mirror of
https://github.com/nhammer514/textfiles-politics.git
synced 2024-12-11 08:44:38 -05:00
3948 lines
278 KiB
XML
3948 lines
278 KiB
XML
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
|
|
<xml>
|
|
<div class="article">
|
|
<p> I N V I S I B L E C O N T R A C T S
|
|
George Mercier</p>
|
|
<p> INTRODUCTION
|
|
[Pages 1-88]</p>
|
|
<p>[Certain conventions have been used in converting INVISIBLE CONTRACTS to an
|
|
electronic medium. For an explanation of the conventions used, please download
|
|
the file INCONHLP.ZIP for further illumination. Other background information as
|
|
well is contained in INCONHLP.ZIP. It is advisable to EXIT this file right now
|
|
and read the contents of INCONHLP.ZIP before proceeding with your study of this
|
|
file.]</p>
|
|
<p>[COMMENTARY FOR THIS FILE: There is some real heavy-duty data in this one. Lots
|
|
of food for thought. Some of it is buried in the religious oriented passages,
|
|
so don't avoid or ignore those, lest you miss out on some real gems. There is
|
|
also some extremely interesting passages regarding the impending (and planned)
|
|
Great Depression II of the 1990's, even more interesting when one considers
|
|
these passages were written over 7 years ago, and yet they are so accurate and
|
|
hit the nail on the head as to current unfolding events regarding the economy.]</p>
|
|
<p> GEORGE MERCIER
|
|
December 31, 1985</p>
|
|
<p>DEAR MR. MAY:</p>
|
|
<p>I was intrigued to see that you have retained an interest in my Letter to Armen
|
|
Condo, even if that Letter was intended to be the isolated private
|
|
correspondence between two people. After receiving numerous inquiries about
|
|
that Letter, I have been quite surprised at the extent to which that Letter has
|
|
been so widely disseminated. At the time I wrote it, I was under the assumption
|
|
that most folks already knew of the underlying evidentiary Commercial contract
|
|
factual settings that Title 26, Section 7203 WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE
|
|
prosecutions are built on top of.</p>
|
|
<p>In your Letter you state that you have some questions about the bank account
|
|
contract as being the exclusive Equity instrument that initiates the attachment
|
|
of liability for the positive administrative mandates of Title 26.</p>
|
|
<p>Please be advised that your reservations are well founded and quite accurate,
|
|
that is, if you did read such an element of exclusivity out of the Letter. The
|
|
reason why your reservations are accurate is because I did not mean to state or
|
|
infer any such thing; however, that is not the problem here. Armen Condo's bank
|
|
accounts were sitting in front of the Judge during his arraignment and all
|
|
pre-Trial hearings, and those Commercial contracts are more than strong enough
|
|
to warrant incarceration on mere default therein. Since the nature of bank
|
|
accounts involves the evidentiary presence of written admissions, together with
|
|
the acceptance of Federal Commercial benefits therefrom, the presence of
|
|
reciprocity expectations contained therein, [001]</p>
|
|
<p>[001]============================================================= RECIPROCITY
|
|
is defined as a relational state where two or more parties, enjoying each
|
|
other's benefits and each possessing various expectations from each other, are
|
|
being reciprocal to each other, a kind of "give and take" going on back and
|
|
forth; and so in this relational setting, there are some kinds of
|
|
interdependence, mutuality, and cooperation expectations in effect between the
|
|
parties. But the key elements that will be repeated over and over again in this
|
|
Letter, is that where the initial benefits were not first exchanged, then the
|
|
secondary obligation to reciprocate does not exist, either. For example, the
|
|
word RECIPROCITY surfaces frequently when Governments discuss exchanging
|
|
favorable trade benefits with each other; each Government controls a source of
|
|
benefits the other wants, and so now the reciprocating mutuality and exchange
|
|
of benefits between the jurisdictions is called RECIPROCITY, but its meaning
|
|
has been elusive for some:
|
|
"The term RECIPROCITY as now currently used in most cases with only a
|
|
vague or very general notion of its meaning... [An] attempt is made to define
|
|
reciprocity when it is specified that the PRIVILEGES granted must be
|
|
equivalent. Thus one writer, basing his definition upon a study of the public
|
|
papers of the Presidents of the United States, remarks:
|
|
"Reciprocity is the granting by one nation of certain
|
|
commercial privileges to another, whereby the citizens of both are placed upon
|
|
an equal basis in certain branches of commerce."
|
|
-MESSAGES AND PAPERS OF THE PRESIDENTS, Page 562." Whenever there is
|
|
an exchange of benefits and there remains some lingering expectations of some
|
|
duty between two parties, then an actual INVISIBLE CONTRACT is in effect [as I
|
|
will discuss later], as it is said that the duty owed back to the party
|
|
initially transferring the benefits is RECIPROCAL in nature. Hence, the steam
|
|
engine is said to be a RECIPROCAL ENGINE: Steam is forced into a chamber
|
|
pushing a piston out, and the piston pushes in turn a lever attached to a
|
|
wheel; now the wheel revolves because the steam initially pushed out a piston.
|
|
So when the revolving wheel comes back fully around, it is now the force of the
|
|
wheel that pushes back the lever, which pushes in turn the piston back into the
|
|
chamber, that clears the chamber for a second and successive injection of
|
|
steam. [See the ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA ["Reciprocating Engines"] (London,
|
|
1929)]. Question: What happens when the wheel (having gotten what it wanted by
|
|
being turned by the lever and having initially accepted the benefits of the
|
|
steam pushing the piston), freezes up for some reason and does not reciprocate
|
|
as expected and now refuses to push the piston back into the chamber? What
|
|
happens is that the engine stops; everything grinds to a halt; and damages are
|
|
created. ...Well, as we turn from a tangible setting where machinery is in
|
|
motion, over to legal reasoning handed down from the Judiciary of the United
|
|
States, no Principles ever change -- because when we turn to the Supreme Court
|
|
rulings in hot political areas of so-called DRAFT PROTESTING and TAX
|
|
PROTESTING, by the end of this Letter you will see the true meaning of
|
|
RECIPROCITY, and of the damages created by refusing to reciprocate when
|
|
expected. Yes, often there are contracts invisible to the Defendant that
|
|
actually control grievances in a Courtroom, and there is to be learned a true
|
|
natural origin of contracts and of reciprocity; the origin lies not with
|
|
American judges trying to create seemingly fictional legal justifications, but
|
|
in NATURE, and actually in the mind of Heavenly Father who, as we will see,
|
|
created what is now called NATURE.
|
|
=============================================================[001]</p>
|
|
<p>and other factors, bank account instruments are CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE of Taxpayer
|
|
Status by virtue of participation in the closed private domain of INTERSTATE
|
|
COMMERCE. And by these CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE fellows entering into the Armen
|
|
Condo factual setting the way they did, those bank accounts were the only
|
|
evidentiary items that I talked about. [002]</p>
|
|
<p>[002]============================================================= CONCLUSIVE
|
|
EVIDENCE is deemed incontrovertible: Because either the Law does not allow
|
|
contradiction for some reason, or in the alternative, because the inherent
|
|
nature of the Evidence is so strong and so convincing that it automatically
|
|
overrules any other mitigating or vitiating Evidence that could possibly be
|
|
presented. Therefore it is deemed provident that CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE, all by
|
|
itself, establishes the proposition that is sought at hand, beyond any
|
|
reasonable or possibly legitimate doubt; this CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE RULE is very
|
|
reasonable in many situations.
|
|
=============================================================[002]</p>
|
|
<p>The other "evidence" the local situ United States Attorney presented to the
|
|
Jury was distraction evidence for public and Jury consumption purposes only,
|
|
and means absolutely nothing to appellate forums (for purposes of ascertaining
|
|
Taxpayer Status). Bank accounts are the highest and best evidence "Cards" the
|
|
King has to deal with, even better than old 1040's, and so that bank account
|
|
evidence should be the very first slice of evidence to go when an Individual
|
|
has concluded within himself that a change in Status is now desired. [003]</p>
|
|
<p>[003]============================================================= I am aware
|
|
that the linguistic use of the word "King", as a moniker to characterize the
|
|
combined Executive and Legislative branches of the United States is a bit
|
|
novel, and I know that most folks would feel uncomfortable with it at first.
|
|
Yet, despite the differential in comfort levels in the use of such semantics, I
|
|
go right ahead and use this characterization anyway because its use, all by
|
|
itself, enhances the important distinction between Common Law Jurisdiction and
|
|
King's Equity Jurisdiction (which distinction is still very much in effect
|
|
today), and makes this distinction much easier to understand; and additionally
|
|
underscores the fact that the United States is stratified at Law into multiple
|
|
jurisdictions to more tightly replicate the contours of Nature, and that the
|
|
United States is not a single monolithic SLIPPERY SLOPE slab of equity Civil
|
|
Law (hybridized old Roman Civil Law). As the American colonies severed
|
|
relations at Law with the Mother Crown, the jurisdiction conferred upon the
|
|
United States by our Fathers was largely similar, in a structural sense, to
|
|
that jurisdiction the King of England already had. But the idea of
|
|
characterizing the combined Executive and Legislative Branches of the United
|
|
States as a "King" may not even be mine. Imagine fictionally in your mind
|
|
having lunch with your Dad and a Federal Appellate Judge in New York City.
|
|
During this imaginary and purely fictional conversation, while the non-existent
|
|
Judge is speaking on a criminal doctrine, he mentions the existence of a
|
|
contemporary "King" here today in the United States, as if it were a very
|
|
natural idea to him. A year later, you realize that relating the jurisdictional
|
|
contours of the United States to those contours which a King should have and
|
|
not have, makes everything seem easy to understand. This is particularly so
|
|
when relating a factual question of police powers limitation, or of a taxing
|
|
limitation, to something tangible and natural like a King's expected
|
|
jurisdictional contours. Additionally, a "King" also accurately reflects
|
|
lingering English Jurisprudence here in the United States, and also reflects
|
|
the present KING TO PRINCE satropic relational status of the United States
|
|
Government to the several States, following the enactment of the AFTER TEN
|
|
Amendments that shifted the RATIO DECIDENDI of power to Washington.
|
|
=============================================================[003]</p>
|
|
<p>Like Irwin Schiff here in late 1985, Armen Condo's reluctance in 1984 to get
|
|
rid of his bank accounts forecloses a teachable state of mind one must have to
|
|
understand multiple other invisible contracts that our King is dealing with,
|
|
and that are more difficult to discern and appreciate the significance of. So
|
|
if a PERSON, seeking a shift in relational Status to INDIVIDUAL, is unwilling
|
|
to first get rid of his bank accounts, then talking to him about anything else
|
|
is an improvident waste of time. [004]</p>
|
|
<p>[004]============================================================= The word
|
|
PERSON is of particular legal significance in American Jurisprudence; it is
|
|
distinguished from the word INDIVIDUAL, with the semantic differential in
|
|
effect between the two being inherently Status oriented. Although sounding
|
|
innocent under common English semantic rules, on the floor of a Courtroom these
|
|
semantic rules take upon themselves deeper significance, as it is quietly known
|
|
by all Judges that PERSONS are clothed with multiple layers of juristic
|
|
accoutrements giving that PERSON'S presence in that Courtroom a special and
|
|
suggestive flavoring to it. On the one hand, PERSONS have special legal rights,
|
|
benefits, and privileges originating from a juristic source; and on the other
|
|
hand, PERSONS also carry upon themselves various obligatory duties (some of
|
|
which, if not handled properly, can be very self-damaging at times) -- but both
|
|
rights and duties are often invisible. In contrast to that layered state of
|
|
juristic accoutrement encapsulation, INDIVIDUALS walk around without any such
|
|
accoutrements [they would be "liberated" as the contemporary vernacular would
|
|
characterize it]. As a point of beginning, PERSONS can be either natural human
|
|
beings like you and me, or artificial juristic entities (such as foreign
|
|
governments, Corporations, Agencies, or Instrumentalities) and the like -- at
|
|
least, here in 1985, those are the only two existing divisions of PERSONS
|
|
presently recognized by the Judiciary (i.e., human beings and paper juristic
|
|
entities).
|
|
"Following many writers on jurisprudence, a juristic person may be
|
|
defined as an entity that is subject to a right. There are good etymological
|
|
grounds for such an inclusive neutral definition. The Latin "PERSONA"
|
|
originally referred to DRAMATIS PERSONAE, and in Roman Law the term was adapted
|
|
to refer to anything that could act on either side of a legal dispute... In
|
|
effect, in Roman legal tradition, PERSONS are creations, artifacts, of the law
|
|
itself, i.e., of the legislature that enacts the law, and are not considered to
|
|
have, or only have incidentally, existence of any kind outside of the legal
|
|
sphere. The law, on the Roman interpretation, is systematically ignorant of the
|
|
biological status of its subjects."
|
|
-Peter French in THE CORPORATION AS A MORAL PERSON, 16 American
|
|
Philosophical Quarterly 207, at 215 (1979). But some time off in the future,
|
|
the world will come to grips with the deeper meanings of Peter French's
|
|
comments about how PERSONS ARE CREATIONS and how the law is ignorant OF THE
|
|
BIOLOGICAL STATUS OF ITS SUBJECTS, because common knowledge will be changing
|
|
one day as the recombinant DNA cellular cultivation technology perfected in the
|
|
late 1970s in special basement laboratories designed into the CIA's Langley
|
|
offices by Nelson Rockefeller blossoms out one day into the Commercial Sector,
|
|
and genetic replicas of humans are brought forth into the public domain. It is
|
|
my legal Prophesy that it is only a matter of time before a Court ruling or
|
|
some slice of LEX makes its appearance somewhere, saying that the original
|
|
natural born human being takes upon themselves full civil and criminal
|
|
liability for all acts performed by their genetic replicas as soon as they
|
|
emerge from the chemical tank, under the ALTER EGO ["second self"] DOCTRINE;
|
|
and that those biological replicas (or SYNTHETIC ALTOMETONS, as the Bolsheviks
|
|
would say) will also be deemed at that time to be PERSONS, fully layered with
|
|
all of the same juristic accoutrements that their natural born human sponsor
|
|
possesses [or would have possessed under similar circumstances]. The use of
|
|
look alikes, or DOUBLES, has a very long history to them, particularly in
|
|
dynastic settings where tremendous wealth is available for some looting; here
|
|
in the United States of 1985, Bolshevik SYNTHETIC ALTOMETONS have already
|
|
produced marvelous results for their sponsors, in both family dynasty and
|
|
political settings involving important positions held in Juristic Institutions.
|
|
When common public knowledge of this technology actually will blossom out into
|
|
the open, I do not know. When the Apostle John was exiled to the Isle of
|
|
Patmos, he once wrote a story on events he had seen in a vision; John talks
|
|
about how someday the world's Gremlins, continuing to incorporate deception
|
|
into their MODUS OPERANDI like they do, will make a big deal out of a man they
|
|
will one day raise up for their purposes. Like the inflated, dramatic, and
|
|
overzealous presentation of Henry Kissinger's intellectual credentials, this
|
|
man will be shown on a much grander scale working great wonders going about the
|
|
world ending one tough crisis after another, as the imp goes about his mischief
|
|
trying to get folks to place trust and confidence in him (just like with
|
|
Henry); and great political power and authority will be given to this imp. John
|
|
describes a fellow who will bring down fire from Heaven, perform other great
|
|
wonders, and then be fatally wounded. As part of the Gremlin deception show,
|
|
this little imp will heal his own wounds and bring himself back from the dead.
|
|
This little Gremlin won't actually heal his own wounds, as the world's news
|
|
media will then want you to believe in furtherance of Gremlin conquests, but
|
|
actually a DOUBLE will be brought forth that will have been previously
|
|
manufactured, while the body of the mortally wounded and double-crossed imp
|
|
will be quietly disposed of out the back door; and at the present time,
|
|
excellent genetic DOUBLES are very feasible to manufacture. At the time the
|
|
world's Gremlins pull off their impending MAGNUM OPUS theatrics [meaning "great
|
|
act" theatrics], John tells us that they will succeed in deceiving many people.
|
|
Few people have in-depth factual knowledge on Gremlin movements, and so few
|
|
folks have trained themselves to be able to think in terms that Gremlins think
|
|
in: Terms that involve deception, intrigue, and the use of doubles, murder, and
|
|
whatever other CRACKING is necessary to get the job done. Like Tax Protestors
|
|
never bothering to try and see things from the Judge's and the King's position,
|
|
by folks never bothering to try and see things from the Gremlin perspective,
|
|
the result is going to be exactly what John tells us: That many people will be
|
|
held in awe of this little Gremlin, just like many people have already held
|
|
Henry Kissinger in awe when they should have thrown him in the trash can, as
|
|
the little Hitler the real Henry once was. As for bringing down fire from
|
|
heaven and other MAGNUM OPUS appearances that John talks about, the holographic
|
|
technology to create multiple colored images is now also highly developed.
|
|
Using a confluence of monochromatic radiation sources (lasers), impressive
|
|
visual images can now be created in an air reception media (just like in STAR
|
|
WARS). The technically impressive show that the world's Gremlins will one day
|
|
sponsor to try and impress people world wide -- THAT THEIR LITTLE IMP IS WORTH
|
|
ADMIRING -- will actually have been rehearsed in a studio first, before being
|
|
brought for on some world exhibition stage the Gremlins will create. [See the
|
|
13th chapter of REVELATION]. One of the dominate themes of this Letter is
|
|
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, and correlative to that, it is my proposition that
|
|
Gremlins can actually never succeed in forcing deception on others. The reason
|
|
why is because deception has to be first created, then conveyed, and then
|
|
accepted by others -- then only can deception succeed. Deception can only find
|
|
fertility in a human mind to the extent that mind is receptive to it;
|
|
similarly, in a sense, it actually takes two people to manufacture a successful
|
|
lie: The first to utter the lie, and the second to accept it as such.
|
|
=============================================================[004]</p>
|
|
<p>That Letter was intended to be the private correspondence between two persons,
|
|
or so I thought. Since no further dissemination of the Letter was expected, no
|
|
detailed explanation of the factual setting otherwise relevant to the subject
|
|
matter content of the Letter was made, nor was any detailed discussion of other
|
|
limiting factors or peripheral elements of jural influence made. Both parties
|
|
already knew key elements of the factual setting that gave rise to the Letter,
|
|
and the subject matter I addressed was intended to be a narrow one, talking
|
|
about bank accounts only as a point of beginning. For that reason, now the
|
|
expansive factual application of that Letter to mean that a Person's
|
|
contractual relationship with a Federally regulated financial institution was
|
|
exclusively the only acceptable PRIMA FACIE Evidence [005]</p>
|
|
<p>[005]============================================================= PRIMA FACIE
|
|
EVIDENCE is Evidence that is good and sufficient on its face. PRIMA FACIE
|
|
differs from CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE in the sense that PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE may be
|
|
contradicted or attacked by other Evidence, whereas CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE is not
|
|
open to such an attack. If left unexplained or unchallenged, PRIME FACIE
|
|
EVIDENCE is deemed to be of sufficient merit to sustain a judgment in favor of
|
|
the issue at hand that it is supporting. Both PRIMA FACIE and CONCLUSIVE
|
|
EVIDENCE are Evidentiary Rules involving the use of PRESUMPTIONS, which I will
|
|
discuss later.
|
|
=============================================================[005]</p>
|
|
<p>-- or even CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE -- of that Person's entry into the juristic
|
|
highways of Interstate Commerce, is an erroneous and overly enlarged
|
|
interpretation, and falls outside the contours of the two narrow questions that
|
|
I thought I had addressed in that Letter:</p>
|
|
<p>1.What right does the King have to criminalize a conversation two
|
|
people have, just because the content discussed in that conversation does not
|
|
meet with the King's approval? (Relating to Mr. Condo's civilly denominated
|
|
prosecution where the United States sought a Restraining Order silencing his
|
|
YHPA ["Your Heritage Protection Association"];
|
|
2.What rights does the King have to incarcerate a Person for a mere
|
|
circumstantial omission that is in want of both a MENS REA [006]</p>
|
|
<p>[006]============================================================= The MENS REA
|
|
is an evil state of mind that is necessarily inherent in all criminals as they
|
|
knowingly go about their pre-planned work by intentionally damaging someone
|
|
else.
|
|
"Criminal liability is normally based upon the concurrence of two
|
|
factors, 'an evil-meaning mind and an evil-doing hand...' ...Few areas of
|
|
criminal law pose more difficulty than the proper definition of the MENS REA
|
|
required for any particular crime. [Extended discussion then follows defining
|
|
what the MENS REA is and is not]."
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. BAILEY, 444 U.S. 394, at 402 (1979)
|
|
=============================================================[006]</p>
|
|
<p>and a CORPUS DELECTI... [007]</p>
|
|
<p>[007]============================================================= The CORPUS
|
|
DELECTI is the hard evidentiary "body of the crime" that is supposed to exist
|
|
on the record; it is related to DUE PROCESS in the sense that it ferrets out a
|
|
unique form of error. Originated as a Common Law rule by judges in our old
|
|
Mother England, the Britannic judiciary had been embarrassed by having
|
|
consented to execute a man for murder, when the individual believed to have
|
|
been murdered later returned to the village very much alive. As a corrective
|
|
result, the judiciary then required that in all capital murder cases, the
|
|
prosecuting Crown has the burden of adducing satisfactory evidence that the
|
|
alleged victim is actually dead (separate from, and in addition to, other
|
|
evidence that the accused is guilty.) Today, the CORPUS DELECTI rule is very
|
|
much a correct PRINCIPLE OF NATURE for those criminal prosecutions falling
|
|
under Tort Law indicia (where no contract governs the grievance); but it lies
|
|
largely in slumber. It could be a test of the factual setting for the presence
|
|
of hard damages on the criminal record, and as such would screen out
|
|
illegitimate prosecutions where the Complainant never experienced any damages;
|
|
but as our Father's Common Law has been replaced by contractual LEX, this rule
|
|
has largely faded away into atrophy. Should it ever be resuscitated, perhaps in
|
|
the form of mandating Criminal Arraignment Magistrates to document either a
|
|
contract or the twin Tort indicia of MENS REA/CORPUS DELECTI on the record, as
|
|
a condition for allowing the criminal prosecution to proceed on to Trial, such
|
|
a procedural rule would automatically disable any Special Interest Group from
|
|
succeeding in having their little penal Majoritarian LEX forced on others in
|
|
violation of both the REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT CLAUSE of Article 4, and of
|
|
PRINCIPLES OF NATURE that replicate the thinking of Heavenly Father. All
|
|
Special Interest Groups sponsored penal LEX is always characterized by the
|
|
absence of any contract or damages present in the factual setting that the
|
|
defendant is being prosecuted for -- such as growing Marijuana in your backyard
|
|
and gambling in your basement. There is a chilling story to be told some other
|
|
time of the Special Interest Temperance sponsors of the Prohibition of the
|
|
1920's here in the United States and of their descendants, who today are
|
|
heavily involved with drug smuggling, so called; as the criminalization of
|
|
plants and plant derivatives that are in broad demand creates a FABULOUS Black
|
|
Market to pursue Commercial enrichment in.
|
|
=============================================================[007]</p>
|
|
<p>the criminalization of a non-event that never happened? (Relating to Mr.
|
|
Condo's 7203 WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE prosecution).</p>
|
|
<p>You have me in such a position, Mr. May, that writing this response to you
|
|
makes me feel like I am the United States Supreme Court, reaffirming a prior
|
|
Opinion, yet turning around and writing voluminous explanative text discussing
|
|
the implications to a slight twist to the factual setting. [008]</p>
|
|
<p>[008]============================================================= In a limited
|
|
cognitive sense, I am also sympathetic to the position Dr. Albert Einstein was
|
|
in when he first disseminated his THEORY OF RELATIVITY in 1929 with
|
|
qualifications, as he knew then that only a few people were in a position to
|
|
come to grips with its contents:
|
|
"... his latest formal document -- the new "Field Theory" on the
|
|
relations between gravitation and electromagnetism -- concerning which he
|
|
himself declares it is absurd to waste time to try to elucidate it for the
|
|
public because 'probably not more than a dozen or so men in the world could
|
|
possibly understand it'."
|
|
-The NEW YORK TIMES ["Einstein Distracted by Public Curiosity; Seeks
|
|
Hiding Place"], Page 1 (February 4, 1929).
|
|
=============================================================[008]</p>
|
|
<p>The narrow answers explaining why Mr. Condo was just plain wrong in both of
|
|
those questions were discussed in that letter -- because in both questions, the
|
|
United States had written Commercial contracts Armen Condo had entered into
|
|
wherein Mr. Condo agreed not to disseminate any erroneous tax information, and
|
|
additionally, where Mr. Condo agreed not to withhold or fail to file any
|
|
information the Secretary of Treasury deemed necessary to determine Mr. Condo's
|
|
Excise Tax Liability (with the amount of tax being measured by net taxable
|
|
income). Those contracts the United States was operating on were Mr. Condo's
|
|
bank accounts.</p>
|
|
<p>Furthermore, to aggravate the just plain "wrongness" of Mr. Condo's position,
|
|
those contracts were entered into by Mr. Condo in the circumstantial context of
|
|
Mr. Condo's attempting to experience monetary profit or gain through the
|
|
operation of those contracts. In other words, there had been an exchange of
|
|
financial Consideration (benefits) involved, and in Contract Law, the exchange
|
|
of valuable Consideration (benefits) is of particular significance. [009]</p>
|
|
<p>[009]=============================================================
|
|
CONSIDERATION is technically defined to be either a benefit or a detriment --
|
|
meaning that some operation of NATURE out there in the practical setting took
|
|
place.
|
|
"Under the common law of Missouri, Consideration sufficient to support
|
|
a simple contract may consist either of a detriment to the Promisee, or a
|
|
benefit to the Promisor."
|
|
-IN RE WINDLE, 653 F.2nd 328, at 331 (1981).
|
|
"The very essence of Consideration... is legal detriment that has been
|
|
bargained for and exchanged for the promise... The two parties must have agreed
|
|
and intended that the benefits each derived be the Consideration for a
|
|
contract."
|
|
-JOSEPHINE HOFFA VS. FRANK FITZSIMMONS, 499 F.Supp. 357, at 365
|
|
(1980). This CONSIDERATION DOCTRINE -- this requirement that there must first
|
|
be a practical operation of NATURE prior to triggering the Law is very
|
|
important, and applies across all factual settings, and not just on contracts,
|
|
as I will explain by the end of this Letter. But for the purposes of this
|
|
Letter, only the benefit slice of CONSIDERATION will be discussed.
|
|
=============================================================[009]</p>
|
|
<p>This Consideration requirement is a correct PRINCIPLE OF NATURE, [010]</p>
|
|
<p>[010]============================================================= Yes, the
|
|
requirement for CONSIDERATION originated in the Heavens, but not so to lawyers,
|
|
who begin their analysis of the Law by starting off in the wrong direction when
|
|
assuming that men created the Law. Just like collegiate intellectual's
|
|
conjecture that the organic history of technological innovations is the result
|
|
of accidents, so too do lawyers skew their perceptions off into factually
|
|
defective tangents:
|
|
"Bargain consideration was invented for the sake of bilateral
|
|
agreements and then was extended to unilateral agreements..."
|
|
-Hugh Willis in RATIONALE OF BARGAIN CONSIDERATION in 27 Georgetown
|
|
Law Journal 414, at 415 (1939).
|
|
The author then continues on with his dribblings.
|
|
=============================================================[010]</p>
|
|
<p>because it is immoral and unethical to hold a contract against a Person under
|
|
circumstances in which that Person never received any benefits from out of it.
|
|
[011]</p>
|
|
<p>[011]============================================================= See Charles
|
|
Fried in CONTRACT AS PROMISE "Consideration" [Harvard University Press,
|
|
Cambridge (1981)].
|
|
=============================================================[011]</p>
|
|
<p>It has to be this way, otherwise the Judicature of the United States would be
|
|
working a Tort (damage) on someone else. So simply giving the other party some
|
|
up front Consideration, which is generally $10 in cash, separately and in
|
|
addition to any other benefit the contract may call for, will vitiate and
|
|
deflect any attack against the future enforcement of that contract on the
|
|
grounds the other party never experienced any benefit from it (the attack is
|
|
called FAILURE OF CONSIDERATION). [012]</p>
|
|
<p>[012]============================================================= For
|
|
commentary in this area of CONSIDERATION, see:
|
|
-James Barr Ames in TWO THEORIES OF CONSIDERATION, 12 Harvard Law
|
|
Review 515 (1899) [discussing the relationship between Consideration and both
|
|
unilateral and bilateral contracts];
|
|
-Arthur Corbin in THE EFFECT OF OPTIONS ON CONSIDERATION, 34 Yale Law
|
|
Journal 571 (1925);
|
|
-Arthur Corbin in NON-BINDING PROMISES AS CONSIDERATION, 26 Columbia
|
|
Law Review 550 (1926);
|
|
-Joseph Beale in NOTES ON CONSIDERATION, 17 Harvard Law Review 71
|
|
(1903);
|
|
-Melvin Eisenberg in THE PRINCIPLES OF CONSIDERATION, 67 Cornell Law
|
|
Review 640 (1982);
|
|
-Samuel Williston in SUCCESSIVE PROMISES OF THE SAME PERFORMANCE, 5
|
|
Harvard Law Review 27 (1894). Samuel Williston authored several tremendous
|
|
books on contract law called:
|
|
1.WILLISTON ON CONTRACTS, [Baker & Voorhis, New York (1936-1945) 9
|
|
volumes];
|
|
2.CASES ON ENGINEERING CONTRACTS ("engineering" meaning "drafting"
|
|
contracts), [Little Brown, Boston (1904)];
|
|
3.RESTATEMENT OF THE LAW ON CONTRACTS [American Law Institute, St.
|
|
Paul (1932)].
|
|
=============================================================[012]</p>
|
|
<p>This Consideration [meaning some practical benefit being exchanged or some
|
|
operation of Nature taking place] can also originate from third persons not a
|
|
party to the contract. [013]</p>
|
|
<p>[013]============================================================= "In most
|
|
actions upon contracts, the Consideration 'moved' directly from the Plaintiff
|
|
to the Defendant, either by way of a benefit conferred or a loss sustained, or
|
|
both, and the promise sued upon was made by the Defendant directly to the
|
|
Plaintiff. But occasionally the whole Consideration arises between the
|
|
Defendant and some third person other than the Plaintiff, and the promise is
|
|
made to such [third] person alone; and the question arises, 'Can any other
|
|
person than the promisee maintain an action upon such promise, solely because
|
|
he is beneficially interested in its performance?' Many cases seem to hold
|
|
that he can. Is that a universal or general rule? Is not the general rule the
|
|
other way? If A sends a package to B by an expressman and pays him double price
|
|
upon his promise to deliver the article promptly, can B recover damages for the
|
|
carrier's non-performance of that contract? ...A perfect, well-rounded contract
|
|
requires not only a promise and a Consideration, but a participation by each
|
|
party in both of these elements..."
|
|
-Edward Bennett in CONSIDERATIONS MOVING FROM THIRD PERSONS in 9
|
|
Harvard Law Review 233, at 233 (1895). As we change settings from a common
|
|
everyday Commercial arrangement where merchandise is being transported back and
|
|
forth, over to a juristic setting involving contracts with Government, nothing
|
|
changes either -- as Consideration is deemed to have been exchanged based upon
|
|
an operation of indirect third persons not a party to the contract [as I will
|
|
discuss under the CITIZENSHIP CONTRACT later on].
|
|
=============================================================[013]</p>
|
|
<p>The word CONSIDERATION has so many different meanings that anyone trying to use
|
|
the word instructionally finds themselves starting over from scratch in the
|
|
presentation of a definition. [014]</p>
|
|
<p>[014]============================================================= "The term
|
|
CONSIDERATION has been used in so many senses that anyone who employs it must
|
|
define it for his own purposes anew. In using it as a title, I mean to include
|
|
thereunder all acts or omissions on the part of anyone other than the promissor
|
|
which, taken in connection with the promise, may be thought to afford a reason
|
|
for granting a legal remedy upon its breach. So stated, the question whether
|
|
Consideration exists in any given instance depends not on the character of the
|
|
particular act relied upon as Consideration, but on its relation to the
|
|
parties, to the promise, and to the particular remedy which is sought."
|
|
-George Gardner in AN INQUIRY INTO THE PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF
|
|
CONTRACTS, 46 Harvard Law Review 1, at 9 (1932). In the typical case of a
|
|
simple business contract these relationships that Gardner was referring to
|
|
appear to be complex at first (as George Gardner did not elucidate himself very
|
|
well in that article), but they are based on very simple PRINCIPLES OF NATURE
|
|
everyone can understand; and when understanding these Consideration rules, the
|
|
indicia of Nature which creates invisible contracts will also surface and
|
|
become apparent. For example, let's say that A promises to B that if B will
|
|
ship him a farm reaper, then A will pay to B $500 ten days after it is shipped.
|
|
Fine. B ships the reaper, thus bring the element of Consideration into the
|
|
factual setting, and so now an invisible contract is formed: How? Since it was
|
|
necessary to promise $500 as an inducement to B to ship the reaper, it is
|
|
reasonably inferred that B experienced an outgoing DETRIMENT of something
|
|
around $500. But as for A, he accepted a benefit (the reaper) that B first
|
|
offered conditionally -- and when practical benefits were accepted by you that
|
|
someone else offered conditionally (here, the benefit was conditioned upon
|
|
receipt of $500 within ten days), then an invisible contract is in effect; and
|
|
contracts do not now, and never did, have to be stated in writing in order to
|
|
be enforceable by American Judges. [The reaper sale is explained in PORT HURON
|
|
MACHINE COMPANY VS. WOHLERS, 207 Iowa 826 (1929)].
|
|
=============================================================[014]</p>
|
|
<p>Under some circumstances, successive Promises cascading down from existing
|
|
contracts can be deemed to be good and valuable Consideration. [015]</p>
|
|
<p>[015]============================================================= Even though
|
|
no tangible CONSIDERATION changed hands when this successive contract was
|
|
executed, the original contract did trigger an exchange of CONSIDERATION, an so
|
|
in a sense, other successive future contracts could be deemed ADDENDUMS to the
|
|
original contract, obtaining their life from the CONSIDERATION the parent
|
|
contract experienced. See:
|
|
-C.C. Langdell in MUTUAL PROMISES AS A CONSIDERATION FOR EACH OTHER in
|
|
14 Harvard Law Review 496 (1900);
|
|
-Samuel Williston in SUCCESSIVE PROMISES OF THE SAME PERFORMANCE in 8
|
|
Harvard Law Review 27 (1894);
|
|
-Ballantine n MUTUALITY AND CONSIDERATION in 28 Harvard Law Review 121
|
|
(1914);
|
|
-OLIPHANT in MUTUALITY OF OBLIGATION IN BILATERAL CONTRACTS AT LAW in
|
|
25 Columbia Law Review 705 (1925);
|
|
-Samuel Williston in THE EFFECT OF ONE VOID PROMISE IN A BILATERAL
|
|
AGREEMENT in 25 Columbia Law Review 857 (1925);
|
|
-Corbin in NON-BINDING PROMISES AS CONSIDERATION in 26 Columbia Law
|
|
Review 550 (1926).
|
|
=============================================================[015]</p>
|
|
<p>Harnessing the element of FRAUD to inure to your benefit is powerful stuff in
|
|
that it vitiates contracts whenever it makes an appearance in a factual setting
|
|
predicated upon contract; [016]</p>
|
|
<p>[016]============================================================= Fraud
|
|
vitiates the juristic vitality and destroys the legal validity of everything
|
|
that it enters into:
|
|
"Fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters. It
|
|
affects fatally even the most solemn judgments and decrees."
|
|
-IRA NUDD VS. GEORGE BURROWS, 91 U.S. 426, at 440 (1875).
|
|
"There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the
|
|
most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments. There is no question that
|
|
many rights originally founded in fraud become -- by lapse of time... no longer
|
|
open to inquiry in the usual and ordinary method."
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. SAM THROCKMORTON, 98 U.S. 61, at 64 (1878). Notice
|
|
how the lack of timeliness impairs one's ability to invoke this DOCTRINE OF
|
|
FRAUD and successfully have contracts, documents, etc. annulled where fraud has
|
|
surfaced as an element; and as we change arguments, the Principle of Timeliness
|
|
(Laches) does not change, so the importance of handling FAILURE OF
|
|
CONSIDERATION in a timely manner as a defense line will also surface as a key
|
|
important judicial indicia in deciding whether or not to award a FAILURE OF
|
|
CONSIDERATION judgment in your favor.
|
|
=============================================================[016]</p>
|
|
<p>and likewise, when contracts are up for review and judgment, the element of
|
|
CONSIDERATION is also so important that the mere absence of it nullifies the
|
|
judicial enforceability of any factual setting alleging the existence of
|
|
contractual liabilities. As the PRESENCE of fraud vitiates contracts, so in a
|
|
similar manner does the ABSENCE of Consideration nullify contracts. [017]</p>
|
|
<p>[017]============================================================= In the early
|
|
1970's, a business called Erika Incorporated had been the recipient of a train
|
|
of money originating from medical claims filed with University Hospital in
|
|
Birmingham, Alabama for the Blue Cross "C-Plus" payment plan. Blue Cross had
|
|
been sending the money to University Hospital, who in turn sent the money to
|
|
Erika. But in the Summer of 1975, University Hospital decided to terminate
|
|
relations with Erika, and so Blue Cross then started paying its subscribers
|
|
directly for services rendered by Erika. Now Erika had to go through the
|
|
nuisance of trying to collect money from some distant patients; this was an
|
|
expensive procedure, and necessarily generated administrative headaches; and so
|
|
now Erika tried to get set up with Blue Cross directly as a PROVIDER, now that
|
|
University Hospital stopped paying Erika. In a preliminary attempt to get paid
|
|
directly from Blue Cross, Erika presented some ASSIGNMENTS that its customers
|
|
had signed, instructing Blue Cross to pay Erika directly, but Blue Cross
|
|
erected some administrative impediments. Later, Erika then asked Blue Cross for
|
|
a PROVIDER NUMBER to return to a relationship where they get paid directly from
|
|
Blue Cross, but Blue Cross refused to issue out such a PROVIDER NUMBER. So in
|
|
the Summer of 1975, numerous letters were going back and forth between the
|
|
corporate management of Erika and Blue Cross. The letters seem to indicate that
|
|
Blue Cross deemed that a PROVIDER NUMBER for Erika really was not necessary,
|
|
and that special checks could be issued out to Erika in circumvention of house
|
|
rules, but things never worked out for Erika. Circumstances came to pass later
|
|
where Erika is unhappy over the loss of revenue, so Erika started an action in
|
|
Federal District Court, now claiming that the letters from Blue Cross stating
|
|
possible circumvention of PROVIDER NUMBER was an offer to a contract which
|
|
Erika later accepted, and therefore a contract was in effect. The Federal Judge
|
|
ruled that an exchange of letters is not a contract, and that all of the offers
|
|
and acceptances stated in such letters means nothing -- since NO CONSIDERATION
|
|
EVER CHANGED HANDS:
|
|
"Even if the exchange of letters can somehow be construed as containing
|
|
essential elements of the agreement, no contract was formed because there was
|
|
no Consideration. Consideration for a promise is an act, a forbearance, or the
|
|
creation, modification or destruction of a legal relation, or a return promise,
|
|
bargained for and given in exchange for the promise. [Remember that
|
|
CONSIDERATION is a hard practical operation of Nature taking place.] ... In the
|
|
instant case, there was no Consideration to Blue Cross from Erika for any
|
|
promise made by Blue Cross. Although legal detriment to the promisee is a valid
|
|
Consideration as a benefit to the promisor, ... that Consideration must be
|
|
bargained for, and in the instant case there is no evidence that the action of
|
|
Erika in submitting bills in the form and manner set forth by Blue Cross and
|
|
refraining from sending such bills to Blue Cross' subscribers was in any way
|
|
bargained for. The Court finds that the exchange of correspondence did not form
|
|
a contractual obligation on the part of Blue Cross to pay the money directly to
|
|
Erika."
|
|
-ERIKA, INC. VS. BLUE CROSS, 496 F.Supp. 786, at 788 (1980). I
|
|
simplified the factual setting on this Case, but the essential factual elements
|
|
relating to the promises written on paper, without any correlative operation of
|
|
Nature (CONSIDERATION) is largely accurate. Here in ERIKA, just like Tax
|
|
Protestors throwing Temporary Restraining Order Petitions at a new Employer,
|
|
one party lost no time barreling into Federal Court demanding some perceived
|
|
rights. And as is very often the case, as happened here, a third party
|
|
intervenes into the factual setting [here Blue Cross], and for reasons the
|
|
complaining party had little control over, damages are being experienced. With
|
|
Tax Protestors, the third party intervening into their factual setting by
|
|
preemptively grabbing their earnings is the IRS. By the end of this Letter, you
|
|
should see quite clearly that the Law now continues to operate out in the
|
|
practical setting where it always has operated before recent technological
|
|
developments like paper, pens, and the like, and even general public literacy,
|
|
which surfaced generally as late as the 1300's to 1600's. The Law does not
|
|
operate on paper [whenever the Law is based on NATURE]; what is written on
|
|
paper is merely a STATEMENT OF THE LAW. Importantly, I hope you should see why.
|
|
=============================================================[017]</p>
|
|
<p>In general terms, both American Jurisprudence and Nature that it is modeled
|
|
after are divided into actions that fall generally under Tort Law and Contract
|
|
Law. [018]</p>
|
|
<p>[018]============================================================= For a
|
|
presentation of the history of the bifurcation of Law into Tort and Contract
|
|
going back into 1200 A.D., see C.H.S. Fifoot in HISTORY AND SOURCES OF THE
|
|
COMMON LAW, TORT AND CONTRACT; [Stevens and Sons, London (1949)].
|
|
=============================================================[018]</p>
|
|
<p>Numerous references will be made throughout this Letter to the two great
|
|
divisions in American Jurisprudence: TORT LAW and CONTRACT LAW. Very simply,
|
|
Contract Law applies to govern a settlement of a grievance whenever a contract
|
|
is in effect. This means that only certain types of very narrow arguments are
|
|
allowed to be plead in Contract Law grievances, since only the content of the
|
|
contract is of any relevance in the grievance settlement. The reason why
|
|
statutes are sometimes brought into a Contract Law judgment setting, statutes
|
|
that do not appear anywhere within the body proper of the contract, is because
|
|
the contract was written under the supervisory Commerce Jurisdiction of the
|
|
State, and that therefore those statutes form a superseding part of the
|
|
contract. [019]</p>
|
|
<p>[019]============================================================= Before 1933,
|
|
it was common practice in the United States for various contracts to contain
|
|
covenants stating that a sum set certain would be paid in Gold Coin, and so
|
|
these special covenants were then called GOLD CLAUSES. They would read
|
|
something to the effect that "... will pay (amount) dollars in gold coin of the
|
|
United States of the standard weight and fineness existing on (date of
|
|
contract)..." In this way, creditors protected themselves from losses due to
|
|
Government creating a monetary change in currency value. When a Joint
|
|
Resolution of Congress in June of 1933 [31 U.S.C. 463] explicitly abrogated the
|
|
judicial enforcement of these GOLD CLAUSES in Commercial contracts, there was
|
|
the usual Patriot howling, claiming that worn out Patriot argument of
|
|
UNCONSTITUTIONALITY; some lingering residues of which continue on down to the
|
|
present time. However, long ago in the early 1800's, an American jurist with
|
|
great foresight, who understood the correct relational status in effect between
|
|
COMMERCIAL contracts and the Constitution, had a few words to say about this
|
|
state of affairs:
|
|
"Nay, if the legislature should pass a law declaring, that all future
|
|
contracts might be discharged by a tender of any thing, or things, besides gold
|
|
and silver, there would be a great difficulty in affirming them to be
|
|
unconstitutional; since it would become part of the stipulations of the
|
|
contract."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARY ON THE CONSTITUTION at 248
|
|
["Prohibitions - Contracts"] (Cambridge, 1833). By the end of this Letter, you
|
|
too should see why COMMERCIAL contracts are born, live and then die, in their
|
|
own strata, without the Constitution offering any significant restrainment on
|
|
Legislative intervention. See generally:
|
|
-THE GOLD CLAUSES, 294 U.S. 240 (1934);
|
|
-Barry, GOLD, 20 Virginia Law Review 263 (1934);
|
|
-Phanor Eder, THE GOLD CLAUSE CASES IN THE LIGHT OF HISTORY, 23 George
|
|
Washington Law Review [Part 1 at Page 369 (Basic concepts of money); and Part 2
|
|
starts at Page 722 ("Debasement, Devaluation and Depreciation")] (1934);
|
|
-Russell Post and Charles Willard, THE POWER OF THE CONGRESS TO
|
|
NULLIFY GOLD CLAUSES, 46 Harvard Law Review 1225 (1933); and others mentioned
|
|
elsewhere in this Letter. Although it seems momentarily pleasing to ventilate
|
|
Patriot frustrations by throwing invectives at the spineless Congress for their
|
|
successive continuum of enacting Rockefeller Special Interest Group legislation
|
|
with the national damages created secondarily in their wake, by the end of this
|
|
Letter, the true remedy will be found lying within yourself.
|
|
=============================================================[019]</p>
|
|
<p>There are many subdivisions within Contract Law, such as Securities Law, Estate
|
|
Inheritance, Quasi-Contract, [020]</p>
|
|
<p>[020]=============================================================
|
|
Quasi-contracts are just contracts. Sir Henry Maine showed the use of the
|
|
adjunct QUASI in such Roman expressions as quasi-contract (quasi ex contractu),
|
|
but it is just an assignment of superfluous terminology. See a review of
|
|
William Keeton's book called QUASI-CONTRACTS by Everett Abbott in 10 Harvard
|
|
Law Review 209 (1896).
|
|
=============================================================[020]</p>
|
|
<p>Statutory Contract, Taxes, Copyright and Trademark Infringement Law, Commercial
|
|
Business Practice under either the Law Merchant or the Uniform Commercial Code,
|
|
Insurance, Admiralty and Maritime Contracts, etc. Operating a business under a
|
|
regulated statutory juristic environment is very much a contract, since a
|
|
numerous array of Government benefits are being accepted by Gameplayers in
|
|
Commerce, as I will discuss later.</p>
|
|
<p>And in contrast to that, we have Tort Law. Think of Tort Law as being a
|
|
Judgment Law to settle grievances between persons where there are damages, but
|
|
without any contract in effect between the parties. [021]</p>
|
|
<p>[021]============================================================= "A tort is a
|
|
breach of duty (other than contractual duty) which gives rise to an action for
|
|
damages. That is, obviously, a merely procedural definition, of no value to the
|
|
layman. The latter wants to know the nature of those breaches of duty which
|
|
give rise to an action for damages. To put it briefly, there is no English Law
|
|
of Tort; there is merely an English Law of Torts, i.e., a list of acts and
|
|
omissions which, in certain conditions, are actionable. Any attempt to
|
|
generalize further, however interesting from a speculative standpoint, would be
|
|
profoundly unsafe as a practical guide."
|
|
-Miles, DIGEST OF ENGLISH CIVIL LAW, Book II, Page xiv (1910). This
|
|
pitiful line of reasoning and of poorly presented facts without any guidance
|
|
Principles, is what collegiate law students are taught, so we should not be too
|
|
surprised to start uncovering damages that lawyers have done to our Father's
|
|
Law. =============================================================[021]</p>
|
|
<p>A good contrasting way to define a Tort is by enumerating on the things that it
|
|
is not: It is not a breach of contract. Included under the heading of Torts are
|
|
such miscellaneous civil wrongs, ranging from simple and direct interferences
|
|
against a person like assault, battery, and false imprisonment; or with some
|
|
property rights, like trespass or conversion; and various forms of negligence
|
|
are Torts ("judge, the defendant was negligent in maintaining his parking lot
|
|
by not fixing a dangerous and obscure crevice that was in it") -- but the final
|
|
definition is a simple one: Any wrong that has been worked by someone, where
|
|
there is no contract in effect, falls under Tort Law when the damaged person
|
|
brings the grievance into Court and tries to seek a judicial remedy. [022]</p>
|
|
<p>[022]============================================================= "...it is a
|
|
distinguishing characteristic of Torts that the duties from the violation of
|
|
which they result are creatures of the law and not of peculiar agreements. As
|
|
contractual duties properly have their origin in, and derive their vitality
|
|
from, the assent of the parties, a breach of such duties only does not
|
|
constitute a Tort."
|
|
-62 CORPUS JURIS 1091, at 1092, Section 2. [See also 86 CORPUS JURIS
|
|
SECUNDUM under "Torts -- Definition, Distinctions, and History"; 86 CORPUS
|
|
JURIS SECUNDUM, Section 2 also discusses "Torts -- Distinction From, and
|
|
Relation To, Contract"].
|
|
=============================================================[022]</p>
|
|
<p>Such an easy concept to understand as that, with parallel easy to understand
|
|
rules and judgment reasoning -- and lawyers are actually baffled by it. [023]</p>
|
|
<p>[023]============================================================= And they
|
|
have been poorly writing cases, statutes and memoranda for a very long time:
|
|
"The law of Edward I's reign draws no clear line between tort and
|
|
contract."
|
|
-Sir William Holdsworth in Volume II, A HISTORY OF ENGLISH LAW, at 369
|
|
[London (1936); 18 Volumes]. But they should not have been baffled; back in the
|
|
early English days of King Henry, strategies for bringing actions into court
|
|
under either Tort or Contract was being fluently discussed back then:
|
|
"[While discussing the beginnings of ASSUMPSIT (ASSUMPSIT was a court
|
|
action to recover from breach of contract on simple unwritten contracts)]
|
|
...The King's Court was not very fond of contract, but it showed some interest
|
|
in tort, and it is in the action of trespass that the quickest progress was
|
|
made. ...The debate [back in the 1300's] makes it clear that all parties
|
|
recognized that the situation was fundamentally contractual, and that it was
|
|
being forced into the form of tort simply because the action of covenant could
|
|
be brought only upon deed upon seal. In this particular instance, the contrast
|
|
with trespass is well made, and the case is left, procedurally, at least, as a
|
|
case of negligent damage to a chattel. But it must not be imagined that this is
|
|
the story of the slow dawn of the idea of contract in the minds of common
|
|
lawyers. They knew quite well [back then] what a covenant was, but they
|
|
deliberately resorted to juggling with [the tort of] trespass because they felt
|
|
unable to sustain an action of covenant without a deed."
|
|
-Theodore Pluckett in HISTORY OF THE COMMON LAW, Page 637 [Little
|
|
Brown Publishers, Boston (1956); 5th Edition]. Today in 1985, lawyers will
|
|
still juggle their arguments around, trying to find the most advantageous
|
|
position for their client; and so applicability of Tort Law or Contract Law is
|
|
still being argued down to the present day.
|
|
=============================================================[023]</p>
|
|
<p>Similarly, orthodox medical doctors here in the United States are also blind,
|
|
by replicating the advisory suggestions of drug companies pursuing Commercial
|
|
Enrichment, to exclude the identification of simple nourishment deficiency as
|
|
the true seminal point of mammalian disease origin. Against that sad background
|
|
(of professionals not even knowing their own profession), [024]</p>
|
|
<p>[024]============================================================= Even
|
|
prominent American jurists have had difficulty coming to grips with the simple
|
|
ideas of Tort and Contract:
|
|
"But it must be remembered that the distinction between tort and
|
|
breaches of contract, and especially between the remedies for the two, is not
|
|
found ready made. It is conceivable that a procedure adapted to redress for
|
|
violence was extended to other cases as they arose."
|
|
-Oliver W. Holmes in THE COMMON LAW, at 13 [Little Brown, Boston
|
|
(1881)]. =============================================================[024]</p>
|
|
<p>the actual identification of Tort Law as an actual branch of the Majestic Oak
|
|
is a relatively recent recognition by American lawyers. Up until about 1859,
|
|
Tort Law was not understood as a separate and distinct branch of Law. [025]</p>
|
|
<p>[025]============================================================= "The
|
|
definition of a tort may be said to have baffled the text-book writers not so
|
|
much on account of the inherent difficulty of the conception as because of the
|
|
implication of the conception in questions of jurisdiction. ...Perhaps none of
|
|
the text-books succeeds in introducing all of these limitations into its
|
|
definition."
|
|
-Lee, TORTS AND DELICTS, 27 Yale Law Journal 721, at 723 (1918).
|
|
=============================================================[025]</p>
|
|
<p>The first treatise in ENGLISH ON TORTS was published in 1859 by Francis
|
|
Hilliard of Cambridge, Massachusetts, who was followed a year later by an
|
|
English author named Addison. [026]</p>
|
|
<p>[026]============================================================= For a
|
|
discussion of the recent recognition of Tort Law by lawyers, see generally,
|
|
PROSSER AND KEETON ON TORTS, Page 1 [West Publishing (1984)]. By the time you
|
|
have finished this Letter, you will see that Tort Law has been in effect long
|
|
before this World ever came into existence, and long before para-legals
|
|
masquerading as professionals created a privately shared monopoly, the Bar
|
|
Association, in which to artificially limit new entrants and quietly pursue
|
|
enhanced Commercial self-enrichment. The fact that Tort Law has only recently
|
|
been recognized in American Jurisprudence since the late 1800's does not mean
|
|
that Tort Law did not exist prior to such recognition -- it only means that
|
|
lawyers were groping in the dark back then [and not that things have really
|
|
changed that much].
|
|
=============================================================[026]</p>
|
|
<p>Even as late as 1871, the leading American legal periodical remarked that:</p>
|
|
<p>"We are inclined to think that Torts is not a proper subject for a law
|
|
book." [027]</p>
|
|
<p>[027]============================================================= 5 AMERICAN
|
|
LAW REVIEW 341 (1871). [Violating a premier PRINCIPLE OF NATURE with the
|
|
baneful and stupid conclusion that factual ignorance is beneficial to you.]
|
|
=============================================================[027]</p>
|
|
<p>In 1853, when Mr. Joel Bishop proposed to write a book on the Law of Torts, he
|
|
was assured then by all publishers he surveyed that there was no such call for
|
|
such a work on that subject. [028]</p>
|
|
<p>[028]============================================================= Mr. Bishop
|
|
was told that:
|
|
"... if the book were written by the most eminent and prominent author
|
|
that ever lived, not a dozen copies a year would be sold."
|
|
-Joel Bishop in NON-CONTRACT LAW, Page 2 (1889).
|
|
=============================================================[028]</p>
|
|
<p>Yet, the distinction in effect between Tort Law and Contract Law was in effect
|
|
during the Roman Empire. [029]</p>
|
|
<p>[029]============================================================= See ROMAN
|
|
LAW AND COMMON LAW, at Page 18, by W.W. Buckland [Cambridge University Press
|
|
(1936)]. =============================================================[029]</p>
|
|
<p>But in addressing Tort Law itself, if I were to hit you over the head with a
|
|
baseball bat or burn down your house, there is no contract in effect governing
|
|
the grievance, so Tort Law rules, reasoning, and arguments govern the
|
|
settlement of this type of grievance. In addition to damages, judges always
|
|
want to examine the factual record presented to analyze the Defendant's
|
|
character, and make sure that the intent to damage was there (as consent and
|
|
accidental damages can vitiate liability). [030]</p>
|
|
<p>[030]============================================================= This means
|
|
that if you had asked me to burn down your house, you would be unsuccessful if
|
|
you later tried to sue me for Tort damages -- because you had CONSENTED. As for
|
|
bringing down a baseball bat on you, what we have here is an assault, and it is
|
|
necessary to argue CONSENT when assault is alleged. However, the STATE OF MIND
|
|
of the actor in assault Tort proceedings is of interest to judges for other
|
|
deeper reasons [because the STATE OF MIND is a behavioral point of beginning
|
|
and leads to other things]:
|
|
"As to assault, this is, perhaps, one of the kind in which the insult
|
|
is more to be considered than the actual damages, though no great bodily pain
|
|
is suffered by a blow on the palm of the hand, or the skirt of the coat, yet
|
|
these are clearly within the legal definition of assault and battery, and among
|
|
gentlemen too often induce duelling and terminate in murder."
|
|
-RESPUBLICA VS. DELONGCHAMPS, 1 Dallas 111, at 114 (1784).
|
|
=============================================================[030]</p>
|
|
<p>And so hitting someone over the head with a baseball bat is called an
|
|
"assault," and there lies a Tort; however, there are many types of Torts that
|
|
do not have any names assigned to them. [031]</p>
|
|
<p>[031]============================================================= Smith, TORTS
|
|
WITHOUT PARTICULAR NAMES, 69 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 91 (1921).
|
|
=============================================================[031]</p>
|
|
<p>Some writers have attempted to uncover certain characteristics that lie in
|
|
common to all Torts as a starting point to identify some Principles (yes, there
|
|
may be some hope for a few of you lawyers after all). [032]</p>
|
|
<p>[032]============================================================= See writers
|
|
like:
|
|
-Radin in A SPECULATIVE INQUIRY IN THE NATURE OF TORTS, 21 Texas Law
|
|
Review 697 (1943);
|
|
-Stone in TOUCHSTONES OF TORT LIABILITY, 2 Stanford Law Review 259
|
|
(1950);
|
|
-Seavey in COGNITIONS ON TORT (1954)
|
|
=============================================================[032]</p>
|
|
<p>One of the reasons why lawyers try and raise numerous subclassifications of
|
|
Tort up to the main level of Tort and Contract (as they grope and search in the
|
|
dark the way they do), is because they do not see the invisible contracts that
|
|
are often quietly in effect, correctly overruling Tort Law intervention, since
|
|
an examination of the factual setting seems void of any contract. By the end of
|
|
this Letter, you will see many invisible contracts for what they really are,
|
|
and you will see how to identify the indicia that create invisible contracts.</p>
|
|
<p>You may not understand the deeper significance of the distinction in effect
|
|
between Tort and Contract right now, but after reading this Letter through a
|
|
few times, the semantic differential in meaning should become very apparent to
|
|
you, as I will give many examples of Contract Law and Tort Law reasonings and
|
|
arguments, as applied across many different factual settings; as whenever there
|
|
is a judgment of some type, there is always in effect some rules and an
|
|
exclusion of some evidence in the mind of the judge a to what arguments will
|
|
and will not be allowed to be heard -- (even though this process goes on
|
|
unmentioned orally by the judge); and the real reason why there is an important
|
|
significance here that you might be interested in taking PERSONAL NOTICE of
|
|
[just like Judges take JUDICIAL NOTICE of special items], in Tort and Contract
|
|
rule differentials in judgment settings, is because we all have an impending
|
|
Judgment with Heavenly Father -- where arguments then presented will be judged
|
|
under similar Tort and Contract rules; a judgment setting where the pure
|
|
magnitude of the consequences renders unprepared incorrect reasoning
|
|
injudicious and lacking in foresight.</p>
|
|
<p>Like in Contract Law, there are numerous subdivisions within Tort Law to place
|
|
a specific grievance into, such as: Civil Rights, Wrongful Death, Product
|
|
Liability, Aviation Law, Personal Injury, Accident Recovery, Professional
|
|
Malpractice, Unfair Competition, Admiralty and Maritime Torts, and certain
|
|
Fraud and Anti-Trust actions, etc.</p>
|
|
<p>[033]============================================================= See:
|
|
-Section 2, subsection 3, by Salmond, LAW ON TORTS, 7th Edition
|
|
(1928);
|
|
-Goodhart, THE FOUNDATION OF TORTIOUS LIABILITY, 2 Modern Law Review 1
|
|
(1938);
|
|
-Williams, THE FOUNDATION OF TORTIOUS LIABILITY, 7 Cambridge Law
|
|
Journal 111 (1938);
|
|
-James, TORT LAW IN MIDSTREAM: ITS CHALLENGE TO THE JUDICIAL PROCESS,
|
|
8 Buffalo Law Review 315 (1959).
|
|
=============================================================[033]</p>
|
|
<p>Based on the Status of the person involved and certain elements in the factual
|
|
setting, and certain types of damages asked for, then what grievance normally
|
|
would be under Contract Law, could be changed to fall under Tort Law.</p>
|
|
<p>So there is the general distinction in effect between Tort and Contract.
|
|
Question: What if a grievance falls into an area of grey where it could fall
|
|
under rules applicable to either Tort of Contract? Although my introductory
|
|
remarks in this Letter are necessarily simplified, numerous commentators have
|
|
mentioned that defining the line between Tort and Contract is sometimes
|
|
difficult. [034]</p>
|
|
<p>[034]============================================================= "Never did a
|
|
Name so obstruct a true understanding of the Thing. To such a plight has it
|
|
brought us that a favorite mode of defining a Tort is to declare merely that it
|
|
is not a Contract. As if a man were to define Chemistry by pointing out that it
|
|
is not Physics or Mathematics."
|
|
-Wigmore, SELECT CASES ON THE LAW OF TORTS, page vii (1912).
|
|
=============================================================[034]</p>
|
|
<p>However, what is important is the reason why a simple distinction became
|
|
difficult: Because the parties to what started out as a Contract Law grievance
|
|
did not fully anticipate all future events that could have occurred between the
|
|
parties in contract. [035]</p>
|
|
<p>[035]============================================================= For example:
|
|
"If I employ a piano tuner to tune my piano and he does it badly, in
|
|
fact does not really tune it, I have a claim for recovery of what I may have
|
|
paid, and for damages for breach of contract, and I can resist action on the
|
|
contract if I have not paid. But there is no question of tort: The duty broken
|
|
was created by the contract. If, however, he not only fails to tune the piano,
|
|
but in the course of his operations breaks some of the hammers, the case is
|
|
altered. If he breaks the hammers negligently, I can sue him for the damage
|
|
either in contract or in tort; if intentionally, then I can sue him in tort or
|
|
(probably) in contract."
|
|
-W.W. Buckland in ROMAN LAW AND COMMON LAW, ["Tort and Contract"] at
|
|
page 273 [Cambridge University Press (1936)].
|
|
=============================================================[035]</p>
|
|
<p>Typically, all blurry factual settings that involve an area between Tort and
|
|
Contract have their seminal point of origin in a Contract that did not
|
|
completely define what would and would not happen under all possible scenarios;
|
|
and this is called INCOMPLETE CONTRACTING. [036]</p>
|
|
<p>[036]============================================================= In response
|
|
to grievances arising out of fractured and insufficient contracts, judges
|
|
sometimes create legal fictions to deal with these voids that the particular
|
|
contracts were silent on; such fictions are the DOCTRINE OF IMPLIED CONDITIONS
|
|
and the DOCTRINE OF PRESUMED INTENT [see Farnsworth in DISPUTES OVER OMISSION
|
|
IN CONTRACT, 68 Columbia Law Review 860 (1968)]. Since the contract does not
|
|
specify rights and duties, a limited slice of Tort Law reasoning enters into
|
|
the Court's judgment, and so now Tort questions of FAIRNESS are then
|
|
entertained by the Judge, under these special limited circumstances (but
|
|
remember, Judges are merely filling voids that were left unsaid by the contract
|
|
-- so there is no derogation of our Father's Law when such limited slices Tort
|
|
are allowed to intervene into what started out as a Contract Law grievance). In
|
|
other cases, sometimes there are unallocated benefits or losses coming out of
|
|
contracts, because quite frequently the contract did not provide for them [see
|
|
Schwartz in SALES LAW AND INFLATION, 50 Southern California Law Review 1, at 8
|
|
to 10 (1976), discussing that if the parties have assumed the risk of inflation
|
|
within certain boundaries, then the consequences of inflation experienced
|
|
outside the specified boundaries of the contract is to be distributed pursuant
|
|
to the FAIRNESS of judicial discretion]. Since the contract is silent on the
|
|
effect of high inflation occurring outside of its boundaries, Tort Law
|
|
reasoning of fairness and unfairness is then allowed to properly enter into the
|
|
picture for this limited reason. Another area of Tort Law reasoning making its
|
|
appearance to fill areas of voids in contracts comes when contract grievances
|
|
are brought into Courts arguing that the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE Section 2-615
|
|
now allows them to weasel out of their contract for some reason [see Hurst in
|
|
FREEDOM OF CONTRACT IN AN UNSTABLE ECONOMY: JUDICIAL REALLOCATION OF
|
|
CONTRACTUAL RISKS UNDER UCC 2-615 in 54 North Carolina Law Review 545 (1976)].
|
|
UCC Section 2-615 ["Excuse By Failure of Presupported Conditions"] allows
|
|
parties in contracts to try and weasel their way out of the contract because
|
|
some excusable circumstances came to pass; when such a contract termination is
|
|
presented before a Judge, factors considered in the Judge's mind also center
|
|
largely around Tort Law arguments of fairness -- but only because the contract
|
|
is silent, and where contracts are silent, Contract Law yields to Tort Law
|
|
arguments of fairness and unfairness [see FAIRNESS AND UTILITY IN TORT THEORY
|
|
by George Fletcher, 85 Harvard Law Review 537 (1972)].
|
|
=============================================================[036]</p>
|
|
<p>Once a determination has been made that Tort or Contract governs the question
|
|
presented, very important differences and rules then apply to settling claims
|
|
and grievances based on the factual setting falling under Principles governing
|
|
Tort Law, or under Principles governing Contract Law; and as you can surmise,
|
|
the question as to whether or not a grievance belongs under Tort or under
|
|
Contract is often a disputed and hotly argued question between adversaries in a
|
|
courtroom battle, as the question as to which Law governs can spell total
|
|
success or total failure for the parties involved. For example, see BUTLER VS.
|
|
PITTWAY CORPORATION, [037]</p>
|
|
<p>[037]============================================================= 770 F.2nd 7
|
|
(1985). =============================================================[037]</p>
|
|
<p>where to adversaries argued Tort Law or Contract Law governance in a pre-Trial
|
|
appeal, which was a product liability/warranty case. [038]</p>
|
|
<p>[038]============================================================= Meaning that
|
|
some merchandise was first purchased under contract, and then evidence of a
|
|
manufacturing defect surfaced later on, so now Tort Law claims were thrown back
|
|
at the manufacturer (claims for damages can be enlarged under Tort Law, since
|
|
Tort Law is a free-wheeling jurisdiction; claims for damages under Contract Law
|
|
are restricted to the content of the contract, as in BREACH OF CONTRACT).
