The assault on the First Amendment doctrine continues

October 28, 2013 § Leave a comment

28 October A.D. 2013

The assault on the First Amendment doctrine continues, but, at the end of the day, that won’t prevent this “Beast’s” date with Judgment.

The cover story for the warrant, Aug. 2013, was enforcement of the no-fire-arms policy regarding the journalist’s husband’s disarmament status stemming from a 1986 “resisting arrest” conviction.  If that seems “thin” on first pass, it doesn’t get any thicker on any subsequent reflection of the matter, either.

What the popular mindset continues to think is that there’s something valuable about “getting the word out” regarding corruption within “government.”  And, while there’ll be some value in that continuing line of activity, where we’re staring in the face of a third-world type dictatorship in the making, getting the word out is in the very same category as political solutions, generally.  What does getting the word out intend to promote?  Political response.  Where the political response mechanism is “controlled” at the source, i.e., keeping the journalists from investigating so as to prevent reporting so as to prevent political response by those in a position to act politically, the concept of political response is all the more neutralized.

As less and less about inside-job corruption is said, the more of that corruption can be expected to be going on.  “Government” isn’t “cleaned up” by attacking investigative journalists and their sources.  That’s like saying that the rodent population will go down by putting the cats somewhere else.

The preventative remedy for the Banana-Republic-style dictatorship is in the marketplace.  Coming to terms with the concept that “federal” means “federal” is the threshold step in that paradigm shift.  For so long as we’re thinking “law” and “politics” instead of “gotcha agreements,” this wanna-be dictatorship is going to continue to make progress down its preferred path.

As we get to the point of adjusting to the reality of the “gotcha-agreement” mechanism, part of that is implemented in the medium of exchange.  The use of the “funny money” tends to confirm the “choice of law” for that transaction.

That investigative journalist and her sources were continuing down the “full-back up the middle” approach to dealing with this “Beast” system.  They’ve been stopped in the backfield for a loss.  What is said in this day and age is less and less relevant.  It’s what we do that’s going to matter, and part of what we’ve got to do, in full support of what this investigative journalist and her sources were trying to do, is come to terms with the mechanism by which this present system functions.  To apply the concepts, it helps first to have them in mind.  Thus, the early part of what we do is educational in nature.  Those good people are still lost in the myths and lies on which we’re all raised of “law” and “politics.”  That’s just not our present legal reality.  It’s fair to say that even up to 1964, there was some measure of “control” via “law” and “politics,” but, when the “Beast” system went commercial circa 1965, which is when the last vestiges of honest weights and measures in general circulation no longer in general circulation, it’s been anything but “law” and “politics.”  The whole of the commercial mechanism was in place by that time, so that the transition would appear seamless.

Exposing this or that scam or corruption within “government” isn’t going to do anything more than cause a bit of very temporary embarrassment within this dictatorship-in-the-making.  To bring that line of insanity to a halt requires dealing with it for what it is rather than for what we wished it were.  To deal with it for what it is, we have to stop using its “funny money,” and, for that few who have a few fights in them, it’ll be very important to come to terms with the reality of the commercial mechanism on which this system depends.  For example, where there’s an issue within the Dept. of Transportation, while there may not be any way to curb the abuses from within that agency, we can do commercial curbing of the scope of their “outreach ministry” by realizing that “transportation” is “commercial” activity.  The feds don’t get much into the non-commercial activity, i.e., into the “traveler” arena, so the direct impact at the national level on that agency isn’t expected to be all that direct.  But, indirectly, since that national system is 100% addicted to the “funny money,” as we learn and apply the differences between “travel” and “transportation” at the STATE level, that will have a commercial impact on the national system, because it’ll start to be a ripple in the “money supply management” system (the “tickets,” when paid, operate to take that many “federal reserve note” “dollars” back out of circulation, which is “the” purpose for the “transportation” enforcement mechanism at the STATE level).

We think “law” and “politics” because we’ve been raised on “law” and “politics” because that’s where this present system has its “controls” in place.  “Law” and “politics” are the magician’s distraction to the reality of the commercial mechanism.  Our gazillion “dollar” “investment” in “law” and “politics” is music to the “Beast’s” ears.  Our focus on “law” and “politics” is what keeps us in the task of digger our hole that much wider and that much deeper.  “Law” and “politics” doesn’t even put the slightest ding in the “Beast’s” armor.  The long and the short on this assault on the First Amendment doctrine is that the First Amendment isn’t a source or mechanism of (effective) control over this “Beast.”  It used to be, but the “Beast” has, in the commercial analogy, bought out all the competition.  It’s not what is said that matters.  It’s what’s done that matters, and what’s done is either to enter a “gotcha agreement” or to avoid it.  What’s done is either to use “funny money” or something else.  We’re not “choosing ye this day” with our words.  We’re “choosing ye this day” with our commercial practices.  Thus, the investigative journalist getting “dirt” on this person or that process is doing a fine work, but an increasingly irrelevant work.  The investigative journalist who first gets his/her mind around our present legal reality will start teaching law and find a thousand-fold increase in the effectiveness of the effort to curb the abuses committed in the name of “government.”

If we’d “take” the push and the shove from this “Beast” and realize where all that “motive force” puts us, we’ll realize that “all” of the remaining options take us to the reality.  The more assaults we find on what vexes us, the more we’re going to have to realize that the “old ways” “don’t work.”  The sooner we realize that it’s not about “law” and “politics” but rather Monte Hall’s, “Let’s Make A Deal!”, the sooner we’re intellectually in a position to comprehend the mechanism of the problem.  To see the problem for what it is, is to see the solution.

In addition to the fact that our “law of man” problems are solved by applying fundamental Law of God solutions, the “law of man” we’ve been taught has been fully intentionally “fed” to us.  There’ll come a day where it’ll make good and perfect sense that we “know” what we “know” because that’s what “the bank” (masquerading as a “government”) taught us.  We’ve been taught what we’ve been taught for the benefit of the bank.  The path of tyranny and dictatorship is what is “good for the bank.”  Where that’s not good for the individual, we simply have a lot of unlearning to do so as then to learn the foundation of the Rock and to start building our foundation on the Rock instead of on the sand.

The Source we need for the investigative stories and exposes isn’t found working in or for this “Beast” system.  In other words, this journalist has been benefited, and while it doesn’t feel that way at the moment, there’ll come a day when it’ll be bright as day that the Source of the information that’s going to provide the solution toward which she’s intending to contribute is fully available in the libraries and on line.  In these life-changing moments, we’ll find the benefit, if we’ll just wear the right set of glasses.

Harmon L. Taylor
Legal Reality
Dallas, Texas

Advertisements

Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading The assault on the First Amendment doctrine continues at Will County Pro-se.

meta

%d bloggers like this: