Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Misrule and Criminal Rule of America
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Judge Bean" data-source="post: 8466" data-attributes="member: 42"><p><strong>Misrule and Criminal Rule of America</strong></p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>A frequent change of men will result from a frequent return of elections, and a frequent change of measures, from a frequent change of men: whilst energy in Government requires not only a certain duration of power, but the execution of it by a single hand.</em></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>James Madison</em></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em></em></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. The late rebellion in Massachusetts has given more alarm than I think it should have done. Calculate that one rebellion in 13 states in the course of 11 years, is but one for each state in a century & a half. No country should be so long without one. Nor will any degree of power in the hands of government prevent insurrections.</em></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><em>Thomas Jefferson</em></span></p><p></p><p>Against the brute exercise of power in the modern age has risen the heroic principle of civil disobedience. But how do you offer nonviolent resistance to a corporation? How do the people revolt against an enormous government institution—the bureaucracy—which itself employs hundreds of thousands of those who should rebel?</p><p></p><p>The problem we now face derives from the original balance struck. The Constitution is a compromise between the volunteered waiver of some rights in exchange for security. The transaction remains incomplete within the exigencies of the pace and heat of history; but the basic arrangement needs no further alteration. Americans will continue to resist the encroachment and the government will continue to test the bounds of its power so long as there are Americans who consent to a rule of law.</p><p></p><p>Yet there is no adequate rule or law under the current bureaucracy and its system of legislation, which is so big that it is easily manipulated in small ways for private advancement. It is a legislative system, a Fourth Branch, set up over time contrary to the representational system mandated by the Constitution. It is an illegal system, and antidemocratic. A system which operates to benefit the elite and wealthy, and supporting corporate interests, may not be as far as any ever devised from the hopes and plans of the Constitutional inventors, but a Fourth Branch of clerks and petty tyrants was not what they foresaw.</p><p></p><p>The onerous bureaucracy and its draconian tedium has given us the bizarre situation of American citizens turning their cash over to foreign nations without representation, and to frivolous artists, elaborate frauds, and fallow farmers. Who knows where the money goes? It cannot be known; the pettifoggers and spendthrifts themselves are in charge of release of the information.</p><p></p><p>The multiplicity of laws under the rubric of regulation destroys democracy. Profusion of rules and regulations is profusion of laws, but laws made without the direct expression of the voters’ will. It is legislation indirect, and delegated, but insufficiently monitored or limited. The constant churning over and amendment of law destroys its power, which depends upon concision and brevity to fly directly to the heart.</p><p></p><p>Law exists in abstract terms of justice, and depends upon conveyed meaning. The majority must be able to comprehend it without explanation of myriad exceptions and conditions. Thousands of detailed regulations operate en masse against communication, such that no person can truly be on notice of violation, or informed of his compliance; ignorance of the law becomes a defense when the judges and attorneys don’t know the exact current form of the law any more than the parties in a case. The simple but pervasive law of <em>notice</em>, an essential concept to our justice system, is rendered toothless by the monstrous bureaus.</p><p></p><p>To succeed in profit, corporations must do business beyond the reach of the legal systems, which are as risky to them in their excess as in their clear statement of corporate obligations, either of which may put a crimp in cashflow. This is because corporations have become criminal enterprises.</p><p></p><p>Of course it is clear that government is not a business any longer conducted for the benefit of the people. It has become a department within every major corporation, run by corporate figures. Corporations are persons, and even have many rights we ordinarily regard as personal and individual. </p><p></p><p>But since corporations are not citizens and cannot vote, they should not be allowed to participate directly in democracy. Corporations are the ones who should be delegated to indirect representation, not the people. If government is not now representative of the democratic will, for whom else does it work but for the fictional persons, the corporations?</p><p></p><p>Cabinet members, heads of government agencies, and the offices of president and vice president swap executive officers and corporate counsel without restraint or shame. One year an important person is said to represent his constituency; the next year when he leaves office he represents a corporate interest, in both instances exercising the same skills and employing the same network of influences. </p><p></p><p>Others are dragged directly from the boardroom to the cabinet, carrying with them the very same agenda and mission, and never losing sight of their masters’ will. The Framers were quite wary of alternate masters imposing their will into the federal government, and separated church from State from the military, and the courts from legislation, and legislation from enforcement of laws, for that very reason.</p><p></p><p>Among the rotating officers of government and private industry there is no sense or invocation of public service, or temporary consignment of personal talent for the good of the democratic community—instead, a Cincinnatus now carries his reins to drive the plow through the halls of Congress and out the back door back into the light, making the government a part of his private crop.</p><p></p><p>The people through their elected officials long ago outlawed overbearing corporations. The antitrust laws are now a well-established system of prosecuting business misconduct, and allow of concurrent civil and criminal cases against monopolists and those engaged in other anticompetitive conduct. </p><p></p><p>Now into its second century, the antitrust movement clearly represents the will of the people to restrict corporations; and it was recognized by Congress that capitalism is not capable of governing itself. The corporations have done nothing lately to redeem themselves from this original judgment, and have always conducted themselves according to the single common rule of profit.</p><p></p><p>The influence of the corporations is illegal and undemocratic, and the people should consider the separation of Business and the State no less important than that of Church and State; but it doesn’t require a Constitutional amendment to make something illegal which is so obviously contrary to the democratic idea. </p><p></p><p>Congress and the States have also passed the RICO statutes, which, like the antitrust laws, have State and federal as well as civil and criminal components—that’s how important these laws are. They were originally targeted to the nexus between business and organized crime, but have been expanded to include a wide range of profiteering.</p><p></p><p>The will of the people has made them important, and they are aimed at organizations which try to avoid law and order to profit by unfair tactics if not outright crime. But how does the government respond to the most grandiose racketeers of all?</p><p></p><p>Not with enforcement of the laws. The will of the people is overridden. Organizations deflect law enforcement by doppelganger, committee, diffusion into the many, who are thought to share guilt the way they do dividends. Corporations extort freedom of taxation, running the common racket of threatening to relocate to more amenable jurisdictions. </p><p></p><p>What is organized crime if not the organized intent to profit from government? They don’t pay taxes; they don’t obey the laws; they all have their hands in the public till up to the elbows. Why do we tolerate this? What will we do when the money runs out? Will we bomb somebody to clear the air then?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Judge Bean, post: 8466, member: 42"] [b]Misrule and Criminal Rule of America[/b] [SIZE=2][i]A frequent change of men will result from a frequent return of elections, and a frequent change of measures, from a frequent change of men: whilst energy in Government requires not only a certain duration of power, but the execution of it by a single hand. James Madison I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. The late rebellion in Massachusetts has given more alarm than I think it should have done. Calculate that one rebellion in 13 states in the course of 11 years, is but one for each state in a century & a half. No country should be so long without one. Nor will any degree of power in the hands of government prevent insurrections. Thomas Jefferson[/i][/SIZE] Against the brute exercise of power in the modern age has risen the heroic principle of civil disobedience. But how do you offer nonviolent resistance to a corporation? How do the people revolt against an enormous government institution—the bureaucracy—which itself employs hundreds of thousands of those who should rebel? The problem we now face derives from the original balance struck. The Constitution is a compromise between the volunteered waiver of some rights in exchange for security. The transaction remains incomplete within the exigencies of the pace and heat of history; but the basic arrangement needs no further alteration. Americans will continue to resist the encroachment and the government will continue to test the bounds of its power so long as there are Americans who consent to a rule of law. Yet there is no adequate rule or law under the current bureaucracy and its system of legislation, which is so big that it is easily manipulated in small ways for private advancement. It is a legislative system, a Fourth Branch, set up over time contrary to the representational system mandated by the Constitution. It is an illegal system, and antidemocratic. A system which operates to benefit the elite and wealthy, and supporting corporate interests, may not be as far as any ever devised from the hopes and plans of the Constitutional inventors, but a Fourth Branch of clerks and petty tyrants was not what they foresaw. The onerous bureaucracy and its draconian tedium has given us the bizarre situation of American citizens turning their cash over to foreign nations without representation, and to frivolous artists, elaborate frauds, and fallow farmers. Who knows where the money goes? It cannot be known; the pettifoggers and spendthrifts themselves are in charge of release of the information. The multiplicity of laws under the rubric of regulation destroys democracy. Profusion of rules and regulations is profusion of laws, but laws made without the direct expression of the voters’ will. It is legislation indirect, and delegated, but insufficiently monitored or limited. The constant churning over and amendment of law destroys its power, which depends upon concision and brevity to fly directly to the heart. Law exists in abstract terms of justice, and depends upon conveyed meaning. The majority must be able to comprehend it without explanation of myriad exceptions and conditions. Thousands of detailed regulations operate en masse against communication, such that no person can truly be on notice of violation, or informed of his compliance; ignorance of the law becomes a defense when the judges and attorneys don’t know the exact current form of the law any more than the parties in a case. The simple but pervasive law of [i]notice[/i], an essential concept to our justice system, is rendered toothless by the monstrous bureaus. To succeed in profit, corporations must do business beyond the reach of the legal systems, which are as risky to them in their excess as in their clear statement of corporate obligations, either of which may put a crimp in cashflow. This is because corporations have become criminal enterprises. Of course it is clear that government is not a business any longer conducted for the benefit of the people. It has become a department within every major corporation, run by corporate figures. Corporations are persons, and even have many rights we ordinarily regard as personal and individual. But since corporations are not citizens and cannot vote, they should not be allowed to participate directly in democracy. Corporations are the ones who should be delegated to indirect representation, not the people. If government is not now representative of the democratic will, for whom else does it work but for the fictional persons, the corporations? Cabinet members, heads of government agencies, and the offices of president and vice president swap executive officers and corporate counsel without restraint or shame. One year an important person is said to represent his constituency; the next year when he leaves office he represents a corporate interest, in both instances exercising the same skills and employing the same network of influences. Others are dragged directly from the boardroom to the cabinet, carrying with them the very same agenda and mission, and never losing sight of their masters’ will. The Framers were quite wary of alternate masters imposing their will into the federal government, and separated church from State from the military, and the courts from legislation, and legislation from enforcement of laws, for that very reason. Among the rotating officers of government and private industry there is no sense or invocation of public service, or temporary consignment of personal talent for the good of the democratic community—instead, a Cincinnatus now carries his reins to drive the plow through the halls of Congress and out the back door back into the light, making the government a part of his private crop. The people through their elected officials long ago outlawed overbearing corporations. The antitrust laws are now a well-established system of prosecuting business misconduct, and allow of concurrent civil and criminal cases against monopolists and those engaged in other anticompetitive conduct. Now into its second century, the antitrust movement clearly represents the will of the people to restrict corporations; and it was recognized by Congress that capitalism is not capable of governing itself. The corporations have done nothing lately to redeem themselves from this original judgment, and have always conducted themselves according to the single common rule of profit. The influence of the corporations is illegal and undemocratic, and the people should consider the separation of Business and the State no less important than that of Church and State; but it doesn’t require a Constitutional amendment to make something illegal which is so obviously contrary to the democratic idea. Congress and the States have also passed the RICO statutes, which, like the antitrust laws, have State and federal as well as civil and criminal components—that’s how important these laws are. They were originally targeted to the nexus between business and organized crime, but have been expanded to include a wide range of profiteering. The will of the people has made them important, and they are aimed at organizations which try to avoid law and order to profit by unfair tactics if not outright crime. But how does the government respond to the most grandiose racketeers of all? Not with enforcement of the laws. The will of the people is overridden. Organizations deflect law enforcement by doppelganger, committee, diffusion into the many, who are thought to share guilt the way they do dividends. Corporations extort freedom of taxation, running the common racket of threatening to relocate to more amenable jurisdictions. What is organized crime if not the organized intent to profit from government? They don’t pay taxes; they don’t obey the laws; they all have their hands in the public till up to the elbows. Why do we tolerate this? What will we do when the money runs out? Will we bomb somebody to clear the air then? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Misrule and Criminal Rule of America
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top