|
|
=============================================================[038]</p>
|
|
<p>In deciding whether to allow Tort or Contract Law to govern, the Second Circuit
|
|
mentioned that:</p>
|
|
<p>"This case falls into a grey area between tort and contract law that
|
|
has never been fully resolved." [039]</p>
|
|
<p>[039]============================================================= BUTLER VS.
|
|
PITTWAY CORPORATION, id., at 9.
|
|
=============================================================[039]</p>
|
|
<p>So, for the introductory purposes of this Letter, I will only be discussing the
|
|
differences between Tort Law and Contract Law in general. [040]</p>
|
|
<p>[040]============================================================= Other
|
|
summary articles discussing the necessary distinctions in effect between Tort
|
|
and Contract are:
|
|
-THE PAST OF PROMISE by E.A. Farnsworth, 69 Columbia Law Review 576;
|
|
-CONTRACT DAMAGES by W.R. Purdue, 46 Yale Law Journal 52 to 96
|
|
(1936-37). =============================================================[040]</p>
|
|
<p>This stratification of the Law into two separate jurisdictions of Tort and
|
|
Contract is quite necessary, and in so doing, the Judiciary is no more than
|
|
conforming the contours of American Jurisprudence to more tightly replicate the
|
|
profile of Nature; and as you will soon see there will be very profound
|
|
consequences experienced by folks who try to outfox Nature by using Tort Law
|
|
reasoning in a Contract Law judgment setting. You should also be aware that
|
|
very often, we all occasionally get ourselves into contracts that become
|
|
invisible for any number of reasons, and then erroneously use the logic of Tort
|
|
Law reasoning to try and weasel our way out of the contract we forgot about.</p>
|
|
<p>Experientially well seasoned contractualists know that the desires and wants of
|
|
people routinely change with the passage of time, and that it is quite common
|
|
that contracts that are entered into today are often unattractive and
|
|
unappealing in the hindsight of the future. So this Consideration rule is of
|
|
particular importance in those types of marginal contracts where the benefit a
|
|
Person experiences from the contract depends upon some future efforts that same
|
|
Person must make, or where the benefits are qualified or otherwise conditional.
|
|
For our purposes, correctly understood, Consideration is a benefit.
|
|
Comprehension of the significance of Consideration is fundamental to one's
|
|
understanding as to why the Judiciary is largely ignoring the IN REM CONTRACT
|
|
RECESSIONS many folks are filing on their Birth Certificates; and understanding
|
|
Consideration (the acceptance of benefits) is the Grand Key to unlocking the
|
|
mystery as to why some of the King's Equity hooks are so difficult to pull out
|
|
of you, as I will discuss later.</p>
|
|
<p>There having been an exchange of valuable CONSIDERATION, when Mr. Condo entered
|
|
into his bank account contracts, Mr. Condo was in an extremely weak position --
|
|
he was just plain wrong with his bank accounts and other invisible contracts
|
|
(having experienced hard cash benefits [Consideration] as a result of the
|
|
contract, as well as giving the King CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE that he was a
|
|
participant in Interstate Commerce and the acceptant of federal benefits) and
|
|
so as a result, there was not a lot of substance left over for Mr. Condo to
|
|
argue about... like trying to argue that the Earth's rotation about its own
|
|
axis is some type of an elliptical illusion, just somehow. Yes Virginia, there
|
|
are absolutes in both Nature and in Contract Law; and Defendants in
|
|
prosecutions can be plain and simple wrong. When one is inside of a King's
|
|
cage, one begins to appreciate just how strong contracts can be. Additionally,
|
|
Mr. Condo was trying to argue the basic unfairness of the proceedings against
|
|
him, but that unfairness argument as well was non-applicable to his Contract
|
|
Judgment. [041]</p>
|
|
<p>[041]============================================================= Unfairness,
|
|
and all of its correlative arguments, are Tort Law arguments and have no place
|
|
whatsoever in the settlement of grievances falling under Contract Law
|
|
Jurisprudence:
|
|
"Since the relationship between the United States and petitioner is
|
|
based on commercial contract, there is no basis for a claim of unfairness in
|
|
this result."
|
|
-STENCEL AERO VS. UNITED STATES, 431 U.S. 666, at 674 (1976).
|
|
Commentators have pointed out the fact that Tort Law is primarily fairness
|
|
oriented. See:
|
|
-Epstein in DEFENSES AND SUBSEQUENT PLEAS IN A SYSTEM OF STRICT
|
|
LIABILITY, 3 Journal of Legal Studies 165 (1974);
|
|
-Epstein in A THEORY OF STRICT LIABILITY in 2 Journal of Legal Studies
|
|
151 (1971);
|
|
-James Henderson in PROCESS CONSTRAINTS IN TORT, 67 Cornell Law Review
|
|
901 (1982). =============================================================[041]</p>
|
|
<p>Unfairness is a concept that is related to moral Tort Law. [042]</p>
|
|
<p>[042]============================================================= Questions of
|
|
FAIRNESS and UNFAIRNESS are questions reserved for grievances that fall under
|
|
Tort -- a concept commentators note over and over again:
|
|
"...Tort theory has served to explain and to justify the changing
|
|
notions of fairness... that are captured by the kaleidoscope of tortious
|
|
events."
|
|
-William Rodgers in NEGLIGENCE RECONSIDERED: THE ROLE OF RATIONALITY
|
|
IN TORT THEORY, 54 Southern California Law Review 1, at 1 (November, 1980).
|
|
When contracts are in effect, questions of fairness are not relevant -- because
|
|
only the content of the contract is relevant.
|
|
=============================================================[042]</p>
|
|
<p>Questions of damages, and lack of damages, of the MENS REA criminal intent, of
|
|
fairness, of risk assumption, of equity, and equality are all reasoning and
|
|
arguments reserved for a Tort Law judgment setting. Remember that Tort Law
|
|
doctrine governs the settlement of grievances that arise between parties
|
|
without any contract being in effect. Tort Law is generally a free-wheeling
|
|
jurisdiction, and anything goes. The decision by the New Jersey State Supreme
|
|
Court to hold sponsors of parties responsible for the acts of persons who drank
|
|
in their homes is a Tort Law grievance. [043]</p>
|
|
<p>[043]============================================================= The case I
|
|
am referring to is KELLY VS. DONALD GWINNELL, 476 A.2nd 1219 (1984). For
|
|
Commentary, see:
|
|
-Paul Verardi in SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY, 23 Duquesne Law Review 1307
|
|
(1985);
|
|
-Maura Mahon in IMPOSING THIRD PARTY LIABILITY ON SOCIAL HOSTS, in 5
|
|
Pace Law Review 809 (1985);
|
|
-Case Notes in TORTS - NEGLIGENCE -- SOCIAL HOST WHO SERVES LIQUOR TO
|
|
A VISIBLY INTOXICATED ADULT GUEST, KNOWING THE GUEST WILL THEREAFTER DRIVE AN
|
|
AUTOMOBILE, MAY BE HELD LIABLE, in 89 Dickerson Law Review 537 (1985). As the
|
|
ripple effect of Tort Law liability attachment ascends up the ladder to reach
|
|
third persons seemingly not involved with the heated grievance, then so too do
|
|
distant and removed Employers get held for similar attachments of Tort
|
|
liability, just like Social Hosts [see Mark Gutis in EXPANDING THIRD PARTY
|
|
LIABILITY FOR FAILURE TO CONTROL THE INTOXICATED EMPLOYEE WHO DRIVES, 18
|
|
Connecticut Law Review 155 (1985); the Case Mark Gutis refers to in his Law
|
|
Review article is OTIS ENGINEERING CORPORATION VS. CLARK, 668 S.W.2nd 307
|
|
(Texas, 1983). This legal reasoning is largely just an extension of the
|
|
liability that has always been in place regarding the liability of the
|
|
Principle or the Torts of his Agents, when those Torts were done without the
|
|
knowledge or authority of the Principle [see William Vance in LIABILITY FOR THE
|
|
UNAUTHORIZED TORTS OF AGENTS in 4 Michigan Law Review 199 (1904)].
|
|
=============================================================[043]</p>
|
|
<p>In contrast to the elastic and expansive nature of Tort Law, when Contracts are
|
|
in effect, only the content of the Contract is of any significance when the
|
|
grievance is up for review and judgment. [044]</p>
|
|
<p>[044]============================================================= If a music
|
|
store sold you a piano and agreed to have it delivered before 6pm tonight, and
|
|
the piano does not get delivered when you need it, do you think you can ask for
|
|
simple breach of contract damages, plus compound the requested damages relief
|
|
asked for in a Court to compensate you for the PSYCHIC INJURIES that you
|
|
experienced because of the embarrassment and humiliation you suffered before
|
|
the eyes of your party guests that evening, as the partying went on without
|
|
that piano being there? Such a request for equitable relief in your Complaint
|
|
for Breach of Contract is patently ridiculous -- however, you need to know why:
|
|
Because when contracts are in effect (the purchase and correlative expected
|
|
delivery of the piano was very much a contract), then only the content of the
|
|
contract will be addressed and considered by the Judge when a grievance arises.
|
|
If you want to get supplemental secondary damages (called CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
|
|
by lawyers) because of the lack of timeliness in the delivery of the piano,
|
|
then you need to get the other party to agree to pay such damages on their
|
|
default, in advance, within the body of the contract; then a Court can address
|
|
your claims of secondary damages [because then your claim falls within the
|
|
content of the contract]. The question of demanding something as indefinite,
|
|
vague and arbitrary as PSYCHIC DAMAGES is a question that belongs in the
|
|
free-wheeling world of Tort Law, where such indefinite questions of fairness
|
|
and unfairness have their home:
|
|
"The primary root of legal liability through psychic causes can be
|
|
traced back to the year 1349 to a tort action which recognized a liability for
|
|
assault without [any] physical touching under the WRIT OF TRESPASS."
|
|
-Harold McNiece in PSYCHIC INJURY AND TORT LIABILITY IN NEW YORK, 24
|
|
Saint John's Law Review 1, at 3 (1949). Harold McNiece then spends the rest of
|
|
the article talking about the difficulty a court has in assigning a set sum of
|
|
money as relief compensation for something as vague and indefinite as perceived
|
|
PSYCHIC DAMAGES:
|
|
"The problem of tort liability where a mental injury is involved has
|
|
troubled the courts for a great many years, and even at present no consistent
|
|
pattern of liability rules exist. When injuries and causes of injuries leave
|
|
the realm of the tangible world and enter the uncharted areas of the mind,
|
|
courts understandably have difficulty in establishing principles of law
|
|
calculated to assure substantial justice. In the psychic injury field, Mr.
|
|
Justice Douglas' observation, though made in another connection, seems to be of
|
|
peculiar pertinence:
|
|
"But there are few areas of the law in black and white. The grays are
|
|
dominant and even among them the shades are innumerable. For the eternal
|
|
problem of the law is one of making accommodations between conflicting
|
|
interests. This is why most legal problems end as questions of degree [quoted
|
|
from ESTIN VS. ESTIN, 334 U.S. 541, at 545 (1948)]."
|
|
-Harold McNiece, id., at 1. By the end of this Letter, you will see
|
|
very well the real deep reasons why the bifurcation of our Father's Law into
|
|
Tort and Contract is an important PRINCIPLE OF NATURE that originated -- not
|
|
with "some Commie Federal Judge throwin' Patriots in jail" -- but in the mind
|
|
of Heavenly Father who created that abstraction Judges now call NATURE.
|
|
=============================================================[044]</p>
|
|
<p>Tort Law means that for every damage someone works on you, corrective damages
|
|
will be applied back to that person as the remedy (call the retort). For
|
|
example, in Tort Law, if you burned down a neighbor's house out of a grudge and
|
|
without the owner's consent (since no Contracts are in effect, Tort Law governs
|
|
the courtroom grievance), pure natural moral Tort Law requires that you be
|
|
damaged in return, i.e., that a retort be worked on you in order to satisfy the
|
|
demands of Justice. As the Sheriff or other neutral disinterested third party
|
|
that administers the retort (to perfect the ends of Justice), by stuffing you
|
|
in one of his cages, that encagement retort itself is largely exempt from
|
|
experiencing further retorts for his damages on you. [045]</p>
|
|
<p>[045]============================================================= This is a
|
|
contributing reason why it is so difficult for people to get TITLE 42, SECTION
|
|
1983 Civil Rights relief, unless both hard damages and special circumstances
|
|
are present in the factual setting, because under normal circumstances, the
|
|
Sheriff is largely immune from further retort since he operates in the retort
|
|
cycle of Justice. [But that is another Letter.] In order for a Federal Civil
|
|
Rights Case to prevail, the elements of unjustified, exceptional, and pathetic
|
|
circumstances must be present in the factual setting to trigger Federal relief
|
|
-- and then when the relief is granted, the Judiciary is really not interested
|
|
in enriching you as much as they are interested in awarding damage money to
|
|
preventively restrain the recurrence of unreasonable police Tortfeasance in the
|
|
future:
|
|
"Remedies for constitutional wrongs, like other legal remedies, chiefly
|
|
involve measures either to prevent or terminate the wrong or to redress the
|
|
harm caused by past unconstitutional [police] conduct."
|
|
-Professor Sager, as quoted by Bruce Miller in UNDERINCLUSIVE
|
|
STATUTES, 20 Harvard Civil Rights -- Civil Liberties Law Review 79, at 112
|
|
[footnote 145] (1985).
|
|
=============================================================[045]</p>
|
|
<p>So the cycle of Tort and retort ends there by the Sheriff jailing you for
|
|
damaging your neighbor the way you did by burning down his house. This is Tort
|
|
Law, and this is a key concept to understand, because numerous people
|
|
throughout the world have so deliberately and very carefully arranged their
|
|
affairs as to have all their murders and MAGNUM Torts executed on their behalf
|
|
under the liability vitiating and recourse free operating environment of pure
|
|
natural Tort Law, as I will explain later. Think about this Tort and Retort
|
|
Doctrine for a while, as it is very powerful -- with it damages can be
|
|
justified in a judgment setting, if your damages occurred to accomplish the
|
|
ends of Justice.</p>
|
|
<p>These people, taking counsel from Gremlins, by arranging their damages to be
|
|
justified as a retort, believe quite strongly that they are morally correct and
|
|
that Heavenly Father [046]</p>
|
|
<p>[046]============================================================= Yes, we very
|
|
much have a Heavenly Father:
|
|
"If our Father and God should be disposed to walk through one of these
|
|
aisles, we should not know of him from one of the congregation. You would see a
|
|
man, and that is all you would know about Him; you would merely know Him as a
|
|
stranger from some neighboring city or country. This is the character of Him
|
|
who we worship and acknowledge as our Father and God... He is our Heavenly
|
|
Father..."
|
|
-Brigham Young, President of the Mormon Church, in remarks delivered
|
|
in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, January 8, 1865. 11 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES
|
|
39, at 40 [London (1867)]. And we are quite similar to our Father in many ways:
|
|
"If we believe there is any truth in the writings of Moses, the
|
|
Patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles, and the teachings of Jesus, if we would
|
|
indeed be consistent Christians and receive the writings of the fathers, and
|
|
believe what was said unto them, we must believe that man is made in the image
|
|
of God, and consequently that we are of the species of the gods. However
|
|
child-like and feeble we are in this condition of mortality, we are
|
|
nevertheless descended from the gods, made in their image and after their
|
|
likeness."
|
|
-Erastus Snow, in a discourse in Salt Lake City, January 20, 1878; 19
|
|
JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 322, at 323 [London (1878)]. [The JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES
|
|
is a large collection of instructional pronouncements by early Mormon Church
|
|
authorities that was published over a number of years in London, England. This
|
|
Letter contains many quotations from the JOURNAL, and since these are
|
|
transcripts of speakers, I made nominal changes in punctuation, capitalization,
|
|
and spelling that I deemed provident under the circumstances; in so doing,
|
|
there was no derogation of the original idea and meaning expressed by the
|
|
speaker. Please check original citations before requoting.]
|
|
=============================================================[046]</p>
|
|
<p>is required to support them and their abominations at the Last Day, as their
|
|
murders have in fact been executed under the vitiating retort cycle of pure
|
|
moral Tort Law, and therefore immune from further recourse, just like the
|
|
Sheriff is immune from further recourse for the damages he worked on you when
|
|
he stuffed you into one of his cages for burning down that house.</p>
|
|
<p>And those people arranging their behavior to conform themselves into a Tort Law
|
|
judgment profile with damages immunization reasoning are correct, because Tort
|
|
Law is a correct and pure operation of Nature, and their damages can very much
|
|
be justified before Father at the Last Day; but the question of justification
|
|
of damages is not going to be relevant at the Last Day, and for the identical
|
|
same reason as to why the question of no damages being present in Highway
|
|
traffic code prosecutions and Income Tax enforcement actions is also not
|
|
relevant. Because just one tiny little problem for these Tort Law justification
|
|
imps surfaces, based upon an obscure, remote, and little known Doctrine
|
|
uncovered from the archives of the Mormon Church in Salt Lake City. I'll
|
|
explain all that later, but understanding the original Tort and recourse free
|
|
"Justice" retort concept, and its appreciation as a true PRINCIPLE OF NATURE,
|
|
is necessary before we probe deeper into Lucifer's extremely clever Illuminatti
|
|
reasoning and Father's little known "Ace" that he has up his sleeve; and then
|
|
into the deeper meaning of this Life, which involves (as you could guess by
|
|
now), a Contract. But Contracts, of and by themselves, are never the end
|
|
objective, they are only a mechanical and procedural tool used to accomplish a
|
|
larger objective: An objective to someday have all of the rights, power,
|
|
domain, keys, status, and authority as our Heavenly Father now has. [047]</p>
|
|
<p>[047]============================================================= "I will go
|
|
back to the beginning, before the world was, to show what kind of a being God
|
|
is... God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits
|
|
enthroned in yonder Heavens. That is the great secret. If the veil was rent
|
|
today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all
|
|
worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible -- I say, if
|
|
you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form -- like
|
|
yourselves, in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was
|
|
created in the very fashion, image, and likeness of God, and received
|
|
instructions from, and walked, talked, and conversed with him, as one man talks
|
|
and converses with another. ...God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an
|
|
Earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did. [Our Heavenly Father when through
|
|
his Second Estate with his Father and has his Father to answer to, and so on
|
|
back up the line]."
|
|
-Joseph Smith, President of the Mormon Church, in remarks delivered at
|
|
a Conference in Nauvoo, Illinois, on April 6, 1844; 6 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 1,
|
|
at 3 [London (1859)].
|
|
=============================================================[047]</p>
|
|
<p>The Grand Meaning of this Life is quite a story, and simply focusing in on the
|
|
relevant material is difficult by virtue of the large volume of distraction
|
|
material that is floating around out there. Nevertheless, as strange as it may
|
|
initially seem, people correctly talking about it generally find themselves
|
|
having to tone things down a bit. [048]</p>
|
|
<p>[048]============================================================= "The whole
|
|
object of the creation of this world is to exalt the intelligences that are
|
|
placed on it, that they may live, endure, and increase for ever and ever... The
|
|
lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like himself; [and
|
|
this will happen after] we have been proved in our present capacity, and have
|
|
been faithful in all things he puts into our possession [namely Contracts]...
|
|
Mankind [is] organized of elements designed to endure to all eternity; it never
|
|
had a beginning, and never can have an end. There never was a time when this
|
|
matter [our Spirits], of which you and I are composed, was not in existence,
|
|
and there never can be a time when it will pass out of existence; it cannot be
|
|
annihilated. [This matter] is brought together, organized, and capacitated to
|
|
receive knowledge and intelligence, to be enthroned in glory, to be made
|
|
angels, Gods -- beings who will hold control over the elements and have power
|
|
by their word to command the creation and redemption of worlds, or to
|
|
extinguish suns by their breath, and disorganize worlds, hurling back into
|
|
their chaotic state. This is what you and I are created for... We are organized
|
|
for the express purpose of controlling the elements, of organizing and
|
|
disorganizing, of ruling over kingdoms, principalities, and powers..."
|
|
-Brigham Young in multiple discourses; 7 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 290; 3
|
|
JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 93; and 3 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 356 (1856 to 1860). So
|
|
much for those collegiate INTELLIGENTSIA clowns, propagating intricate theories
|
|
of evolution on American campuses; like Tax Protestors flirting with Tort Law
|
|
rationalizations in summary Contract enforcement proceedings, the individuals
|
|
damaged by intellectuals with their factual error are largely themselves (as
|
|
others can only be damaged by deception to the extent that such a deceptive
|
|
skew is wanted and accepted). And this remains true even though a large number
|
|
of people, and even Congressmen, support Tax Protestors; and a large number of
|
|
people with impressive worldly credentials also support evolution (after all,
|
|
"It's been accepted as scientific fact"). Yes, factual verities do march on
|
|
independent of any acceptance, rejection, or comprehension of them by anyone.
|
|
...The word INTELLIGENTSIA, of a Russian origin, has spread world wide, and
|
|
means generally those members of the educated class or informed people who were
|
|
criticizing institutions and pushing theories around. In Russia, there were
|
|
philosophically illicit political overtones semantically associated with the
|
|
characterization INTELLIGENTSIA:
|
|
"The concept of INTELLIGENTSIA must not be confused with the notion of
|
|
INTELLECTUALS. Its members thought of themselves as united by something more
|
|
than mere interest in ideas; they conceived of themselves as being a dedicated
|
|
order, almost a secular priesthood, devoted to the spreading of a specific
|
|
attitude to life, something like a gospel. ...they invented social criticism."
|
|
-Isiah Berlin in RUSSIAN THINKERS ["Birth of the Russian
|
|
Intelligentsia"], at 117 [Viking Press, New York (1978); sentences quoted out
|
|
of order] For our purposes, a member of the American INTELLIGENTSIA is also an
|
|
INTELLECTUAL, bristling with theories, who pushes and propagates popular
|
|
theorems and notions they believe that the world wants to hear, while tossing
|
|
aside countermanding factual information that negates the theory's veracity.
|
|
Occasionally, I will throw a spicy little invective at INTELLIGENTSIA
|
|
INTELLECTUALS by supplementally characterizing them as CLOWNS -- a somewhat
|
|
strong characterization, but nevertheless appropriate when used. Gremlins, too,
|
|
have also found the use of this word attractive:
|
|
"Fahun, the foreign minister, had been adamant, but now Sadat overruled
|
|
both Fahun and himself -- and accepted Henry Kissinger's proposition... it was
|
|
at that moment that Kissinger decided he was dealing, not with a clown, but
|
|
with a statesman."
|
|
-"How Henry Kissinger Did It," an advertisement in FOREIGN AFFAIRS
|
|
MAGAZINE, page A29 [Council on Foreign Relations, New York (April, 1976)]. Due
|
|
to the strong contrasting semantic differential CLOWNS creates, it neatly wraps
|
|
up into one word what would have been several paragraphs of negative commentary
|
|
discussing the absence of both competence and intellectual prowess.
|
|
=============================================================[048]</p>
|
|
<p>Tax Protestors, like their brothers in contract defilement, Draft Protestors
|
|
(as I will explain later), denounce the basic illegitimacy of the United States
|
|
-- our fat King -- silencing speech, and of criminalizing something that just
|
|
didn't happen ("How could not filing a piece of paper be a crime? Why, the
|
|
Fifth Amendment says I don't gotta be a witness against my self. Common Law
|
|
says there can be no Constructive Offenses..."; and on and on). But
|
|
unappreciated by Mr. Condo was the Contract Law jurisdictional environment he
|
|
was being prosecuted in: A summary Commercial contract enforcement proceeding,
|
|
up for review and enforcement based on administrative findings of fact. [049]</p>
|
|
<p>[049]============================================================= In such
|
|
administrative enforcement proceedings under grievances arising out of
|
|
privileges and contracts that Congress created, Federal Judges are acting
|
|
MINISTERIALLY as a Legislative Court, functioning as an extension of the agency
|
|
for the King, and not JUDICIALLY as an Article III Court acting like neutral
|
|
and disinterested Referees calling the shots as umpires between adversaries;
|
|
and so some steps taken by the Judge acting MINISTERIALLY, to shorten the
|
|
proceedings or otherwise silence the Defendant when irrelevant subject matter
|
|
is being discussed, are largely non-reversible on appeal. In NORTHERN PIPELINE
|
|
VS. MARATHON PIPE LINE [458 U.S. 50 (1982)], the Supreme Court ruled that
|
|
Congress can create non-Article III LEGISLATIVE COURTS in three areas:
|
|
Territorial Courts, Military Courts Martial, and in disputes involving
|
|
privileges that Congress created in the first place [MARATHON, id., at pages 64
|
|
et seq.]. Participating in that closed private domain of King's Commerce is
|
|
very much accepting and benefiting from a privilege created by Congress.
|
|
=============================================================[049]</p>
|
|
<p>In these Equity contract enforcement proceedings, questions of morality, of
|
|
Torts, [050]</p>
|
|
<p>[050]============================================================= Throughout
|
|
this Letter, the word TORT is a multiple entente, and may mean either its
|
|
general public semantic understanding of just plain damages, or of Tort Law
|
|
Jurisprudence which generally circulates around both damages as a center of
|
|
gravity and correlative retort immunization reasoning.
|
|
=============================================================[050]</p>
|
|
<p>of basic reasonableness, of pure natural justice, of fairness, of mental
|
|
intent, of the presence of a CORPUS DELECTI, of privacy rights, of equality
|
|
between this instant Defendant and other previous Defendants and the like, are
|
|
all irrelevant. And the only thing that is relevant is the content of the
|
|
contract that was entered into some time earlier, in general, and the exact
|
|
technical infraction the United States, as your Adversary in a 7203 Action,
|
|
wants addressed as the grievance, in particular. Under some limited
|
|
circumstances, Federal Judges will annul contract enforcement actions where
|
|
unreasonable and over-zealous statute enforcement Tortfeasance has taken place
|
|
-- what appears to be "fairness" -- but such annulment is really only to
|
|
preemptively restrain such Tortfeasance from recurring in the future, and not
|
|
to benefit you at all. So whether in a driver's license contract grievance
|
|
setting of a highway speeding infraction, or in a Commercial contract WILLFUL
|
|
FAILURE TO FILE grievance setting with the King through a bank account and
|
|
other contracts, the only thing that is relevant is you and your contract. All
|
|
other previous persons, their cases of defilement, and their grievances, and
|
|
what arguments they made or did not make, is irrelevant. Translated into the
|
|
practical setting where a poor Defendant is presenting a defense line, this
|
|
means that all motions that are made for dismissal, based on grounds relating
|
|
to anyone else's previous prosecution, are automatically denied, as being
|
|
irrelevant to the instant factual setting. Equality and fairness are not
|
|
relevant in settling contract grievances. Equality and fairness are Tort Law
|
|
arguments; they are definable only along the infinite; and if the Judiciary
|
|
allowed equality or fairness to enter into the contract arena, then the effect
|
|
of allowing equality and fairness on one side is to work a Tort on the other
|
|
side -- so the Judiciary simple rules, very properly, that when contracts are
|
|
in effect, only the content of the contract is relevant. Although this policy
|
|
has the uncomfortable secondary effect of making Federal Judges appear to be
|
|
carefully selected Commie pinkos when dealing with a Tax Protestor (as Federal
|
|
Judges go about their work enforcing invisible contracts), restraining the
|
|
subject matter that will be discussed in a Contract Judgment setting to include
|
|
only the content of the contract, is a correct attribute of Nature, and does
|
|
correctly replicate the mind, will, and intention of Heavenly Father (as I will
|
|
discuss later on) in the area of laying down rules for settling contract
|
|
grievances. The very common belief that folks have, that since 100 other
|
|
persons prosecuted for the same contract infraction got suspended sentences,
|
|
and therefore in equality you too should get a suspended sentence, is in error.
|
|
What other people do or don't do, or what happens to or does not happen to them
|
|
in their contract judgment, is not relevant to you and your contracts. This
|
|
equality and fairness applicability is an important principle to understand,
|
|
because we all have an important Judgment impending at the Last Day. Here is
|
|
where Heavenly Father is going to judge us at the Last Day along very similar
|
|
lines; because Father is operating on numerous invisible Contracts I will
|
|
discuss later. You Highway Contract Protestors and Income Tax Protestors out
|
|
there now have such a marvelous advantage, if you would but use your valuable
|
|
knowledge acquired through such prosecutions and your study of the Law, to
|
|
avoid making the same Tort Law argument mistakes at the Last Day before Father
|
|
-- where unlike now, there will be no more going back and trying some argument
|
|
line out again. Today, you can go back into a courtroom over and over again,
|
|
throwing one successive argument after another at the Judge as many times as
|
|
you feel like, until you finally figure out what legal reasoning is correct,
|
|
what is incorrect, and why. Such a repetitive presentation of error is not
|
|
going to be possible at the Last Day -- there will be no going back to Heavenly
|
|
Father a second and successive times and throwing another round of defensive
|
|
arguments at Him. Your Tort Law reasoning of equality, fairness, and of no
|
|
damages and no MENS REA, when presented before Father at the Last Day to
|
|
justify your behavior down here will fall apart and collapse, and for very good
|
|
reasons that I will explain later. This judicial enforcement, separating Tort
|
|
from Contract in WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE prosecutions, is but one manifestation
|
|
of the extent to which rare gifted genius rules in the Federal Judiciary. [051]</p>
|
|
<p>[051]============================================================= The word
|
|
GENIUS is deemed by some to be a strong characterization whose presentment
|
|
should be sparingly used.
|
|
"Genius is a word that ought to be reserved for the rarest of gifts."
|
|
-Justice Felix Frankfurter, in MARCONI WIRELESS VS. UNITED STATES, 320
|
|
U.S. 1, at 62 (1942). On the day President Nixon announced on behalf of Nelson
|
|
Rockefeller that Warren Burger was going to be nominated to be the new Chief
|
|
Justice of the United States, President Nixon stated that in filing vacancies
|
|
on the Supreme Court, he would look for those judges who would follow in the
|
|
tradition of Felix Frankfurter. QUESTION: Who is Felix Frankfurter? Born in
|
|
1882 in Vienna, Austria, Felix Frankfurter emigrated to the United States with
|
|
his family. Three previous generations of European Frankfurters were jewish
|
|
rabbis; Felix's dad had studied for the rabbinate, but he pursued commercial
|
|
interests here in the United States while his son Felix went to Harvard
|
|
University to study Law. Felix stayed in Cambridge afterwards generally to
|
|
teach Law, although he took short stints to New York City and Washington.
|
|
Nominated to the United States Supreme Court by FDR in 1939, Felix Frankfurter
|
|
was one of the most intellectually strong and intense, high-powered Spirits
|
|
that was ever brought forth into this Estate -- and I admire him so much for
|
|
his impressive calibre. Merely reading his Supreme Court rulings is a
|
|
stretching exercise in intellectual gymnastics, as he compressed a well-blended
|
|
train of ideas into a single sentence and selected an organically enlarging
|
|
succession of words and phrases to swirl around his justifications and
|
|
elucidations on both peripheral ideas and concepts turning on a central axis.
|
|
Yes, Felix Frankfurter was very much a man of great and tremendous ability,
|
|
operating on a slice of rare gifted genius so exalted in stature that he left
|
|
all others biting the dust behind him -- but here is where I stop throwing
|
|
accolades at Felix Frankfurter: Because Felix Frankfurter was a Gremlin. ...In
|
|
April of 1913, that fateful year again, there was held a little known
|
|
CONFERENCE ON LEGAL AND SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY; organized largely by Harold Laski,
|
|
Felix Frankfurter, and his close friend Morris Cohen, the CONFERENCE was
|
|
chaired by John Dewey; Keynote Speaker was Roscoe Pound, Dean of the Harvard
|
|
Law School. Out of that CONFERENCE held in 1913, wrote Felix Cohen [son of
|
|
Morris Cohen]:
|
|
"...much of the social and philosophical consciousness of modern
|
|
American jurisprudence derives." Felix Frankfurter was an admirer of imp Roscoe
|
|
Pound, and openly propounded the redirection of American jurisprudence into
|
|
what Felix Frankfurter called SOCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE (meaning in a sense,
|
|
that Law was going to be now determined by the social needs of the community,
|
|
and those old worn out relics of fixed Property Rights, Common Law rules, hard
|
|
Constitutional pronouncements and the like that are difficult for Gremlins to
|
|
massage, are just not anything that we need to be concerned with anymore). In
|
|
1913, Felix Frankfurter talked about a "great job" that would have to be done
|
|
on American Law, stating that:
|
|
"That it has to be done -- to evolve a constructive jurisprudence going
|
|
hand in hand with the pretty thorough going overturning that we are in for."
|
|
Felix Frankfurter admired Gremlin economist John Maynard Keynes and actually
|
|
accepted his doctrines; Felix expressed recurring high remarks for a "socially
|
|
sound taxing system" of high estate and income taxes; and while teaching at
|
|
Harvard, he taught his students that:
|
|
"The Constitution is not a fixed body of truth, but a mode of social
|
|
adjustment." President Teddy Roosevelt once sent a letter to a newspaper in
|
|
Boston attacking Felix Frankfurter for his Bolshevik orientation and sympathy,
|
|
and came down on Felix for the assistance he was giving to Communists -- but an
|
|
attack on Felix Frankfurter through Teddy Roosevelt is not necessary to see the
|
|
imp in Felix Frankfurter (scan Felix's personal correspondence in THE
|
|
BRANDEIS--FRANKFURTER CONNECTION by Bruce Murphy [Oxford University Press, New
|
|
York (1982)]. Yes, Felix Frankfurter was a Gremlin; he taught their doctrines,
|
|
he admired their philosophy (damaging others through the instrument of taxation
|
|
never bothered Felix at all), he attended their conferences, he spoke at their
|
|
forums, he offered to them his assistance, he expressed sympathy at any
|
|
difficult position they would be in, and he also created the model image of an
|
|
imp Jurist that the Gremlins wanted so much for emulation by others. This brief
|
|
sketch was extracted largely from:
|
|
-Mike Parrish in FELIX FRANKFURTER AND HIS TIMES [The Free Press, New
|
|
York (1982)];
|
|
-Helen Thomas in FELIX FRANKFURTER -- SCHOLAR ON THE BENCH [John
|
|
Hopkins Press (1960)];
|
|
-Leonard Baker in BRANDEIS & FRANKFURTER: A DUAL BIOGRAPHY [Harper and
|
|
Row, New York (1984)];
|
|
-Nelson Dawson in LOUIS BRANDEIS, FELIX FRANKFURTER AND THE NEW DEAL
|
|
[Archon Books, Hamden, Connecticut (1980)];
|
|
-Joseph Lash in FROM THE DIARIES OF FELIX FRANKFURTER [WW Norton &
|
|
Company, New York (1975)];
|
|
-Wallace Mendelson in FELIX FRANKFURTER: A TRIBUTE [Respnal & Company,
|
|
New York (1964)];
|
|
-H.N. Hirsch in THE ENIGMA OF FELIX FRANKFURTER [Basic Books, New York
|
|
(1981)];
|
|
-Phillip Kurland in MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER AND THE CONSTITUTION
|
|
[University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1971)];
|
|
-Melvin Urofsky in THE BRANDEIS--FRANKFURTER CONVERSATIONS [Supreme
|
|
Court Review (1985), at 299 (University of Chicago Press)]. This is the same
|
|
Gremlin that Richard Nixon was once told to say something nice about, and this
|
|
is the same little high-powered Gremlin I will be quoting throughout this
|
|
Letter. =============================================================[051]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, contractual equity is a hard line to abide by, and people who operate
|
|
their lives with that smooth and envious SAVIOR FAIRE always avoid entering
|
|
into such tight binding regulatory restrainments in their affairs that they
|
|
know that their minds just cannot handle in the future. [052]</p>
|
|
<p>[052]============================================================= Throughout
|
|
this Letter there are numerous examples cited of invisible Contracts and
|
|
invisible Principles in effect that are latent and difficult to see; although
|
|
the consequences for violating the Principles and Contracts are also invisible
|
|
initially, yet their latent nature remains elusive and invisible only for a
|
|
short while. Eventually, there is a hard accounting coming due on all
|
|
Principles that are violated, and so when Judges throw their corrective
|
|
snortations at improvident defense arguments, they are actually your friends --
|
|
even though their status of such also remains invisible. Anything that even
|
|
vaguely replicates a corrective presentation of error is to our benefit in the
|
|
advance similitude of the Last Day it creates for us. In the Armen Condo
|
|
Letter, I quoted United Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter on the advisory
|
|
statement he made that yes, equity is brutal -- but that Judges are merely
|
|
enforcing contracts [so the remedy for the problem actually lies within
|
|
ourselves]. And just as invisible Contracts sometimes get us into difficult
|
|
positions, so too do invisible Principles get invoked by Judges to correctively
|
|
retort improvident positions being taken by parties. For example, when a Judge
|
|
invokes JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL against you, he is actually invoking an invisible
|
|
PRINCIPLE OF NATURE to operate to your advantage, by preventing you from
|
|
defiling yourself. [I will discuss JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL later on.] [Transcriber's
|
|
Note: Yes, the author seems predisposed to delaying the discussion of a LOT of
|
|
things "later," but keep in mind we are now ONLY on page 35 of a 745-page book,
|
|
so when the author says "later" remember that there's a lot of room to
|
|
elaborate on "later."] When Judges invoke this DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL,
|
|
the appearance created on the floor of the Courtroom is that"
|
|
"The rule is a harsh and rigid one which deprives a litigant of the
|
|
right to assert a claim."
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. CERTAIN LAND, 225 F.Supp. 338, at 342 (1964). Like
|
|
the appearance created that Judges are Fifth Column Commies by greasing the
|
|
procedural skids of a Tax Protestor into a Federal Cage as they merely enforce
|
|
invisible taxation contracts in effect; Federal Judges know that the
|
|
enforcement of invisible PRINCIPLES OF NATURE on the floor of their Courtroom
|
|
also creates the image that the rulings are harsh, unnecessarily rigid, and
|
|
patently unfair. But the Judge is merely invoking PRINCIPLES OF NATURE that the
|
|
defendant has no knowledge of. So the seminal point of correction lies within
|
|
ourselves; and to uncover the existence of invisible Contracts and invisible
|
|
PRINCIPLES OF NATURE in effect is to uncover our Heavenly Father who created
|
|
that abstraction that Judges now call NATURE.
|
|
=============================================================[052]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, experienced people will forego some immediate benefits all contracts
|
|
initially offer, just to avoid the larger liability and cost picture later on.
|
|
Yes, it is better to forego experiencing impressive glossy benefits and accept
|
|
nominal benefits that accomplish the same thing, and avoid a contract
|
|
altogether. For example, this could mean buying a used car for cash without an
|
|
installment contract, rather than a new one on installment payments, unless the
|
|
structure of your livelihood is such that enrichment is experienced as a result
|
|
of the gloss benefits, such as real estate salesmen, who need the gloss to make
|
|
a SUB SILENTIO statement: That they are a very important person; someone you
|
|
should better start paying some attention to; someone you had better start
|
|
doing some business with.</p>
|
|
<p>There are folks out there, marvelous, bright, and otherwise just great all
|
|
around, but who are weak in some administrative dimension; these types should
|
|
generally shy away from difficult and marginally feasible contracts they can't
|
|
handle. In a domestic family setting, marriage counselors report back identical
|
|
observations: That it was household mismanagement or unmanagement originating
|
|
from infracted contracts previously entered into under a relaxed level of
|
|
interest or inappropriate budgetary environment that caused unnecessary
|
|
secondary grief sometime later on. (In other words, like Armen Condo, they
|
|
entered into contracts unknowingly incompatible with their philosophy, and not
|
|
appreciating the significance of the contract's terms thereof. So the recourse
|
|
significant became invisible to them. Those are the contracts and Equity
|
|
Relationships they should have avoided all along from the beginning, AB
|
|
INITIO.) [053]</p>
|
|
<p>[053]============================================================= The word
|
|
EQUITY is an ENTENTE in that it carries multiple meanings in Law, depending on
|
|
the semantic context in which it is exposited. On one hand, it can mean
|
|
fairness or justice, and also a "nexus relationship with benefits accepted
|
|
equal to contract relational status" on the other hand. For a profile review of
|
|
the jurisprudential foundations of American Equity Jurisprudence going back
|
|
into the old B.C. Greek days of Aristotle, see EQUITY AND THE CONSTITUTION, by
|
|
Gary McDowell [University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1982)]; and the several
|
|
hundred citations therein.
|
|
=============================================================[053]</p>
|
|
<p>So, from a counseling perspective, a general attitude might be to have a spirit
|
|
of reluctance about your MODUS OPERANDI before entering into recourse
|
|
contracts. Entering into Commercial contracts with anyone without careful
|
|
respect to the terms that the contract calls for is an invitation for nothing
|
|
but headaches and aggravations you don't need, and could have, and should have,
|
|
avoided at a lower, pre-contract chronological level.</p>
|
|
<p>In order to appreciate just how wrong Mr. Condo really way, and just how stupid
|
|
and not very well thought out his sophomoric badmouthing was of the presiding
|
|
Federal Judge, [054]</p>
|
|
<p>[054]============================================================= I am aware
|
|
of the distinction between a FEDERAL Government and a NATIONAL Government. A
|
|
FEDERAL Government can freely change itself through acts of the Legislatures,
|
|
while a NATIONAL Government can only be changed or altered by the direct
|
|
popular consent of the Citizenry, and not through acts of Legislatures. The
|
|
United States Constitution is a composite hybrid blend of the two, meaning that
|
|
it possesses limited grants of NATIONAL power and limited grants of FEDERAL
|
|
power. For this Letter, that distinction will be abated and addressed later.
|
|
=============================================================[054]</p>
|
|
<p>one needs to study and be brought to a knowledge of Contract Law -- its
|
|
majestic origins and history, and of recourse Commercial contracts -- their
|
|
enforcement and life in the contemporary American judicial setting. What I am
|
|
about to say may very well surprise you, but the reality is that those
|
|
seemingly unnatural and artificial instruments we call Contracts are actually
|
|
highly and tightly interwoven into Nature and Natural Law. [055]</p>
|
|
<p>[055]============================================================= "Take away
|
|
Covenants, and you disable Men from being useful and assistant to each other...
|
|
We therefore esteem it a most Sacred command of the Law of Nature, and what
|
|
guides and governs, not only the whole method and order, but the whole grace
|
|
and ornament of Human Life, that every man keep his faith, or which amounts to
|
|
the same, that he fulfill his Contracts, and discharge his promises."
|
|
-Samuel de Puffendorf, THE LAW OF NATURE AND OF NATIONS (1729);
|
|
(Translated from the French by Basil Kennett.)
|
|
=============================================================[055]</p>
|
|
<p>And it is very rare that I have found any contract enforcement or grievance
|
|
proceeding to have been inappropriately adjudged, based upon the factual
|
|
setting presented, the issues raised for settlement and the question addressed
|
|
by the presiding administrative or judicial magistrate.</p>
|
|
<p>Such strong enforcement of contracts improperly concerns some people, who don't
|
|
give too much thought to the consequences of being able to have any Commercial
|
|
contract simply tossed aside and annulled judicially, just because one of the
|
|
parties no longer feels like honoring the terms of the contract. [056]</p>
|
|
<p>[056]============================================================= And
|
|
COMMERCIAL CONTRACT means a full recourse contract that will be enforced before
|
|
a Judge, and you are up against asset seizure and incarceration on your
|
|
default, unless explicitly waived by the other party. By the end of this
|
|
Letter, you will see just what you are really in for, when entering into a
|
|
so-called COMMERCIAL CONTRACT. Don't be fooled by those nice pleasant smiles,
|
|
those oh so friendly salesmen on the floor -- they are out for your money, and
|
|
they are going to use the guns and cages of the State to finish getting what
|
|
they want: Your money.
|
|
=============================================================[056]</p>
|
|
<p>That's right, under that line of reasoning, contracts should be tossed aside
|
|
and annulled just because one of the parties doesn't feel like it anymore: Like
|
|
Armen Condo no longer feeling like sending in a 1040 anymore. His self
|
|
declarations of lofty Status are initially impressive ("I am not a slave
|
|
anymore"); but unilateral self declarations do not now, and never have,
|
|
annulled contract liability. By the end of this Letter, you will know how to
|
|
get out of a contract, but such a termination does not involve self
|
|
declarations of status. The reason why there is such a tight adhesive
|
|
relationship going on in American Jurisprudence between contract enforcement
|
|
and Nature/Natural Law is because Contracts are very much on the mind of the
|
|
Great Creator who made Nature. [057]</p>
|
|
<p>[057]============================================================= Yes,
|
|
Heavenly Father created our Jurisprudence, a fact which when given some thought
|
|
is so obvious that even private legal commentators remark on it occasionally:
|
|
"Law, whose seat is in the bosom of God..."
|
|
-Morgan & Maguire in LOOKING BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS AT EVIDENCE, 50
|
|
Harvard Law Review 909, at 910 (1937).
|
|
=============================================================[057]</p>
|
|
<p>And so when American Jurisprudence so strongly enforces contracts, then the
|
|
Judiciary, as an agent of Nature, is merely replicating the mind of our Creator
|
|
who wants to have people learn to honor their contracts -- and yes, even more
|
|
so when those contracts contain philosophically bitter terms, like the
|
|
Bolshevik Income Tax. Learning the deeper meaning of that Principle is a bit
|
|
more important than some folks realize: Because Contracts are very important to
|
|
Heavenly Father. And the design of Nature to so strongly enforce contracts is
|
|
inverse evidence to indicate that Father deals extensively with Contracts,
|
|
wants people to learn to respect Contracts, and will honor his Contracts with
|
|
you (if you can get a Contract out of Father). Heavenly Father is similar to
|
|
the King in the limited sense that both of them want something from us, and
|
|
both of them use the same tools to get what they want. Father wants our bodies,
|
|
and the King wants our money, and both use Contracts extensively to accomplish
|
|
their end objectives. I conjecture that the King is far more successful in
|
|
gross aggregate percentage terms by his manipulative adhesive use of invisible
|
|
contracts to get what he wants than Father is with His invisible Contracts, as
|
|
Father does not force himself on unwilling participants. The King deals with
|
|
people out of the barrel of a gun and accomplishes through clever
|
|
administrative arm-twisting and adhesion contract wringing what otherwise
|
|
cannot be sustained in front of the Supreme Court in freely negotiated contract
|
|
terms; whereas in contrast Heavenly Father deals with people very
|
|
conservatively on the basis of their wants, and where no Contract is wanted, I
|
|
can assure you none will be forced on you. The King has copied the MODUS
|
|
OPERANDI of Father to deal extensively in Contracts, and then has added his own
|
|
Royal enrichment twist to it: Unlike Father's altruism (legitimate concern for
|
|
the interests of others), our King is only interested in himself, his own
|
|
welfare, and in that Golden Money Pot he passes out to Special Interest Groups
|
|
who make their descent on Washington when Congress is in Session, in vulture
|
|
formation. [058]</p>
|
|
<p>[058]============================================================= "History
|
|
shows that financial power and political power eventually merge and unite to do
|
|
their work together... The federal bureaucracy at the present time is
|
|
effectively under the control of the corporate and moneyed interests of the
|
|
nation."
|
|
-Supreme Court Justice William Douglas as quoted by Bob Woodward and
|
|
Scott Armstrong in THE BRETHREN, page 399 [Simon & Schuster, New York (1979)].
|
|
Please be advised that the mere mentioning of THE BRETHREN does not constitute
|
|
an endorsement of that book, as that was a very tacky and childish book for two
|
|
CIA agents to have written.
|
|
=============================================================[058]</p>
|
|
<p>There are numerous reasons why Heavenly Father wants our bodies -- one is so,
|
|
for our benefit, we can be Glorified some day and have a continuing association
|
|
with Him again. Such a statement is implicitly a status statement, since in
|
|
order to associate with Father, one's stature must be on a similar calibre to
|
|
Father. [059]</p>
|
|
<p>[059]============================================================= "How many
|
|
Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not
|
|
Gods and worlds, and when men were not passing through the same ordeals that we
|
|
are now passing through. That course has been from all eternity, and it is and
|
|
will be to all eternity. You cannot comprehend this, but when you can, it will
|
|
be to you a matter of great consolation. It appears ridiculous to the world,
|
|
under their darkened and erroneous traditions, that God has once been a finite
|
|
being... He has passed on, and is exalted far beyond what we can now
|
|
comprehend." [Our Heavenly Father had his Father, and so on back up the line;
|
|
there never was a time when this line of progression from son to father to son
|
|
was not in effect].
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse at the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City on
|
|
October 8, 1859; 7 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 331, at 333 to 334 [London (1860)].
|
|
=============================================================[059]</p>
|
|
<p>But Father first wants to patiently see who His friends really are, under
|
|
circumstances where his very existence is difficult to see. Yes, these are
|
|
Adversary proceedings we are in down here (and when you take out a new Contract
|
|
with Father, you will know what I mean, as Lucifer the Great Adversary ("Great"
|
|
in terms of ability), will suddenly start to take you very seriously). If
|
|
Heavenly Father has the Celestial Jurisdiction it takes to Glorify a person
|
|
into such an indescribable state similar to his own Status, as people entering
|
|
into Father's highly advanced Contracts down here have been explicitly and
|
|
bluntly promised, then Father ought to be very carefully listened to. [060]</p>
|
|
<p>[060]============================================================= There are
|
|
several layers of Contracts available down here beyond the introductory
|
|
Contract of Baptism. They become increasingly difficult to administer, not
|
|
because they are inherently difficult in themselves, but because you will be
|
|
placed under tremendous pressure by the Adversary to either be in default or
|
|
otherwise infract the Contract, and unfortunately Lucifer and his army of
|
|
hardworking imps know exactly what they are doing, as they go about their work
|
|
trying to run folks into the ground.
|
|
=============================================================[060]</p>
|
|
<p>There are a few people who have lived upon this Earth before us, who now have
|
|
such Glorified bodies under advanced timing schedules, and FIRST PERSON
|
|
EVIDENCE of that nature (an eye witness) is difficult for Heathens to reverse
|
|
or countermand under attack, so they have no choice but to ignore it and talk
|
|
about something else. [061]</p>
|
|
<p>[061]============================================================= For example,
|
|
the July 1985 issue of AMERICAN ATHEIST is quite political with extensive
|
|
negative commentary on the Federal Judiciary of the United States. When
|
|
religion itself is addressed as a subject matter, rather than talking about a
|
|
specific Spiritual event they cannot refute (such as the many personal
|
|
appearances of Jesus Christ Himself going on today in the United States), they
|
|
back off and take a lighter, safer road: By badmouthing the institution of
|
|
religion in general:
|
|
"All religions come from man's absurd egocentricity, from his planetary
|
|
xenophobia, from his arrogant sense of being the center of things."
|
|
-AMERICAN ATHEIST, id., at page 20. Beginning with the unreality and
|
|
limited factual knowledge that they do, by travelling down the wrong tangent,
|
|
AMERICAN ATHEISTS have no choice but to exercise one defective judgment after
|
|
another in order to support multiple erroneous successive conclusions
|
|
predicated upon their seminal factual assumptions. To begin a correct initial
|
|
point of beginning, we will enlarge the initial factual setting assessed, and
|
|
enter into evidentiary consideration of FIRST PERSON eye witness evidence that
|
|
operates to countermand and overrule all of their internal conclusions that God
|
|
does not exist: As there are, in fact, people now living, here in the United
|
|
States of 1985, who have seen and conversed with Jesus Christ, face to face,
|
|
just as one man speaks to another. AMERICAN ATHEISTS are in the same
|
|
ecclesiastical posture that Gremlin Nikolai Lenin was once in, who once stated
|
|
quite flatly:
|
|
"Every religious idea, every idea of God, even flirting with the idea
|
|
of God, is unutterable vileness... of the most dangerous kind, 'contagion' of
|
|
the most abominable kind [CONTAGION means a contagious disease]. Millions of
|
|
sins, filthy deeds, acts of violence [Lenin should THE LAST ONE to talk] and
|
|
physical contagions... are far less dangerous than the subtle, spiritual idea
|
|
of God decked out in the smartest 'ideological' costumes... Every defense or
|
|
justification of God, even the most refined, the best intentioned, is a
|
|
justification of reaction."
|
|
-Gremlin Nikolai Lenin [after he changed his name for the fourth
|
|
time], in his frequently quoted Letter to Maxim Gorky, November 13, 1913.
|
|
Nikolai Lenin seems to be quite irritated at the mere mentioning of the
|
|
possible existence of a Supreme Being -- as well he should. As I will discuss
|
|
later, Nikolai Lenin was among those who were also thoroughly irritated at
|
|
Father back in the First Estate, and his being brought forth into this Second
|
|
Estate did not alter his personality or MODUS OPERANDI. Today, Heathens and Tax
|
|
Protestors share a common attribute with Gremlins in that they do not want the
|
|
responsibility weighing on them that is always associated with knowledge of
|
|
error; and the error of Tax Protestors is their continued defilement under
|
|
contracts that were once invisible to them.
|
|
=============================================================[061]</p>
|
|
<p>Although that retortional statement, of and by itself, is not strong enough to
|
|
irritate a hardened Atheist, this statement might:</p>
|
|
<p>"No human has had the power to organize his own existence. That there
|
|
is one greater than we, the Father, actually begat the Spirits, and they were
|
|
brought forth and lived with Him... I want to tell you... that you are well
|
|
acquainted with God our Father... For there is not a soul of you but what has
|
|
lived in his house and dwelt with him year after year... We are the children of
|
|
our Father in Heaven... We are Sons and Daughters of Celestial Beings, and the
|
|
germ of Deity dwells within us." [062]</p>
|
|
<p>[062]============================================================= Brigham
|
|
Young, in multiple discourses: 8 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 64, at 67, et seq., to
|
|
10 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 192.
|
|
=============================================================[062]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, both the mind of Heavenly Father and the mind of the Savior are swirling
|
|
in a vortex of Contracts. [063]</p>
|
|
<p>[063]============================================================= "Making
|
|
covenants with his people and with individuals has always been one of the
|
|
principle ways in which the Lord deals with them. The scriptures tell us that
|
|
he made covenants with Adam, with Noah, with Enoch, Melchizedek, Abraham, and
|
|
others and that he also made covenants with Israel of old, with the Jaredites,
|
|
and with the Nephites. Surely [we] are a blessed people, because in a similar
|
|
way the Lord has made covenants with us individually and collectively."
|
|
-El Ray Christiansen, in CONFERENCE REPORTS, October, 1972, pages 43
|
|
to 44. [CONFERENCE REPORTS are the transcripts of what is called GENERAL
|
|
CONFERENCE proceedings of the Mormon Church, which are held twice annually in
|
|
Salt Lake City. This event called GENERAL CONFERENCE is when prominent GENERAL
|
|
AUTHORITIES come forth out into the open in successive speaking appearances,
|
|
and present their views on subjects that interest them. The Conference is now
|
|
televised, and transcripts are issued].
|
|
=============================================================[063]</p>
|
|
<p>For a brief sizing glimpse at the extent to which Contracts are constantly and
|
|
endlessly on the mind of Father and the Savior, open up either the Old or the
|
|
New Testaments to any place at random, and see how many pages can be turned
|
|
before the word "Covenant" [Contract] reappears. [064]</p>
|
|
<p>[064]============================================================= That I am
|
|
aware of, the root word COVENANT occurs 303 times in the Old and New Testaments
|
|
alone. When I opened a spot at random, I uncovered a statement by Ezekiel:
|
|
"I bound myself by oath, I made a covenant with you... and you became
|
|
mine."
|
|
-EZEKIEL 16:8 In Hebrew, EZEKIEL means the "strength of God", which is
|
|
a well chosen name for this man who lived in Babylonia in the 500 BC era.
|
|
Commentators have associated Ezekiel with the elevated stature of Isaiah and
|
|
Jeremiah, and for good reasons. The circumstances surrounding Ezekiel's Calling
|
|
are described in Chapter 1, and his Celestial Commission follows in Chapters 2
|
|
and 3. What we know today as the BOOK OF EZEKIEL has been divided into 47
|
|
Chapters and is grouped largely around four dominate themes. The BOOK OF
|
|
EZEKIEL is almost devoid of biographical and personal details; it was known
|
|
that Ezekiel had been a Priest, was one of the first deportees to Babylonia
|
|
[after Babylon had gone to the dogs], and had lived there in a refugee
|
|
community at Tel-Abib on the River Chebar, which was a large irrigation canal
|
|
leading from the Euphrates on the north side of Babylon. The only reference to
|
|
his family is that the death of his wife on the eve of the fall of Jerusalem
|
|
was for him a small personal symbol of the larger national disaster that had
|
|
befallen Babylon. Ezekiel was very much in tune with the Celestial order of
|
|
things: The vision he once had of the throne chariot of Jesus Christ is one of
|
|
the most impressive pictures of the Glory and Celestial Majesty of Deity to be
|
|
found anywhere in the Old Testament; and he also repetitively talks about
|
|
COVENANTS 17 times over (a man does not harp on the same subject matter over
|
|
and over again without there being special significance and deeper importance
|
|
to it). =============================================================[064]</p>
|
|
<p>Here in the United States, in a Commercial contract factual setting, the word
|
|
"covenant" is of an Old English Law Merchant origin, and now means only a few
|
|
clauses within a larger contract; [065]</p>
|
|
<p>[065]============================================================= For example,
|
|
an attempt by CIA agent Frank Snepp to use the First Amendment to try and
|
|
weasel his way out of one of the individual covenants within his larger
|
|
COMMERCIAL Employment Contract with the CIA that he had previously entered
|
|
into, was correctly rebuffed by the Supreme Court in FRANK SNEPP VS. UNITED
|
|
STATES, 444 U.S. 507 (1979).
|
|
=============================================================[065]</p>
|
|
<p>like when entrepreneurs sell their businesses, the continuing restriction they
|
|
take upon themselves within the larger Purchase and Sale Contract, not to turn
|
|
right around and build up the same duplicate business all over again until some
|
|
5 to 10 years or so has first lapsed, is called a COVENANT NOT TO COMPETE.
|
|
[066]</p>
|
|
<p>[066]============================================================= See
|
|
generally, Louis Hammon in COVENANTS AS QUASI-CONTRACTS in 2 Michigan Law
|
|
Review 106 (1903).
|
|
=============================================================[066]</p>
|
|
<p>But in an ecclesiastical setting, what all ancient and contemporary Prophets
|
|
and Patriarchs cal COVENANTS, are really CONTRACTS:</p>
|
|
<p>"As all of us know, a covenant is a contract and an agreement between
|
|
at least two parties. In the case of gospel covenants, the parties are the Lord
|
|
and men on Earth. Men agree to keep the commandments and the Lord promises to
|
|
reward them accordingly. The gospel itself is the new and everlasting covenant
|
|
and embraces all the agreements, promises, and rewards which the Lord offers
|
|
his people." [067]</p>
|
|
<p>[067]============================================================= Joseph
|
|
Fielding Smith, in CONFERENCE REPORTS ["Gospel Covenants"], page 70 (October,
|
|
1970). =============================================================[067]</p>
|
|
<p>In analyzing the Law comparatively with Father's Plan for us, there are
|
|
numerous facial changes in descriptive names for things that are commonly known
|
|
and understood by everyone under other names. For example, what we call a
|
|
CONTRACT in our everyday Life, Heavenly Father calls COVENANTS. And the
|
|
financial enrichment one party receives under a contract here in the United
|
|
States (such as the financial compensation a Landlord receives out of a Lease
|
|
Contract from a Tenant), is called a BENEFIT; and what is called a BENEFIT
|
|
arising under contract in a Commercial setting is known as a BLESSING arising
|
|
under Covenant in an ecclesiastical setting with Heavenly Father. [068]</p>
|
|
<p>[068]============================================================= "A covenant
|
|
is an agreement between two or more parties. An oath is a sworn attestation to
|
|
the inviolability of the promises in the agreement. In the covenant of
|
|
Priesthood the parties are the Father and the receiver of the Priesthood. Each
|
|
party to the covenant undertakes certain obligations."
|
|
-Marion G. Romney in CONFERENCE REPORTS, page 17 (April, 1976).
|
|
=============================================================[068]</p>
|
|
<p>Coming down into this Life, this "Second Estate" we are now in (as the ancient
|
|
Prophets originated its characterization), [069]</p>
|
|
<p>[069]============================================================= "I will
|
|
therefore put you in remembrance, though you once knew this before... [that
|
|
there were] angels that kept not their First Estate,..."
|
|
-A Letter from Jude in JUDE 1:5 to 6.
|
|
=============================================================[069]</p>
|
|
<p>our memories were deflected off to the side and temporarily locked away. [070]</p>
|
|
<p>[070]============================================================= "When a man
|
|
goes to sleep at night he forgets the doings of the day. Sometimes a partial
|
|
glimpse of them will disturb his slumbers; but sleep is the general thing, and
|
|
especially sound sleep, throws out of memory everything pertaining the past;
|
|
but when we awake in the morning, with the wakefulness returns a vivid
|
|
recollection of our past history and doings. So it will be when we come up into
|
|
the presence of Father and God in the mansion whence we emigrated to this
|
|
world. When we get there we will behold the face of our Father, the face of our
|
|
Mother, for we were begotten there the same as we were begotten here..."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake
|
|
City, August 20, 1871; 14 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 233, at 241 [London (1872)].
|
|
=============================================================[070]</p>
|
|
<p>Coming down from the First Estate into this World, we all came here by
|
|
Contract, and sometime in the third trimester of our mother's pregnancy, our
|
|
spirits entered these bodies (called the "quickening" of the body). There came
|
|
a point in time back during the First Estate, when after Father revealed his
|
|
Grand Plans for us all, as the Sons of God we all shouted for joy in ecstatic
|
|
response. [071]</p>
|
|
<p>[071]============================================================= "We will
|
|
refer now to the [38th] Chapter of Job, to show that there were Sons of God
|
|
before this world was made. The Lord asked Job a question in relation to his
|
|
pre-existence, saying,
|
|
'Where was thou when I laid the cornerstone of the Earth?' "Where were
|
|
you, Job, when all the Morning Stars sang together, and all the sons of God
|
|
shouted for joy; when the nucleus of this creation was commenced? If Job had
|
|
been indoctrinated into all the mysteries of modern religionists, he would have
|
|
answered this question by saying,
|
|
'Lord, why do you ask me such a question? I had no existence at that
|
|
time.' "But the very question implies a previous existence of Job, but he had
|
|
forgotten where he [had been], and the Lord put the question as though he did
|
|
exist, showing to him in the declaration, that, when he laid the cornerstone of
|
|
the Earth, there were a great many sons of God there, and that they all shouted
|
|
for joy. Who were these sons of God?... They were Jesus, the elder brother, and
|
|
all the family that have come from that day until now -- millions on millions
|
|
-- and all who will come hereafter, and take tabernacles of flesh and bones
|
|
until the closing up scene of this creation."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse delivered in the 14th Ward Assembly
|
|
Rooms, December 15, 1872; 15 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 241, at 246 [London (1873)].
|
|
Discourse then continues into a protracted discussion as to why we, as the sons
|
|
of God back then, shouted for joy, at that time. This fellow Job that Orson
|
|
Pratt talks about lived in the lands of Uz, and fathered ten children; his
|
|
livelihood was that of a rancher, managing at one time over ten thousand sheep,
|
|
camels, oxen, and the like. The BOOK OF JOB occupies a unique position in the
|
|
Old Testament; it stands outside all of the conventional classifications of Old
|
|
Testament literature in that it is neither Law (in the sense of THE TORAH), nor
|
|
is it history, and it has no parallel with the other Prophets in the Old
|
|
Testament. In both literary form and general outlook, Job is different; a large
|
|
part of the book may be called dialogue as people are quoted speaking back and
|
|
forth to each other, but the dialogue is of a succession of elaborate
|
|
protracted speeches rather than an accelerated exchange of conversation such as
|
|
is often found in the narrative books. The BOOK OF JOB takes it place nestled
|
|
along side with the great ancient Sumerian and Akkadian theodicies [meaning
|
|
works dealing with the nature of Celestial Justice]. The central position of
|
|
the book deals with the Question: What should the righteous man expect to
|
|
receive from the hands of God? Should he expect only good fortune, or should he
|
|
also expect bad fortune? Job talks about how both contrasting types of
|
|
circumstances are thrown at Saints from Father. As for himself, Job once had
|
|
great prosperity, but then everything was swept away from him except his life.
|
|
After being tried right down to the wire, Job had his prosperity returned to
|
|
him in double. Individuals holding unrealistic understandings of Divine MODUS
|
|
OPERANDI are counselled that adverse circumstances making their appearance in
|
|
our lives are not to be ruled out, and should actually be expected to surface
|
|
at some point in time [see JOB 2:10 after reading the preceding background
|
|
text]; but today as has always been the case, the NOBLE AND GREAT (like Job
|
|
from yesterday) are intolerant of distractions, they know what they want to
|
|
hear, and when they hear the right words -- they buckle down tight and get
|
|
serious, and enter into Celestial Covenants, just like Job did [see JOB 31:1
|
|
and 41:4]. =============================================================[071]</p>
|
|
<p>Whether this shouting for joy took place before or after Father started
|
|
extracting his Contracts out of us, I don't know; talk in this area is limited
|
|
to generalities. [072]</p>
|
|
<p>[072]============================================================= "Our
|
|
Spirits... were in the Councils of the Heavens before the foundations of the
|
|
Earth were laid. We were there. We sang together with the Heavenly hosts for
|
|
joy when the foundations of the Earth were laid, and when the plan of our
|
|
existence upon this Earth and redemption were mapped out. We were there, we
|
|
were interested, and we took part in this great preparation... We were vitally
|
|
concerned in the carrying out of these great plans and purposes, we understood
|
|
them, and it was for our sakes they were decreed, and are to be consummated..."
|
|
-Joseph F. Smith, GOSPEL DOCTRINE, page 93, et seq. [Deseret Book,
|
|
Salt Lake City (1939)].
|
|
=============================================================[072]</p>
|
|
<p>But we do know that we are ones that Job referred to as the Sons of God. [073]</p>
|
|
<p>[073]============================================================= "We were
|
|
there when the foundations of the Earth were laid. We were numbered among the
|
|
sons of God, whom the Lord speaks of to the patriarch Job. 'Where wast thou,
|
|
[speaking to Job], when I laid the cornerstone of the Earth, when all the sons
|
|
of God shouted for you, and the morning stars san together?' Job, where were
|
|
you at that time? He was among them, he was there, perhaps he did not remember
|
|
it, any more than we do."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse on March 9, 1879; 20 JOURNAL OF
|
|
DISCOURSES 142, at 156 [London (1880)].
|
|
=============================================================[073]</p>
|
|
<p>Later on, after we have been around down here for a while, by the careful
|
|
honoring of those other Contracts we can enter into down here, we can enlarge
|
|
our standing before Father and be like him some day, by ordered, planned, and
|
|
organized accretion. [074]</p>
|
|
<p>[074]============================================================= "We believe
|
|
that we are children of our parents in Heaven. That being that dwells in my
|
|
tabernacle, and those beings that dwell in yours; the beings who are
|
|
intelligent and possess, in embryo, all of the attributes of our Father in
|
|
Heaven; the beings that reside in those earthly houses, they are the children
|
|
of our Father who is in Heaven. He begat us before the foundations of this
|
|
Earth were laid and before the Morning Stars sang together or the Sons of God
|
|
shouted for joy when the corner stones of the Earth were laid, as is written in
|
|
the sayings of the Patriarch Job."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake
|
|
City, August 20, 1871; 14 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 233, at 240 [London (1872)].
|
|
=============================================================[074]</p>
|
|
<p>Some of those other Celestial Contracts that are available to be entered into
|
|
down here are the introductory Contract of Baptism, and the more advanced
|
|
Endowment Contracts [which are entered into in Temples], in addition to
|
|
multiple other ecclesiastically related Contracts. [075]</p>
|
|
<p>[075]============================================================= The first
|
|
Covenant is the introductory Covenant of BAPTISM, and although I characterize
|
|
it as being INTRODUCTORY, it nevertheless is the same identical NEW AND
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT spoken of by the Prophets and Patriarchs of old (as I will
|
|
discuss later). A great man once had a few words to say about the significance
|
|
of this BAPTISM COVENANT:
|
|
"By accepting membership in the Church, through Baptism and the laying
|
|
on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, a person enters into a Covenant
|
|
with the Lord to obey and live by all the requirements of the Gospel. The
|
|
Lord's promise, conditioned upon such obedience, is the gift of Eternal Life.
|
|
"What must we then think... of a Covenant where God himself is the
|
|
party of the first part? Such a Covenant God has made with every one of us [as
|
|
members of this Church]. He has entered into an agreement with us. If you will
|
|
do all things which the Lord your God shall command you; if you will do his
|
|
will, you shall have glory added upon your heads forever and ever. That is his
|
|
pledge, and God keeps his Covenants and we should do the same.
|
|
"How do we enter into that Covenant? Not by signing a written
|
|
instrument. True. But in a most impressive manner and most authoritative manner
|
|
[by conferring upon his servants down a GRANT OF CELESTIAL JURISDICTION]. The
|
|
Lord commissions his servants, bestows upon them his Priesthood and authorizes
|
|
them to perform sacred ordinances, the same as if he had signed it in person.
|
|
They call attention to the necessity of the following the Lord Jesus Christ and
|
|
obeying his Gospel, doing all things whatsoever the Lord shall command us. That
|
|
is the contract, and we enter into it in a most solemn way. What is the
|
|
formality of it, if not by writing with pen and ink? It is by baptism by
|
|
immersion for the remission of sins. What a wonderful and impressive formality!
|
|
Could anything be more so? In baptism by immersion we symbolism both death and
|
|
life, for as the Apostle Paul explains: 'We are buried with [Christ] by baptism
|
|
into death' and brought forth out of the watery grave in likeness of his
|
|
glorious resurrection.
|
|
"This explanation of the significance of the baptismal Covenant has
|
|
remained vivid in my mind for all these forty years."
|
|
-Marion G. Romney in CONFERENCE REPORTS ["A Covenant Obligation"], at
|
|
129 (October, 1978).
|
|
=============================================================[075]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, these Covenants that we can now enter into are REPLACEMENT Covenants,
|
|
because Heavenly Father already has invisible Contracts in effect on us all, as
|
|
we all entered into Contracts with Father in the First Estate, all of us
|
|
without exception: Saint, sinner, Heathen, and Gremlin:</p>
|
|
<p>"In our preexistence state, in the day of the great Council, we made
|
|
certain agreements with the Almighty..." [076]</p>
|
|
<p>[076]============================================================= John
|
|
Widtsoe, writing in the "The Worth of Souls," in UTAH GENEALOGICAL AND
|
|
HISTORICAL MAGAZINE, October, 1934, at page 198. This statement appears in the
|
|
context of a discussion of what some of the special terms of those Contracts
|
|
were that Latter-Day Saints entered into with Father back then.
|
|
=============================================================[076]</p>
|
|
<p>And the content of those preexistence [previous existence] First Estate
|
|
Covenants are designed to remain largely withheld from our present memory for a
|
|
reason. [077]</p>
|
|
<p>[077]============================================================= "... I think
|
|
there is great wisdom in withholding the knowledge of our previous existence.
|
|
Why? Because we could not, if we had all our pre-existent knowledge
|
|
accompanying us into this world, show to our Father in the Heavens and to the
|
|
Heavenly host that we would be in all things obedient; ... In order to try the
|
|
children of men, there must be a degree of knowledge withheld from them, for it
|
|
would be no temptation to them if they could understand from the beginning the
|
|
consequences of their acts, and the nature and results of this and that
|
|
temptation. But in order that we may prove ourselves before the Heavens in all
|
|
things, we have to begin at the very first principles of knowledge, and be
|
|
tried from knowledge to knowledge, and from grace to grace, until, like our
|
|
elder brother, we finally overcome and triumph over all of our imperfections,
|
|
and receive with him the same glory that he inherits, which glory he had before
|
|
the world was. That is the way we as a people look upon our previous
|
|
existence."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse delivered in the 14th Ward Assembly
|
|
Rooms, December 15, 1872; 15 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 241, at 245 [London (1873)].
|
|
=============================================================[077]</p>
|
|
<p>Back in the First Estate, not everyone entered into the same identical terms on
|
|
their previous existence Contracts. There was very much Contract customization
|
|
involved, when Father deemed it appropriate. For example, the Noble and the
|
|
Great Spirits, who excelled in valiance back then above all others, had special
|
|
addendums attached to their First Estate Contracts with Father, just tailor
|
|
made for their missions down here:</p>
|
|
<p>"Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were
|
|
organized before the world was; and among these were many of the Noble and
|
|
Great ones; And God saw these souls that they were good, and [in a Conference]
|
|
he stood in the midst of them, and he said:
|
|
'These I will make my rulers.'
|
|
"For he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were
|
|
good, and he said unto me:
|
|
"Abraham, thou art one of them; thou was chosen before thou wast
|
|
born..." [078]</p>
|
|
<p>[078]============================================================= The writings
|
|
of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, written in his own hand on papyrus. See
|
|
"Book of Abraham," Chapter 3, in DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS [meaning FATHER'S
|
|
DOCTRINE AND CONTRACTS]. Published by the Mormon Church, Salt Lake City, Utah.
|
|
This is an unusual book and is also distinctively peculiar in that it is the
|
|
only book in the world that has the honor of a Preface in it written by Jesus
|
|
Christ himself [this Preface now appears as Section 1]. In an age when the
|
|
prevailing view is that the Heavens were probably once open to Revelation a
|
|
long time ago, but now are forever closed (for some unexplained reason), the
|
|
publication of such a doctrinally hybrid volume such as the DOCTRINE AND
|
|
COVENANTS is as startling as well as it is unique -- because its contents are
|
|
not really open to debate or argument. They require either total acceptance or
|
|
total rejection -- a somewhat extreme and difficult position for a person
|
|
unacquainted with them to take at first. However, the word UNIQUE means
|
|
"standing alone" or perhaps something "different or new." In a contemporary
|
|
ecclesiastical setting where a confluence of divergent religious thoughts
|
|
permeate the intellectual scene, UNIQUE infers something that is different from
|
|
generally accepted predominate views -- and so the effect of DOCTRINE AND
|
|
COVENANTS is to supply an enlarged understanding through enlarged factual
|
|
presentations -- not in opposition or contradiction to other previously
|
|
recorded or circulated Revelations, but merely adding an enlarged dimension to
|
|
information already at hand. Like privately circulating newsletters offering
|
|
slices of factual information largely only complimentary to that which appears
|
|
in the Government Billboards of the major New York City media -- the
|
|
newsletter's factual presentations now creates an enlarged basis of factual
|
|
knowledge for their readers to exercise judgment on, and so such additional
|
|
information often leads, in turn, to end conclusions that fall outside of the
|
|
generally accepted predominate contours of views that the Gremlin controlled
|
|
Government Billboard major media would prefer that folks remain intellectually
|
|
isolated within. Even so, be cognizant that the information in Father's
|
|
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS only "adds a dimension" to other sources of Celestial
|
|
information obtainable elsewhere, and by no means are represented as being
|
|
complete in themselves; nor should they be relied upon as offering such a total
|
|
and thorough picture of the Celestial scene that other important complimentary
|
|
sources of information [such as that originating from our Patriarchs and
|
|
Fathers of old] are improvidently tossed aside and ignored.
|
|
=============================================================[078]</p>
|
|
<p>Although that brief account by Abraham does not describe everything that went
|
|
on in that Conference, what also transpired in that Conference, in addition to
|
|
the lofty Status pronouncements from On High, was the extraction of additional
|
|
Contract Addendums out of the participants, just tailor made to fit the Noble
|
|
and the Great.</p>
|
|
<p>As we enter into and fulfill Father's Advanced Contracts down here, the
|
|
significance of those Contracts that we entered into in the First Estate fades
|
|
away until they are of no significance whatsoever. [079]</p>
|
|
<p>[079]============================================================= Numerous
|
|
Christian commentators have detected that something was Divinely special about
|
|
the idea of a COVENANT, and their feelings are correct -- the idea is very
|
|
significant. But being deficient in factual knowledge on the First Estate where
|
|
we came from, and not having other key slices of information, they never hit
|
|
the nail right on the head, or even come close to it. See:
|
|
-Delbert Hillers in COVENANT: THE HISTORY OF A BIBLICAL IDEA [John
|
|
Hopkins Press (1969)];
|
|
-D. McCarthy in TREATY AND COVENANT; A STUDY IN THE ANCIENT ORIENT
|
|
DOCUMENTS... [Pontifical Bible Institute, Rome (1963)];
|
|
-George Mendenhall in LAW AND COVENANT IN ISRAEL AND THE ANCIENT NEAR
|
|
EAST [The Biblical Colloquium, Pittsburgh (1955)];
|
|
-George Mendenhall in "COVENANT" THE INTERPRETER'S DICTIONARY OF THE
|
|
BIBLE [Abingdon, New York (1962)];
|
|
-William H. Brownlee in A COMPARISON OF THE COVENANTERS OF THE DEAD
|
|
SEA SCROLLS WITH PRE-CHRISTIAN JEWISH SECTS [The Biblical Archeologist
|
|
(September, 1951)].
|
|
=============================================================[079]</p>
|
|
<p>These Contracts that we enter into with Father down here supersede our previous
|
|
Contracts, and if no Contract is entered into with Father down here, then the
|
|
governing Contract at the Judgment Day will be the First Estate Contract.
|
|
People playing the Contract avoidance routine on Father's Contracts are playing
|
|
with fire and damaging themselves, because knowledge of the content of those
|
|
Previous Existence Contracts is being withheld from us for a reason. This then
|
|
raises a moral question: What right does Father have to hold us to Contracts,
|
|
the content of which we have no knowledge of? Answer: Father has our consent to
|
|
do so as part of the game plan. Yes, we are placed in this world measurably in
|
|
the dark, necessarily so. [080]</p>
|
|
<p>[080]============================================================= "We are
|
|
placed in this world measurably in the dark. We no longer see our Father face
|
|
to face. While it is true that we once did; we stood in His presence, seeing as
|
|
we are seen, knowing, according to our intelligence, as we are known; that
|
|
curtain has dropped, we have changed our abode, we have taken upon ourselves
|
|
flesh; the veil of forgetfulness intervenes between this life and that, and we
|
|
are left, as [the Apostle] Paul expresses it, to "see through a glass darkly,"
|
|
to "know in part and to prophesy in part;' to see only to a limited extent, the
|
|
end from the beginning. We do not comprehend things in their fullness. But we
|
|
have the promise, if we will receive and live by every word that proceeds forth
|
|
from the mouth of God, wisely using the intelligences, the opportunities, the
|
|
advantages, and the possessions which He continually bestows upon us -- the
|
|
time will come, in the eternal course of events, when our minds will be cleared
|
|
from every cloud, the past will recur to memory, the future will be an open
|
|
vision, and we will behold things as they are, and the past, present and future
|
|
will be one eternal day, as it is in the eyes of God our Father, who knows
|
|
neither past, present or future; whose course is one eternal round; who
|
|
creates, who saves, redeems and glorifies the workmanship of His hands, in
|
|
which He Himself is [in turn] glorified."
|
|
-Orson F. Whitney, in a discourse delivered in the Tabernacle on
|
|
Sunday, April 19, 1885; 26 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 194, at 195 [London (1886)].
|
|
=============================================================[080]</p>
|
|
<p>And when you understand the benefits of the game plan, your initial reticence
|
|
will also fade away. [081]</p>
|
|
<p>[081]============================================================= And the
|
|
benefits are quite substantial:
|
|
"As our Father and God begat us, sons and daughters, so will we rise
|
|
immortal, males and females, and also beget children, and, in our turn, form
|
|
and create [other] worlds, and send forth our spirit children to inherit those
|
|
worlds, just the same as we were sent here, and thus will the works of God
|
|
continue..."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake
|
|
City, August 20, 1871; 14 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 233, at 242 [London (1872)].
|
|
=============================================================[081]</p>
|
|
<p>And if it initially appears to be unfair to penalize someone for their innocent
|
|
ignorance by being judged under invisible contracts they had no knowledge of,
|
|
then remember that in a Contract Law Judgment setting such nice things as
|
|
fairness and relative levels of knowledge or ignorance of the Contract's terms
|
|
are all irrelevant factors; and this Tort Law argument of UNFAIRNESS, by being
|
|
made a party to such excessively one-sided and unequal contract terms really
|
|
falls apart when the temporary deflection of the previous memory itself is made
|
|
such an integral and an important structural element in those First Estate
|
|
Contracts. [082]</p>
|
|
<p>[082]============================================================= "We come
|
|
here to live for a few days, and then we are gone again... We had an existence
|
|
before we came into the world. Our spirits came here to take these tabernacles;
|
|
they came to occupy them as habitations, with the understanding that all that
|
|
had passed previously to our coming here should be taken away from us, that we
|
|
should not know anything about it."
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse made at the Bowery, Salt Lake City on
|
|
June 22, 1865; 3 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 362, at 367 [London (1856)].
|
|
=============================================================[082]</p>
|
|
<p>This means that if there had been no memory deflection taking place, then the
|
|
objectives Father has for us in this Life, to live in a free-wheeling world for
|
|
a little while by "starting over" in a sense, would be infeasible to
|
|
accomplish; and so without memory deflection there would have been no reason
|
|
for this Second Estate Life and the numerous Contracts associated with it --
|
|
Celestial Contracts that overrule our First Estate Covenants. [083]</p>
|
|
<p>[083]============================================================= "We all
|
|
acknowledge that we had an existence before we were born into this world. How
|
|
long before we took our departure from the realms of bliss to find our
|
|
tabernacle in the flesh is unknown to us. Suffice it to say that we were sent
|
|
here. We came willingly... Then if it be true that we entered into a Covenant
|
|
with the powers Celestial, before we left our former homes, that we would come
|
|
here and obey the voice of the Lord, through whomsoever he might speak, these
|
|
powers are witnesses of the Covenant into which we entered [back then]; and it
|
|
is not impossible that we signed the articles thereof with our own hands --
|
|
which articles may be retained in the archives above, to be presented to us
|
|
when we rise from the dead, and be judged out of our own mouths, according to
|
|
that which was written in the books. Did we Covenant and agree that we would be
|
|
subject to the authorities of Heaven placed over us? ...Did we Covenant to be
|
|
subject to the authority of God in all the different relations of life -- that
|
|
we would be loyal to the legitimate powers that emanate from God? I have been
|
|
lead to think that such is the truth. Something whispers these things to me in
|
|
this light. ...What did we agree to before we came here? If to anything, I
|
|
suppose the very same things [that] we [have] agreed to since we [came] here,
|
|
that are legitimate and proper."
|
|
-Orson Hyde, in a discourse made in the Tabernacle on October 6, 1859
|
|
["Sowing and Reaping -- Fulfillment of Covenants"] in 7 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES
|
|
313, at 314 [London (1860)].
|
|
=============================================================[083]</p>
|
|
<p>The unfairness aspect of this impending state of affairs that gnaws at us -- of
|
|
people being adjudged under invisible Contracts -- causes some folks to want to
|
|
shy away from such a harsh Father; but such a reduced view of Father's Plans is
|
|
defective. In this world, we are conditioned to think that penalizing someone
|
|
means directly throwing something negative at him, i.e., docking his pay,
|
|
giving him a reprimand, having him picked up, confining the fellow to barracks,
|
|
giving the poor fellow a spanking, or having him taken out and shot, and the
|
|
like. To be penalized by Father carries no such negative circumstances being
|
|
applied against us at all; a penalty levied at us by Father is the mere absence
|
|
of a possible prospective Celestial Blessing that could have been ours -- if we
|
|
had buckled down tight and gotten serious when presented with information to
|
|
the effect that Contracts are governing at the Last Day. So when Father places
|
|
a Contract Law Judgement environment in effect for us on the Judgment Day, and
|
|
people then start claiming unfairness for any one of several dozen different
|
|
reasons (and each argument has merit to it), their arguments sounding in the
|
|
Tort of unfairness will fall apart and collapse, and properly so, as there is
|
|
nothing inconsistent about Father's selective withholding of any of his
|
|
discretionary Blessings from us that were waived by us, and the great Celestial
|
|
Grant of Eloha. [084]</p>
|
|
<p>[084]============================================================= The phrase
|
|
used here, SOUNDING IN TORT, appears in different places throughout the Federal
|
|
jurisprudential strata of the United States. When a grievance is presented to a
|
|
Judge for a ruling, it means that the relationship is not predicated on a
|
|
contract, and that the instant claim being sought is sounding [based on]
|
|
correlative arguments of unfairness, for some reason, and therefore Tort Law
|
|
applies there to fill the vacuum left by no contracts. Remember that Tort Law
|
|
and its arguments of UNFAIRNESS can sometimes apply to govern grievances even
|
|
when a contract is hanging in the distant background, because the instant
|
|
grievance falls outside of the content of the contract. That I could find, the
|
|
phrase SOUNDING IN TORT first surfaced in a Supreme Court ruling in a Case
|
|
called GARLAND VS. DAVIS, 45 U.S. 131, at 141 (1846), which declared the rule
|
|
that Contract grievances are best separated away from, and adjudged differently
|
|
from Tort grievances (and properly so). The Court also ruled in GARLAND that
|
|
declarations made within a Pleading, commingling Tort claims with Contract
|
|
claims, are to be discouraged. There are 56 other Supreme Court cases I found
|
|
where the phrase SOUNDING IN TORT appears. Recently, it appears in Footnote #2
|
|
to MIGRA VS. WARREN SCHOOL DISTRICT, 465 U.S. 75 (1984) while discussing an
|
|
action for Tort damages sought on grounds of wrongful interference unfairness
|
|
with the petitioner's Contract of Employment. In Federal statutes, the phrase
|
|
is found in the INDIAN TUCKER ACT.
|
|
"The Court of Claims shall have jurisdiction to render judgment... upon
|
|
any express or implied contract... in cases not sounding in tort."
|
|
-28 U.S.C. 1505. Some of the other Federal statutes incorporating this
|
|
phrase SOUNDING IN TORT are:
|
|
-28 U.S.C. 1346 ["United States as Defendant"];
|
|
-28 U.S.C. 1491 ["Claims against the United States generally"];
|
|
-28 U.S.C. 2412 ["Costs and fees"]. By the end of this Letter, the
|
|
distinction between Tort and Contract should be quite clear to see; and most
|
|
importantly, its true origin in the mind of Heavenly Father who created Nature,
|
|
and not judges, should be recognized.
|
|
=============================================================[084]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, the Third Estate we will enter into after the Last Judgment Day is
|
|
stratified into multiple different strata, and people will go where they are
|
|
most comfortable; yes, Father has many mansions in his House. [085]</p>
|
|
<p>[085]============================================================= "Salvation
|
|
is an individual operation... We read in the Bible that there is one glory of
|
|
the Sun, another glory of the Moon, and another glory of the Stars. In the Book
|
|
of DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS, these glories are called Telestial, Terrestrial, and
|
|
Celestial, which is the highest. These are worlds, different departments, or
|
|
Mansions, in our Father's House. Now these men, or those women, who know no
|
|
more about the power of God, and the influences of the Holy Spirit, than to be
|
|
led entirely by another person, suspending their understanding, and pinning
|
|
their faith upon another's sleeve, will never be capable of entering into the
|
|
Celestial glory, to be crowned as they anticipate; they will never be capable
|
|
of becoming Gods. They cannot rule themselves, to say nothing of ruling others,
|
|
but they must be dictated to in every trifle, like a child. They cannot control
|
|
themselves in the least, but James, Peter, or somebody else must control them.
|
|
They never can become Gods, nor be crowned as rules with glory, immortality,
|
|
and eternal lives. They never can hold scepters of glory, majesty, and power in
|
|
the Celestial Kingdom. Who will? Those who are valiant and inspired with the
|
|
true independence of Heaven, who will go forth boldly in the service of God,
|
|
leaving others to so as they please, determined to do right, though all mankind
|
|
besides should take the opposite course."
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse at the Tabernacle on February 20, 1853;
|
|
1 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 309, at 312 [London (1854)].
|
|
=============================================================[085]</p>
|
|
<p>For example, if you simply cannot handle a difficult Contract or do not want
|
|
the responsibility that such a difficult Contract carries along with it -- then
|
|
that is fine, as Father has a Kingdom for you; and if this idea of spending
|
|
Time and all Eternity in the midst of clowns who also cannot handle Contracts
|
|
intrigues you, then I would suggest that you explore the possibility of
|
|
terminating further interest in this Letter. Maybe I am missing something
|
|
somewhere, but I think it is inconsistent for Tax and Highway Protestors to so
|
|
freely and willingly be criminally prosecuted for no more than defining a new
|
|
elevated Status relationship with Government -- but then for those same
|
|
Protestors to turn around and say that yes, they would somehow enjoy spending
|
|
the rest of Time and all Eternity on their knees licking someone else's feet as
|
|
some low level ministering angels. Therefore, we will settle for nothing but
|
|
the top -- and if we err along the way, then we erred while expending maximum
|
|
effort. [086]</p>
|
|
<p>[086]============================================================= "These words
|
|
set forth the fact to which Jesus referred to when he said, 'In my Father's
|
|
House are many Mansions.' How many I am not prepared to say; but there are
|
|
three distinctly spoken of: The Celestial, the highest; the Terrestrial, the
|
|
next below it; and the Telestial, the third. If we were to take the pains to
|
|
read what the Lord has said to his people in the Latter days we should find
|
|
that he has made provision for all the inhabitants of the Earth; every creature
|
|
who desires, and who strives in the least, to overcome evil and subdue iniquity
|
|
within himself or herself, and to live worthy of glory, will possess one. We
|
|
who have received the Fullness of the Gospel of the Son of God, or the Kingdom
|
|
of Heaven that has come to Earth, are in possession of these laws, ordinances,
|
|
commandments and revelations that will prepare us, by strict obedience, to
|
|
inherit the Celestial Kingdom, to go into the presence of the Father and the
|
|
Son."
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse in the New Tabernacle on June 25th,
|
|
1871; 14 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 147, at 148 [London (1872)].
|
|
=============================================================[086]</p>
|
|
<p>When Contracts are in effect, the only thing that is relevant in a Contract Law
|
|
Judgment setting is the content of the contract, the Person whose behavior the
|
|
contract seeks to measure compliance with, and the behavior that was being
|
|
measured; and as we traverse from a political setting involving Tax Protestors
|
|
to an ecclesiastical setting involving us all at the Last Day, then nothing
|
|
changes. The fact that Irwin Schiff and Armen Condo never bothered to read the
|
|
Commercial bank account merchant contracts that they were adjudged to be in
|
|
default of, and also their invisible Citizenship Contracts, and then were
|
|
penalized under those contracts by being incarcerated in a Federal cage, that
|
|
ignorance of the contract's terms is neither a relevant question nor excusable
|
|
behavior under a Contract Law judgment setting. Literally, the only thing that
|
|
is relevant is: Did they honor the contract or not. People who are unable to
|
|
think along these precise and very narrow ratiocinative [087]</p>
|
|
<p>[087]=============================================================
|
|
RATIOCINATIVE means the process of exact thinking with little room, if any, for
|
|
error. =============================================================[087]</p>
|
|
<p>lines of Contract Law will find themselves being self-penalized for their
|
|
ignorance (penalized in the sense that prospective blessings that could have
|
|
been their's will be forfeited). If that sounds excessively harsh, then
|
|
momentarily picture yourself as being in Father's position, and then consider
|
|
what you would do differently when confronted with a group of people who can
|
|
and do think precisely, and another group of people that do not think so
|
|
precisely, and another group who really could care less about anything. [088]</p>
|
|
<p>[088]============================================================= "All of the
|
|
doctrines of Life and Salvation are as plain to the understanding as [are]
|
|
geographical lines of a correctly drawn map. This doctrine, revealed in these
|
|
latter times, is worthy of the attention of all men. It gives the positive
|
|
situation in which they will stand before the Heavens when they have finished
|
|
their career. Generation after generation is constantly coming and passing
|
|
away. They all possess more or less intelligence, which forms the foundation
|
|
within them for the reception of an eternal increase [in their] intelligence...
|
|
But [in contrast to that] hundreds of millions of human beings have been born,
|
|
lived out their short earthly span, and passed away, ignorant alike of
|
|
themselves and of the PLAN OF SALVATION provided for them. It gives great
|
|
consolation, however, to know that this glorious plan devised by Heaven follows
|
|
them into the next existence, offering for their acceptance eternal life and
|
|
exaltation of thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers in the presence of
|
|
their Father and God, through Jesus Christ his Son. How glorious -- how ample
|
|
is the gospel plan in its saving properties and merciful designs. This one
|
|
revelation, containing this Principle, is worth worlds on worlds to mankind."
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake
|
|
City, on January 12, 1862; 9 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 147, at 148 [London (1862)].
|
|
=============================================================[088]</p>
|
|
<p>And it will be on the Judgment Day that we will be judged by Contracts, and
|
|
under a Contract Law jurisprudential setting -- and not under the rights,
|
|
justice, relative collective equality, and group fairness of pure natural moral
|
|
Tort Law. Interestingly enough, also known to those Persons who have entered
|
|
into Father's Advanced Contracts down here is that the timing of the Judgment
|
|
Day can be accelerated into this life, thus removing any lingering vestige of
|
|
uncertainty someone may have about their Standing before Father; there is no
|
|
Last Day for these special people to concern themselves with. When Father
|
|
approves of your Standing down here, you are going to know it under rather
|
|
strong circumstances.</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, Heavenly Father has contracts on us all going back into the First Estate.
|
|
[089]</p>
|
|
<p>[089]============================================================= "Those
|
|
covenants that [Latter-Day Saints now make] were also made in the beginning of
|
|
the creation. They are now renewed to us..."
|
|
-Heber C. Kimball, in a discourse made in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake
|
|
City, January 6, 1861; 9 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 126, at 130 [London (1862)].
|
|
=============================================================[089]</p>
|
|
<p>And just like Federal Judges in 7203 WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE prosecutions
|
|
quietly taking Judicial Notice of contracts in their Chambers even before the
|
|
Tax Protestor gets arrested and the adversary criminal proceedings start,
|
|
Father too already has all the Contracts he needs in front of him awaiting the
|
|
judgment scene of Last Day -- First Estate Contracts that were solicited from
|
|
us before we were born into this World, and this Second Estate proceeding
|
|
started to collect and assemble the factual setting the Last Day will issue out
|
|
a Judgment on. First Estate Contracts are now in effect on everyone -- ON
|
|
EVERYONE -- down here without any exceptions, and Father is not interested in
|
|
either any Tort or great thing we accomplish -- except that if that action is
|
|
encompassed within the content of a positive or restraining covenant on one of
|
|
the Contracts he has on us. [090]</p>
|
|
<p>[090]============================================================= "Those
|
|
things which we call extraordinary, remarkable, or unusual may make history,
|
|
but they do not make real life. "After all, to do well those things which God
|
|
ordained to be the common lot of all mankind, is the truest greatness. To be a
|
|
successful father or a successful mother is greater than to be a successful
|
|
general or a successful statesman."
|
|
-Joseph F. Smith in JUVENILE INSTRUCTOR, page 752 (December 15, 1905).
|
|
Let's say you were Armand Hammer, and you spent your life building up a great
|
|
oil company -- OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM. Was that a great event for Mr. Hammer to
|
|
accomplish down here? Yes, it very much was, and a very difficult task
|
|
technically as well. But -- building up one huge OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM or
|
|
building up one thousand such dynastic empires means nothing to magnify your
|
|
standing at the Last Day. Although the training and SAVOIR-FAIRE acquired in
|
|
the process of such empire construction that dynasty builders are going through
|
|
is prepatory to other things, and could be very helpful to them in other ways;
|
|
the successful administration of difficult Celestial Contracts remains the
|
|
dynasty builder's sole obstacle to inheriting the Celestial realms, as much as
|
|
the administration of those Celestial Contracts remains the sole obstacle to us
|
|
PEASANTS as well.
|
|
=============================================================[090]</p>
|
|
<p>By the wording of the Contracts Father has on us, a wide ranging array of
|
|
damages are not permissible -- but the moral Tort question of damages itself is
|
|
not relevant unless the damages fall into an area restricted by the Contract.
|
|
In a similar way, some of the Contract terms call for both positive action and
|
|
negative restrainment under situations where there could be no damages created
|
|
regardless of what we do; SO DAMAGES ARE NOT RELEVANT WHEN CONTRACTS ARE IN
|
|
EFFECT. ONLY CONCERN YOURSELF WITH THE CONTENT OF THE CONTRACT. And even if we
|
|
have carefully avoided entering into any Contracts with him now in this Life,
|
|
he still has Contracts on us all from the First Estate he will hold us to at
|
|
the Judgment Day: In other words, there is no such thing as outfoxing Father.
|
|
[091]</p>
|
|
<p>[091]============================================================= Do you want
|
|
to even try and outfox Father? A profile examination of the benefits that we
|
|
will experience by entering into, and then honoring a difficult advanced
|
|
contract, makes the search for ways to outfox Father rather silly and childish
|
|
in comparison. We are all organized to become Gods; whether or not we
|
|
accomplish such a noble objective depends upon how we handle our affairs down
|
|
here in this school.
|
|
"Intelligent beings are organized to become Gods, even the sons of
|
|
Gods, to dwell in the presence of the Gods, and become associated with the
|
|
highest intelligences that dwell in eternity. We are now in that school, and
|
|
must practice upon what we receive."
|
|
-Brigham Young, President of the Mormon Church, in a discourse made in
|
|
the Bowery, Salt Lake City, September 2, 1860; 9 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 158, at
|
|
160 [London (1862)]. This life is a school, and Protestors refusing to consider
|
|
the idea, however remotely accurate it might be, that it is they themselves
|
|
that might be in error with their Protesting, are manifesting in that setting
|
|
an attitude of UNTEACHABLENESS. Such an attitude [forcefully concluding
|
|
prematurely that the King is wrong, and I am right] causes Protestors to
|
|
disregard countermanding factual information when it surfaces. Such a rejection
|
|
of that uncomfortable information, before it is analyzed for authenticity,
|
|
relevancy, etc., is not exemplary of good students. Students who go through
|
|
school effortlessly are those who are in a teachable state of mind, and are
|
|
receptive to the possibility that they may have been in error before.
|
|
=============================================================[091]</p>
|
|
<p>Unlike our King in Washington who has multiple technical deficiencies existing
|
|
within his own statutes, which when invoked timely preclude him from collecting
|
|
any Inland Revenue tax money under many circumstances even when it is
|
|
rightfully due and payable, there are no deficiencies in the Contracts Father
|
|
writes; and for the incredible benefits being offered by Father, [092]</p>
|
|
<p>[092]============================================================= "...I
|
|
expect, if I am faithful with yourselves, that I shall see the time with
|
|
yourselves that we shall know how to prepare to organize an Earth like this --
|
|
know how to people that Earth, how to redeem it, how to sanctify it, and how to
|
|
glorify it, with those who live upon it [being ones] who hearken to our
|
|
counsels. The Father and the Son have attained to this point already; I am on
|
|
the way, and so are you, [along with] every faithful servant of God."
