduct such operations.

            Their wealth is a significant factor, but it is created, maintained, and increased by the powers of the control of people’s minds through propaganda, now reinforced by technologically advanced means. We might say that they are a crypto-technocratic oligarchy with a plutocratic buffer zone of minions controlling an outer ring of corrupt politicians and officials who serve in a rigged democracy which is a defunct constitutional republic, which was thrown together in the beginning by a dubiously virtuous aristocracy, but I’ll settle on oligarchy.

            But yes, if people mean “wealth” it should be plutocracy. I wouldn’t say we are in a true plutocracy. Conventional wealth is not the biggest ruling stick among TPTB. It is information and technology, which is hoarded and kept among an elite few in its complete and optimal forms, respectively. And yes, they might not even be human per se.

          3. Don

            Thanks the correction sounds a bit better.
            I could have added to my reply that all tho I hold a clear “Title” to our home I don’t really own it because twice a year the real owners send me a “tax” bill with the force of a sheriffs gun behind it and if I fail to pay its out on the street we are placed!!! In fact a few years ago in Beaver County Penna a widows home was confiscated over nonpayment of $6.50 yes I said six dollars and fifty cents!!!! The judge justified it by saying” ITS THE LAW” ALAS WOE IS ALL OF US Everything is upsidedown everything is backwards.

          4. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

            Well I agree with many of your points Afshin. There certainly is a very good objective case for a concentration of power and an abuse of that power by people who identify as Jewish. That is true. But my position is always that I suspect the vast majority of complicity is ignorant and accidental. To the extent it is not, it is often misinformed or intentionally misled. Do people ban together? of course. But the vast majority of the people are simply tools. Knowing or not. Even those who think they have control can end up like Joe Pesci in Goodfellas. lol. The masses are always used by those above, so are the dukes and barrons. Whatever form of manipulation they can use, they will. One of my early posts deals with this precise idea that the system is run like the mob. It asks if you’re ready to play a game.

            The important thing is knowing how to see THE GAME being played and understanding the basic structure of the games that are played and generally by whom, i.e. the very rich and powerful who choose to stay hidden. Once someone can pull back sufficiently far from a single incident to see the overview, then it becomes much harder to fool them with any game. — L

  6. Carey Nottingham

    Initially my thought was “the draft?” really? we are so “free” now that the government has no need to draft anyone. I mean, we haven’t implemented the draft since the 70’s, right? But as I read, I realized that since they have it, they can use it at ANY time and there is not anything anyone anywhere can do about it.

    That is the shocker. That is the real kicker. …and THAT is why it is so necessary to have people truly understand what the system is perfectly DESIGNED to do.

    another eyebrow raisin’ hit, Legalman!

    Reply
    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Yes Carey you’re initial reaction is like most people. Who cares about the draft?? lol Well nobody does right NOW, but…..what if an “emergency” just “happens” to come up? Certainly not a false flag event, no, I am talking about something they promise us is REAL. lol. Well, then its off to the trenches we go for god and country to be slaughtered. NOBODY wanted us in WWI. The people had to be conned into barely supporting it with false flags like the sinking of the Lusitania which was the “catalyst” for our entry into WWI which then “gave us” the draft and this p.o.s. opinion. Then by the time WWII came along it was “settled law”. And then we got the draft during peacetime. Remember, we still have the selective service law. Why? what is the point of forcing the draft age men to sign up? hmmm? Could it be that they want to be ready and they want to continue to keep the idea in the heads of everyone that it is perfectly constitutional and nothing to think about? no, I’m sure that’s not it. lol. Anyway, the power is far too great. The abuse far too great. The entire war economy and meme is one of the CENTRAL themes they need and use. People need to see it for what it is. take care. — L

      Reply
  7. Crocodile

    “….I didn’t even mention the 13th amendment which says you cannot be held to involuntary servitude unless convicted of a crime….”

    “involuntary servitude” = slavery ?

    “convicted of a crime” – what if the psychopaths just say ALL people are “convicted” (by a secret court ?) and are all criminals ? Then all people are slaves ! At least for the psychopaths, and they are in power.

    True, LegalMan ?
    By now the status QUO certainly has enough “laws” to convict everyone for whatever they want…..

    Reply
    1. Don

      Croc I read recently that it would take 10 lifetimes to just read all the laws that are written!!! If that isn’t complete utter insanity I don’t know what is. Shall we say worldwide insanity!!!

      Reply
    2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Yes Croc, they have more than enough laws and ultimately anyone or any group can be subjected to what you say. And in fact many already are everyday. But there is a tipping point of course and that limitation is the only thing that keeps them in line. Practicality, not philosophy keeps them from doing what you suggest. But as the people become more drugged, and sprayed, and emf’d into oblivion, well, the numbers of the people who are even capable of rational unclouded thought decline, the resistance declines, and the creeping creep creepiness of the monster grows slowly. lol. Just like the way inflation eats away unseen by most. The only solution is seeing and understanding the STRUCTURE of the game they play, that way it matters not what permutation or iteration they try, it is still seen as the same scam. Long live the stars and stripes!! Spreading freedom bombs and liberty drones to the world! lol — L

      Reply
  8. GeorgiaCracker

    Power in all it’s forms is powerfully corrupting. You point out that we who believe in the ideas espoused in the Constitution are deluding ourselves but our delusion is not in the ideas, but in people’s corrupting the intent of the ideas for power.

