… Ralph Boryszewski wrote “The CONstitution That Never Was: How the American People have been CONNED by Lawyers”
I met Ralph in Rochester when he was in his mid 80s and his whole apartment was filled with books floor to ceiling. I can only imagine what a wealth of knowledge was stored in that little apartment.
"Since I promise my paid subs two of my absolute best articles per month; the ending of this one is so mind-blowing that most people will be absolutely floored, so this is just for them. If you love learning stuff you never knew that will forever change the way you look at something, I set my account to the lowest amount Substack will allow me to accept, which is only $5 per month or $50 per year. Trust me when I say, this one is worth it, so meet me on the other side of this paywall and get dopamine rush of Truth…"
…not even close. I met Clint in person in Philadelphia at the conference in 2012 I think. He has no agenda other than expose the STRAMAN as he was a social security theft victim, following the rabbit hole and finding all he writes. He also made a documentary “Lethal Injection: the story of vaccination” that was on YouTube for 10 years and then during convid yt took it down. It maybe under the same title on rumble or odysee
Most of my readers cannot afford to pay for a book. Out of nearly 4,800 readers, only 39 are able to support me, and most of them are elderly people...
The Constitution was written to make it impossible for Jesuits and Jews (bad kind) from invading the USA, itself a creation of the Jesuits - proven to my mind by the book "Rulers of Evil". The founding fathers were concerned allowing Jesuits and Jews into the USA would ruin the country from within, which they have been doing ever since.
While the Constitution sounds grandiose and eloquent, that's for deception, which worked like an evil spell - no? The Constitutional republic long since dissolved, either before the Civil War when the southern congressmen walked out and Lincoln declared an emergency, or in 1913 when the Federal Reserve and IRS were created. Speaking of which, I recently learned the "W2" form for tax returns is called "W" for "war". It was supposedly a voluntary war tax, which would end after the world war did, but citizens of the USA have been paying that "voluntary" war tax ever since.
The House of Rothschild is a Jesuit creation, as is Zionism and Zionist state, the purpose being to use Jewish people as scapegoats. If you haven't researched the Jesuits yet, "Rulers of Evil" is a good place to begin, along with "Secret History of the Jesuits". The "Superior General" of the Jesuits controls the military forces of the world, and conducts the symphony of evil we are living in, which is orchestrated by satan/lucifer. Jesuits are the "army of satan", the umbrella organization over all the Babylonian mystery religion offshoots: Freemasons, Talmudic Jews, and satanic secret societies of all kinds.
EDIT: I did it again (!) now seeing my comment below, which I missed when looking to see if I'd commented yet. I suffer from some dementia for a variety of reasons, sorry about my mistake! That said, I highly recommend everybody read "Rulers of Evil" by Tupper Saussy, one of the most amazing books I've ever read...!
Still, it's not the Freemasons only; most of them are only useful morons, but the ones on the top seem to be allies of the self-proclaimed "elite"; when I finalize the Cabal, it's a lot more clear:
The Articles of Confederation suit the liberty minded but the U.S. Constitution suit those GLOBALISTS who have usurped the very meaning of our REPUBLIC !
The biggest problem with the Constitution is not with the contents and intent. The biggest problem is people. The people have consistently elected people who are self-serving and that do not abide by the Constitution. The most damaging element is the Congress. It was the Congress that voted to give away the country's fiscal control to a private corporation of bankers (The Federal Reserve). Now the money is controlled (and printed by) by the Fed. Congress also gave the government the right to collect income taxes. Congress has created various federal agencies (administrative Deep State) which were given the power the write law (rules and regulations). At best, Congress is lazy; at worse, Congress is corrupt. Most of the country's problems have been created by Congress. So, the weakness of the Constitution is that it depended on the people doing due diligence and voting responsibly. The people tend to be ignorant and uninvolved, allowing others to tend to their affairs, property and rights.
You and I agree that the problem is human nature. However, voting itself is a psyop that accomplishes two things:
1. Voters acknowledge the legitimacy of a foreign occupying power;
2. The voter can be blamed for voting for "the wrong side," while all viable candidates serve the foreign power.
No honest candidate has a chance to be elected (even Ross Perot was threatened enough to bail out at the time, not that I was an avid supporter, but he looked misguided by thinking he could act on his own).
The Fed doesn't print; the Treasury does, and it transfers the bills by weight to the Fed. On the other hand, about 98% of the "money" in circulation are loans and their interests (the latter causing inflation).
The IRS is a private company, serving the Fed.
Everything in the grabberment is serving the foreign occupying power (which is "the deep state"). The grabberment officials are "only following orders."
Aren't these questions moot? Does anyone really suppose that we wouldn't end up with exactly the same or nearly the same form of central control with or without Articles of Confederation or a Constitution?
The problem resides in the human condition. We have always had humans who desire power and control over others and those who do not. I suppose what we really need are those humans who lack a desire for power and control to exert such capacities despite their dislike for such endeavors. I think back to the "Oera Linda."
Young women with intuitive abilities were trained and led the settlements. It was their calling or duty to do so. They did the negotiating. They made the decisions. They settled disputes. I remember reading where they refused agreements with those outsiders who wanted access (control) to their water supply knowing they could poison or restrict their water.
Their men were not neutered. They hunted, sailed, and conducted war if necessary. The young women eventually grew older, married, and had children retiring from their earlier role, but the protectors of their freedom arose from these trained young women who could intuit people's motives and who had been trained in the Oero Lindan strong tradition of freedom.
Considering how far constitutional rights have been ignored and forgotten, yes, the question is moot. Still, there are plenty of people supporting voting, expect a political savior, and believe that the Constitution has any relevance today...
Besides avarice, the drive for control (which is supposed to provide security for themselves) certainly motivate most people to acquire power. However, most people don't want to and even are unable to take responsibility for their power, which is a deadly mix...
Theoretically, men compete and women cooperate, but men are capable of compromise, and women tend to desire security more than men...
Oera Linda promoted esotericism, and I don't believe in self-empowerment (Masons, witches, and the like), because I think, it's a Satanist trait...
It's easy to imagine the "ideal society," but in reality, human nature always wins.
The book "Rulers of Evil" explains how Jesuits created the United States, assuming it's true? The author was a Christian and spent over a decade writing it, so I assume it's likely true. The book theorizes that Superior General Ricci never died, rather he sailed to America, and was the catalyst for creation of this country.
The Constitution was written so it allowed both Jesuits and Jews to immigrate here, after they both had been banned from many countries in Europe - a few countries banned the Jesuits and Jews repeatedly. Some of the founding fathers were concerned about allowing those two groups into the country, because it would likely lead to serious problems in the future, as it obviously did and does.
I paid over $100 for an original copy of this amazing book a few years ago (it has gone up since), like dozens (hundreds?) of books about Jesuits, the SOS decided to end it being printed. Fortunately "Rulers of Evil" is available to read online for free. I can't be certain it's all valid, but it sure rings my bell. What do ya'll think about this book?
The Jesuits were banned in many places, because they were directly under the Pope's jurisdiction; just what happened to the Templars. However, they were infiltrated by Masons in the 19th century, and the Roman Catholic Church has indeed been captured by globalist interests by now.
I am finding the blaming of a single party simplistic, and here is why:
As I posted underneath "finalizing who is responsible", the "synagogue of satan" (SOS) is who I consider the enemy, which means "assembly of the adversary", as you likely know.
Jesus Christ named the SOS as the adversary when He accused the Pharisee of being part of it. It makes sense to me that a single organization controls the world for lucifer, who I believe the "statue of liberty" represents (the light bearer).
Freemasons, 'Jews', and secret societies in general are part of the mystery religion of Babylon, that's my understanding anyways. They use the Babylonian Talmud and Kabbalah. Jesuits, however, are the "army of god" - really meaning the "army of satan" satanically inverted. It makes sense to me that the SOS would have an "army" to control the world, and a "Superior General" to control the army.
I also believe there may be a "grey council" of the elite satanic bloodlines, a "grey pope" elected by the council used to control the black and white popes. Although there is no hard proof, supposedly an Orsini is now the grey pope. Soon a new white pope will be selected to replace the far-left liberal pope Francis, probably a far-right conservative who will show claws and fangs?
… Clint Richardson (strawmanstory.info free book) met a gov building security guard in Philadelphia when they struck a conversation. The guard asked him “What do you think U.S.A. stand for?”
After a pause and waiting for the guard to answer his own question, with a serious face said:
If you really want to see what one man has gone thru to try and protect his son from being forced to become a "girl", you need to watch this interview with Jeff Younger. Yes, its lengthy, but he will tell you exactly how corrupt the court system is, how the judges don't give a damn about our Constitution, and what a true Devil his ex-wife is. Its horribly sad and shows how unjust our "justice" system is. He goes into such detail; I feel so sorry for fathers who have no say once they get divorced and how beat up they become. Its one hell of a wake-up call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNbhyJYt4SI
A constitution implies that there is still a master overriding the slaves. The constitution was supposed to protect the people from government tyranny. The government is the constitution and is never to be questioned in its outrageous authority.
No, I don't think the constitution is impenetrable. The government has poked so many holes in it the Swiss cheese makers are complaining. As long as there is government, there will be no piece of paper that will keep it from destroying the citizen.
The trouble was that the Founding Fathers replaced one set of tyrannical thugs with another. We have a behemoth of a shark trying to swallow us whole. And it can't read.
Re your statement re the Founders and their replacement of one group of thugs with another, does that hold for you given the Articles of Confederation? Or are you suggesting that the Constitution gave us a new group of thugs?
The Articles gave much less chance for thuggery, IMO -- at least centralized thuggery. Some of my favorites like Patrick Henry expressed great concern of the potential thuggery of the new "constitution." Labeled an "anti-federalist," Henry was very much a true federalist.
Thuggery has always been around, including at all (s)elections. It's easier to impose it, when it's centralized, but it works locally, too...
Switching from British rule to federal power provided independent control over the country, which has been used for consolidating global power through the "indispensable nation" which, not by any means, is indispensable now...
In case anyone's interested, here're a couple of good books on the subject on how the constitution perverted and undermined the claimed "principles" of government.
“The Constitution looked fairly good on paper, but it was not a popular document; people were suspicious of it, and suspicious of the enabling legislation that was being erected upon it. There was some ground for this. The Constitution had been laid down under unacceptable auspices; its history had been that of a coup d'état.
“It had been drafted, in the first place, by men representing special economic interests. Four-fifths of them were public creditors, one-third were land speculators, and one-fifth represented interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising. Most of them were lawyers. Not one of them represented the interest of production — Vilescit origine tali. (the dice were loaded from the start)
-Albert Jay Nock, Liberty vs. the Constitution: The Early Struggle
As a matter of fact, it was never a "people's Constitution", as has been so frequently claimed at Presidential elections, and on other similar occasions. They, the people, were never very much interested, either in the project itself or in the ratification of a form of national government. They did not particularly want anything of the sort and they did not like what came out of Philadelphia, but this distaste was not strong enough to overcome their natural lethargy, so only about five percent of the white male population voted as to whether the Constitution should be accepted or rejected. As it was, it only got by by the skin of its teeth and by some very clever management on the part of its proponents. The whole thing, in conception, formulation, and realization, was
the work of a small group of enthusiastic young men of property and position...."
-Ralph Adams Cram, Nemesis of Democracy - PDF - , The American Review, December 1936, pp. 129-141
Funny that the supporters of the con job were called "federalists" since they created a de facto monolith, not a federation. They destroyed the con-federation by illegally subverting the original con - federation.
Excellent tp bring this up, Ray! How many are willing to "defend the constitution " without having looked into its origin, etc.?!
In this audio I also discovered additional historical information I previously was unaware of, such as who the authors of the constitution were (the majority freemasons) and that Patrick Henry immediately recognized the badly written document and fought (unsuccessfully) against its inception as such. Worth a listen for sure, even if you aren't Christian:
" The Federal Government, after being centralized by the “Constitution,” was hijacked with The Federal Reserve Act of 1913"
True.
In fact, the constitution "hijacked" the advertised principles of the "American" "Revolution" and several banks put teeth into the hijacking even before 1913. There're reasons why Hamilton's national Bank of the US was closed by Andrew Jackson.
I really dislike vids, but I viewed yours and pronounce it not only accurate but worthwhile to the point where I'll view it again and tell others about it.
… Ralph Boryszewski wrote “The CONstitution That Never Was: How the American People have been CONNED by Lawyers”
I met Ralph in Rochester when he was in his mid 80s and his whole apartment was filled with books floor to ceiling. I can only imagine what a wealth of knowledge was stored in that little apartment.
…highly recommend!!!!
Reach out to Clint for an interview
https://www.youtube.com/live/gvggPkeJv4E?si=xrqt8QvK0000-KLp
Not familiar with Ralph, but Agent has some useful info on that, too. Here is but one:
https://chemtrails.substack.com/p/lies-the-1776-psyop-and-independence
At 19, I threw out all my books, which amounted to a small library. At 38, I did the same. Somehow, my mind can retain details for decades back...
Still, a link to Ralph's publication would be most welcome!
I got to this...
"Since I promise my paid subs two of my absolute best articles per month; the ending of this one is so mind-blowing that most people will be absolutely floored, so this is just for them. If you love learning stuff you never knew that will forever change the way you look at something, I set my account to the lowest amount Substack will allow me to accept, which is only $5 per month or $50 per year. Trust me when I say, this one is worth it, so meet me on the other side of this paywall and get dopamine rush of Truth…"
Blah blah blah. Screw that.
I agree. Screw that. A few friends have been giving me lifetime free access. You have that to my site, too.
Believe me, it's worth it! :)
…another book that’s FREE is “Strawman: The real story of your artificial person”, by Clint Richardson.
When I accessed his website strawmanstory.info it says that it was suspended, but, it’s available on archives website:
https://archive.org/stream/strawmanstoryv1finalfreedownload080617/Strawman_Story_V1_Final_Free_Download_080617_djvu.txt
This one looks like marketing...
…not even close. I met Clint in person in Philadelphia at the conference in 2012 I think. He has no agenda other than expose the STRAMAN as he was a social security theft victim, following the rabbit hole and finding all he writes. He also made a documentary “Lethal Injection: the story of vaccination” that was on YouTube for 10 years and then during convid yt took it down. It maybe under the same title on rumble or odysee
You see, the problem is that, while I am not accusing you, most trolls use the "I have seen it" and "I knew him" narrative.
However, you could possibly find a way to summarize Clint's accomplishments and provide the links after introducing them in a sentence or two.
The fact that his documentary was taken down still doesn't make him a hero. Most heroes never get a chance to get out with anything:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/whistleblowers
…https://starrynightpublishing.com/products/the-constitution-that-never-was-how-the-american-people-have-been-conned-by-lawyers
Most of my readers cannot afford to pay for a book. Out of nearly 4,800 readers, only 39 are able to support me, and most of them are elderly people...
The Constitution was written to make it impossible for Jesuits and Jews (bad kind) from invading the USA, itself a creation of the Jesuits - proven to my mind by the book "Rulers of Evil". The founding fathers were concerned allowing Jesuits and Jews into the USA would ruin the country from within, which they have been doing ever since.
While the Constitution sounds grandiose and eloquent, that's for deception, which worked like an evil spell - no? The Constitutional republic long since dissolved, either before the Civil War when the southern congressmen walked out and Lincoln declared an emergency, or in 1913 when the Federal Reserve and IRS were created. Speaking of which, I recently learned the "W2" form for tax returns is called "W" for "war". It was supposedly a voluntary war tax, which would end after the world war did, but citizens of the USA have been paying that "voluntary" war tax ever since.
The House of Rothschild is a Jesuit creation, as is Zionism and Zionist state, the purpose being to use Jewish people as scapegoats. If you haven't researched the Jesuits yet, "Rulers of Evil" is a good place to begin, along with "Secret History of the Jesuits". The "Superior General" of the Jesuits controls the military forces of the world, and conducts the symphony of evil we are living in, which is orchestrated by satan/lucifer. Jesuits are the "army of satan", the umbrella organization over all the Babylonian mystery religion offshoots: Freemasons, Talmudic Jews, and satanic secret societies of all kinds.
EDIT: I did it again (!) now seeing my comment below, which I missed when looking to see if I'd commented yet. I suffer from some dementia for a variety of reasons, sorry about my mistake! That said, I highly recommend everybody read "Rulers of Evil" by Tupper Saussy, one of the most amazing books I've ever read...!
The Jesuits were infiltrated only in the second half of the 19th century. Please, reconsider their part in the whole:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/on-ring-to-rule-them-all
The Constitution was already a Freemasonic takeover:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/do-you-believe-in-the-constitution
Still, it's not the Freemasons only; most of them are only useful morons, but the ones on the top seem to be allies of the self-proclaimed "elite"; when I finalize the Cabal, it's a lot more clear:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/finalizing-who-is-responsible
The Constitution has no enforcement system. It's is Masonic document for public consumption.
The Articles of Confederation suit the liberty minded but the U.S. Constitution suit those GLOBALISTS who have usurped the very meaning of our REPUBLIC !
The biggest problem with the Constitution is not with the contents and intent. The biggest problem is people. The people have consistently elected people who are self-serving and that do not abide by the Constitution. The most damaging element is the Congress. It was the Congress that voted to give away the country's fiscal control to a private corporation of bankers (The Federal Reserve). Now the money is controlled (and printed by) by the Fed. Congress also gave the government the right to collect income taxes. Congress has created various federal agencies (administrative Deep State) which were given the power the write law (rules and regulations). At best, Congress is lazy; at worse, Congress is corrupt. Most of the country's problems have been created by Congress. So, the weakness of the Constitution is that it depended on the people doing due diligence and voting responsibly. The people tend to be ignorant and uninvolved, allowing others to tend to their affairs, property and rights.
You and I agree that the problem is human nature. However, voting itself is a psyop that accomplishes two things:
1. Voters acknowledge the legitimacy of a foreign occupying power;
2. The voter can be blamed for voting for "the wrong side," while all viable candidates serve the foreign power.
No honest candidate has a chance to be elected (even Ross Perot was threatened enough to bail out at the time, not that I was an avid supporter, but he looked misguided by thinking he could act on his own).
The Fed doesn't print; the Treasury does, and it transfers the bills by weight to the Fed. On the other hand, about 98% of the "money" in circulation are loans and their interests (the latter causing inflation).
The IRS is a private company, serving the Fed.
Everything in the grabberment is serving the foreign occupying power (which is "the deep state"). The grabberment officials are "only following orders."
Aren't these questions moot? Does anyone really suppose that we wouldn't end up with exactly the same or nearly the same form of central control with or without Articles of Confederation or a Constitution?
The problem resides in the human condition. We have always had humans who desire power and control over others and those who do not. I suppose what we really need are those humans who lack a desire for power and control to exert such capacities despite their dislike for such endeavors. I think back to the "Oera Linda."
Young women with intuitive abilities were trained and led the settlements. It was their calling or duty to do so. They did the negotiating. They made the decisions. They settled disputes. I remember reading where they refused agreements with those outsiders who wanted access (control) to their water supply knowing they could poison or restrict their water.
Their men were not neutered. They hunted, sailed, and conducted war if necessary. The young women eventually grew older, married, and had children retiring from their earlier role, but the protectors of their freedom arose from these trained young women who could intuit people's motives and who had been trained in the Oero Lindan strong tradition of freedom.
Considering how far constitutional rights have been ignored and forgotten, yes, the question is moot. Still, there are plenty of people supporting voting, expect a political savior, and believe that the Constitution has any relevance today...
Besides avarice, the drive for control (which is supposed to provide security for themselves) certainly motivate most people to acquire power. However, most people don't want to and even are unable to take responsibility for their power, which is a deadly mix...
Theoretically, men compete and women cooperate, but men are capable of compromise, and women tend to desire security more than men...
Oera Linda promoted esotericism, and I don't believe in self-empowerment (Masons, witches, and the like), because I think, it's a Satanist trait...
It's easy to imagine the "ideal society," but in reality, human nature always wins.
The book "Rulers of Evil" explains how Jesuits created the United States, assuming it's true? The author was a Christian and spent over a decade writing it, so I assume it's likely true. The book theorizes that Superior General Ricci never died, rather he sailed to America, and was the catalyst for creation of this country.
The Constitution was written so it allowed both Jesuits and Jews to immigrate here, after they both had been banned from many countries in Europe - a few countries banned the Jesuits and Jews repeatedly. Some of the founding fathers were concerned about allowing those two groups into the country, because it would likely lead to serious problems in the future, as it obviously did and does.
I paid over $100 for an original copy of this amazing book a few years ago (it has gone up since), like dozens (hundreds?) of books about Jesuits, the SOS decided to end it being printed. Fortunately "Rulers of Evil" is available to read online for free. I can't be certain it's all valid, but it sure rings my bell. What do ya'll think about this book?
The Jesuits were banned in many places, because they were directly under the Pope's jurisdiction; just what happened to the Templars. However, they were infiltrated by Masons in the 19th century, and the Roman Catholic Church has indeed been captured by globalist interests by now.
I am finding the blaming of a single party simplistic, and here is why:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/finalizing-who-is-responsible
As I posted underneath "finalizing who is responsible", the "synagogue of satan" (SOS) is who I consider the enemy, which means "assembly of the adversary", as you likely know.
Jesus Christ named the SOS as the adversary when He accused the Pharisee of being part of it. It makes sense to me that a single organization controls the world for lucifer, who I believe the "statue of liberty" represents (the light bearer).
Freemasons, 'Jews', and secret societies in general are part of the mystery religion of Babylon, that's my understanding anyways. They use the Babylonian Talmud and Kabbalah. Jesuits, however, are the "army of god" - really meaning the "army of satan" satanically inverted. It makes sense to me that the SOS would have an "army" to control the world, and a "Superior General" to control the army.
I also believe there may be a "grey council" of the elite satanic bloodlines, a "grey pope" elected by the council used to control the black and white popes. Although there is no hard proof, supposedly an Orsini is now the grey pope. Soon a new white pope will be selected to replace the far-left liberal pope Francis, probably a far-right conservative who will show claws and fangs?
… Clint Richardson (strawmanstory.info free book) met a gov building security guard in Philadelphia when they struck a conversation. The guard asked him “What do you think U.S.A. stand for?”
After a pause and waiting for the guard to answer his own question, with a serious face said:
UNDER SATAN’S AUTHORITY
Sounds cute. Whose "Satan"? :)
The Sabbatean Frankists were/are just hiding behind calling themselves Jews.
…Pseudojews… a perpetual holocaustal excuse for advancing their agenda
Sorry, I disagree. As far as I can see, it's the advancement of the "globalist" plot, which happens to include many parties:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/finalizing-who-is-responsible
Of course, "the Jews" (who don't exist) have been rallied up against "antisemitism," and it looks like it applies in the Palestinian case:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-palestinian-case-promotes-jewish
If you really want to see what one man has gone thru to try and protect his son from being forced to become a "girl", you need to watch this interview with Jeff Younger. Yes, its lengthy, but he will tell you exactly how corrupt the court system is, how the judges don't give a damn about our Constitution, and what a true Devil his ex-wife is. Its horribly sad and shows how unjust our "justice" system is. He goes into such detail; I feel so sorry for fathers who have no say once they get divorced and how beat up they become. Its one hell of a wake-up call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNbhyJYt4SI
A constitution implies that there is still a master overriding the slaves. The constitution was supposed to protect the people from government tyranny. The government is the constitution and is never to be questioned in its outrageous authority.
No, I don't think the constitution is impenetrable. The government has poked so many holes in it the Swiss cheese makers are complaining. As long as there is government, there will be no piece of paper that will keep it from destroying the citizen.
The trouble was that the Founding Fathers replaced one set of tyrannical thugs with another. We have a behemoth of a shark trying to swallow us whole. And it can't read.
Re your statement re the Founders and their replacement of one group of thugs with another, does that hold for you given the Articles of Confederation? Or are you suggesting that the Constitution gave us a new group of thugs?
