This chapter is 202 pages long and far from the average Americans patience, so I am eliminating most, if not all of the graphics, however I do encourage all to go to the authors site and give them a look, as it would not only be educational, but respectful to this extraordinary author.
Squaring The Past
By Clint Richardson
Welcome to Part two of this essay series. Continuing from where we left off, the comprehension in the reader that the constitution of the United States – thanks to multiple declared “national emergency’s” – is no longer a part of the current political setting in America or the world must be clear. The constitution grants no rights to men. It has no power but that wielded from its congress, interpreted by Congress’s statutory court under the Executive Branch, and whether constitutional or unconstitutional, the laws of government are enforced violently by that Executive Branch under military rule (Lieber Code). Having been verified in the U.S. Code, from within the congressional record, and through the obvious and blatant actions of Congress and the Executive, acknowledging the constitution’s suspension is a necessary step in overcoming the cognitive dissonance continuously shrouded over us through govern-ment (mind control) and the distraction of enter-tain-ment (the entering and holding of the mind). The constitution is used today as nothing more than a religious (Ecclesiastical) and unquestioning tool of justification (Justice) for government to commit atrocities in its tyranny – romanticized abuse. This understanding that the Executive Branch (the military enforcement arm) of the United States government is no longer bound to Congress (by its own choice) or by the constitution itself is a prerequisite for continuing down this road of discovery and sobriety.
If this is not clear, I would suggest going back to the prerequisite part 1 of this essay, here:
Some will turn away from this information, stating as a defense that they have faith in government and in their particular corporate church.
But how is faith defined legally within the church and govern-ment?
From black’s Law 1st edition:
FAITH. 1. Confidence; credit; reliance. Thus, an act may be said to be done “on the faith” of certain representations. 2. Belief; credence; trust. Thus, the constitution provides that “full faith and credit” shall be given to the judgments of each state in the courts of the others. 3. Purpose; intent; sincerity; state of knowledge or design. This is the meaning of the word in the phrases “good faith” and “bad faith”. In Scotch law. A solemn pledge* an oath. “To make faith” is to swear, with the right hand uplifted, that one will declare the truth.
Remember the sacramentum; the sacred oath? Remember the God Trust as the full faith and credit of the United States and its dollar that holds you, your children, and your property as surety and collateral? And don’t you wonder why the constitution would simply assume that the judgements of any court of law is automatically good for everyone in every state, very much like the doctrine of religion? Does that sound like a fair trial to you?
As a “state of knowledge”, faith represents ignorance as “belief without fact”. Is that really where God would want his children to be – lead by the bloodline of royal corporations as governments who demand faith over reason and nature? The Bible says no.
Join me now for a pictorial and documented view of the United States and its history like you’ve never seen it before…
A Dark Authority
Perhaps you, as I have for so long, have wondered where exactly the “Authority” of government comes from?
What gives police authority to beat my head, shoot, or Taze me?
What gives the president the authority to declare an emergency and militarily force all people to comply with his rules?
Does it come from the people; in the form of the consent of the governed to be ruled by force?
Well, one might very well answer yes to this question after enduring a selective public education sponsored by that same government authority. But what if 49% of the people do not agree with that lawful authority? Must they really just grin and bear its tyranny, even if the corruption in that government is so blatant and scattered all over the news as to be a way of life instead of just random events?
Can the quorum of voices of the people through their “representatives” in Congress really force all of the people to comply with its will and law through the military rule of the Executive?
Does that really sound like a free country to you – where your liberties can be stripped away from you by the vote of the other people in a majority over you? Is that a republic?
