Steven~ 
Help me out some here!

I am familiar with this act and of a great many of similar attitude and intent, 
but do not clearly follow your particular assertions as it appears we have two 
issues -- or more -- all rolled up together!

We have to go back to the onset of the colonies and why anybody wanted to 
transfer lock stock and barrel to such distant, hostile, and flatly dangerous 
entirely primative land so inadequately supplied! We have to add to that the 
assurances -- many if not most phony -- offerred to the "settlers" if they 
would chance it. A key word here is "liberal"; followed closely with 
unconstrained added to the obvious ; largely self governed!

Most of course knew the "Crown" COULD not deliver anything like what they 
promised, but it was a lot like the opportunities offerred the settlers here of 
the Northwest territory. One big difference was the kind of rule the British 
Crown was ACCUSTOMED to dishing out added to the nearer and more common 
physical proximity by/of those here. 

ANY atempt to make a show of Imperial might here was just naturally met with 
more than a mere impertenance as those responders might well be in the midst of 
fighting off the indigent locals and at the same time starvation or sickness 
unattended!

It must as well be recalled that it was not in the too distant past that the 
British Empire had undergone a real fighting revolution and the power of 
aristocracy was yet descending before the people! Congruently, the local 
boroughs of the "Isles" were celebrating a new level of what might be 
characterized as "Home Rule" and local issues were often largely handled by 
local politics! 

To then extend rule/control upon the colonists in opposite matter where it was 
physically impossible for the "Big Wigs" half way aroung the world to in any 
manner sense the actual conditions, needs and/or desires of the people, was to 
offer heartless and most often mindless efforts of micro-management unneeded, 
unwanted as well as untenable!

Now about the gold: the colonists were often at terrific disadvantage to 
control pricing and other elements of finance/commerce due to the pecularities 
of the remote needs they sufferred and more often lacked the ability of acting 
from any barganing posture. On the other side of the ocean the politicians -- 
the King and the King's men -- were bent but for one thing; prosperity gained 
from abroad to spread amongst themselves.

 There is no mystery concerning the gold financing the revolution as well as 
the "continental dollars" printed when loans of gold and silver became scarace 
or non-existent! The fact that the king of England managed to finance the 
killing of his on troops does not speak of sportsmanship or some sense of fair 
play! What it sounds loud and clear of is skulduggery heavily involved in the 
concepts of the revolution itself. Here it must be well remembered the age old 
so-called Jew-banker ploy of playing both ends against the middle, the middle 
being any other financial control than the Rothschild's, pending the outcome of 
the really unascertainable motives attending the finanity of the entire 
shebang!  

Enter contrived central banking, its lines of control, and the bankruptcy 
similar to the mortage scams of present.

Now please explain where in all this you see where the Fourth of July and the 
Unanimous Declaration happened in stranger happenstance than I tried to portray!
~Hal~



________________________________
Sent: Tue, January 5, 2010 10:33:18 AM
Subject: Re: [jophome] FW: granted immunity by the democratic Senate leadership 
from Medicaid funding mandates

 
Hal,

Even if this is all true and I am not saying it isn't! OK? And it may well been 
all a legal matter at that time because if they did provide the new nation with 
gold then we should have paid it back in gold. If it was paid off with paper 
printed by them then we should buy the printing press so we can print the same 
and send it to them. 