The Articles gave much less chance for thuggery, IMO -- at least centralized thuggery. Some of my favorites like Patrick Henry expressed great concern of the potential thuggery of the new "constitution." Labeled an "anti-federalist," Henry was very much a true federalist.
Thuggery has always been around, including at all (s)elections. It's easier to impose it, when it's centralized, but it works locally, too...
Switching from British rule to federal power provided independent control over the country, which has been used for consolidating global power through the "indispensable nation" which, not by any means, is indispensable now...
All "revolutions" have only been about changing masters...
Some may find this interesting.
The STRIPED FLAG of the EAST INDIA COMPANY, and its CONNEXION with the AMERICAN "STARS and STRIPES"
Article by Sir Charles Fawcett
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/gb-eic2.html
In case anyone's interested, here're a couple of good books on the subject on how the constitution perverted and undermined the claimed "principles" of government.
“The Constitution looked fairly good on paper, but it was not a popular document; people were suspicious of it, and suspicious of the enabling legislation that was being erected upon it. There was some ground for this. The Constitution had been laid down under unacceptable auspices; its history had been that of a coup d'état.
“It had been drafted, in the first place, by men representing special economic interests. Four-fifths of them were public creditors, one-third were land speculators, and one-fifth represented interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising. Most of them were lawyers. Not one of them represented the interest of production — Vilescit origine tali. (the dice were loaded from the start)
-Albert Jay Nock, Liberty vs. the Constitution: The Early Struggle
https://mises.org/library/liberty-vs-constitution-early-struggle
As a matter of fact, it was never a "people's Constitution", as has been so frequently claimed at Presidential elections, and on other similar occasions. They, the people, were never very much interested, either in the project itself or in the ratification of a form of national government. They did not particularly want anything of the sort and they did not like what came out of Philadelphia, but this distaste was not strong enough to overcome their natural lethargy, so only about five percent of the white male population voted as to whether the Constitution should be accepted or rejected. As it was, it only got by by the skin of its teeth and by some very clever management on the part of its proponents. The whole thing, in conception, formulation, and realization, was
the work of a small group of enthusiastic young men of property and position...."
-Ralph Adams Cram, Nemesis of Democracy - PDF - , The American Review, December 1936, pp. 129-141
www.unz.org/Pub/AmericanRev-1936dec-00129
Funny that the supporters of the con job were called "federalists" since they created a de facto monolith, not a federation. They destroyed the con-federation by illegally subverting the original con - federation.
Excellent tp bring this up, Ray! How many are willing to "defend the constitution " without having looked into its origin, etc.?!
In this audio I also discovered additional historical information I previously was unaware of, such as who the authors of the constitution were (the majority freemasons) and that Patrick Henry immediately recognized the badly written document and fought (unsuccessfully) against its inception as such. Worth a listen for sure, even if you aren't Christian:
https://open.substack.com/pub/dfreality/p/christianity-and-the-constitution?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1nfb39
I am all for self-government in small communities, but power always goes centralized; it's in human nature...
Unfortunately, I never watch long videos or listen to long audios; prefer to read.
"Patrick Henry immediately recognized the badly written document "
He also refused to attend the convention saying, "I smell a rat."
Too bad, he didn't raise hell about it...
Yes! (Also mentioned in Scipio's audio that I link to.)
" The Federal Government, after being centralized by the “Constitution,” was hijacked with The Federal Reserve Act of 1913"
True.
In fact, the constitution "hijacked" the advertised principles of the "American" "Revolution" and several banks put teeth into the hijacking even before 1913. There're reasons why Hamilton's national Bank of the US was closed by Andrew Jackson.
Here is a video I put together regarding the Truth About The Constitution: https://youtu.be/uYtJ1nJecAg?si=42cQP-B0YN8x7Jvi
I really dislike vids, but I viewed yours and pronounce it not only accurate but worthwhile to the point where I'll view it again and tell others about it.
Thanks!
Same here. Luckily, the video was short enough and after starting to watch it, I immediately realized its excellence.
Thank you! I am embedding this into the article.