If I were to challenge this perceived authority as an individual outside of that group-think mentality, I would need to challenge each office of government, starting from the lowest level of that government Beast. I would have to follow the chain of authority of all public officials, from police to police chiefs to Sheriffs to judges to councilmen to mayors to Governors to State legislators and senators… and finally I would be re-directed all the way up to the Federal level of the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches and Cabinets, and then finally to the man himself – the President of the United States. For each of these officials would indeed claim to answer to the authority of the one above themselves as the origin of their own perceived legal authority, but only after trying to convince me that as one of the “people” the president actually gets his power from me. And he will say this even when I outright declare him a criminal, smiling ear to ear in arrogance at my petulance while attempting to convince me that his authority is in fact the law of the people – of myself. I am apparently “the people”, though I have no voice…
But if finally I were to then challenge the authority of the President of the United States himself… to whom would he then point above him? Is it possible that there is a power higher than the President that he claims to receive his authority from? Of course, his public answer and claim of authority would be derived in full circle back to the fallacious lowest level of the “consent of the governed” – the power of the people as a body politic of one, with only one voice – despite the 10’s or 100’s of millions who do not agree.
E Pluribus Unem – out of many, one.
So here is the true test of this word authority…
What happens when I challenge the authority of the people – of the body politic – as nothing but an authoritarian, indoctrinated mob led by government over myself and my natural rights with no clue that the people are harming themselves by their blind delegation of power to government?
What happens if I don’t agree that 51% of the people can vote to allow a corrupt government to take away my liberties, especially on known-to-be-rigged computer voting machines? And if government is based on the consent of all the people as one collective voice, what happens if one of those people no longer consents to being a part of that group-think model? What if one individual stands up and says no? Can a people really be free if any one of them are forced to obey a morally reprehensible law simply because the majority of people around them ignorantly acquiesce to granting government the authority to enforce that law? If government passes laws while in the same sentence exempting itself from its own laws, can we really call what we have in America today lawful, when the law is provably lawless?
So where can I possibly be directed to at this point to ask the people – after following this chain of mythical authority all the way to the top level of U.S. President and finally back to myself – where as part of a group of people without knowledge or comprehension I somehow authorize myself to be abused, mistreated, extorted from, stolen from, kidnapped, imprisoned, quarantined, and even killed?
Where, oh where does this authority come from?
Now that I know that the President’s power derives from myself, as one of the people, I still have the same question: Who or what gives authority to government? And for that matter, who or what gives authority to the people or to the Constitution of the United States?
I know what the answer is not, because it certainly is not me! And yet I am supposedly lumped in as a part of the people…?
It is with great horror that I must inform you that I have finally found the answer to these questions after many years of searching… and it isn’t good.
You see, we must realize that civil legal law and code – the law of men – is a law that cannot be enforced except with the use of violent force and duress. After all, what good is a Congress or a Judicial opinion if that opinion or law is not backed up by an army of security guards to force the people into accepting and obeying those laws and opinions?
So the first hard lesson we all need to comprehend is that any and all man-made law absolutely requires the force of law, either defensive or offensive. For voluntary taxes to be paid, punishments and consequences must be made to force payment of those voluntary taxes – for who would voluntarily pay for and support their own tyranny and enslavement unless forced or manipulated by govern-ment (mind control)?
Governments must make all things illegal before it can control the populace by issuing licenses to legally commit an illegal act.
And by punishing those who act without permission from government for even the most trivial of things, the authority of government is created through perceived fear. The government’s law must turn natural rights into political government granted rights (revokable privileges and benefits) in order to establish a true fascist society. And if you haven’t noticed lately, that is exactly what the federal United States government has done to America…
But still the question remains – why do 100’s of millions of people allow a few hundred congressional, judicial, and executive employees of the United States practice fascism right out in the open? Is the lack of knowledge and recognition of just what fascism is really that prevalent? Is ignorance really that blissful? Are meager benefits really worth the tyranny?
And still I must ask… Where does anyone’s authority to pass any law come from?
I have finally found the shocking answer, for all law throughout history has always been based upon a Higher Authority. In other words, God has always been the gnostic Authority of man’s law, from Cannon law to its modern perversion of ecclesiastical oppression. The question is, which god or derivative thereof was manifested in establishing the United States as a central federation of government through constitution?
The laws of the United States are codified into what is known as “U.S. CODE“. This includes the codification of the constitution of the United States.
I consulted Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, printed in 1856, for a definition of this word “code”:
CODE, legislation. Signifies in general a collection of laws. It is a name given by way of eminence to a collection of such laws made by the legislature.
This struck me as quite an odd use of language. Just what and where does this “eminence” hail from, and who exactly is granting it upon the holy U.S. Code of the United States government?
Of course, it then occurred to me that I had certainly heard government use this word before…
The 5th Amendment to the constitution – labeled as one of the “Bill of Rights” – clearly and unequivocally proclaims that your life, liberty, and property can be taken away by government with court order (due process). This is often referred to as the “Taking’s Clause“. It’s most common name though is eminent domain.
Eminent domain is a prime example of what a free country certainly is not! For if my life, my rights (liberties), and my property can simply be seized upon by a corrupt court’s opinion (the faith of the court) without my permission, in no way can any sane and rational man claim to live freely in the jurisdiction of the United States.
Bouvier’s goes on to define the words eminence and domain:
EMINENCE; A title of honor given to cardinals.
CARDINAL, ecclesiastical law. The title given to one of the highest dignitaries of the court (government) of Rome. Cardinals are next to the pope in dignity; he is elected by them and out of their body (body politic). There are cardinal bishops, cardinal priests, and cardinal deacons.
So like our president, the Pope is “elected” by cardinals (appointed representatives) who claim “eminence” (honor through title). So where does this eminence come from in the United States? And who bestowed this eminent authority upon the person who appointed these cardinals to the U.S. government? Do “the people” as a group know the will of God and somehow esoterically vote accordingly through a holy Vulcan mind meld? And if so, why do some people vote differently than other people?
DOMAIN. It signifies sometimes, dominion, territory governed – sometimes, possession, estate – and sometimes, land about the mansion house of a lord. By domain is also understood the right to dispose at our pleasure of what belongs to us. 2. A distinction, has been made between property and domain. The former (property) is said to be that quality which is conceived to be in the thing itself, considered as belonging to such or such person, exclusively of all others. By the latter (domain) is understood that right which the owner has of disposing of the thing. Hence domain and property are said to be correlative terms; the one is the active right (of the tenant) to dispose, the other (property is) a passive quality which follows the thing, and places it at the disposition of the owner.
DOMINION. The right of the owner of a thing to use it or dispose of it at his pleasure.
As tenants, citizens are not the owner of property registered with government. Property as a “passive quality” title is revokable through eminent domain by the true owner, which is government in Trust. So title of property is nothing but a positive (revokable) right (privilege) granted by government, which has dominion over your person and your property (artificial paper things and Titles).
But wait a minute! This legal definition of domain combined with the descriptive word “eminent” leads me to believe that the “Codes” passed by the legislature hold their authority directly from God Almighty… or some other god! And since when are titles of Nobility and Honor allowed in the United States against the constitution?
Oh, wait, I get it… the constitution itself is in fact a sacred set of articles granting the ultimate titles of sacred nobility!!!
Am I to understand that the representatives of the people – the congress and senate – are acting in the same capacity as Cardinals of the Catholic or other Church? Makes sense, considering that for many centuries the church has been the eminent government of most kingdoms.
When I asked a friend of his opinion on this concept, he referred me to Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, where I found another surprising legal definition that is actual case law:
EVIL. It is an “evil” within rule that either means or end of conspiracy must be evil, to frustrate or impede a government function, whether that function is performed under a constitutional or an unconstitutional law. U.S. v. Rhoads, D.C. D.C., 48 F.Supp. 175, 176.
So according to the opinion of the courts, it is evil to impede the government while it is acting unconstitutionally?
Why am I being arrested, officer?
You’ve committed illegal evil, sir.
Oh, yes then… carry on…
In other words, it is evil to interfere with the holy eminence of government when it claims dominion over your life, your children’s life, your liberty, and your property. I seem to recall that it is evil to frustrate or impede the church as it pretends to act under God as well, but then it claims to be government too.
Now, I suppose we all have different ideas of what constitutes the word evil, but this is ridiculous! After the initial shock of this court opinion and legal definition faded a bit for me, a cold realization subsumed my soul as I realized something very important. This is nothing if not a religious opinion of a religious judicial court based upon its own delusional religious eminence and sacra-ment.
I harkened back to years of research and remembered other confounding claims of property ownership by government, which now started to make perfect sense from a religious standpoint.
Here we see the concept of domain explained on a universal scale: government owns all property, and the people are allowed to be tenants of that property as mere users once registered as citizens. And this from the congressional record!
“The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of government, i.e. law, amounting to mere user; and user must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” — Senate Document No. 43, 73D Congress, 1st Session, entitled: “Contracts Payable in Gold”, by George Cyrus Thorpe, submitted to the senate: April 17, 1933
“The money will be worth 100 cents on the dollar because it is backed by the credit of the Nation. It will represent a mortgage on all the homes and other property of all the people in the Nation.” –Congressman Patman, speaking from the Congressional Record of March 9, 1933, and referring to the Act of March 9, 1933.
If the United States has eminent domain over any and all property it claims, then the United States by default is technically the owner of all property in the United States (jurisdiction). In other words, it claims a dark eminence over the people and what they perceive as their personal property, but which is in fact the domain of the United States central government (a church and state). What else can one call this supposed authority of eminence over all things but righteous?
The Founding Fathers
Of The American Temple
The questions we will be answering today are: Where does this declared eminence hail from? Who or what were the founding fathers that claimed constitutional eminence over all “people”? How are the politicians of today related to those founding fathers? And from what Order of men did they then and now subscribe?
I considered for a long period the rather bold righteousness of these two congressional statements above… And that’s when it struck me – the Authority of government is not lawful in any way! It is not based on the consent of the people or upon the spirit of true justice. It is not even based on anything of or in this world. The horrifying truth is that the major governments of the world, including the United States, are claiming a uniform Authority from God… or from some other occult, godly, and etherical power unknown to most people.
But I didn’t fool myself anymore, for I knew then exactly which god it was.
I knew this almost immediately, because God’s law is the natural law. And everything the United States government does within its eminent “Code” is an attack upon that natural law and the natural rights of the people – the law of God and nature to do no harm to others or their property. U.S. Code is an absolute assault on the Ten Commandments and natural law, allowing government permission to kill, rape, pillage, and torture the enemies of its state within its eminent code. For nowadays, government hardly does anything else but harm its subjected people and eminently pronounce domain over all property and people in America, as well as the rest of the world through its military occupation and forced nation building – more commonly known as “spreading democracy”.
I understood then that my beliefs were absolutely irrelevant; my historical perspective dead wrong.
And I finally comprehended that day the truly dark nature of the Eminent Authority and Domain of this government and of that claimed by its founders. And so I went searching for the answers as to who or what their true higher Authority actually was…
The Tools Of Masonry And Law
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, lets us understand the deeper meaning of the words used in U.S. Codes and around the world, finding their origins in the ancient sacred geometry of Freemasonry:
RULE. This is a metaphorical expression borrowed from mechanics. The rule, in its proper and natural sense, is an instrument by means of which may be drawn from one point to another, the shortest possible line, which is called a straight line. 2. The rule is a means of comparison in the arts to judge whether the line be straight, as it serves in jurisprudence, to judge whether an action be just or unjust, it is just or right, when it agrees with the rule, which is the law. It is unjust and wrong, when it deviates from it. lt is the same with our will or our intention.
RULE OF LAW. Rules of law are general maxims, formed by the courts, who having observed what is common to many particular cases, announce this conformity by a maxim, which is called a rule; because in doubtful and unforeseen cases, it is a rule for their decision; it embraces particular cases within general principles…
In a million years I would never have guessed that the “Maxims” of law were based upon a metaphysical Masonic concept or tool of justice.
And so I looked to see how other words in this eminent legal system and language were based upon the tools of Masonry…
Of the most commonly used tools by a mason, one which does not get much attention, is the folding ruler. While the compass measures direction and the square measures angle, the rule is used to measure height and length. These modern day “rulers” used to be called a “story pole”, and in modern times have been replaced in practicality by the retracting steel measuring tape. Of course the necessity for a straight line, just as in ecclesiastical law, is paramount in masonry – the shortest distance between two points.
It is important to understand that the teachings of masonry are dualistic, using the tools of building and measurement as “metaphoric expressions” for the character of a man as a Freemason.
For example, the “Square” is one of the most important tools in Freemasonry. Besides being the first working tool in the Second Degree, it is also the Second Great Light.
The Plumb Rule is the emblem of integrity. The Plumb Rule consists of a weight hanging freely at the end of a line; the principle that actuates it is the influence of gravity. No matter where it is placed, it always points to the centre of the earth. So it is in the spiritual world, but here it points unerringly to God.
Note here that pointing downward to the center of the earth as opposed to pointing up to the heavens is represented as pointing to “God”. Perhaps I am mistaken, but rumor has it that something or someone else hangs out down there…
In the Third Degree, the Skirret is an implement which acts on a centre pin, whence a line is drawn to mark out the ground for the foundation of the intended structure. Symbolically, the Skirret points out that straight and undeviating line of conduct laid down for our pursuit in the Volume of the Sacred Law; and so to “square”, “level” and “upright” we must add “straight”. “Straight” is defined as the shortest distance between two points; and in our dealings with God, our neighbour and ourselves, we find that the shortest path is that which is straight. We can easily be tempted to take an easier path and so forsake the straight, perhaps at first just a little, but that “little” can become a habit. To keep on the straight requires restraint, which is rarely easy.
The Chisel is the last of the three working tools of the First Degree, and rightly so, because the Chisel should never leave our hand. As our ritual tells us: “the Chisel points out the advantages of education, by which means alone we are rendered fit members of every civilized society“. “Points out the advantages of education” — and is that not the whole theme of the Second Degree? There we are exhorted to extend our researches into the hidden mysteries of nature and science. “Science” in that use is the ancient word for knowledge, and education is the acquisition of knowledge, the way to which lies up the Winding Staircase. As the workman, with the aid of a chisel gives form and regularity to the shapeless mass of stone, so education by cultivating ideas and polishing rude thoughts transforms the ignorant savage into the civilised being.
The Chisel furthermore demonstrates the advantages of discipline. The mind like the diamond in its original state is unpolished, but by grinding away the external coat we are enabled to discover the latent beauty of the stone. Thus education discovers the latent beauties of the mind, and draws them forth to range over the field of matter and space in order to display the summit of human knowledge, our duty to God and man.
Why do judges use a gavel in their court proceedings?
The Gavel, we are told, represents the force of conscience, which, of course, is the voice of our own soul, or as our ritual puts it “the voice of nature” and the “centre from which we cannot err“. It is this inner voice that is ever ready to warn us when without it we would err. If we let conscience guide us, and are prompt to heed it, we will find its voice becoming stronger and clearer with every day of our lives; but, if we fail to heed it, failure becomes a habit, and its voice will eventually become so weak that it is barely audible, so that finally there is no warning at all and its owner becomes a really evil person.
Conscience, like the Gavel, will “knock off all superfluous knobs and excrescence’s” so that the rough stone of our character will become the Perfect Ashlar fit for the Temple.
“The Latin assis was a board or plank; in the diminutive form, assula, it meant a small board, like a shingle, or a chip. In this connection it is interesting to note that our “axle” and’ “axis” were derived from it. In early English this became asheler and was used to denote a stone in the rough as it came from the quarries. The Operative Masons called such a stone a “rough ashlar,” and when it had been shaped and finished for its place in the wall they called it a “perfect ashlar.” An Apprentice is a rough ashlar, because unfinished, whereas a Master Mason is a perfect ashlar, because he has been shaped for his place in the organization of the Craft.“
Source: 100 Words in Masonry