For the founding fathers we have two possibilities.
they were part of the cabal that doesn’t hate us. They helped found America because they had faith in our ability to keep the republic, and wanted us to be free.
they were part of the cabal that hates us, which is why 2A was vague, why they didn’t ban the federal government and private banks from issuing fiat currency, and why they didn’t specify the constitution was to be interpreted on a literalist basis. America, Lady Liberty, was set up to be history’s biggest sacrifice of an innocent virgin to ring in the new age.
Both ring true. As for the existence of part of the cabal that doesn’t hate us… who is President Trump, really?
It really depends on your definition of the word "Cabal". I always associate Cabal with the elites who hate us. I guess what you are saying is that there are equally powerful elite who dont hate us. Now, that is something I can believe it based on everything we are seeing. It is even possible that while most of the Cabal are after money, power and control, only a small portion of them are after depopulation, however with the mismanagement of financial system the two groups probably came together since the only way to get out of bankrupting the world is by depopulating enough people.
As for the founding fathers, I have a very hard time thinking of 2A as vague. The mockingbird media presents it as vague, but if it were indeed vague it would have been gone decades ago. I would say it was created to the best of their ability in the context of that time to provide adequate protection to the people based on their experience with tyranny.
Looking at this differently, if they wanted to intentionally weaken the constitution, making the right to bear arms vague would probably be much less effective than a lot of other things they could have done.
why they didn’t ban the federal government and private banks from issuing fiat currency
Federal reserve is unconstitutional. Article 8 of the constitution clearly specifies who can issue currency and what is currency. Its silver dollars of specific weightage, and only the treasury can mint it. Please listen to this episode of Bill Cooper's hour of time: http://hourofthetime.com/bcmp3/11.mp3
One of the founding fathers replied to the crowd that they had created a constitutional republic if you can keep it. In the end whatever people will allow is what will happen. It is quite possible that SCOTUS deciding whats constitutional and whats not is unconstitutional as well. Nowhere in the constitution does it actually say thats how things should work. It happened through some clever power wranglings early on.
I have a very hard time thinking that the constitution was sabotaged from the get go. Just looking at how hard the Cabal fought - including British invasion, Civil war etc, to take control of the financial system and how many decades it took - I would say the constitution was rock solid from the beginning.
It really depends on your definition of the word "Cabal". I always associate Cabal with the elites who hate us. I guess what you are saying is that there are equally powerful elite who dont hate us. Now, that is something I can believe it based on everything we are seeing. It is even possible that while most of the Cabal are after money, power and control, only a small portion of them are after depopulation, however with the mismanagement of financial system the two groups probably came together since the only way to get out of bankrupting the world is by depopulating enough people.
The Titanic/Fed episode is a good example. The evil part of the cabal had to kill various other members of the cabal in order to create the Fed. Some part of the cabal, therefore, resisted the Fed and the ensuing wars, bubbles, crashes, depressions, wars, bubbles again, wars again, perma-recession masked by money printing, and finally the crash we’re seeing today.
The existence of President Trump, who’s executing an intricate plan that, let’s be honest, none of us had anything to do with and none of us knew was even being planned, suggests this part of the cabal doesn’t hate us. They averted a war with Russia and seem to have dealt a death blow to the evil cabal, who are dying worldwide but not yet dead. And they gave us Qtards just what we need to know to understand how this happened and what rules we need to prevent it from happening again.
Further reading on the topic of the good cabal and bad cabal yields discussion on a council of 9, on a schism in the freemasons which manifested in our world as the civil war, which I understand is when the good cabal actually lost and the foundation of the Fed and steamrolling of those opposed was inevitable by that time…. And the idea that our planet undergoes regular, mathematically predictable cataclysms that many ancient societies, under the throes of foreign red haired conquerors, predicted with their pyramids, which are found worldwide. The good cabal intended to save themselves as always, but didn’t intend to prevent us from doing the same. By contrast, the bad cabal has visited all these sites, gleaned the message, then vandalized/destroyed the sites to prevent others learning. They plan to ride out the cataclysm and tell their kids and any surviving normies that it was a nuclear winter caused by the old nation states and overpopulation etc., and that their way is the only way to prevent it happening again, then they’ll live happily ever after as dynastic gods ruling a herd of humans on earth.
As for the founding fathers, I have a very hard time thinking of 2A as vague. The mockingbird media presents it as vague, but if it were indeed vague it would have been gone decades ago. I would say it was created to the best of their ability in the context of that time to provide adequate protection to the people based on their experience with tyranny. Looking at this differently, if they wanted to intentionally weaken the constitution, making the right to bear arms vague would probably be much less effective than a lot of other things they could have done.
It could have been clearer. They left the door apparently closed but in fact it was ajar, waiting for their efforts to attack it. The message they wanted to convey with America is that freedom doesn’t work. In order for that message to stick, freedom must first be put into practice. They brought slaves here knowing freedom isn’t suitable for all of earth’s peoples, and now we’re grappling with it, proving their point. Everything happening here is being documented in excruciating detail. Ultimately we will all die in a 2 mile high tidal wave which the cabal intends to tell surviving generations was the result of a nuclear war caused by our hubris and arrogance with this “freedom” and “nation state” and “overpopulation” nonsense. And no one will ever make these “mistakes” again.
Federal reserve is unconstitutional. Article 8 of the constitution clearly specifies who can issue currency and what is currency. Its silver dollars of specific weightage, and only the treasury can mint it. Please listen to this episode of Bill Cooper's hour of time: http://hourofthetime.com/bcmp3/11.mp3
Big fan of Bill, I’ve listened and read all of them many times. He was absolutely right. But the prohibition on money magick, which was a known phenomenon at the time, could have been much clearer. They left the door ajar for the pilpul that permits what we’ve seen since 1913. To the post-cataclysm historian, it will appear as though we tried a free state and failed, but really we were set up with bad language.
One of the founding fathers replied to the crowd that they had created a constitutional republic if you can keep it. In the end whatever people will allow is what will happen. It is quite possible that SCOTUS deciding whats constitutional and whats not is unconstitutional as well. Nowhere in the constitution does it actually say thats how things should work. It happened through some clever power wranglings early on.
More shit that should have been solved in the drafting stage but inexplicably wasn’t. This means of attacking a system of law was also not unknown at the time. Another way of thinking of it, the freemasons built us an apparently sound castle, but there were secret passages for their use, everywhere.
Or, our ship appears to be commanded by we the people, but they have a secret rudder control. When the time comes, they’ll slam us on the shoals and then tell everyone from then on, “this is why you must have a captain and strict control”.
I have a very hard time thinking that the constitution was sabotaged from the get go. Just looking at how hard the Cabal fought - including British invasion, Civil war etc, to take control of the financial system and how many decades it took - I would say the constitution was rock solid from the beginning.
Why didn’t they make literalist interpretation a requirement? They knew of this issue at that time as well. So many unfortunate oversights, if they weren’t against us then they were incompetent. The trick was to ensure it ran for a while, but ultimately failed. How else to use us as a lesson for future generations of human cattle about the danger of self governance, freedom, etc.
The cabal fought hard against Napoleon as well, but Napoleon was a freemason who served the crown all along. Wars are population control, they always control both sides. Once Napoleon exterminated the pesky French revolutionaries in the Russian winter, far from the cabal’s interests, freemasons in France perverted France’s law (giving rise to horrors like the civil code system of law, as opposed to common law), perverted our science (freemasons like Pasteur, whose idiotic germ theory beat out Bechamps’ correct terrain theory), and perverted western culture (under their rule France went from the most powerful nation on earth to a cute little country of chefs, fashion designers, and surrender monkeys, and consider the maçons’ gift to America, the Statue of Liberty. A giant virgin to be sacrificed… what do the spikes on her crown signify? An eclipse? Like the one that will blacken the sky for days as the oceans slosh over the continents and wash away almost all evidence of what really happened here.
The American civil war being a war between good and bad Cabal faction - that intrigues me. Any pointers on that? Who were the good Cabal players, for instance?
As for the good Cabal that is now trying to liberate the world under Trump/Q - I am not sure if that was aligned with the faction of people like Astor. It's possible they were completely independant factions. However it's nice to think that it's possible.
Your analysis on Napoleon is spot on. This is why when people bunch all freemasons together as "depopulating elites" it's not correct.
As for all the wars and tragedies after the Fed was created - I dont believe they are all actually civil wars between the Cabal factions. Wars and destruction is a necessary component to keep the Central Banking ponzi scheme to keep going and hence they need to make them happen regardless. However, they never let a good tragedy go to waste, and as one of the side effects they also use their wars to eliminate anyone who stands against them. This could give the impression of a civil war.
Re civil war: I read something about it being a battle between the old southern freemasons based in Atlanta, Georgia, who were the "good" cabal, and another sect but the site I first read about it, amallulla.org, is now gone. I had intended to go back and pick up on the scent at some point, but failed to archive offline. It alleged that this was actually over control of Pike's Peak, which is gigantic solid granite rock inside of which the cabal believes it is possible to ride out the coming cataclysm.
Re Astor. The sinking of the Titanic and foundation of the Fed was a call to war against the anti-Fed faction within the cabal. If that faction was not destroyed, it's only reasonable to expect that it would retaliate in a timely and effective manner. We all know no one can go toe to toe with the beast, it prints money and we don't. So I agree, nothing that happened since the founding of the Fed has been cabal civil war, they've all been the victor in the cabal civil war waging war against US. So the good cabal laid low until the opportune moment to strike arrived? Remember President Trump bowing out of 2012 saying the time wasn't right? He knew what was coming and knew when he needed to make his move. They were driving the bus off a cliff, but Trump became driver at the last second, put his foot on the gas, and used all the fuel up just before the bus careens off the cliff. And now we are noticing some of the passengers had parachutes...
Re Napoleon: why did Napoleon conquer Malta (home of the Knights Hospitallers)? Note the role the Hospitallers played in Friday the 13th. When the Freemasons appeared in England and Scotland in the Peasants' Revolt, they mostly destroyed Hospitallers' properties. The British fleet basically held back until he'd accomplished that task and unloaded in Egypt, then sunk his boats. Napoleon set about releasing smallpox and plague, his troops vandalized various ancient ruins (concealing the message the ancients laid down in stone at their great expense for our benefit), he spent 3 nights in the pyramid (!), he depopulated modern Israel (the better for it to be settled following the 1917 Balfour declaration and later "holocaust"). Then he returned home and murdered mainland patriots for the benefit of the City of London. Lastly, he retired on a remote tropical island resembling his childhood home, where he wiled away his retirement exploring the countryside on horseback.
Now is probably a good time to mention that Alexander Hamilton was never a Freemason despite the painting depicting him as such, and Washington was appointed to lead the new Virginia lodge even though he wasn’t a member.
I think the Masons hijacked the image of the Founding Fathers just like they hijack everything else.
We can debate which founding fathers were and which weren’t, but the founding documents and US gov’t documents since then have been festooned with cabal symbols. The cabal was there.
Freemasons were I think given or learnt secret knowledge perhaps after the last cataclysm and kept it to themselves as no one would believe it as most went back to a caveman type existence where everything was forgotten....cycles of Yuga. Perhaps some of them went rogue...used their knowledge against humanity....so not all freemasons are bad. Just the top tier and perhaps not all of them
I find this theory compelling as well. Why are the moon and sun of equal apparent magnitude in the sky? Why is ours the only planet with mountains? Why pyramids aligned with stars, worldwide? Why don’t Canada’s Indians know about the astrological significance of medicine wheels, did they even create the medicine wheels or find them? Why are dinosaurs impossible (consider the pterodactyl, which is laughable)? How’d ancient cultures who hadn’t invented the lens know about Saturn’s rings? Why does our own sun burn our skin? Why are our backs so ill suited for the use they’re put to? Studies on mice show that fucking with magnetic fields can produce antisocial behaviour, consider in the context of God flooding the world as sin grows out of control…
I wasn't implying aliens, I was implying that our planet once orbited Saturn, was ejected from that orbit in a cataclysmic event, descended to our current orbit picking up the moon along the way, and the moon and earth decelerated using a gyroscope-like effect, unloading all the friction of slowing down onto the earth's crust, hence mountains.
How did our ocean come to have the same concentration of dissolved solids as Saturn's rings?
Yet it’s being pilpulled to shreds and we all have memes about how it could have been clearer. The people who fought the British have no excuse for not knowing this would happen.
The ONLY way it could be any clearer is by rewording it thus:
"Because a well regulated militia is necessary to a free state the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
That changes no meaning at all from the original and is clear as day. It took me 0.3 nanoseconds to think of it that way based on the original. Anyone who tries to say the 2nd amendment is unclear is either lying to themselves more than to you, or doesn't understand English.
Anyone who says it’s sufficiently clear has somehow missed how watered down it has become, and doesn’t understand that laws aren’t attacked by friendly laymen but by hostile lawyers. There are ways to make airtight documents that stand the test of time, venetian merchant law does very well at this, as did English common law until recently (today’s judges make a mockery of the institution, but on purpose).
noun
a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral:
You have a right to say what you please. dictionary.com
define the word "infringe":
verb (used without object), in·fringed, in·fring·ing.
to encroach or trespass (usually followed by on or upon):
Don't infringe on his privacy. dictionary.com
As in; "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed".
Furthermore the type of "right" we are dealing with was outlined in the Declaration of Independence. It reads as follows; "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness".
By the very nature of government tyranny you will be placed in a position of self-defense. It says our right to self-defense is granted by God. The simple part of "shall not be infringed" should be clear enough. This is why gun laws are already unconstitutional.
They have always manipulated language to control us and they're gonna continue to do it in different ways. Language doesn't just "change over time". It gets manipulated over time and that's what causes us to forget proper definitions a meanings. The words our fathers used can clearly be defined. But citing "anti-2A memes" as a viable threat means you might just be sucked into a whole 'nother void of lies and questioning yourself.
Go read the Canadian whatever-it-is. THAT'S vaguely written. It reads like Trudeau himself wrote it.
You wasted all those words to say "the constitution doesn't specify if it should be interpreted in a literalist fashion, or according to changing contemporary language and understanding, and further leaves much unsaid about the parameters of the right it purports to protect" which was exactly my point from the beginning.
The constitution can't simultaneously be clear enough and omit everything you just said, among many many other omissions. It's a legal document intended to last for centuries or perhaps perpetually, these issues simply HAVE to be addressed, and they were not. It's not impossible to do, and by the time of the founding fathers, others had already successfully drafted legal documents that remained in use for centuries.
If you think my posts are "anti 2A" you're a fucking illiterate retard, go back to reddit. I am posting in support the God given right to bear arms, and the way we support that right down through the centuries is by clearly codifying it into constitutional law, exactly as the founding fathers didn't do.
Go read the Canadian whatever-it-is. THAT'S vaguely written. It reads like Trudeau himself wrote it.
See, I don't think you even understand the issues here. In fact, the Canadian Charter is very clear, it says right at the beginning that it's NOT to be interpreted in a literalist fashion. It's a shit document for protecting rights, for the same reason as the US constitution does a shit job protecting your rights: it didn't specify literalist interpretation.
Imagine having to specify that a law is supposed to be interpreted as it is written. The problem would not be with them for failing to do so, the problem would be with the LIAR that is interpreting it.
Don't get me started on banning the government from issuing fiat currency. Watch The Money Masters instead.
For the founding fathers we have two possibilities.
they were part of the cabal that doesn’t hate us. They helped found America because they had faith in our ability to keep the republic, and wanted us to be free.
they were part of the cabal that hates us, which is why 2A was vague, why they didn’t ban the federal government and private banks from issuing fiat currency, and why they didn’t specify the constitution was to be interpreted on a literalist basis. America, Lady Liberty, was set up to be history’s biggest sacrifice of an innocent virgin to ring in the new age.
Both ring true. As for the existence of part of the cabal that doesn’t hate us… who is President Trump, really?
It really depends on your definition of the word "Cabal". I always associate Cabal with the elites who hate us. I guess what you are saying is that there are equally powerful elite who dont hate us. Now, that is something I can believe it based on everything we are seeing. It is even possible that while most of the Cabal are after money, power and control, only a small portion of them are after depopulation, however with the mismanagement of financial system the two groups probably came together since the only way to get out of bankrupting the world is by depopulating enough people.
As for the founding fathers, I have a very hard time thinking of 2A as vague. The mockingbird media presents it as vague, but if it were indeed vague it would have been gone decades ago. I would say it was created to the best of their ability in the context of that time to provide adequate protection to the people based on their experience with tyranny.
Looking at this differently, if they wanted to intentionally weaken the constitution, making the right to bear arms vague would probably be much less effective than a lot of other things they could have done.
Federal reserve is unconstitutional. Article 8 of the constitution clearly specifies who can issue currency and what is currency. Its silver dollars of specific weightage, and only the treasury can mint it. Please listen to this episode of Bill Cooper's hour of time: http://hourofthetime.com/bcmp3/11.mp3
One of the founding fathers replied to the crowd that they had created a constitutional republic if you can keep it. In the end whatever people will allow is what will happen. It is quite possible that SCOTUS deciding whats constitutional and whats not is unconstitutional as well. Nowhere in the constitution does it actually say thats how things should work. It happened through some clever power wranglings early on.
I have a very hard time thinking that the constitution was sabotaged from the get go. Just looking at how hard the Cabal fought - including British invasion, Civil war etc, to take control of the financial system and how many decades it took - I would say the constitution was rock solid from the beginning.
The Titanic/Fed episode is a good example. The evil part of the cabal had to kill various other members of the cabal in order to create the Fed. Some part of the cabal, therefore, resisted the Fed and the ensuing wars, bubbles, crashes, depressions, wars, bubbles again, wars again, perma-recession masked by money printing, and finally the crash we’re seeing today.
The existence of President Trump, who’s executing an intricate plan that, let’s be honest, none of us had anything to do with and none of us knew was even being planned, suggests this part of the cabal doesn’t hate us. They averted a war with Russia and seem to have dealt a death blow to the evil cabal, who are dying worldwide but not yet dead. And they gave us Qtards just what we need to know to understand how this happened and what rules we need to prevent it from happening again.
Further reading on the topic of the good cabal and bad cabal yields discussion on a council of 9, on a schism in the freemasons which manifested in our world as the civil war, which I understand is when the good cabal actually lost and the foundation of the Fed and steamrolling of those opposed was inevitable by that time…. And the idea that our planet undergoes regular, mathematically predictable cataclysms that many ancient societies, under the throes of foreign red haired conquerors, predicted with their pyramids, which are found worldwide. The good cabal intended to save themselves as always, but didn’t intend to prevent us from doing the same. By contrast, the bad cabal has visited all these sites, gleaned the message, then vandalized/destroyed the sites to prevent others learning. They plan to ride out the cataclysm and tell their kids and any surviving normies that it was a nuclear winter caused by the old nation states and overpopulation etc., and that their way is the only way to prevent it happening again, then they’ll live happily ever after as dynastic gods ruling a herd of humans on earth.
It could have been clearer. They left the door apparently closed but in fact it was ajar, waiting for their efforts to attack it. The message they wanted to convey with America is that freedom doesn’t work. In order for that message to stick, freedom must first be put into practice. They brought slaves here knowing freedom isn’t suitable for all of earth’s peoples, and now we’re grappling with it, proving their point. Everything happening here is being documented in excruciating detail. Ultimately we will all die in a 2 mile high tidal wave which the cabal intends to tell surviving generations was the result of a nuclear war caused by our hubris and arrogance with this “freedom” and “nation state” and “overpopulation” nonsense. And no one will ever make these “mistakes” again.
Big fan of Bill, I’ve listened and read all of them many times. He was absolutely right. But the prohibition on money magick, which was a known phenomenon at the time, could have been much clearer. They left the door ajar for the pilpul that permits what we’ve seen since 1913. To the post-cataclysm historian, it will appear as though we tried a free state and failed, but really we were set up with bad language.
More shit that should have been solved in the drafting stage but inexplicably wasn’t. This means of attacking a system of law was also not unknown at the time. Another way of thinking of it, the freemasons built us an apparently sound castle, but there were secret passages for their use, everywhere.
Or, our ship appears to be commanded by we the people, but they have a secret rudder control. When the time comes, they’ll slam us on the shoals and then tell everyone from then on, “this is why you must have a captain and strict control”.
Why didn’t they make literalist interpretation a requirement? They knew of this issue at that time as well. So many unfortunate oversights, if they weren’t against us then they were incompetent. The trick was to ensure it ran for a while, but ultimately failed. How else to use us as a lesson for future generations of human cattle about the danger of self governance, freedom, etc.
The cabal fought hard against Napoleon as well, but Napoleon was a freemason who served the crown all along. Wars are population control, they always control both sides. Once Napoleon exterminated the pesky French revolutionaries in the Russian winter, far from the cabal’s interests, freemasons in France perverted France’s law (giving rise to horrors like the civil code system of law, as opposed to common law), perverted our science (freemasons like Pasteur, whose idiotic germ theory beat out Bechamps’ correct terrain theory), and perverted western culture (under their rule France went from the most powerful nation on earth to a cute little country of chefs, fashion designers, and surrender monkeys, and consider the maçons’ gift to America, the Statue of Liberty. A giant virgin to be sacrificed… what do the spikes on her crown signify? An eclipse? Like the one that will blacken the sky for days as the oceans slosh over the continents and wash away almost all evidence of what really happened here.
Godspeed.
The American civil war being a war between good and bad Cabal faction - that intrigues me. Any pointers on that? Who were the good Cabal players, for instance?
As for the good Cabal that is now trying to liberate the world under Trump/Q - I am not sure if that was aligned with the faction of people like Astor. It's possible they were completely independant factions. However it's nice to think that it's possible.
Your analysis on Napoleon is spot on. This is why when people bunch all freemasons together as "depopulating elites" it's not correct.
As for all the wars and tragedies after the Fed was created - I dont believe they are all actually civil wars between the Cabal factions. Wars and destruction is a necessary component to keep the Central Banking ponzi scheme to keep going and hence they need to make them happen regardless. However, they never let a good tragedy go to waste, and as one of the side effects they also use their wars to eliminate anyone who stands against them. This could give the impression of a civil war.
Re civil war: I read something about it being a battle between the old southern freemasons based in Atlanta, Georgia, who were the "good" cabal, and another sect but the site I first read about it, amallulla.org, is now gone. I had intended to go back and pick up on the scent at some point, but failed to archive offline. It alleged that this was actually over control of Pike's Peak, which is gigantic solid granite rock inside of which the cabal believes it is possible to ride out the coming cataclysm.
Re Astor. The sinking of the Titanic and foundation of the Fed was a call to war against the anti-Fed faction within the cabal. If that faction was not destroyed, it's only reasonable to expect that it would retaliate in a timely and effective manner. We all know no one can go toe to toe with the beast, it prints money and we don't. So I agree, nothing that happened since the founding of the Fed has been cabal civil war, they've all been the victor in the cabal civil war waging war against US. So the good cabal laid low until the opportune moment to strike arrived? Remember President Trump bowing out of 2012 saying the time wasn't right? He knew what was coming and knew when he needed to make his move. They were driving the bus off a cliff, but Trump became driver at the last second, put his foot on the gas, and used all the fuel up just before the bus careens off the cliff. And now we are noticing some of the passengers had parachutes...
Re Napoleon: why did Napoleon conquer Malta (home of the Knights Hospitallers)? Note the role the Hospitallers played in Friday the 13th. When the Freemasons appeared in England and Scotland in the Peasants' Revolt, they mostly destroyed Hospitallers' properties. The British fleet basically held back until he'd accomplished that task and unloaded in Egypt, then sunk his boats. Napoleon set about releasing smallpox and plague, his troops vandalized various ancient ruins (concealing the message the ancients laid down in stone at their great expense for our benefit), he spent 3 nights in the pyramid (!), he depopulated modern Israel (the better for it to be settled following the 1917 Balfour declaration and later "holocaust"). Then he returned home and murdered mainland patriots for the benefit of the City of London. Lastly, he retired on a remote tropical island resembling his childhood home, where he wiled away his retirement exploring the countryside on horseback.
Now is probably a good time to mention that Alexander Hamilton was never a Freemason despite the painting depicting him as such, and Washington was appointed to lead the new Virginia lodge even though he wasn’t a member.
I think the Masons hijacked the image of the Founding Fathers just like they hijack everything else.
We can debate which founding fathers were and which weren’t, but the founding documents and US gov’t documents since then have been festooned with cabal symbols. The cabal was there.
I do want to know when the Eye of Providence was added to US currency. I feel like that’s a big moment in cabal history.
Freemasons were I think given or learnt secret knowledge perhaps after the last cataclysm and kept it to themselves as no one would believe it as most went back to a caveman type existence where everything was forgotten....cycles of Yuga. Perhaps some of them went rogue...used their knowledge against humanity....so not all freemasons are bad. Just the top tier and perhaps not all of them
I find this theory compelling as well. Why are the moon and sun of equal apparent magnitude in the sky? Why is ours the only planet with mountains? Why pyramids aligned with stars, worldwide? Why don’t Canada’s Indians know about the astrological significance of medicine wheels, did they even create the medicine wheels or find them? Why are dinosaurs impossible (consider the pterodactyl, which is laughable)? How’d ancient cultures who hadn’t invented the lens know about Saturn’s rings? Why does our own sun burn our skin? Why are our backs so ill suited for the use they’re put to? Studies on mice show that fucking with magnetic fields can produce antisocial behaviour, consider in the context of God flooding the world as sin grows out of control…
We don't know this is the only planet with mountains. And they say there arecpyramids on Mars.
Only man talks of sin...god doesn't. And don't quote the Bible full of lies aliens and fakery please
I wasn't implying aliens, I was implying that our planet once orbited Saturn, was ejected from that orbit in a cataclysmic event, descended to our current orbit picking up the moon along the way, and the moon and earth decelerated using a gyroscope-like effect, unloading all the friction of slowing down onto the earth's crust, hence mountains.
How did our ocean come to have the same concentration of dissolved solids as Saturn's rings?
2A is not vague.
Yet it’s being pilpulled to shreds and we all have memes about how it could have been clearer. The people who fought the British have no excuse for not knowing this would happen.
The ONLY way it could be any clearer is by rewording it thus:
"Because a well regulated militia is necessary to a free state the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
That changes no meaning at all from the original and is clear as day. It took me 0.3 nanoseconds to think of it that way based on the original. Anyone who tries to say the 2nd amendment is unclear is either lying to themselves more than to you, or doesn't understand English.
Anyone who says it’s sufficiently clear has somehow missed how watered down it has become, and doesn’t understand that laws aren’t attacked by friendly laymen but by hostile lawyers. There are ways to make airtight documents that stand the test of time, venetian merchant law does very well at this, as did English common law until recently (today’s judges make a mockery of the institution, but on purpose).
define the word "right".
noun a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral: You have a right to say what you please. dictionary.com
define the word "infringe":
verb (used without object), in·fringed, in·fring·ing. to encroach or trespass (usually followed by on or upon): Don't infringe on his privacy. dictionary.com
As in; "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed".
Furthermore the type of "right" we are dealing with was outlined in the Declaration of Independence. It reads as follows; "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness".
By the very nature of government tyranny you will be placed in a position of self-defense. It says our right to self-defense is granted by God. The simple part of "shall not be infringed" should be clear enough. This is why gun laws are already unconstitutional.
They have always manipulated language to control us and they're gonna continue to do it in different ways. Language doesn't just "change over time". It gets manipulated over time and that's what causes us to forget proper definitions a meanings. The words our fathers used can clearly be defined. But citing "anti-2A memes" as a viable threat means you might just be sucked into a whole 'nother void of lies and questioning yourself.
Go read the Canadian whatever-it-is. THAT'S vaguely written. It reads like Trudeau himself wrote it.
You wasted all those words to say "the constitution doesn't specify if it should be interpreted in a literalist fashion, or according to changing contemporary language and understanding, and further leaves much unsaid about the parameters of the right it purports to protect" which was exactly my point from the beginning.
The constitution can't simultaneously be clear enough and omit everything you just said, among many many other omissions. It's a legal document intended to last for centuries or perhaps perpetually, these issues simply HAVE to be addressed, and they were not. It's not impossible to do, and by the time of the founding fathers, others had already successfully drafted legal documents that remained in use for centuries.
If you think my posts are "anti 2A" you're a fucking illiterate retard, go back to reddit. I am posting in support the God given right to bear arms, and the way we support that right down through the centuries is by clearly codifying it into constitutional law, exactly as the founding fathers didn't do.
See, I don't think you even understand the issues here. In fact, the Canadian Charter is very clear, it says right at the beginning that it's NOT to be interpreted in a literalist fashion. It's a shit document for protecting rights, for the same reason as the US constitution does a shit job protecting your rights: it didn't specify literalist interpretation.
Imagine having to specify that a law is supposed to be interpreted as it is written. The problem would not be with them for failing to do so, the problem would be with the LIAR that is interpreting it.
Don't get me started on banning the government from issuing fiat currency. Watch The Money Masters instead.
Imagine writing a law for laymen instead of for hostile lawyers.