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse in a Special Conference held in the
|
|
Tabernacle in Salt Lake City on August 28, 1852; 6 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 273,
|
|
at 274 [London (1859)].
|
|
=============================================================[092]</p>
|
|
<p>you should not even probe for any improvident technical moves. [093]</p>
|
|
<p>[093]============================================================= "There was a
|
|
time before we ever came into this world when we dwelt in [Father's] presence.
|
|
We knew what kind of being he is. One thing we saw was how glorious he is.
|
|
Another thing, how great was his wisdom, his understanding, how wonderful was
|
|
his power and his inspiration. And we wanted to be like him... If we will just
|
|
be true and faithful to every Covenant, to every Principle of Truth that he has
|
|
given us, then after the resurrection we would come back into his presence and
|
|
we would be just like he is. We would have the same kind of bodies -- bodies
|
|
that would shine like the sun."
|
|
-Joseph Fielding Smith in TAKE HEED TO YOURSELVES!, page 345 [Desert
|
|
Book Publishing, Salt Lake City (1966)].
|
|
=============================================================[093]</p>
|
|
<p>And this question of trying to outfox Father, is why the Illuminatti, who
|
|
otherwise like to consider themselves as being very clever folks, will find
|
|
their Torts, murders, revolutions, wars and environmental damages
|
|
justifications fall apart and collapse at the Last Day -- because pure natural
|
|
moral Tort Law will be irrelevant at the Judgment Day. They will regret having
|
|
made their improvident technical moves down here: By trying to outfox Father
|
|
with their clever Tort Law reasoning on justifying damages. Father has a
|
|
special treat planned, an Ace up his sleeve, just tailor made for dealing with
|
|
these Illuminatti and Bolshevik types of Gremlins; it is the same identical Ace
|
|
that Federal Judges have up their sleeves, just tailor made to deal effectively
|
|
with Constitutionalists: An invisible Contract the poor fellow didn't even know
|
|
about. By the end of this Letter, you will know of the numerous layers of
|
|
invisible Contracts the King has on Tax Protestors. But assuming that you
|
|
avoided entering into new Contracts with Father in this Life, then when your
|
|
memory is restored to you, Father will solicit an accounting of the terms of
|
|
the Contract he extracted from you in the First Estate. [094]</p>
|
|
<p>[094]============================================================= "Now admit,
|
|
as the Latter-Day Saints do, that we had a previous existence, and that when we
|
|
die we shall return to God and our former habitation, where we shall behold the
|
|
face of our Father, and the question immediately arises, shall we have our
|
|
memories increased, that we shall remember our previous existence? ...we
|
|
shall."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse delivered in the 14th Assembly Rooms on
|
|
December 15, 1872; 15 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 241, at 249 [London (1873)]. Jesus
|
|
is often portrayed as being the MEDIATOR OF THE NEW COVENANT [Hebrews 12:24],
|
|
which means that he has some type of an equitable interest in it:
|
|
"For as these memorials of the ATONEMENT were used by the ancient
|
|
Patriarchs and Prophets to manifest to God their faith in the Plan of
|
|
Redemption and in the coming Redeemer... Jesus [is] the Mediator of the New
|
|
Covenant..."
|
|
-John Taylor in THE MEDIATION AND ATONEMENT, at 123 [Deseret
|
|
Publishing, Salt Lake City (1892)]. Question: If there is a NEW COVENANT, was
|
|
there an OLD COVENANT? Answer: Yes, there most certainly was an Old Covenant;
|
|
and Father extracted the OLD Covenant out of us all in the First Estate, so now
|
|
that Covenant has the appearance of being invisible to us. Jesus Christ once
|
|
had a few words to say about the replacement of Father's First Estate Covenant
|
|
with his own [meaning that at the Last Day before Father, those Spirits who
|
|
entered into Father's NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANTS down here will find that
|
|
Jesus is acting as their Advocate before the Father at the Last Day]:
|
|
"...I say unto you that all old Covenants have I caused to be done away
|
|
with in this thing; and this is a NEW AND AN EVERLASTING COVENANT, even that
|
|
which was from the beginning."
|
|
-DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS 22:1.
|
|
"...I am in your midst, and am your Advocate with the Father."
|
|
-DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS 29:5. With Jesus Christ being your Advocate
|
|
before Father at the Last Day [which is a benefit offered to those who have
|
|
entered into Father's NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT], I am unaware of any other
|
|
Counselor I would rather have, acting on my behalf. ...Another set of Covenants
|
|
that Jesus was responsible for replacing with another Covenant, are the
|
|
Covenants associated with the LAW OF MOSES that our Fathers from another era
|
|
once entered into [the sacrifice of Jesus back near the MERIDIAN OF TIME
|
|
fulfilled the symbolic blood sacrifices that many of the Mosaic Ordinances were
|
|
centered around (the MERIDIAN OF TIME separates B.C. from A.D.)].
|
|
=============================================================[094]</p>
|
|
<p>And so what was once an invisible Contract will then become a rather strongly
|
|
known Contract, and then and there the Gremlins will crinkle in self-inflicted
|
|
anguish. The Prophets have stated that there will be weeping, wailing and a
|
|
gnashing of teeth at the Last Day; [095]</p>
|
|
<p>[095]============================================================= "I am Alpha
|
|
and Omega, Christ the Lord; yes even I am he, the Beginning and the End, the
|
|
Redeemer of the World. ...at the... Last Great Day of Judgment... woes shall go
|
|
forth, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth, yea, to those who are found on
|
|
my left hand."
|
|
-DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS 19:1 to 5.
|
|
=============================================================[095]</p>
|
|
<p>those are rather strong characterizations to use -- but now you know why -- for
|
|
among other reasons, the Gremlins will have a perfect knowledge that their
|
|
clever justifications to pull off and try and get away with WORLD CLASS
|
|
mischief were not worth it. And when, at the Last Day, the Illuminatti and
|
|
their Gremlin brothers are confronted with the terms of those First Estate
|
|
Contracts that they entered into before this Second Estate even started, and
|
|
when Father then asks for a simple factual recital of their Covenant
|
|
compliance, then will the Gremlins realize the irrelevancy of their excuses to
|
|
justify and vitiate their murder, war, and miscellaneous abomination damages
|
|
(and all committed, of course, to accomplish and perfect Justice); and those
|
|
Illuminatti types might just find themselves, at that time, being a bit
|
|
disappointed: Because their Tort Law justifications will not even be addressed
|
|
by Father.</p>
|
|
<p>Father will be asking a very simple question then, to which he will expect,
|
|
very properly, a very simple answer: What was the extent to which you honored
|
|
your Contracts?</p>
|
|
<p>Gremlin defense arguments sounding in the Tort of damages justification will be
|
|
tossed aside and ignored then at the Last Day just like State and Federal
|
|
Judges now toss aside and ignore Tort Law arguments of Constitutionalists and
|
|
other Protestors arguing lack of CORPUS DELECTI damages to try and get a
|
|
dismissal of Tax and Highway Contract enforcement prosecutions, when invisible
|
|
contracts unknown to the Constitutionalist were actually in effect. There is
|
|
actually nothing inaccurate or defective about the planned Gremlin defense
|
|
arguments, just like there is nothing inaccurate or factually defective about
|
|
Patriot arguments thrown at Judges today; the question is not one of accuracy
|
|
or whether they are correct, but rather the question is one of whether the
|
|
defense line addresses the contract compliance question asked -- and they
|
|
don't, they are not relevant. Simple questions of Contract compliance by their
|
|
nature exclude a large body of prospective rebuttals that are distractive to
|
|
the simple question asked; when contracts are up for review and judgment, then
|
|
only the content of the Contract is of any relevance. [096]</p>
|
|
<p>[096]============================================================= In August of
|
|
1937, Maurice Harper and Fred Test were beer distributors in Ontario, Oregon.
|
|
They needed to borrow some money, so they entered into a contract with their
|
|
own beer suppliers for a loan; they gave a real property deed on land they
|
|
owned to their supplier of beer as security for this loan, and as circumstances
|
|
often work out, the loan went into default, and a sale of the property quickly
|
|
was commenced by the beer suppliers with the result being that the minimal
|
|
price obtained under the pressure such an accelerated forced sale was far below
|
|
market value. The sale yielded just enough money to pay off the loan, and there
|
|
was no surplus available to give to the beer distributors who had posted the
|
|
land as security for the loan. Maurice Harper and Fred Test yelled UNFAIR, and
|
|
then threw a Court action at the beer suppliers for damages. UNFAIRNESS is not
|
|
relevant when contracts are up for review, so the action was brought in under
|
|
Tort Law. [How is an action brought under Tort? By simply claiming in the
|
|
Complaint that Tort Law governs the grievance, pleading such things as the
|
|
damages experienced and then asking relief sounding in Tort; however, whether
|
|
or not your Tort claims ultimately prevail is another question]. Here, Harper
|
|
and Test asked for the Tort relief in the nature of EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. A Trial
|
|
was held, and during Trial at the close of evidence presentation, the Defendant
|
|
beer suppliers motioned the Court to require the Plaintiffs, Harper and Test,
|
|
to identify whether they wanted to proceed to judgment under the rules of Tort
|
|
of Contract:
|
|
"Plaintiffs [Harper and Test] elected to proceed in Tort. Immediately
|
|
upon the election, being made by Plaintiffs, the Defendants moved for a
|
|
directed verdict on the grounds that the Complaint failed to state a CAUSE OF
|
|
ACTION in Tort and in support of the motion counsel stated:
|
|
"...it is our position that in this case, when construed in the light
|
|
of surrounding circumstances as it must be done, does not raise any obligation
|
|
or does not permit the inference of any obligation EXISTING IN LAW OUTSIDE OF
|
|
THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACT ITSELF..."
|
|
-HARPER VS. INTERSTATE BREWERY, 120 P.2nd 757, at 761 (1942). The
|
|
Court when on to analyze the difference between Tort and Contract; and as is
|
|
the factual setting in so many cases brought before the Judiciary for
|
|
resolution, a business relationship in effect between some parties was
|
|
initially construed around a Contract as the center of gravity, and when
|
|
unanticipated circumstances came to pass (as someone pulled something sneaky
|
|
off that the Contract has made no governing provision for), so the Judiciary
|
|
now has a grievance that is sounding in Tort with a Contract hanging in the
|
|
background:
|
|
"The distinction between a TORT and a BREACH OF CONTRACT is broad and
|
|
clear, in theory. In practice, however, it is not always easy to determine
|
|
whether a particular act or course of conduct subjects the wrongdoer to an
|
|
action in Tort, or one merely for breach of Contract. The test to be applied is
|
|
the nature of the right which is being invaded. If this right was created
|
|
solely by the [contractual] agreement of the parties, the Plaintiff is limited
|
|
to an action EX CONTRACTU. If it was created by law he may sue in Tort."
|
|
-HARPER VS. INTERSTATE BREWERY, id., at 762. Under these cases where a
|
|
Contract is hanging in the background, but a Tort Law claim is being demanded
|
|
as the relief, often times Attorneys for the Plaintiff will ask for both Breach
|
|
of Contract and Tort relief, reciting elements of the factual setting that
|
|
support the respective claims, with the end result being that appellate judges
|
|
are frequently asked to draw lines dividing Tort from Contract, as was the
|
|
instant factual setting here with HARPER. But important for the moment is that
|
|
the distinction once created in the Heavens, a long time ago, bifurcating Tort
|
|
from Contract, is now being honored by the Judiciary, and that the Contract Law
|
|
legal reasoning being enforced by judges today -- as seemingly unpleasant as it
|
|
is initially -- that excludes arguments and other distractions from being
|
|
considered unless they fall within the content of the Contract, is in fact a
|
|
correct PRINCIPLE OF NATURE that everyone will eventually become very well
|
|
acquainted with at the Last Day.
|
|
=============================================================[096]</p>
|
|
<p>If Father was planning on using pure natural moral Tort Law Justice at the
|
|
Judgment Day, then there could be no such things as the third party liability
|
|
absorption feature such as the Atonement (which is operation of Contract); and
|
|
additionally, for the tortious act of swatting a fly, spanking our kids,
|
|
drilling a railroad tunnel through a mountain, or mowing our lawns, we would be
|
|
penalized forever -- if we are operating under the rules of pure natural moral
|
|
Tort Law (which means that all Torts get retorted as the remedy -- with an
|
|
exception being only those excusable Torts necessary to perfect the Ends of
|
|
Justice). That important qualifying retort exception reasoning is the line that
|
|
Lucifer carefully taught his Illuminatti followers to profile themselves around
|
|
to justify their actions before Father. [097]</p>
|
|
<p>[097]============================================================= Lucifer too
|
|
uses contracts to accomplish his end objectives; he too is playing this
|
|
Contract Game. As for Lucifer, irrevocable oaths and covenants are required for
|
|
standing membership in Illuminatti temples. Once contracts are extracted out of
|
|
new Illuminatti initiates, that Equity Relationship that was created is
|
|
considered to be a FAIT ACCOMPLI (meaning once accomplished, then being
|
|
irrevocable in nature). In other secret societies that Lucifer maintains a
|
|
managing interest in, covenants (contracts) that were sealed under blood oaths
|
|
are extracted out of new members. So Lucifer very much knows all about the
|
|
rather strong underlying nature of Contracts and of Contract Law Jurisprudence.
|
|
Witches also use covenants extensively; for a discussion of First Degree,
|
|
Second Degree and Third Degree Initiation Rites, see Janet and Stewart Farrar
|
|
in A WITCHES BIBLE [Magickal Childe Publishing, 35 West 19th Street, New York
|
|
10011 (1981)].
|
|
=============================================================[097]</p>
|
|
<p>Lucifer's clever inveiglement to use damage arguments to vitiate yourself at
|
|
the Last Judgment Day is facially very attractive, and since Tort Law itself is
|
|
a correct PRINCIPLE OF NATURE, any scrutiny of Lucifer's reasoning withstands
|
|
attack and challenge from any angle; it is not until a remote, little known,
|
|
and obscure doctrine is uncovered from the archives of the Mormon Church in
|
|
Salt Lake City (regarding our lives as Spirits before with Father, and Father's
|
|
Previous Existence Contracts on us all, and therefore our Judgment will be
|
|
under Contract Law) does Lucifer's brilliant Tort Law justification reasoning
|
|
fall apart and collapse. In reading Illuminatti literature, Lucifer again
|
|
manifests his supergenius at deception through concealment, as although there
|
|
are references to general Spiritual matters (certain strata of Illuminatti are
|
|
not atheists) as a distraction, however there are no references to any
|
|
Contracts with Father out there that the Illuminatti need to concern themselves
|
|
with. An exemplary line propagated by persons who circulate in the genre of
|
|
Witches, Bolsheviks, and Illuminists is that "You should do it in the name of
|
|
Justice, so you can justify it in the end."</p>
|
|
<p>In the pop song ONE TIN SOLDIER, one finds the following lyrics:</p>
|
|
<p>"...Do it in the name of Heaven, you can justify it in the end... There
|
|
won't be any Trumpets blowing come the Judgment Day..." [098]</p>
|
|
<p>[098]============================================================= Lyrics
|
|
Copyright by FLASHBACK RECORDS/ARISTA RECORDS, New York City. Words and music
|
|
by Dennis Lambert and Brian Potter, Trousdale Music Publishing (1969); revived
|
|
by COVEN RECORDS (WARNER BROTHERS, 1971); MGM RECORDS, (1973); WARNER BROTHERS
|
|
again (1974).
|
|
=============================================================[098]</p>
|
|
<p>These lyrics also appear in the Hollywood movie BILLY JACK. [099]</p>
|
|
<p>[099]============================================================= Starring Tom
|
|
Laughlin and Delores Taylor; distributed by WARNER BROTHERS (1971).
|
|
=============================================================[099]</p>
|
|
<p>With a setting on an Indian Reservation in the Western United States, the plot
|
|
in BILLY JACK told the tale of how the ever changing laws of men are frequently
|
|
out of harmony with true Justice, and so now murder is necessary to accomplish
|
|
the true Ends of Justice where the laws of men fall short; sort of like forcing
|
|
a contemporary hybrid variant of ROBIN HOOD's grab as a means of accomplishing
|
|
JUSTITIA OMNIBUS [justice for all]. Remember that the Illuminatti Gremlins need
|
|
to have people (their prospective recruits in particular) think in terms of
|
|
Tort Law reasoning down here, and so they propagate the view that murders
|
|
committed to accomplish Justice (to correctively retort the damages of others
|
|
that the Law does not reach) are excusable acts that Heavenly Father is
|
|
required to vitiate and ignore at the Last Day [just like the Sheriff is
|
|
excused from bearing the consequences for working the damages you experienced
|
|
when he incarcerated you, after you had first burned your neighbor's house
|
|
down; what the Sheriff did, as a neutral and disinterested third party, was to
|
|
correctively retort the damages created by others]. Once an Illuminatti
|
|
initiate accepts this reasoning, it takes little effort to have the initiate
|
|
accept the application of Tort Law reasoning to larger corrective retorts like
|
|
wars, wholesale murders, environmental damages, use of the police powers of the
|
|
state to accomplish other damages, and assorted other MAGNUM OPUS abominations
|
|
that accomplish proprietary Illuminatti objectives, and all very carefully
|
|
documented and neatly arranged to remedy some other damages else where, and
|
|
also benefit the world by accelerating the commencement timing of the
|
|
Millennial Reign. This is brilliant reasoning that Lucifer taught these little
|
|
Gremlins; Tort Law is a correct PRINCIPLE OF NATURE and cannot itself be
|
|
attacked from any angle. The use of Tort Law reasoning to govern judgments when
|
|
no contracts are in effect is absolutely morally correct and in harmony with
|
|
Nature in itself, and so are all of its retorts to perfect Justice and the Ends
|
|
of Justice. And so an esoteric [100]</p>
|
|
<p>[100]============================================================= To be
|
|
ESOTERIC means to be designed for, and understood by, specially informed people
|
|
only; or otherwise withheld from generally open public avowal.
|
|
=============================================================[100]</p>
|
|
<p>factual element deficiency problem surfaces that will absolutely nullify those
|
|
expected benefits Witches are driving towards as they travel down that YELLOW
|
|
BRICK ROAD of theirs: Heavenly Father extracted Contracts out of us all in the
|
|
First Estate before we came down here, and so Tort Law reasoning will not be
|
|
applicable at the Last Day. Yes, those Trumpets will blow at the Last Day;
|
|
sorry, Gremlins, but your days are numbered. Yes, the HANDWRITING IS ON THE
|
|
WALL for Gremlins. [101]</p>
|
|
<p>[101]============================================================= Back in the
|
|
days of David, there was once a great and fabulous City called Babylon,
|
|
reaching its peak at about 600 B.C. Today, BABYLON has a lingering illicit
|
|
stigma associated with it, but before Babylon went to the dogs, it was very
|
|
impressive. Babylon was the most prominent, majestic, prosperous, and powerful
|
|
City that the world had ever known, up to that time. It had been the most
|
|
important trading center, it had the most powerful military force, the greatest
|
|
cultural resources, and was even a center of tourism due to its Hanging Gardens
|
|
and numerous other man made wonders. Babylon had twin sets of tall walls
|
|
surrounding her and with a moat in between; massive and everlasting, those twin
|
|
walls were so thick and so dimensionally impressive that they were viewed as
|
|
being impregnable by any military technology of the day. Inside the City, there
|
|
was a two year supply of food; and there was no lack of water, either, because
|
|
no less than the great river Euphrates ran through Babylon. Yes, Babylon was
|
|
powerful, wealthy, and just so secure that any potential adversary could hardly
|
|
be taken seriously. And even when it became clear that an increasingly powerful
|
|
adversary like the Medes and the Persians were building military momentum,
|
|
there was no concern within Babylon -- whatever adversaries the world offered
|
|
were only huffing hot air. At a Royal banquet one night in his Palace [DANIEL
|
|
5:1], King Belshazzar saw a finger writing messages on a wall. None of this
|
|
soothsayers, astrologers, or wise men [filled with a wide ranging array of
|
|
factual knowledge on everything the WORLD had to offer -- except Spiritual
|
|
matters] could interpret the meaning. After the clowns had had their turn,
|
|
along came the Prophet Daniel who understood what he saw; and told the King
|
|
what the King did not want to hear: That Father had adjudged his kingdom, and
|
|
found it wanting in minimum Spiritual expectations; that the impossible was
|
|
going to happen and that Babylon was going to be divided and given to
|
|
adversaries -- introduced into the violent and unpleasant circumstances of an
|
|
invasion [DANIEL 5:25 to 28]. Father meant what he said, and so the HANDWRITING
|
|
WAS ON THE WALL for Babylon. That same evening, the flow of the great River
|
|
Euphrates receded, and then slowed down to a trickle; it had been diverted
|
|
upstream by the Gremlin Darius, who had big plans for the conquest of Babylon.
|
|
And now there were holes in the great walls of Babylon where the Euphrates once
|
|
was. The riverbed openings served as the ingress point of entry for the
|
|
invading army of Darius; and Babylon was conquered without resistance. [See
|
|
generally, the ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA ["Babylon"] (London, 1929)]. ...Down to
|
|
the present day, the phrase HANDWRITING ON THE WALL has come to characterize
|
|
improvident and unrealistic fantasy expectations one holds by reason of
|
|
unappreciated impending adverse circumstances, particularly in an area
|
|
involving Father. Today, the United States has a very similar military
|
|
adversary waiting in the wings, an adversary who has been busy on a very well
|
|
known extensive commitment to prepare for war. Water resources were the
|
|
ACHILLES HEEL that brought Babylon to her knees then; and when our turn comes,
|
|
it too will be the sudden and unexpected damages of our water resources that
|
|
the Russians will use to make their invasion Statement, as they attempt a very
|
|
quick lock down on American military installations. Babylon had its quislings
|
|
then, and we have our's now; and we should have known something was afoot when
|
|
Nelson Rockefeller spent two years of his life in the early 1970's heavily
|
|
involved in collecting information on American water resources.
|
|
=============================================================[101]</p>
|
|
<p>In other words, Lucifer counsels his followers to perform their murders and
|
|
Torts in the retort cycle of Justice administration where they can be justified
|
|
and vitiated, so that Heavenly Father would then be required to excuse and
|
|
vitiate their behavior at the Last Day. Under Tort Law reasoning, all Torts
|
|
(damages) need to be "retorted" as the remedy to perfect Justice, but the
|
|
person administering the retort damage itself, like the Sheriff, is immune from
|
|
further cyclic retort, so the Justice cycle stops there. And there also lies
|
|
the Grand Key for getting people to commit murders while believing quite
|
|
strongly that they are exempt from Father's Justice: By simply arranging the
|
|
background circumstances for the murder to fall under the protective justifying
|
|
retort cycle of Justice. Therefore, the person who administers the retort is
|
|
immune from further damages himself. In this brilliant way, Lucifer intends to
|
|
double cross all of his hardworking assistants down here, every single one
|
|
without exception, but not until just before the Judgment Day: Because although
|
|
Tort Law is a correct PRINCIPLE OF NATURE, our Great Judgment will be under
|
|
Contracts and Contract Law, and Tort Law arguments and rationalizations will be
|
|
ignored. So, when Heavenly Father pulls his Ace out of his sleeves to deal with
|
|
these clever Gremlins who sincerely believe that they have found a way to
|
|
outfox Father and get away with MAGNUM Torts by neatly justifying everything in
|
|
the good name of Justice, Father will do no more than merely lift the veil of
|
|
memory we all had lowered on us to seal away the access to our past memories
|
|
while we once journeyed through this Second Estate, and the poor Gremlins will
|
|
then and there remember with a perfect knowledge of the Contracts they
|
|
previously entered into with Father in the First Estate -- Contracts that were
|
|
invisible during the Second Estate. Now the Gremlins will be sealing their own
|
|
fate, as their Tort Law arguments are not relevant when a simple and limited
|
|
accounting of Contracts is asked for.</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, Lucifer was in the many Councils of Heaven with us all when we were on our
|
|
knees reciting the terms of our Contracts from our tongues, [102]</p>
|
|
<p>[102]============================================================= When the
|
|
rebellion in the Heavens took place, Lucifer was cast down to the Earth; so the
|
|
Earth was created before the rebellion, and Lucifer was there in the Heavens
|
|
when the first version of those Contracts were extracted from us all, and so by
|
|
encouraging arguments sounding in Tort, Lucifer knows exactly what he is doing
|
|
(meaning that he intends to double cross his servants down here at the Last Day
|
|
-- giving them a line of reasoning that will fall apart and collapse before
|
|
Father's Judgment Day).
|
|
=============================================================[102]</p>
|
|
<p>Lucifer knows very well that Contract Law jurisprudence will govern the Last
|
|
Day. Does Lucifer know what he is doing in his Tort Law reasoning? He most
|
|
certainly does. [103]</p>
|
|
<p>[103]============================================================= "In regard
|
|
to the battle in Heaven... when Lucifer, the Son of the Morning, claimed the
|
|
privilege of controlling the Earth and redeemed it, a contention arose; but I
|
|
do not think it took long to cast down one-third of the hosts of Heaven, as it
|
|
is written in the Bible. But let me tell you that it was one-third part of the
|
|
spirits who were prepared to take tabernacles upon this Earth, and who rebelled
|
|
against the two-thirds of the Heavenly Hosts; and they were cast down to this
|
|
world. It is written that they were cast down to this Earth -- to this TERRA
|
|
FIRMA that you and I walk on, and whose atmosphere we breathe. One-third of the
|
|
spirits that were prepared for this Earth rebelled against Jesus Christ, and
|
|
were cast down to Earth, and they have opposed him from that day to this, with
|
|
Lucifer at their head. He is their general -- Lucifer, Son of the Morning. He
|
|
was once a brilliant and influential character in Heaven, and we will know more
|
|
about him hereafter."
|
|
-Brigham Young, in a discourse made at the Bowery, Salt Lake City,
|
|
July 19, 1857; 5 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 52, at 54 to 55 [London (1858)].
|
|
=============================================================[103]</p>
|
|
<p>Tort Law reasoning itself cannot be attacked, as it is merely a reflection of
|
|
Nature, and it does have its proper time and place to govern the settlement of
|
|
grievances between persons when contracts are not in effect. The question is
|
|
not whether Tort Law is morally correct or incorrect, or whether Tort Law is in
|
|
or out of harmony with Nature; the question is one of applicability of either
|
|
Tort Law or Contract Law reasoning to govern the judgment of a factual setting
|
|
presented for a ruling. And so as long as Lucifer keeps his hard working
|
|
Gremlin servants down here thinking along Tort Law lines, and discussing only
|
|
Tort Law reasoning in their private communications they send back and forth to
|
|
each other, then Lucifer is getting all that he wants now, since his little
|
|
Gremlins will go right ahead and knowingly commit tremendous damages while
|
|
sincerely believing that they are on safe grounds at the Last Day, just like
|
|
Highway Contract Protestors very sincerely believe that the absence of a MENS
|
|
REA and CORPUS DELECTI, together with the nonexistence of a Driver's License,
|
|
will place them and their Tort Law RIGHT TO TRAVEL unfairness arguments on safe
|
|
grounds before sophisticated appellate judges [this is not correct, as I will
|
|
explain later]. This is a brilliant deception EXTRAORDINAIRE by Lucifer to his
|
|
Gremlins, and this is also extremely sophisticated reasoning (which in itself
|
|
creates an allure to intellectual Gremlins). [104]</p>
|
|
<p>[104]============================================================= Gremlins
|
|
highly admire INTELLECTUALS, as there is something about their high-powered
|
|
status that creates such an intriguing aura of devilish mystique. Gremlin Henry
|
|
Kissinger once had a few words to say about his mentors, INTELLECTUALS, putting
|
|
in an honest days' labor, going through the foibles and headaches that they do;
|
|
those poor hardworking INTELLECTUALS, racking themselves to sole one tough
|
|
problem after another; but also the INTELLECTUAL contributes to an important
|
|
participating juristic role in making global conquest administratively
|
|
efficient:
|
|
"How about the role of individuals who have addressed themselves to
|
|
acquiring substantive knowledge -- the intellectuals? Is our problem, as is so
|
|
often alleged, the lack of respect shown to the intellectual by our society?
|
|
"The problem is more complicated than our refusal or inability to
|
|
utilize this source of talent. Many organizations, governmental or private,
|
|
rely on panels of experts. Political leaders have intellectuals as advisors...
|
|
"One problem is the demand for expertise itself. Every problem which
|
|
our society becomes concerned about... calls into being panels, committees, or
|
|
study groups supported by either private or governmental funds. Many
|
|
organizations constantly call on intellectuals for advice. As a result,
|
|
intellectuals with a reputation soon find themselves so burdened that their
|
|
pace of life hardly differs from that of the executives who they counsel. They
|
|
cannot supply perspective because they are as harassed as the policy makers.
|
|
All pressures on them tend to keep them at the level of the performance which
|
|
gained them reputation. In his desire to be helpful, the intellectual is too
|
|
frequently compelled to sacrifice what should be his greatest contribution to
|
|
society -- his creativity...
|
|
"A person is considered suitable for assignments within certain
|
|
classifications. But the classification of the intellectual is determined by
|
|
the premium our society places on administrative skill. The intellectual is
|
|
rarely found at the level where decisions are made. His role is commonly
|
|
advisory. He is called in as a 'specialist' in areas whose advice is combined
|
|
with that of others from different fields of endeavor on the assumption that
|
|
the policymaker is able to choose intuitively the correct amalgam of
|
|
'theoretical and 'practical' advice. And even in this capacity, the
|
|
intellectual is not a free agent. It is the executive who determines in the
|
|
first place whether he needs advice. He and the bureaucracy frame the question
|
|
to be answered. The policy maker determines the standard of relevance...
|
|
"The contribution of the intellectual to policy is therefore in terms
|
|
of criteria that he has played only a minor role in establishing. He is rarely
|
|
given the opportunity to point out that a query limits a range of possible
|
|
solutions or that an issue is posed in irrelevant terms. He is asked to solve
|
|
problems, not to contribute to the definition of goals. Where decisions are
|
|
arrived at by negotiation, the intellectual -- particularly if he is not
|
|
himself a part of the bureaucracy -- is a useful weight in the scale. He can
|
|
serve as the means of filtering ideas to the top outside of organizational
|
|
channels or as one who legitimizes the viewpoint of contending factions within
|
|
and among departments. This is why many organizations build up batteries of
|
|
outside experts or create semi-independent research groups, and why articles or
|
|
books become tools in the bureaucratic struggle. In short, all too often what
|
|
the policymaker wants from the intellectual is not ideas but endorsement.
|
|
"This is not to say that the motivation of the policymaker towards the
|
|
intellectual is cynical. The policymaker sincerely wants help... Of necessity,
|
|
the bureaucracy gears the intellectual effort to its own requirements and its
|
|
own pace; the deadlines are inevitably that of the policymaker, and all too
|
|
often they demand a premature disclosure of ideas which are then dissected
|
|
before they are fully developed. The administrative approach to intellectual
|
|
effort tends to destroy the environment from which innovation grows. Its
|
|
insistence on 'results' discourages the intellectual climate that might produce
|
|
important ideas whether or not the bureaucracy feels it needs them.
|
|
"Thus, though the intellectual participates in policymaking to an
|
|
almost unprecedented degree, the result has not necessarily been salutary for
|
|
him or of full benefit to the officials calling on him...
|
|
"In seeking to help the bureaucracy out of this maze, the intellectual
|
|
too frequently becomes an extension of the administrative machine, accepting
|
|
its criteria and elaborating its problems. While this, too, is a necessary task
|
|
and sometimes even an important one, it does not touch the heart of the
|
|
problem...
|
|
"This does not mean that the intellectual should remain aloof from
|
|
policymaking. Nor have intellectuals who have chosen withdrawal necessarily
|
|
helped this situation. There are intellectuals outside the bureaucracy who are
|
|
not part of the maelstrom of committees and study groups but who have,
|
|
nevertheless, contributed to the existing stagnation through a perfectionism
|
|
that paralyzes action by posing unreal alternatives. There are intellectuals
|
|
within the bureaucracy who have avoided the administrative approach but who
|
|
must share the responsibility for the prevailing confusion because they refuse
|
|
to admit that all of policy involves an inevitable element of conjecture. It is
|
|
always possible to escape difficult choices by making only the most favorable
|
|
assessment of the intentions of other states or of political trends. The
|
|
intellectuals of other countries in the free world where the influence of
|
|
pragmatism is less pronounced and the demands of the bureaucracies less
|
|
insatiable have not made a more significant contribution. The spiritual malaise
|
|
described here may have other symptoms elsewhere. The fact remains that the
|
|
entire free world suffers not only from administrative myopia but also from
|
|
self righteousness and the lack of a sense of direction [that sounds like
|
|
something a Gremlin going no where would say].