    Reply
    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well Georgia Cracker I think that there is a slight misunderstanding on your part. The constitution does not espouse any ideas about freedom or liberty etc. All it does is set up a governmental structure and then supposedly limit the entity from acting in certain ways and areas. If you think it does espouse ideas then just point to one actually in the document. Those noble ideas you are imagining are simply NOT IN THERE. The people who use it against you have created an illusion, a fantasy. They have gotten everyone to imagine that it is what you just implied when it is not. The People project on to this document outlining a structure the idea that it REPRESENTS and “espouses” the ideas of freedom and liberty. So they cling to it as though defending the document is defending those ideals. When the truth, as I have shown over and over, is the opposite. That IS the heart of the deception. Do you see the distinction? It is a sleight of hand deeply embedded into the psyche of the people. It is not easy to break. But to truly support freedom and liberty you must oppose the conjobstitution and live in the reality of what that document enables. I hope I have been able to clear that up. And I hope that perhaps you can see that now. Take care. — L

      Reply
  9. andrew johnson

    Regarding the “draft.”

    “And I didn’t even mention the 13th amendment which says you cannot be held to involuntary servitude unless convicted of a crime. But what is forced conscription to “serve” if not that?”

    Well said.

    “A foul oder drafted into the room”
    “A man drafted into the military”

    A “draft” is a current of air.

    The govt’s claimed authority to draft, has all the substance of a current of air.

    Reply
    1. Eileen K.

      Andrew, you just nailed it perfectly … the world “draft” actually means a current of air 🙂 … excellent description, too. LOL!
      Your last description nails it …. The gov’t’s claimed authority to draft, has all the substance of a current of air 🙂 … Perfect 🙂

      Reply
  10. Don

    UGH Just had a bad thought I live in Penna. we have a state constitution [own a copy but never read it] kinda wonder if it also is akin to the US Constitution? “A Constitution of no authority” ??? As Spooner called it back around 1880 I think. Don

    Reply
        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          Well Don I thank you for the compliment. I am certainly not in the great one’s league. But he is quite the standard to reach for. –L

          Reply
    1. consent-to-be-governed

      It is my understanding the Constitution of 9/17/1787 was patterned after the Pennsylvania Constitution. See 1790 Penna Constitution below.

      Pennsylvania was established in 1682 when the King granted the Lands known as Pennsylvania to William Penn. Between 1682 and 1789, Pennsylvania was inhabited by the Quakers, Amish and Mennonite to name a few, all of which are conscientious objectors and pacifists. When was the last time that you viewed a Military Action movie with Amish, Mennonites, Buddhists or any other peaceful sect participating in bellicose activities?

      As you will read below there existed then as well as now an exemption to not engage in the Militia/Military.

      http://www.duq.edu/academics/gumberg-library/pa-constitution/texts-of-the-constitution/1790

      Of the militia.
      Sect. II. The freemen of this commonwealth shall be armed and disciplined for its defence. Those who conscientiously scruple to bear arms, shall not be compelled to do so; but shall pay an equivalent for personal service. The militia officers shall be appointed in such manner, and for such time, as shall be directed by law. – See more at: http://www.duq.edu/academics/gumberg-library/pa-constitution/texts-of-the-constitution/1790#sthash.76oCY6Kz.dpuf

      Start by asking the obvious questions…

      At what age can one enter selective service? 18 years old. Article 1, Section 2, clause 2
      What is the age of majority under common law on Non-Federal Territory? 21 years old. Article 1, Section 3, clause 3

      The Constitution of 9/17/1787 made permanent the NW Ordinance for the United States which at this point in time was the land East of the Mississippi and West of the Ohio River. It was comprised of one District. It was the territory that was won as a result of the Revolutionary War and surrendered by the King at the Treaty of Paris. The word District can be first traced to Babylon one the Steel Finger Code of Hammurabi.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

      There is nothing new under the Sun… Everything that is old is new again… History is not linear it is cyclic and it keeps repeating over and over again.

      Reply
      1. Don

        http://thelastoutpost.com/law-seminars/the-buck-act.html
        UGH again!!! I never heard of the Buck Act of the 1940s till today!!! However it is just another one of the multitude of NETS cast over us as well as the SNARES TRAPS and SPIDER WEBS WOVEN to enslave us all!!!
        If one reads between the lines and checks out the definitions of the words via Strongs Concordance Isa.59 clearly depicts our current state of affairs worldwide!!!

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *