J.A.I.L. News Journal
We Can't Allow The "Clueless"
To Stop The Rest of Us From Getting J.A.I.L. Passed
----- Original Message
April 14, 2005 11:32 AM
Subject: ?Re: The
"Legal Reality" Must Be Brought In Line With the Declaration
***The organic Constitution was written on behalf of the People
(i.e., the governed) for the purpose of creating a government
designed to protect the interests of the
Then what is the excuse for the "governed"
woman on the steps asking old BJ Franklin what type government she
I don't know of any legitimate agency which
can operate outside the knowledge and intention of the
Principle. If the CONstitution issued out of the
Principle that ought to be the GOVERNING woman, wouldn't you
And she wouldn't have had that question,
So the question proves she was
clueless....as every other "We the people" in the
And the Clueless and aimless can not be
Principle or governing.
So the term "consent of the governed" is
admission of an inferior status....akin to servants; The "consent" a
slave gives his master.
No, I think it can be shown Harmon is
sufficiently right-on in his observation that it should cause
thinking people to at least reinvestigate the
But I wouldn't expect anything out of the
Clueless for they do not know that they do not know and they do not
have sufficient awareness even to question that they do not
BTW, the Declaration of Independence is not
mentioned in the CONstitution and is of no force and effect, if it
could have been, because of the abandonment created in that
international COMPACT called the U.S. CONstitution and at the very
least proven by the expressed international servitudes in Article VI.
The Judges would be bound by those international servitudes as
so-called "law of the land", those prior Engagements and
Debt, and where it does this would trump anything else the
CONstitution purports to create. So the Judges could be following the
CONStitution and be bound thereby but it wouldn't
necessarily mean anything to "we the
And because of the expressed
servitudes in Article VI, the people are powerless to argue,
because if they believe the CONstitution has force and
effect they also must accept the controlling Principle. That
Principle is implied by the express servitudes and it isn't we the
people or any who might think they are. And it's the reason why
any CONstiutional reliance for "rights" could be found to be
"(1) frivolous, (2) without
merit, (3) of no authority, and (4) ludicrous." Because where those
rights tend to abrogate the international obligations
or trespass Title those "rights" must
They really did it to us
Hook, line and sinker.
OH, but did you get your license to do
Because it's illegal to claim the King's
Fish as your own.
Oh Wait! It's WE that are the Groupers who
First, I appreciate all the interesting discussion
that my correspondence with Harmon Taylor has brought to our screen. I'm
sure we can all learn from it-- maybe even eventually become "clued in"
or "informed." But we can't allow the "clueless" to stop our efforts in
getting J.A.I.L. passed and implemented as soon as possible!
Earlier today I put out a JNJ titled "WHAT?
The Constitution Is An Ex Parte Restraining Order??"
Therein I stated that the People must take matters about government and
its relationship to the People back to the Declaration of Independence
which sets forth, according to the Laws of Nature (which is universal and
undeniable), that relationship. According to nature, mankind (the People)
is created by the Creator and endowed with natural rights-- not asked
for, but existing as being part of the human species. Again, this is
according to nature-- regardless of religious
belief, or any government-- domestic, foreign, or international.
The Declaration describes the natural relationship
between "man" (I'll use the term "People") and government thusly: "That
to secure these [natural] rights, governments are instituted among men
[among the People], deriving their [government's] just powers from the
consent of the governed [the People]." AGAIN I say, this is according to
the Laws of Nature. Now comes the question, "HOW do the People institute
government?" The DOI doesn't direct the specifics on "how" but it does
set forth that it's the People that are to institute (create) government
FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of securing their natural rights. That much is
established by the DOI.
True-- the Constitution doesn't mention the DOI.
Perhaps it should have. However, that doesn't take away from the fact
that the DOI is the authority FOR a Constitution
by the People, since that is the manner by which the People (actually the
states on behalf of the People-- and it has to be "on behalf of the
People" since the People is/are the origin of authority for the
Constitution) chose to institute its government. The Constitution is the
"How" which the People have chosen to institute government in this
country. It would have been nice if the Constitution mentioned the DOI as
being the authority by which the People created it, but that isn't the
only defect it has. Be that as it may, the facts are still there--
whether mentioned or not-- and we must deal with the Constitution as
written and theoretically "ratified."
The People can't really go beyond "ratification"
because that's when the door opened up for the fraud to pour in, since
there was no enforcement provision written into the Constitution as a
specific spelled-out process by which the People could have independently
prevented the government fraud from happening. "Bind them down with the
chains of the Constitution"? Government wasn't "bound" at all, as it
should have been.
You get into "Principal/Agent" discussion. There
can be no denying that by nature, the People
would be likened as the "Principal" (the authority for government) and
government the "Agent" (the protector, the guardian) of the People. While
it is also the nature of people to be ignorant and lazy regarding
legalities, even of their own natural status as being the true sovereigns
over government, that does not take away from the fact that THAT IS THE
PEOPLE'S NATURAL STATUS whether they exercise it or not-- that status is
You say I don't know
of any legitimate agency which can operate outside the knowledge and
intention of the Principal. That would
be true in normal business. However, with reference to the People, we're
dealing with the status of a naturally-created being in relation to the
People-created government. Only human beings created by a Creator can
take on that natural status, and only in relation to their People-created
government. Relationships between Human A and Human B do not
consist of that natural status-- a status that exists despite People's
knowledge, acceptance, and exercise of it.
That's why we need men (and women), among the
People, to represent them and their interests. That's supposed to be the
role of government, --and the ONLY role-- to protect the People's rights
because they don't have the knowledge, awareness, or skills to protect
themselves in society, whether because they are lazy or otherwise. There
IS a proper place for government, but it's imperative that it be
People-centered, not self-centered. The
Framers knew that government would be prone to become self-centered, but
they did not provide a means for the People-- not
a government function-- to keep that from happening.
Clueless and aimless can not be Principal or
term "consent of the governed" is admission of an inferior status....akin
to servants; The "consent" a slave gives his master. No, that can't be, as a matter
of nature. There has to be a minority of the
People, operating independently as the People, knowledgeable and
cognizant enough to be able to monitor the actions of government, to keep
it in line with its fiducial functions for the People. It obviously can't
be ALL of the People, because most of them ARE ignorant, lazy,
"clueless," and "aimless." But that doesn't negate the fact that they
are the governed, spoken of in the DOI, and
their interests must be protected by the government, and that "government
protection" must be monitored by a segment of the People who ARE
informed, "clued in," astute, alert, aware, of what was intended for this
country as established by the DOI. That segment cannot be brainwashed,
intimidated, deceived, or fooled into thinking that "government is the
friend of the People." (You know-- "We're the government, and we're
here to help you!")
Anything dealing with "international" this or that
in the Constitution must be examined by the People. Is it in compliance
with the principles set forth in the DOI? The People can't get wound up
in the "Corporate U.S." trap. As I said, there's a ton of fraud that has
taken over this country, and 200+ years of it is enough! We have to clean
up the cobwebs of fraud and deception that has clogged our minds. For the
sake of freedom in this country, get out of that deceptive
THE EVILS ARE NO LONGER SUFFERABLE!
ACIC, National J.A.I.L.