|
|
"Thus, if the intellectual is to make a contribution to national
|
|
policy, he faces a delicate task. He must steer between the Scylla of letting
|
|
the bureaucracy prescribe what is relevant or useful and the Charybdis of
|
|
defining those criteria too abstractly. If he inches too much toward the
|
|
former, he will turn into a promoter of technical remedies; if he chooses the
|
|
latter, he will run the risks of confusing dogmatism with morality and of
|
|
courting martyrdom -- of becoming, in short, as wrapped up in a cult of
|
|
rejection as the activist is in a cult of success.
|
|
"Where to draw the line between excessive commitment to the bureaucracy
|
|
and paralyzing aloofness depends on so many intangibles of circumstances and
|
|
personality that it is difficult to generalize... The intellectual should
|
|
therefore refuse to participate in policymaking, for to do so confirms the
|
|
stagnation of societies whose leadership groups have little substantive
|
|
knowledge...
|
|
"The intellectual must therefore decide not only whether to participate
|
|
in the administrative process but also in what capacity: Whether as an
|
|
intellectual or as an administrator.
|
|
"Such an attitude requires an occasional separation from
|
|
administration. The intellectual must guard against his distinctive, and in
|
|
this particular context, most crucial qualities: The pursuit of knowledge
|
|
rather than of administrative ends and the perspective supplied by a
|
|
non-bureaucratic vantage point. It is therefore essential for him to return
|
|
from time to time to his library or his laboratory to 'recharge his batteries.'
|
|
If he fails to do so, he would turn into an administrator [and we wouldn't
|
|
want that to happen], distinguished from some of his colleagues only by having
|
|
been recruited from the intellectual community."
|
|
-Henry Kissinger in THE NECESSITY OF CHOICE ["The Policymaker and the
|
|
Intellectual"], at page 348 [Harper & Brothers, New York (1960)]. Today, few
|
|
common folks have much admiration for INTELLECTUALS; very appropriately, many
|
|
folks find them irritating because they are out of touch with hard DAY TO DAY
|
|
practical reality -- a state of perception that has been going on since the
|
|
very founding of this Republic:
|
|
"These lawyers, and men of learning, and moneyed men, that talk so
|
|
finely, gloss over matters so smoothly, to make us poor illiterate people
|
|
swallow down the pill, expect to get into Congress themselves; that expect to
|
|
be the managers of the Constitution, and get all the money and power in their
|
|
own hands, and then they will swallow up all us little folks, like the great
|
|
LEVIATHAN, Mr. President; yes, just as the whale swallowed up JONAH. This is
|
|
what I am afraid of..."
|
|
-Mr. Singletarry, a rural delegate to the special 1788 Massachusetts
|
|
Convention elected to consider ratification of the Constitution, as quoted by
|
|
Jonathan Elliot in II DEBATES IN THE SEVERAL STATE CONVENTIONS, at 102 [J.B.
|
|
Lippincott, Philadelphia (1863)]. And INTELLECTUALS also possess behavioral
|
|
elements of playfulness about them that is difficult to come to grips with at
|
|
first:
|
|
"The very suggestion that the intellectual has a distinctive capacity
|
|
for mischief, however, leads to the consideration that his piety [means STATE
|
|
OF BEING PIOUS], by itself, is not enough. He may live for ideas, as I have
|
|
said, but something must prevent him from living for ONE IDEA, from becoming
|
|
excessive or grotesque... the beginning and end of ideas lies in their efficacy
|
|
with respect to some goal external to intellectual processes. The intellectual
|
|
is not in the first instance concerned with such goals. This is not to say that
|
|
he scorns the practical: The intrinsic intellectual interest of many practical
|
|
problems is utterly absorbing. Still less is it to say that he is impractical;
|
|
he is simply concerned with something else, a quality in problems that is not
|
|
defined by asking whether or not they have practical purpose. The notion that
|
|
the intellectual is inherently impractical will hardly bear analysis (...Adam
|
|
Smith, Thomas Jefferson... have been eminently practical in the politician's or
|
|
businessman's sense of the term)...
|
|
"If some large part of the anti-intellectualism of our time stems from
|
|
the public's shock at the constant insinuation of the intellectual as expert
|
|
into public affairs, much of the sensitiveness of intellectuals to the
|
|
reputation as a class stems from the awkward juxtaposition of the sacred and
|
|
profane roles. In his sacred role, as prophet, scholar, or artist, the
|
|
intellectual is hedged about by certain sanctions -- imperfectly observed and
|
|
respected, of course, but still effective...
|
|
"It is part of the intellectual's tragedy that the things he most
|
|
values about himself and his work are quite unlike those society values in him.
|
|
Society values him because he can in fact be used for a variety of purposes,
|
|
from popular entertainment to the design of weapons. But it can hardly
|
|
understand so well those aspects of his temperament which I have designated as
|
|
essential to his intellectualism. His playfulness, in its various
|
|
manifestations, is likely to seem to most men a perverse luxury; in the United
|
|
States the play of the mind is perhaps the only form of play that is not looked
|
|
upon with the most tender indulgence. His piety is likely to seem nettlesome,
|
|
if not actually dangerous. And neither quality is considered to contribute very
|
|
much to the practical business of life...
|
|
"To those who suspect that intellect is a subversive force in society,
|
|
it will not do to reply that intellect is really a safe, bland and emollient
|
|
thing... To be sure, intellectuals, contrary to the fantasies of cultural
|
|
vigilantes, are hardly ever subversive of a society as a whole.
|
|
"I have suggested that one of the first questions asked in America
|
|
about intellect and intellectuals concerns their practicality. One reason why
|
|
anti-intellectualism has changed in our time is that our sense of the
|
|
impracticality of intellect has been transformed. During the [1800's], when
|
|
business criteria dominated American culture almost without challenge, and when
|
|
most business and professional men attained eminence without much formal
|
|
education, academic schooling was often said to be useless. It was assumed that
|
|
schooling existed not to cultivate certain distinctive qualities of the mind
|
|
but to make personal advancement possible. For this purpose, an immediate
|
|
engagement with the practical tasks of life was held to be more usefully
|
|
educative, whereas intellectual and cultural pursuits were called unworldly,
|
|
unmasculine, and impractical."
|
|
-Richard Hofstadter in ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM IN AMERICAN LIFE, starting
|
|
at 29 [Random House, New York (1963)]. When the United States began its
|
|
existence out from underneath the thumb of King George, the presence of stuffy
|
|
INTELLECTUALS on the political scene was not a problem then:
|
|
"When the United States began its national existence, the relationship
|
|
between intellect and power was not a problem. The leaders WERE the
|
|
intellectuals. Advanced though the nation was in development of democracy, the
|
|
control of its affairs still rested largely in a patrician elite; and within
|
|
this elite men of intellect moved freely and spoke with enviable authority.
|
|
Since it was an unspecialized and versatile age, the intellectual as expert was
|
|
a negligible force; but the intellectual as ruling-class gentleman was a leader
|
|
in every segment of society -- at the bar, in the professions, in business, and
|
|
in political affairs. The Founding Fathers were sages, scientists, men of broad
|
|
cultivation, many of them apt in classical learning, who used their wide
|
|
reading in history, politics, and law to solve the exigent problems of their
|
|
time. No subsequent era in our history has produced so many men of knowledge
|
|
among its political leaders as the age of John Adams [and others]. One might
|
|
have expected that such men, whose political achievements were part of the very
|
|
fabric of the nation, would have stood as permanent and overwhelming
|
|
testimonial to the truth that men of learning and intellect need not be
|
|
bootless and impractical as political leaders. It is ironic that the United
|
|
States should have been founded by intellectuals; for throughout most of our
|
|
political history, the intellectual has been for the most part either an
|
|
outsider, a servant, or a scapegoat."
|
|
-Richard Hofstadter in ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM IN AMERICAN LIFE, at 145
|
|
[Random House, New York (1963)]. The reason why having INTELLECTUALS on the
|
|
scene back then was not a problem is because INTELLECTUALS, per se, are not a
|
|
source of problems; only when operating as slippery bureaucratic extensions of
|
|
Gremlin intrigue, only then does the tainted lustre of their high-powered
|
|
intellect come home to roost -- then they become problems.
|
|
=============================================================[104]</p>
|
|
<p>And just as Lucifer freely uses his deception to motivate his associates in his
|
|
direction, so to do his Gremlin assistants down here use deception between each
|
|
other in turn, whenever they feel like it. Gremlins thrive on throwing
|
|
deceptions back and forth at each other, and they do not really concern
|
|
themselves on the background setting the deception takes place in. [105]</p>
|
|
<p>[105]============================================================= Yes, there
|
|
are no circumstances that are spared from the strategic use of DECEPTION --
|
|
when Gremlins are running the show:
|
|
...Carved in the white walls of the Riverside Church in New York City
|
|
are the figures of six hundred men that the world esteems as being great for
|
|
one reason or another -- hanging on the walls are canonized saints,
|
|
philosophers, kings, and other assorted geniuses. One panel enshrines fourteen
|
|
geniuses of science, starting with Hippocrates, who died around 370 B.C., to
|
|
Albert Einstein [who was still alive when he was enshrined in this Church]. In
|
|
this environment surrounded by greatness converged some 2500 people from 71
|
|
countries to the sanctuary of Riverside Church in New York City on this Friday,
|
|
February 2, 1979. They had dropped what they were doing world wide to come pay
|
|
their last respects and hear final praise and eulogies for Nelson Rockefeller.
|
|
They heard orations from, among others, daughter Ann Rockefeller Roberts, from
|
|
son Rodman C. Rockefeller, from brother David Rockefeller, and from Gremlin
|
|
Henry Kissinger. [See the NEW YORK TIMES ["Dignitaries and Friends Honor
|
|
Rockefeller"], page 1 (February 3, 1979)]. Judging by the glowing
|
|
characterizations that were used to express final admirations for Nelson, this
|
|
Church is really missing out on something special if a limestone statue of
|
|
Nelson Rockefeller isn't soon enshrined with the 600 others mounted on the
|
|
walls.
|
|
...Of the orations spoken at Nelson's funeral service, Henry
|
|
Kissinger's eulogy deserves very special attention: Because it was steeped in
|
|
deception. Seemingly with tears in his eyes, Henry Kissinger's choking voice
|
|
was echoed throughout the great sanctuary of the Riverside Church. Kissinger
|
|
characterized Nelson as "friend," "inspiration," "teacher," and "my older
|
|
brother." Seemingly stricken with grief, Kissinger's eulogy act was a smooth
|
|
masterpiece in well-oiled deception, and brought tears to the eyes of many. In
|
|
his final passage, Kissinger claimed that he frequently chatted with Nelson
|
|
Rockefeller:
|
|
"In recent years, he and I would often sit on the veranda overlooking
|
|
his beloved Hudson River in the setting sun. I would talk more, but he
|
|
understood better. And as the statues on the lawn glazed in the dimming light,
|
|
Nelson Rockefeller would occasionally get that squint in his eyes, which
|
|
betokened a far horizon, and he would say, because I needed it, but above all,
|
|
because he deeply felt it...
|
|
'... never forget, that the most profound force in the world is love'."
|
|
-NEW YORK TIMES, id., ["Excerpts From Eulogies At Memorial for
|
|
Rockefeller"], page 23. Having finished his smooth acting job, having left the
|
|
mourners spellbound and wailing largely in tears, this little Henry who had
|
|
criminally coordinated at a mid-management level the murder of Nelson
|
|
Rockefeller a week earlier, slowly turned and left the pulpit. Nelson
|
|
Rockefeller had never actually spoken those words Henry claimed -- but pesky
|
|
little details like that are not important; conversations between Nelson and
|
|
Henry were limited to communications exchanged in furtherance of wars, murders,
|
|
conquest, and revolutions, with only a minimal amount of personal interest
|
|
material being exchanged as necessary to fill a vacant time slice hiatus.
|
|
Background factual accuracy is never something that Gremlins concern themselves
|
|
with, and Henry Kissinger's fraudulent and deceptive eulogy of Nelson
|
|
Rockefeller, under circumstances where any enlightening corrective retort would
|
|
be inappropriate, was no exception to the Gremlin MODUS OPERANDI of using
|
|
deception as an instrument of aggression wherever and whenever they feel like
|
|
experiencing the benefits derived from it.
|
|
=============================================================[105]</p>
|
|
<p>Absent unusual appreciation for what an abbreviated Contract Law judgment
|
|
setting is really like (such as trying to contest speeding and insurance
|
|
infractions on Highway Contract enforcement proceedings, going through 7203
|
|
WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE Star Chamber prosecutions, etc.) only very few folks
|
|
have the factual background necessary to grasp the significance of this line.
|
|
Due to circumstances which transpired back in the First Estate, Lucifer
|
|
passionately hates us all (i.e., all persons who took bodies in this Second
|
|
Estate), and he fully intends to have each and every single person, without any
|
|
exceptions, who trusted in his Tort Law logic and reasoning, screwed to the
|
|
wall for having done so. This planned double cross by Lucifer even includes his
|
|
highly prized intimates, the contemporary Rothschild Brothers, with whom
|
|
Lucifer has personally conversed with, face-to-face; Lucifer has the
|
|
Rothschilds believing that they are the top dogs and they call the shots. They
|
|
too will be double crossed, and this is true even though Lucifer has very
|
|
reliably dealt with many Rothschild generations in this Second Estate going
|
|
back several centuries. Yet, the Rothschilds will likely never the see the
|
|
forest for the trees, as the effect of his impending MAGNUM OPUS Double Cross
|
|
will not even occur until this World is over with, and then it is too late to
|
|
start taking an interest in Contracts with Father, and stop using pure natural
|
|
moral Tort Law Principles to govern your behavior, under such untimely and
|
|
belated circumstances. Boy, I can just hear Baron Phillippe de Rothschild, LE
|
|
GREMLIN EXTRAORDINAIRE, now at the Last Day telling Father that:</p>
|
|
<p>"Father, you just don't understand... why, I had to have David killed
|
|
to accelerate the arrival of your Millennium. The world experienced the
|
|
benefits of it. It just had to be done to further your Ends of Justice."</p>
|
|
<p>As for the Rothschilds, after their Eyes are Opened on the foolishness of their
|
|
Tort Law reasoning, their greatest disappointment at that time may yet lie in
|
|
another area altogether: As they ponder the long term significance of their
|
|
being denied further inhabitation on this planet they once participated in
|
|
Creating. [106]</p>
|
|
<p>[106]============================================================= The
|
|
Rothschild nest of Gremlins are not as smart as they like to think of
|
|
themselves; however, with their aloofness above us peasantry, you could not
|
|
tell them that. John Taylor, President of the Mormon Church, once tried and got
|
|
nowhere:
|
|
"Do you think that the jews today would want to publish things
|
|
pertaining to Jesus, describing the manner in which he would come? I should
|
|
think not. In a conversation I once had with Baron Rothschild, he asked me if I
|
|
believed in the Christ? I answered him: "Yes, God has revealed to us that he is
|
|
the true Messiah, and we believe in him." I further remarked: "Your Prophets
|
|
have said 'They shall look upon him whom they have pierced, and they shall
|
|
mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for
|
|
him, as one that is in bitterness for his first born.', 'And one shall say unto
|
|
him, What are these wounds in thy hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which
|
|
I was wounded in the house of my friends.'" Do you think the jewish rabbis
|
|
would refer you to such scripture as that? Said Mr. Rothschild, "Is that in our
|
|
Bible?" "That is in your Bible, sir."
|
|
-John Taylor, speaking at a Funeral Service on December 31, 1876; 18
|
|
JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 324, at 329 [London (1877)]. The Rothschilds commune with
|
|
Lucifer from time to time, and his grand plans for conquest that have been
|
|
revealed to the Rothschilds (plans that have been handed down the line
|
|
originating in time back almost to the Garden of Eden), are so impressive and
|
|
so outstanding that the Rothschilds are totally relying on Lucifer to come
|
|
through for them. But just like the Rothschilds are deficient on factual
|
|
information regarding the jewish perspective of a Messiah (however defective a
|
|
view that is factually), the Rothschilds are also deficient on information
|
|
explaining why Lucifer is only pretending to be interested in their welfare
|
|
before Father, and actually intends to double cross them at the Last Day.
|
|
=============================================================[106]</p>
|
|
<p>In the Third Estate, this planet is in for some refining and advancement, and
|
|
there will be no Gremlins inhabiting the Earth then. [107]</p>
|
|
<p>[107]============================================================= "Who, in
|
|
looking upon the Earth as it ascends in the scale of the Universe, does not
|
|
desire to keep pace with it, that when it shall be classed in its turn among
|
|
the dazzling orbs of the blue vault of Heaven, shining forth in all the
|
|
splendors of Celestial Glory, he may find himself proportionately advanced in
|
|
the scale of intellectual and moral excellence. [Would GREMLINS even concern
|
|
themselves with that?] Who, but the most abandoned, does not desire to be
|
|
counted worthy to associate with those higher orders of Beings who have been
|
|
redeemed, exalted, glorified, together with the worlds they inhabit, ages
|
|
before the foundations of our Earth were laid? Oh man, remember the future
|
|
destiny and glory of the Earth, and secure thine everlasting inheritance upon
|
|
the same, that when it shall be glorious, thou shalt be glorious also."
|
|
-Orson Pratt, in a discourse ["The Earth -- Its Fall, Redemption, and
|
|
Final Destiny -- the Final Abode of the Righteous"], appearing in 1 JOURNAL OF
|
|
DISCOURSES 328, at 333 [London (1854)].
|
|
=============================================================[107]</p>
|
|
<p>Father was the only architect of this particular planet. [108]</p>
|
|
<p>[108]============================================================= The world is
|
|
searching for evidence, just something out there some where, that suggests the
|
|
possibility that life might exist on other planets. Like Tax Protestors looking
|
|
in the wrong places by searching for error in others rather than in themselves,
|
|
the world would also be wise to look for answers to their probing questions on
|
|
the extraterrestrial in a local source that they have known about all along:
|
|
"The Earth upon which we dwell is only one among the many creations of
|
|
God. The stars that glitter in the heavens at night and give light unto the
|
|
Earth are His creations, redeemed worlds, perhaps, or worlds that are passing
|
|
through the course of their redemption, being Saved, purified, glorified, and
|
|
exalted by obedience to the principles of truth which we are now struggling to
|
|
obey. Thus is the work of our Father made perpetual, and as fast as one world
|
|
and its inhabitants are disposed of, He will roll another into existence. He
|
|
will create another Earth, He will people it with His offspring, the offspring
|
|
of the Gods in eternity, and they will pass through [their] probations such as
|
|
we are now passing through [ours], that they may prove their integrity by their
|
|
works; that they may give an assurance to the Almighty that they are worthy to
|
|
be exalted through obedience to those principles, that unchangeable PLAN OF
|
|
SALVATION which has been revealed to us."
|
|
-Orson F. Whitney, in a discourse in the Tabernacle on Sunday, April
|
|
19, 1885; 26 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 194, at 196 [London (1886)].
|
|
=============================================================[108]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, Lucifer has a double cross up his sleeve planned for the Rothschilds, just
|
|
like the Rothschilds in turn have numerous impending double crosses planned for
|
|
their associates as well. A DOUBLE CROSS is a serious betrayal that occurs on
|
|
the tail end of a well-planned continuum of deception -- and deception is very
|
|
important to Gremlins. [109]</p>
|
|
<p>[109]============================================================= "Deception
|
|
tests the means by which we perceive reality, and it reminds us sharply of what
|
|
these means are. We have our sense organs which receive data, principally ones
|
|
affixed to our head -- ears, eyes, nose. But this data is given shape and
|
|
meaning by the thing inside our skull, the brain. This has only second-hand
|
|
evidence of what is real out THERE. "Deception must seem particularly frivolous
|
|
for the scientist because PERception, working out these just what is there, is
|
|
his vocation. It may also tempt him for just this reason. Like the playful
|
|
punch for the athlete, it makes fun of the faculties that he prizes most. But
|
|
we are all using these faculties and perceiving things at every waking moment.
|
|
Anyone who has been involved in a practical joke on either the delivering end
|
|
or the receiving end knows something of the pleasures. "It is important to note
|
|
that for the person who is fooled, the fun, if any, lies in the process of
|
|
being fooled, not the consequences. A deceived spouse cannot be relied on to
|
|
react with a chortle of glee, and the editors of McGraw-Hill did not go around
|
|
chuckling after they found that Clifford Irving had hoaxed them into parting
|
|
with most of a million dollars. For deception is not practiced only for fun. It
|
|
is also practiced to steal money, fame or the love of women, to win battles and
|
|
sink ships, to demoralize populations and overthrow governments."
|
|
-Norman Moss in THE PLEASURES OF DECEPTION ["Introduction"], at page 7
|
|
[Reader's Digest Press, New York (1977)].
|
|
=============================================================[109]</p>
|
|
<p>And the mass media serves as a good instrument to propagate a large volume of
|
|
factually worthless information. [110]</p>
|
|
<p>[110]============================================================= "The power
|
|
and the glory of the Press are based on the false assumption that the best way
|
|
to talk to a man is through a loudspeaker. It's certainly not the only way; but
|
|
if you think of men as indistinguishable units of a group, community, newspaper
|
|
circulation or concentration camp, this scattergun broadcasting may make some
|
|
simple announcement understood. But a free Press doesn't make simple
|
|
announcements. The Russian doctrinaires have tried to prove that men can be
|
|
taught to forget that they are first and foremost INDIVIDUALS, or at least to
|
|
act as if they had forgotten; and their Press is just the ticket for mass men.
|
|
Our world is perhaps not so far ahead of the Russian doctrine as we like to
|
|
suppose, but in theory at least we honor the INDIVIDUAL."
|
|
-Thomas S. Matthews in THE SUGAR PILL: AN ESSAY ON NEWSPAPERS, at 178
|
|
[The Camelot Press, London (1957); (Simon & Schuster republished in New York
|
|
(1959)]. In the APPENDIX, the author analyzed newspapers to determine the
|
|
actual content of factual events reported; out of 11 articles appearing on the
|
|
front page, only 4 of those reported events had actually occurred. The other 7
|
|
events were either commentary, or stories dealing with projected, predicted,
|
|
intended, or desired events.
|
|
=============================================================[110]</p>
|
|
<p>Similar to Gremlins thriving when throwing deceptions back and forth at each
|
|
other, deception is also very attractive for Gremlins to throw at the public at
|
|
large. [111]</p>
|
|
<p>[111]============================================================= In contrast
|
|
to the deception proclivities of Gremlins, Heavenly Father would prefer to deal
|
|
with us on the basis of ABSOLUTE TRUST, when possible; a highly privileged
|
|
relational status he has entered into with other people down here on occasion;
|
|
an exalted relational status known to a handful of great people, like Abraham
|
|
Lincoln, who used this relational status in a diplomatic setting, particularly
|
|
with a Russian Czar. And ABSOLUTE TRUST is an impending criteria element I
|
|
suspect will become one of the minimum indicia required for enjoying Celestial
|
|
relationships with Father. And just as there is ABSOLUTE TRUST, so is there
|
|
ABSOLUTE TRUTH:
|
|
"Science, as I understand it, is a search after Absolute Truth -- after
|
|
something which when ascertained is of equal interest to all thinkers of all
|
|
nations. No matter how wise and learned and famous a person may have said a
|
|
thing is so in the realm of science, it remains open to anybody to prove that
|
|
it is not so; and if it is proved to be not so, the authority of the wise and
|
|
learned and famous person disappears like a morning mist. In science, what we
|
|
are really seeking is not the opinion or the command of any human being. We are
|
|
subject to no [such] command, and are not bound to follow any previously
|
|
expressed opinion."
|
|
-Edwin Whitney in THE DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS, 3 Michigan Law Review
|
|
89, at 89 (1904). And as we change from law books over to religious books (so
|
|
called) nothing changes there, either:
|
|
"There are absolute truths and relative truths. The rule of dietetics
|
|
have changed many times in my lifetime. Many scientific findings have changed
|
|
from year to year... Absolute Truths are not altered by the opinion of men. As
|
|
science has expanded our [factual] understanding of the physical world, certain
|
|
accepted ideas of science have had to be abandoned in the interest of truth.
|
|
Some of these seeming truths were stoutly maintained for centuries. The sincere
|
|
searching of science often rests only [next to] the threshold of truth, whereas
|
|
revealed facts give us certain Absolute Truths as a beginning point so we may
|
|
come to understand the nature of man and the purpose of life... We learn about
|
|
these Absolute Truths by being taught by the Spirit... God, our Heavenly Father
|
|
-- Elohim -- lives. That is an Absolute Truth. All four billion of the children
|
|
of men on the Earth might be ignorant of Him and his attributes and his powers,
|
|
but he still lives. All the people on the face of the Earth might deny [his
|
|
existence] and disbelieve, but he lives in spite of them. [Everyone] may have
|
|
their own opinions, but [Father] still lives, and his form, powers, and
|
|
attributes do not change according to men's opinions. In short, opinion has no
|
|
power [to intervene] in the matter of Absolute Truth. [Father] still lives.
|
|
"...The intellectual may rationalize [Jesus Christ] out of existence
|
|
and the unbeliever may scoff, but Christ still lives and guides the destinies
|
|
of his people.
|
|
"...The watchmaker in Switzerland, with materials at hand, made the
|
|
watch that was found in the sand in a California desert. The people who found
|
|
the watch had never been to Switzerland, nor seen the watchmaker, nor seen the
|
|
watch [being] made. [But] the watchmaker still exists, no matter the extent of
|
|
[the Californians' factual] ignorance or experience. If the watch had a tongue,
|
|
it might even lie and say "There is no watchmaker." [But] that would not alter
|
|
the Truth. If men were really humble, they will realize that they [only]
|
|
DISCOVER [or uncover], but do not CREATE, Truth."
|
|
-Spencer Kimball in ABSOLUTE TRUTH; 8 Ensign Magazine, at 3 [Salt Lake
|
|
City (September, 1978)].
|
|
=============================================================[111]</p>
|
|
<p>The mass media is a very important instrument for the conveyance stage of
|
|
deception by Gremlins. [112]</p>
|
|
<p>[112]============================================================= Remember
|
|
that deception is a three step process: First it is created, then conveyed, and
|
|
then accepted. Failure at any point voids the entire deception show. As for the
|
|
second stage of deception, the mass media is one such very important instrument
|
|
of deception conveyance:
|
|
"With the creation of the mass media, a whole new area of deception
|
|
opened up. This provided the means of fooling the whole public at the same time
|
|
in the same way. Anything told through the mass media carries credibility. It
|
|
is more solid than rumor, more respectable than gossip, more believable than
|
|
hearsay. People who say they never believe what they read in the newspapers in
|
|
fact absorb what they read as uncritically as others.
|
|
"The authority that is given to the mass media, regardless of the
|
|
message, is seen in the lack of discrimination with which unsophisticated
|
|
readers and viewers talk about them. 'The newspapers say so and so.' One wants
|
|
to ask WHICH newspaper. And which part of the newspaper, the editorial columns
|
|
or the news pages? And whether it was one of the newspaper's own staff or an
|
|
outside commentator. 'They said on television...' But one wants to ask WHO
|
|
said? Was it the news reader, stating it as a fact? Or was he reporting someone
|
|
else's opinion? Or was someone giving it as HIS viewpoint, a politician, a
|
|
commentator, or a critic? After all, you don't say 'They said on the
|
|
telephone,' you say who told you.
|
|
"This authority stems partly from the fact that the media, and
|
|
particularly the news media, deal with public issues that are beyond the
|
|
experience of most of its audience."
|
|
-Norman Moss in THE PLEASURES OF DECEPTION ["Fit To Print: Hoaxing and
|
|
the Media"], at page 70 [Reader's Digest Press, New York (1977)]. Yes, many
|
|
public issues are in fact beyond the intellectual experience of their
|
|
audiences, and those issues will continue to remain beyond the experience of
|
|
those audiences until such time as the members of those audiences individually
|
|
start to perk up a bit and ask some QUESTIONS -- a point of beginning in a new
|
|
MODUS OPERANDI of intellectual enlightenment that Tax Protestors would also be
|
|
wise to take particular notice of; a MODUS OPERANDI that would catalytically
|
|
trigger the uncovering of a great deal of latent error existing not only in
|
|
juristic settings where ambitious kings and princes in bed with looters and
|
|
Gremlins have plastered the countryside with invisible contracts, but also in
|
|
ecclesiastical settings where even more important invisible Contracts are also
|
|
hanging in the background, waiting for the Last Day to arrive -- then those
|
|
Contracts will become VERY visible. But if you are different, you will want to
|
|
uncover and deal with those invisible Celestial Contracts now, to avoid being
|
|
surprised by them at the Last Day, just like Protestors are surprised in tax
|
|
and highway enforcement actions where their UNFAIRNESS arguments are tossed
|
|
aside and ignored. Many Protestors have a secret hunch that some contract is
|
|
there, but they draw a blank when trying to identify just what contract it is,
|
|
or how they got into it.
|
|
=============================================================[112]</p>
|
|
<p>Deception is important to Gremlins and those who replicate their MODUS
|
|
OPERANDI; so much so that almost like intellectual nourishment, Gremlins seem
|
|
to manifest deep intermittent cravings for a few good clever sounding lies.
|
|
[113]</p>
|
|
<p>[113]============================================================= Part of the
|
|
reason for this is that Gremlins see real, immediate, and impressive benefits
|
|
to be experienced by selectively incorporating deception into their MODUS
|
|
OPERANDI. For example, it is typical of Gremlin methodology to pretend to be
|
|
opposed to something that they really want:
|
|
...When Gremlin Nelson Aldrich wanted the Congress to pass the Federal
|
|
Reserve Act in 1913, he tried to create the appearance that he did not want it;
|
|
even though every one knew it was very similar to his proposed ALDRICH CURRENCY
|
|
BILL of 1907, he went right ahead and threw invectives at it any way, citing
|
|
some technical reservations [see 97 THE NATION MAGAZINE, at 376 (October 23,
|
|
1913)]. Nelson Aldrich was in bed with another Gremlin by the name of Frank
|
|
Vanderlip, President of National City Bank of New York. Frank Vanderlip's
|
|
invectives that were thrown at the proposed Federal Reserve System were so
|
|
puzzling that Senator Robert Owen, Chairman of the Senate Banking and Currency
|
|
Committee, expressed publicly his feelings that misrepresentation was in the
|
|
air -- but an impending World War I was also in the air, and Gremlins wanted
|
|
the immediate benefits that the Federal Reserve System would be generating for
|
|
them.
|
|
...John Rockefeller made a distinct and protracted habit of pretending
|
|
to be opposed to ventures that he secretly owned or controlled. In A
|
|
ROCKEFELLER FAMILY PORTRAIT by William Manchester [Little Brown & Company,
|
|
Boston (1958)], starting at page 80, there lies numerous examples of how
|
|
Gremlin John Rockefeller selectively incorporated deception into his business
|
|
dealings in order to experience the immediate enrichment benefits such
|
|
deception assisted in creating; also discussed is how he also used rigged
|
|
enterprises as TROJAN HORSES to entrap those whom he wanted to destroy, by
|
|
pretending to be sincerely interested in acquiring those enterprises.
|
|
...The Rothschild nest of Gremlins are also very good at this deception
|
|
game as well. In 1981, the French Government announced the nationalization of
|
|
36 Rothschild banks and other Rothschild industrial properties. President
|
|
Francois Mitterrand said the grab was "just and necessary to serve the national
|
|
interest" [WALL STREET JOURNAL ["Mitterrand Calls Nationalization 'Just,
|
|
Necessary'"], page 36 (September 25, 1981)]; but imp Mitterrand was lying, and
|
|
conveniently failed to mention the fact that he once worked in a Rothschild
|
|
bank as an officer, and continued to be under their thumb down to the present
|
|
day as an administrative nominee planted in a political jurisdiction. Baron Guy
|
|
de Rothschild, senior Gremlin of the Rothschild nest, claimed that he "...was
|
|
embittered by [the] pending takeover of his family's metal, mining, hotel and
|
|
other businesses." Even the BANQUE ROTHSCHILD headquarters the family had
|
|
owned for 170 years was scheduled to be grabbed by the French Government. [See
|
|
the WALL STREET JOURNAL ["For Baron Guy de Rothschild of France, Expropriation
|
|
is a Nightmare Relived"], page 30 (November 17, 1981)]. When the Baron was
|
|
asked, very appropriately, why he did not oppose this asset grab idea when
|
|
Mitterrand had publicly proposed it in the 1980 French Presidential Election,
|
|
the Gremlin Baron retorted with a pathetic little lie: "...We aren't cleverer
|
|
than anyone else" [id., at 30]. Meanwhile, no one concluded the obvious: That
|
|
the Rothschilds wanted the Government purchase to take place, and had quietly
|
|
told Mitterrand specifically what businesses they wanted to sell to the
|
|
Government in one lump group, and then, with that rare gifted Gremlin genius of
|
|
deception, publicly pretended to oppose the grab [had Baron Rothschild really
|
|
opposed the grab, Mitterrand would have soon been resident at the bottom of the
|
|
English Channel]. But the Rothschild Gremlins are super brilliant in pursuing
|
|
commercial enrichment, and they are very wise to the cyclic nature of business;
|
|
and so when the French Government nationalized their extensive network of
|
|
railroads back after the turn of the Century, the Rothschilds wanted the sale
|
|
["nationalization"] to take place, as they knew that the great and grand era of
|
|
railroading was over with. For a good technical discussion of the cyclic nature
|
|
of business and of entire industries, see the 6 volume set called THE DECLINE
|
|
OF COMPETITION by Arthur Burns [McGraw Hill, New York (1936)]. In Pittsburgh,
|
|
there is a research institute that does nothing but study cycles:
|
|
Foundation for the Study of Cycles, Inc.
