Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda and "laws" (again, all created by the Cabal). The propaganda and laws provide out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things that the "two sides" don't argue about at all. (See the Aldritch plan (right) v. the Federal Reserve Act (left) e.g.)

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today. We don't realize this because the ideals are shoved at us constantly. We don't look at what's really in the laws themselves. When we do, and we see things that don't look right, we justify it with "that was just a product of the time," or "things have changed," etc., exactly as cognitive dissonance demands. But when you look at the actual "changes," you find even worse fuckery. For example, the 14th amendment ensured that the "3/5ths compromise" that was built into the constitution couldn't happen again, but it subsequently made everyone a slave to the all powerful government.

Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda and "laws" (again, all created by the Cabal). The propaganda and laws provide out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things that the "two sides" don't argue about at all. (See the Aldritch plan (right) v. the Federal Reserve Act (left) e.g.)

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today. We don't realize this because the ideals are shoved at us constantly. We don't look at what's really in the laws themselves. When we do, and we see things that don't look right, we justify it with "that was just a product of the time," or "things have changed," etc., exactly as cognitive dissonance demands. But when you look at the actual "changes," you find even worse fuckery. For example, the 14th amendment took care of the "3/5ths compromise" that was built into the constitution, but it subsequently made everyone a slave to the all powerful government.

Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda and "laws" (again, all created by the Cabal). The propaganda and laws provide out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things that the "two sides" don't argue about at all. (See the Aldritch plan (right) v. the Federal Reserve Act (left) e.g.)

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today. We don't realize this because the ideals are shoved at us constantly. We don't look at what's really in the laws themselves. When we do, and we see things that don't look right, we justify it with "that was just a product of the time," or "things have changed," etc. But when you look at the actual "changes," you find even worse fuckery. For example, the 14th amendment took care of the "3/5ths compromise" that was built into the constitution, but it subsequently made everyone a slave to the all powerful government.

Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda and "laws" (again, all created by the Cabal). The propaganda and laws provide out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things that the "two sides" don't argue about at all.

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today. We don't realize this because the ideals are shoved at us constantly. We don't look at what's really in the laws themselves. When we do, and we see things that don't look right, we justify it with "that was just a product of the time," or "things have changed," etc. But when you look at the actual "changes," you find even worse fuckery. For example, the 14th amendment took care of the "3/5ths compromise" that was built into the constitution, but it subsequently made everyone a slave to the all powerful government.

Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda and "laws" (again, all created by the Cabal). The propaganda and laws provide out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things they don't talk about at all.

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today. We don't realize this because the ideals are shoved at us constantly. We don't look at what's really in the laws themselves. When we do, and we see things that don't look right, we justify it with "that was just a product of the time," or "things have changed," etc. But when you look at the actual "changes," you find even worse fuckery. For example, the 14th amendment took care of the "3/5ths compromise" that was built into the constitution, but it subsequently made everyone a slave to the all powerful government.

Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda and "laws" (again, all created by the Cabal). The propaganda and laws provide out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things they don't talk about at all.

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today.

Based on what that is more credible than original source material?

Based on other source material. A TON of other source material. I gave you my assessment of having done an investigation into the matter. The source material that gave me my impression is extensive. Making a full case with all of the evidence is a book length work. Consider my statements the "abstract." Some of that evidence will be in later parts of my report.

You are either truly against it or your are not.

This is the Prison of Two Ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are forced into one side or the other. The whole "left-right" thing was created by the Cabal to control everyone. Real decisions by the individual are made based on a complicated decision making process. This decision making process is guided by propaganda (again, created by the Cabal). This propaganda provides out's for cognitive dissonance (ignore or justify certain pieces of evidence) to guide decisions down one of the two provided paths.

This is how division is created, and how society is propelled forward down the path the Cabal intend. Mostly, society isn't guided by the differences in policy, but by where they agree; the things they don't talk about at all.

you have states that wanted to change the definition of what a human was so they could selectively apply the constitution.

The Constitution is not what you think it was. It is a common error to conflate the DoI, which made flowery statements and the Constitution, which was a signed Treaty. The Constitution made perfectly clear that not all people were created equally. It is rife with such statements, made into law. The states didn't "want to change the definition of what a human was," they just didn't want to be subject to a Treaty violation. If I can find the link to the piece of (period) evidence that explains this clearly I will post it. I was looking, but I can't find it. I know I have it in my work somewhere.

The founding ideals of the USA could not in any way survive along side slavery.

The "founding ideals" and the "founding" are fundamentally at odds. The "ideals" were the packaging. The packaging lied about what was inside. It was flawed from the very beginning, intentionally, to lead us to today.