But all that didn't happen! Did it? Read what more people should know things 
like this:

>>
>>1766 - The Declaratory Act - 
>>Colonies impose duties and taxes upon his majesty's subjects in the said 
>>colonies.
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/A_Time_Line_focusing_on_Taxes,_Money_and_War.html

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, 
must be the truth." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

"The individual is handicapped by living with the monstrous conspiracy all of 
their adult life and they will not realize that it really exists until they 
first listen to President John F. Kennedy's audio posted on his Presidential 
Library website and then read the research about the subject." ~ Steven 
Pattison 

Audio - 
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset+Tree/Asset+Viewers/Audio+Video+Asset+Viewer.htm?guid={51BCDE90-AF4F-4EE9-A68E-ECC4CDE97F76}&type=Audio
 

Research - 
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Pattison_You_Be_The_Judge.html
 
In God we trust with all "Unalienable rights" reserved,

/S/ Steven Pattison, my name in propria persona, a sovereign without subjects 
and one of the People within the boundaries of Kansas, a state of the Union - 
(913) 491-0320 CT 9 to 5 


>
>
>
>Doug ~ 
>When the original united States of America was set up, it was done under the 
>mutual and UNANIMOUS understanding that the “union” formed in compact was 
>merely a “necessary evil” and was as such in no way to be either coveted nor 
>sanctified. The then leaders went on with clear explanation of this notion, 
>that as such the ties therefrom should be adequately characterized through the 
>use of the adjective form of the word “united” which, as such, would forever 
>not be capitalized unless the usage was so called for by the rules of English 
>grammar alone (i.e., for example where it to begin a sentence).
> 
>This pressing and immediate “need” for the compact was and forever shall 
>remain clear. The then following “Articles of Confederation”, the actual only 
>formal and properly established EXTENSION of the Unanimous Declaration of the 
>united States of America was again so drawn under the common mindset of dire 
>need. This need was to satisfy the clamor of European politicians (Largely 
>Bankers led by Rothschilds) for a more firm base of assurance that financial 
>obligations entered into by the fledgling nation would have some sort of 
>restrictive tax base upon the populace to assure the source of treasury for 
>repayment.  History has taught that there were financial interests ON BOTH 
>SIDES of the Atlantic seeking such a ready tiller!
> 
>Now the “Unanimous Declaration” is the one true “constitution” of the American 
>States when they are acting in combination. It is indeed the whole of the 
>“law” under which we are SUPPOSED to have been living from inception, 
>Accordingly, the Articles of Confederation only acted as a tool by which 
>certain actions of the States might be expected to be performed while yet 
>remaining under the strict parameters of its foundation document constituting 
>both its creation form as well as intent of operation. These “Articles” were 
>not gracefully set forth as they tip-toed on the verge of decimation of the 
>fundamental underlying COMMON MINDSET that the States were and were to remain 
>indeed free and independent republics such duration to be as long as the 
>compact withstood whatever test of time! To this point, however, the 
>Continental Congress remained the one law making and enabling body! Without 
>moving through the details, the following so-called
 “Constitution for the “ United States of America ”, as drawn up by the “People 
of the United States of America ” (Apparent separate units/political bodies!) 
was and shall forever remain a rather disparate and almost discordant document 
intended to alter the pilotage of the American Ship of State. Such meandering 
tendencies were enough to tear asunder the yet new “compact” without the added 
constraints of the so-called “Bill of Rights” which of course is none such 
“Bill”! To whatever extent it was assembled to pervert the “original intent”, 
it clearly was the tool by which politics and political intrigue entered the 
scene of American governance! That intrigue grew to monster proportions by 
March 27th, AD 1861 when America was sublimely separated from those original 
clear and clean definitions and intents!
> 
>What political intrigue you bring out here merely represents the extremes 
>reached to which we now must exist in disdain as payment for all those many 
>American generations who sat on their hands as the foul sea monster now at 
>random coursing the seas of state exhibits an appetite grown in proportion to 
>the size those past generations -- as well as our own -- have allowed it to 
>mature into as it bobs in and out with the actual united States of America 
>well stationed in constraint within its bowels!
> 
>The question arises: Have we become a society of irredeemable curs?! How may 
>we – must we – reapportion?
>~Hal~
> 
>P.S.~ Caught your teleconference tonight; thanks for your good works and 
>allowing your light to shine! You have become more valuable than my favorite, 
>Nelson Riddle!
>
>
>
>
________________________________



      

Reply via email to