|
|
124 South Highland Avenue
|
|
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15206 The Gremlin MODUS OPERANDI
|
|
cycle of deception/benefit/deception/benefit is a continuation of the operant
|
|
training they received in the First Estate by their mentor, Lucifer. Back in
|
|
the First Estate, Gremlins there made the mistake of listening to the
|
|
high-powered promptings of Lucifer with his attractive exemplary modelling for
|
|
prompt advancement and accomplishment, even if deception had to be used as a
|
|
tool to achieve the desired objective; under this doctrine, acquiring the
|
|
objective itself was much more important than some silly little righteous
|
|
advisory from Father -- after all, there were no consequences for side stepping
|
|
Father's advice a few times, and it was just ADVICE at that time, as we were
|
|
without Covenants back then. Over and over again, Spirits back then who
|
|
listened to Lucifer's counseling to circumvent Father's advice by the selective
|
|
use of deception (and other devices) found themselves experiencing immediate
|
|
benefits for having done so; and with such incentives, Lucifer became very
|
|
popular -- but many Spirits later deeply regretted listening to Lucifer's sugar
|
|
coated lies, including Lucifer himself, for invisible reasons they never
|
|
contemplated at the time the recurring deception and benefit cycle was in
|
|
motion: The time came when Father called together the first of many Council
|
|
Sessions and we were all presented with a sketch outline of the PLAN OF
|
|
SALVATION, and this Second Estate was diagrammed to us. We all participated in
|
|
creating this World; then the Council was reconvened again and highly detailed
|
|
presentations of the PLAN OF SALVATION was made to us. This would be a
|
|
freewheeling world where anything goes, but without any factual memory of the
|
|
past we would be adrift, so navigation would be difficult and only those
|
|
persons sensitive to the promptings of the Spirit would achieve the end
|
|
destination of returning to Father's presence, and soon thereafter inherit his
|
|
Celestial Status and powers. Like having amnesia, we would not be able to
|
|
recall the First Estate, other than to have warm feelings about it when
|
|
mentioned; but our habits and psychological conditioning that we had ingrained
|
|
within ourselves during our protracted sojourning in the First Estate would
|
|
carry on largely transparent to the momentary loss of factual knowledge. Now
|
|
Lucifer realized, too late, the special significance of the memory retention
|
|
profile of the mind that Father designed into his offspring; this memory keeps
|
|
accumulating factual information, knowledge, and judgments from out of the
|
|
past, and keeps drawing on these past experiences to influence and often
|
|
control the judgment exercised in the present time. Now Lucifer understood very
|
|
clearly that the judgments he had been exercising up until that point of time
|
|
would actually be influencing and even controlling his navigation down in this
|
|
Second Estate -- and Lucifer didn't like that; he was smart -- he knew that
|
|
based on what Father had outlined in Council, his circumvention and tossing
|
|
aside of what was then Father's ADVISORIES would also continue on down here,
|
|
and so he would not be returning to inherit Father's Celestial Glory. Now
|
|
Lucifer really saw that through his past psychological conditioning of himself,
|
|
he would never return to Father's presence, nor obtain Father's Celestial
|
|
Status that he had craved for so much in passionate emulation. Suddenly, after
|
|
it was too late, Lucifer himself now saw the wisdom of listening to Father
|
|
(that it was listening to Father that had been the real important judgment to
|
|
make all along). At the height of his popularity, a large percentage number of
|
|
the Spirits of Heaven had been listening to Lucifer, and soon they too realized
|
|
that they had been taken in and mislead, and so now while still in Council the
|
|
invectives started flying: Many blamed Lucifer directly for the garbage advice
|
|
he had given, while other smarter Spirits realized that the true source of
|
|
their error had actually been within themselves, and that Lucifer had simply
|
|
been feeding a want. Those who had been snickering at those dumb stupid
|
|
unmotivated GOY supporters of Michael -- wasting their time concerning
|
|
themselves with the trivia of what Father had to say about this or that when
|
|
such grand and important conquests were so imminent -- now saw that it was the
|
|
Last who were now First, and that what they thought had been the First in
|
|
importance was now the Last. Now that their mentor Lucifer had nothing to lose,
|
|
he offered himself to be the Savior for mankind, subject to certain
|
|
qualifications designed to insure that he would return to Father's presence --
|
|
but Father declined his invitation. With no possible way to ascend to Father's
|
|
Celestial Status, Lucifer was not about to let this get any farther without
|
|
putting up a good fight, and so he then openly rebelled against Father: The War
|
|
in Heaven was on, but only about a third of the Spirits participated with
|
|
Lucifer in trying to pull off this incredibly stupid grab for power act;
|
|
Lucifer was cast out, and was locked onto the domain of this planet (which had
|
|
been created before the War took place, and the War itself is actually very
|
|
recent). Many of the Spirits who had listened to and had emulated Lucifer in
|
|
the First Estate switched sides at the last minute and valiantly fought against
|
|
Lucifer's Rebellion; as viewed from Lucifer's perspective, these Spirits
|
|
betrayed him when he thought he needed them most. After the Rebellion was
|
|
quashed, these Spirits who had switched at the last minute accepted Father's
|
|
PLAN OF SALVATION, entered into Covenants with Father regarding what will and
|
|
will not be adjudged at the Last Day, and were promised bodies down here.
|
|
Although they did switch sides at the last minute, they nevertheless continued
|
|
to retain their deeply ingrained devilish intellectual orientation, as amnesia
|
|
only blocks out factual knowledge and not personality or habits [which is why
|
|
Mothers can often discern noticeable differences in her offspring's
|
|
personalities from one baby to the next within a few hours after birth -- sorry
|
|
collegiate Heathen INTELLIGENTSIA, but variations in personality are not
|
|
"genetic" -- a favorite catch-all word fraudulently used by clowns to explain
|
|
away what they have no knowledge of].
|
|
...Today in 1985, those Spirits that once admired Lucifer so much are
|
|
now down here among us; and like their mentor they can be collectively
|
|
characterized by several key indicia: They are highly motivated, intellectually
|
|
strong people and can be found in any profession where intellectual knowledge
|
|
is important, such as in the law and in scientific research; their driving
|
|
themselves in the First Estate to go after one successive hard won benefit
|
|
after another, as frequently as possible, makes them razor sharp in the pursuit
|
|
of business and commercial enrichment -- and they have a sparkle in their eyes
|
|
for the gold and silver of this world (both juristic and physical), as that is
|
|
what induced them to lay aside Father's advisories and acquire benefits at any
|
|
cost, and without regard to moral or ethical values or the consequences of
|
|
deception or damages. They also developed a reputation back then for going just
|
|
too far. And like their mentor Lucifer, they have an intimate affection in
|
|
their hearts for music and musical instruments, and no interest in agriculture,
|
|
horticulture, plants, or farming of any nature. Today, these Spirits are
|
|
friendly, they smile, and they are easy to talk to; but whenever Jesus Christ
|
|
is mentioned, they subconsciously draw anything from a blank to outright hatred
|
|
-- and yet, they do not know why they possess such a disposition. Today in
|
|
1985, these Spirits -- one level above demon -- are all around us; and now,
|
|
just like yesterday, they like to think of themselves as being pretty cute and
|
|
smart when they pull off a business deal laced with lies and deception; they
|
|
have no adverse concern for running someone else into the ground while getting
|
|
what they want, politically or commercially -- it feels very natural to them.
|
|
Having been trained by Lucifer to selectively incorporate deception into their
|
|
MODUS OPERANDI for purposes of experiencing strategic conquest, they now
|
|
continue on with the same old formula since it appears to be working so well
|
|
and feels so natural to them; and the primary reason why Father let them come
|
|
down to this Adamic world is because of their valiant display in one of the
|
|
final Sessions of Council -- but even that judgment of theirs, as correct as it
|
|
was, was just an isolated fluke [fluke or no fluke, this judgment stands as
|
|
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE that these little Gremlins can exercise correct judgment in
|
|
matters concerning their relational standing before Father -- WHENEVER THEY
|
|
FEEL LIKE IT]. Having had a protracted working relationship with them before,
|
|
Lucifer is very well acquainted with these people, and he is now using these
|
|
Gremlins as expendable meat to do his dirty work for him; and at the Last Day
|
|
we are told that Lucifer will be there, too -- and he fully intends to get
|
|
even.
|
|
...Today, we are in the Second Estate for a short while, and everyone
|
|
is starting over from scratch, even up, and at point zero; and nothing has
|
|
changed as the world Gremlin's, and a good many Heathens and Christians along
|
|
with them, are falling for the same line again for the second time over. That
|
|
Commercial enrichment and other forms of worldly conquest are very important,
|
|
and so at a minimum, an occasional deceptive act here or there in business
|
|
carries no adverse significance along with it. Meanwhile, Father has said NO to
|
|
deception, and no exceptions.
|
|
=============================================================[113]</p>
|
|
<p>Sadly so, deception has the appearance of being contagious, unless efforts are
|
|
made to deflect the onslaught of its occurrence, and its prevalence throughout
|
|
the United States today could be exemplified perhaps in the dynastic corridors
|
|
of corporate power, where Commercial executives busy themselves by being
|
|
constantly fixated on their own self enrichment objectives. [114]</p>
|
|
<p>[114]============================================================= The reason
|
|
why IBM chose to move its headquarters out of Manhattan in 1961 was shrouded
|
|
behind a veil of secrecy and deception, a MODUS OPERANDI faithfully replicated
|
|
later on by other corporate executives while trying to explain away why their
|
|
offices were being transplanted out of New York City in the latter 1960's and
|
|
1970's. Starting on page 28 in COMPUTER DECISIONS MAGAZINE for March of 1977,
|
|
Thomas Mechling explains the reason why IBM packed their bags and left
|
|
Manhattan for a hill top orchard in Armonk, 30 miles North of New York City. In
|
|
explaining away the relocation, IBM Vice President J.J. Bricker tried to peddle
|
|
the bleeding heart line that IBM employees were unhappy with life in NYC and
|
|
wanted the suburbs:
|
|
"We have a belief that if the people can spend more time with their
|
|
families and have easier commuting, there is a certain plus for the employees
|
|
and their families. The plus is indicated by the attitude of everybody."
|
|
-[COMPUTER DECISIONS, id., at 30]. But J.J. Bricker was silent on the
|
|
fact that internal IBM polls had revealed an aversion to move to the suburbs --
|
|
just the opposite as reported; later, secretarial and clerical employees would
|
|
actually refuse to make the relocation to Armonk [id., at 30]. It turns out
|
|
that the real reason why IBM left Manhattan is because Thomas J. Watson, Jr.,
|
|
had been briefed by Nelson Rockefeller on the planned "likelihood" of a
|
|
controlled nuclear war taking place in the United States, with NYC standing as
|
|
a certain target; and so hearing that, Watson wanted out of NYC.
|
|
"The real, unwritten, and unspoken reasons that Thomas J. Watson, Jr.
|
|
wanted to get his top management the hell out of mid-Manhattan in 1961 was to
|
|
escape and survive a nuclear bombing of New York City, a likelihood seen by the
|
|
most influential, inside-information sources he was uniquely privy to..."
|
|
-[COMPUTER DECISIONS, id., at 28] The war Nelson Rockefeller was
|
|
referring to had been planned to occur far in the future -- in the late 1970s
|
|
[see RECON057/58], timed immediately after certain long range military
|
|
objectives were expected to have been accomplished by then (such as a base on
|
|
the Moon). The ability to control the direction of the staged "war" by having
|
|
superior and redundant hardware recourse over pretended Russian adversaries was
|
|
deemed very important by the Four Rockefeller Brothers. But the planned war
|
|
never came to pass as unexpected factors surfaced like Russian military
|
|
intervention and reversals by numerous allies of the Four Rockefeller Brothers
|
|
(who had started pulling off their own assorted double crosses in 1976); so out
|
|
of weakness in the late 1970's, the Four Rockefeller Brothers then shifted to a
|
|
FIRST STRIKE Nuclear War posture, a posture our adversaries took very astute
|
|
notice of. It is important to realize that when we are formally invaded under
|
|
Russian supervision [TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE: Although the mass media is constantly
|
|
informing us that the "cold war is over," don't be too surprised to one day
|
|
realize in the not too distant future how far from reality that deceptive (and
|
|
intentional) presentation of "facts" truly was, and as always, this particular
|
|
slice of deception upon the public is one of the most important of all, if not
|
|
THE TOP OF THE HEAP, as the successful conveyance and acceptance of this
|
|
particular deception is expected to bear the greatest fruit in all of history
|
|
for the Gremlins perpetrating it on an unsuspecting American populace.
|
|
Remember, that when dealing with the subject of Gremlins, you are necessarily
|
|
going to bump up against layers upon layers upon layers upon layers of
|
|
deception. Just remember that the designer of a trap has, as his overriding
|
|
objective, the goal that the trap will fool the intended victim and thus
|
|
achieve its purpose of creating damages, while inversely resulting in some form
|
|
of benefit to the designer], they will be believing in part that they are doing
|
|
the right thing in order to save the world from Nuclear War [the other parts
|
|
involve SET UP combined with a deep Russian allure for grand scale conquest];
|
|
yes, some folks who never gave it any thought will view that line as being
|
|
ridiculous -- however, that is not important; what is important is that the
|
|
impending military seizure of the United States, without any damages, if
|
|
possible, is viewed by our adversaries, for whatever their reasons are, as
|
|
being both justified, morally necessary and even compelling. This is why the
|
|
impending invasion itself is actually very feasible, with both momentum and
|
|
motive being present. However, the prospect of an invasion remains remote to
|
|
most folks (to those who have even bothered to think about it) as they dismiss
|
|
the likelihood of such circumstances ever transpiring. However, an enlarged
|
|
basis of factual knowledge on the incentives the Russians are operating on now
|
|
makes this impending invasion very attractive on their part, and an objective
|
|
assessment would reveal that, yes, they actually do have strong and hard
|
|
motives for at least trying to do so.
|
|
...And as for the Four Rockefeller Brothers, by the end of 1979, each
|
|
of the Four Rockefeller Brothers had been introduced into the world of
|
|
Rothschild double cross under violent and unpleasant circumstances -- an
|
|
interesting look ahead glimpse into the magnitude of the consequences of
|
|
Lucifer's planned Tort Law double cross at Father's Last Day. [See generally,
|
|
Thomas B. Mechling in 9 COMPUTER DECISIONS MAGAZINE, page 28 ["Gimme Shelter:
|
|
Why IBM Fled the City"], (March, 1977)].
|
|
=============================================================[114]</p>
|
|
<p>Why are such Gremlins, impressive by appearances, so freely willing to work
|
|
damages on other folks? The answer lies in the fact that they believe,
|
|
superficially, that they are doing the right thing (remember what they went
|
|
through in the First Estate). For example, in a Gremlin attack on Father's
|
|
jurisprudential structure here in the United States, the disintegration of our
|
|
jurisprudence (or "legal system") is considered by Gremlins to be a goal worthy
|
|
of achieving:</p>
|
|
<p>"The disintegration of our legal system... would end in a revival of
|
|
justice, due to the restoration of the authority of the people which constitute
|
|
the living, vital principle of the law; and by restoration of prosperity due to
|
|
the confidence of the people in the disposition and capacity of their own
|
|
Government to protect them in modern conditions of life. That system, fought as
|
|
being inadmissible for 13 small States, has survived expansion across the
|
|
continent; and, in its form and substance, is, if any human institutions can
|
|
be, equal to the conquest of every economic and moral frontier." [115]</p>
|
|
<p>[115]============================================================= Gremlin
|
|
James E. Lawson, attorney for the Federal Power Commission, testifying before
|
|
Congress in WORKER'S RIGHT TO WORK in Hearings before a Subcommittee of the
|
|
Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, at page 51; 72nd Congress,
|
|
Second Session, discussing Senate Bill 5480 (February, 1933).
|
|
=============================================================[115]</p>
|
|
<p>So too do Gremlins apply this same planned disintegration reasoning to propose
|
|
that there be a continuous succession of wars and other military damages
|
|
operations, specifically for the purpose of bringing about a quiescent
|
|
tranquility that will, they believe, be the result of a world tired from wars.
|
|
Yes, Lucifer is slick in his justification of damages. [116]</p>
|
|
<p>[116]============================================================= One of the
|
|
neglected Leit Motifs of the New Testament [LEIT MOTIF means dominate or
|
|
recurring theme] is the Adversarial nature of this World being an enlarged
|
|
continuation of the heated feud between Jesus and Lucifer that took place back
|
|
in the First Estate; each recognizes the other as his old opponent and rival
|
|
[see the true Status recognition of Jesus by devils in MARK 5:7 and LUKE 4:34
|
|
to 35; and the recognition is mutual in LUKE 10:18]. The Adversarial contest
|
|
between Jesus and Lucifer that had its genesis in the First Estate was once
|
|
continued down here in a desert battle [MATTHEW 4:1]; with that inflated bag of
|
|
hot air -- Lucifer -- claiming the lead role and challenging prominent
|
|
Personages, nothing changes on this stage either, because the bouts that
|
|
Lucifer's imps and Jesus once exchanged as Adversaries are now being handed
|
|
down to us all as Lucifer's imps throw one good Tort drubbing after another at
|
|
us, with many folks having no sensitivity even to the existence of the
|
|
drubbings or their origin. The invisible War we are involved in down here
|
|
[EPHESIANS 6:12] is a continuation of the conflict in the beginning [HYPOSTASIS
|
|
OF THE ARCHONS 134:20]; with those actors on this stage largely following the
|
|
same mentor now that they had found attractive once before on the previous
|
|
stage [JOHN 8:44; and ODES OF SOLOMON 24:5 to 9]. And just like once before in
|
|
the First Estate, today there is also now a large group of folks just idly
|
|
sitting on the sidelines watching it all go by; they associated nothing of
|
|
importance to what they were watching then, and they now continue to associate
|
|
nothing of importance to the movements of Gremlins today.
|
|
=============================================================[116]</p>
|
|
<p>And just as Lucifer is slick [meaning effective while remaining largely
|
|
invisible] with his justification of damages reasoning, so too do his
|
|
assistants down here need close scrutiny in order to figure out what they are
|
|
up to nowadays. [117]</p>
|
|
<p>[117]============================================================= Remember
|
|
that deception takes three separate steps to be successful [CREATION,
|
|
CONVEYANCE and ACCEPTANCE]. If any one of those steps individually falls apart,
|
|
then the deception stops right then and there. As it pertains to the CREATION
|
|
stage of deception: Well known to a few selected legal circles (and in
|
|
particular the United States Department of Justice) are the words of United
|
|
States Special Judge Advocate John A. Bingham Jr., who made arguments at the
|
|
criminal prosecution of John H. Surratt and other conspirators who were
|
|
involved logistically with the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln. This
|
|
Trial took place in Washington, D.C. in 1865:
|
|
"A conspiracy is rarely, if ever, proven by positive testimony. When a
|
|
crime of high magnitude is about to be perpetrated by a combination of
|
|
individuals, they do not act openly, but covertly and secretly. The purpose
|
|
formed is known only to those who enter into it. Unless one of the conspirators
|
|
betrays his companions and give evidence against them, their guilt can be
|
|
proven only by CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE... It is said by some writers on
|
|
evidence that circumstances are stronger than positive proof. A witness
|
|
swearing positively, it is said, may misapprehend the facts or swear falsely,
|
|
but that circumstances cannot lie... It is reasonable that where a body of men
|
|
assume the attribute of individuality, whether from commercial business or the
|
|
commission of a crime, that the association should be bound by the acts of one
|
|
of its members, in carrying out the design."
|
|
-John A. Bingham Jr. in TRIAL OF THE CONSPIRATORS FOR THE
|
|
ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN, ETC., at page 52; in arguments before a
|
|
Military Commission, delivered June 27 and 28, 1865 [GPO, Washington (1865);
|
|
quoting on part UNITED STATES VS. COLE, ET AL., 5 McLean 601]; {University of
|
|
Rochester, RUSH RHEES LIBRARY, Rare Books Room ["Lincoln File -- Seward
|
|
Pamphlets"], Rochester, New York}]. Notice how Conspirators may be proven: Only
|
|
by one of the INSIDERS talking (not very likely), or by watching their
|
|
movements and observing the train of circumstances they leave behind them. One
|
|
of the ways to observe Gremlin movements is to observe the more visible people
|
|
that they necessarily associate with in Commerce [Gremlins have to associate
|
|
with those irritating non-Gremlin vermin, since there are just not enough
|
|
Gremlins to go around]. And then watch for the circumstantial fallout resulting
|
|
from the relational activities by their more visible associates in Commerce to
|
|
signal something grand impending in the air... something originating with
|
|
Gremlins themselves. One example of someone, not a Gremlin, who associated
|
|
circumstantially with Gremlins and learned in advance of the intended outcome
|
|
of some of their sneaky maneuverings for conquest and damages, was an Episcopal
|
|
Minister by the name of Edward Welles. Bishop Edward Welles was Rector of the
|
|
CHRIST CHURCH in Alexandria, Virginia [the Church of George Washington]. In his
|
|
autobiography published in 1975, Bishop Welles had a few words to say about his
|
|
brief interfacing with Gremlin Franklin D. Roosevelt, immediately prior to
|
|
Pearl Harbor:
|
|
"Another of my friends was Norman H. Davis, president of the AMERICAN
|
|
RED CROSS, who was elected to our Parish vestry. He was very close to President
|
|
Franklin D. Roosevelt, and saw him frequently. On November 6, 1941, I had lunch
|
|
with Mr. Davis in Washington, and learned of the approaching war with Japan,
|
|
which would begin within five weeks. I was shaken, and asked Mr. Davis to urge
|
|
the President to appoint a NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER, and handed Mr. Davis a
|
|
letter I had written to President Roosevelt on the subject. Mr. Davis did hand
|
|
my letter to the President, who did appoint the following New Year's Day as a
|
|
NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER. I was so moved by the luncheon revelations that later
|
|
that very day, I sent out mimeographed postal cards to the congregation,
|
|
stating:
|
|
'The Rector is preaching a Sermon at 11am service Sunday,
|
|
November 9th, which he feels is sufficiently important to call to your
|
|
attention. The Sermon will assess the desperate situation that confronts
|
|
America this Armistice Day, and suggests basic Christian attitudes and
|
|
actions.'
|
|
"On Sunday in the course of that Sermon, I said:
|
|
'Few people realize how great is the possibility that we shall
|
|
actually be at war with Japan within 30 days.'
|
|
"The congregation was deeply shocked. And in response to many requests
|
|
my booklet of Sermons was reprinted with this Sermon added. 28 days after that
|
|
Sermon came December 7th, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and the war was
|
|
on."
|
|
-Edward Welles in his autobiography THE HAPPY DISCIPLE, at 62
|
|
[Learning Incorporated, Massette, Maine (1975)]. Bishop Welles, at that time,
|
|
had no way of knowing that President Roosevelt's advance knowledge of Pearl
|
|
Harbor was due to FDR's diligent and extended efforts to bring about that
|
|
attack. Like others brought in from the outside, Bishop Welles was snared in a
|
|
Gremlin's web of intrigue by innocent circumstantial association. Deception is
|
|
very important to Gremlins, as they continue on with their deception down to
|
|
the present day, by wanting folks to believe that no one could possibly have
|
|
known anything was afoot in 1929:
|
|
"In the Summer of 1929 a few prophets foresaw the coming stock market
|
|
crash. Only one gifted with second sight could have foreseen the sequel -- a
|
|
world depression historians would single out by calling GREAT. In the United
|
|
States at any rate, most of the businesses community continued to believe in
|
|
permanent prosperity, until the bottom fell out."
|
|
-Harold van Cleveland and W.H. Brittain in A WORLD DEPRESSION?,
|
|
Foreign Affairs, page 223 (January, 1975). Contrary to what those two gentlemen
|
|
would like you to believe -- that NO ONE could have known what was impending,
|
|
in fact the Gremlins knew, and they took steps to immunize themselves from the
|
|
unpleasant circumstances they were planning to bring down on us all; but not
|
|
everyone was caught off guard by their manufactured depression: Those
|
|
individuals who had been tipped off by Gremlins also went about their work
|
|
buttoning down the hatches. We turn now back into early October, 1929; into a
|
|
bank in New York City, where a young banker was about to be introduced into the
|
|
eerie world of Gremlin intrigue:
|
|
"I was impressed when Mr. Henry Morganthau Sr., a retired banker and
|
|
former ambassador, called on the bank in person, and directed it to dispose of
|
|
every stock, security, and bond then held in his Trust, and to reinvest the
|
|
proceeds in Bonds of the U.S. Government. Gratuitously, he added that he wished
|
|
these bonds remained so invested until he directed otherwise, a step which he
|
|
said he did not contemplate taking for at least 15 years... To me it seemed as
|
|
if he knew what he was doing and why. He did not appear to be following a
|
|
hunch... The impression he gave was one of confidence in his judgment. It was
|
|
this impression which convinced me that there was a basis for that judgment,
|
|
that what he knew others could know."
|
|
-Mr. Norman Dodd, in a New York City speech in 1946 [Mr. Dodd later
|
|
went onto be the Director of Research for the Reece Committee of Congress in
|
|
1953, investigating the role played by Tax Exempt Foundations in furtherance of
|
|
Gremlin objectives. See HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX EXEMPT
|
|
FOUNDATIONS, House Report 217; 83rd Congress, Second Session (May, June, July,
|
|
1953); Mr. Dodd is identified on page 5 as being the Director of Research
|
|
[which in itself produced another chilling successive seriatim of factual
|
|
accounts in well organized Gremlin mischief]. A few weeks after Mr. Morganthau
|
|
took that action directing the reinvestiture of his family Trust money, the
|
|
advisory memoranda that Gremlins had been quietly circulating among their
|
|
intimates began to jell, and the Great Stock Market Crash was on, as planned
|
|
[as I will discuss later].
|
|
...Now it is 1985, now quite some time has lapsed since the first great
|
|
American Depression, and now another Great Depression is once again scheduled
|
|
to make its appearance; and as before, individuals transacting business with
|
|
Gremlins are once again dropping CIRCUMSTANTIAL indicia that Great Depression
|
|
II is impending:
|
|
...In 1979, planning for a large regional mall to be located on
|
|
an abandoned airport in southern Rochester, New York, was in its advanced
|
|
stages by a consortia of the Wilmorite Group (of the Wilmont Family who
|
|
previously built numerous large shopping centers) and Emil Mueller (who owned
|
|
the land underneath the abandoned airport). The Mall would be called
|
|
MARKETPLACE MALL, and the very extensive and impressive research and market
|
|
studies on the Rochester area demographic and retail purchasing power had been
|
|
completed. This mammoth Mall would be a magnet, bringing in shoppers from far
|
|
away Syracuse and Buffalo, New York, and even Toronto, Canada. Having done its
|
|
homework, the Wilmorite Group sent its leasing scouts out to search for
|
|
tenants; they needed a few heavy anchors [ANCHOR tenant means the big well
|
|
known national chain stores who draw large crowds with their large advertising
|
|
budgets], and quite a few small tenants as well. They managed to line up Sears
|
|
Roebuck, JC Penney, and small regional department store chains like McCurdy's
|
|
and Sibley's [owned by Associated Dry Goods Corporation in New York City]. They
|
|
made a preliminary inquiry at a Canadian department store chain called THE
|
|
HUDSON BAY COMPANY, based in Toronto, but the Wilmorite invitation to lease
|
|
space in Rochester was politely declined. The HUDSON BAY COMPANY chain is
|
|
exclusively Canadian, and does not have any store anywhere in the United
|
|
States, but that meant nothing to the Wilmorite MALL pushers; so several
|
|
Wilmorite leasing executives paid a personal visit to the HUDSON BAY COMPANY
|
|
administrative offices in Toronto to try and convince those Canadian fellows
|
|
that this American mall was going to be special, and that they might want to
|
|
reconsider this one. That is a normal everyday business proposition, and the
|
|
Wilmorite executives were in Toronto on a normal everyday business trip -- but
|
|
they were not prepared for the shock that they would be receiving, as they
|
|
found themselves entering into the closed private world of international
|
|
Gremlin intrigue; they would be leaving Toronto bewildered that day. While
|
|
trying to make their leasing presentation to HUDSON BAY COMPANY officials, the
|
|
Wilmorite Group was told that the HUDSON BAY COMPANY would be unable to lease
|
|
space in that proposed Mall, as well as any other Mall in the United States --
|
|
because American exclusion orders had come down from upstairs, from advice by
|
|
Gremlin Edgar Bronfman himself [of HOUSE OF SEAGRAMS in Montreal], that a major
|
|
American depression was in gestation, and that your proposed Mall would one day
|
|
be desolate, and that the HUDSON BAY COMPANY would be unable to participate in
|
|
your venture. Needless to say, such blunt rebuffment is very rare in business
|
|
on the North American Continent, where common business rejection practice
|
|
nowadays is to deflect the real reason off to the side and point attention over
|
|
to something else nice. [A toned down and less grandiose MARKETPLACE MALL
|
|
opened to the public in late 1982].
|
|
...Now in 1985 it is some five years later with some industries
|
|
stagnant and others showing modest growth, but no real prosperity in the air.
|
|
Now word has come down from another business associate of Edgar Bronfman who
|
|
works for FAIRVIEW-CADILLAC, LTD., a large Canadian real estate development
|
|
firm (who speaks to Edgar frequently on the phone), to watch for a period of
|
|
large corporate mergers in the news, as the management, acting on INSIDE
|
|
information, starts to button down the hatches; generally, about 1990 or so is
|
|
the year planned for the planned erosion in the economy to start to appear
|
|
widespread due to the wide ranging number of industries that will have reached
|
|
hat long awaited Gremlin day of a STATIONARY STATE, or stagnation. The computer
|
|
industry will likely never recover from its doldrums of 1983; discretionary
|
|
retail purchases will slow down first, then followed by a slowdown in necessary
|
|
items like food and clothes, so watch for inventory statistics by retail
|
|
chains, as they accelerate their personnel and inventory trimming. Government
|
|
unemployment and Commerce statistics should be disregarded, together with the
|
|
planned assurances for the media and Government to make: THAT ALL IS WELL.
|
|
[TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE: Can't you just remember George Bush speaking soothing
|
|
words to that effect during the debates and elsewhere during his campaign?
|
|
..."Yes, everything is just fine America, now please go back to sleep..."]
|
|
Personal moves to be made to deflect the effect of the Depression should be to
|
|
replicate for yourself the PRINCIPLE OF NATURE manifested by certain mammals
|
|
like chipmunks and squirrels, as they accumulate a personal reservoir of
|
|
storage items to hold them through known impending lean seasons. This impending
|
|
Depression in the United States off in the 1990's will be unique in the sense
|
|
that the United States will also be simultaneously finding itself engaging in
|
|
military defense operations internally; and the disruptions to Commerce such
|
|
military intervention created will cause regional areas of where there are
|
|
literally no commodities available for purchase at any price (unlike the
|
|
somewhat quiescent domestic scene in the 1930's and World War II where the
|
|
stores had merchandise to sell and the problem then was lack of purchasing
|
|
money).
|
|
...No, Edgar Bronfman will never publicly say anything revealing, as
|
|
Gremlin Conspirators, like Lucifer, do not operate in the open; but having our
|
|
EARS CLOSE TO THE GROUND and by watching people who interface with Mr.
|
|
Bronfman, those CIRCUMSTANCES tell us more than what we need to know: That the
|
|
world's Gremlins have a few surprises; planned for us. And today, just like in
|
|
the 1930's, the next Depression is also being brought to you courtesy of
|
|
international Gremlin intrigue -- and not by some confluence of market factors
|
|
that collegiate INTELLIGENTSIA economist clowns, and others sponsored into
|
|
positions of prominent administrative power would like you to believe, such as
|
|
this little imp:
|
|
"The problem of controlling booms and depressions is a major part of
|
|
any country's economic problem, at its broadest... The problem of preventing
|
|
booms and depressions has to do mainly with the question of utilizing our
|
|
resources as fully and continuously as possible."
|
|
-Marriner S. Eccles, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, in
|
|
CONTROLLING BOOMS AND DEPRESSIONS, Fortune Magazine, page 88a (April, 1937).
|
|
Sorry Marriner, depressions originate with the massaging of the economy under
|
|
the plans of Gremlins; a situation made technically feasible since the economy
|
|
is under the central control of an instrumentality of the King. Giving the
|
|
Gremlins more control of the house management, FULLY AND CONTINUOUSLY, will not
|
|
end the depressions, as Gremlins have been more than competent to manufacture
|
|
depressions with less than the degree of control they now have. Only getting
|
|
rid of the Gremlins themselves will end depressions -- but this is not the kind
|
|
of talk that Gremlins want to hear propagated.
|
|
=============================================================[117]</p>
|
|
</div>
|
|
</xml>
|