Un-founding the U.S.A., building the trap

by Dahni

© Copyright 1/27/10

all rights reserved

HOW can WE the People regain control of Our right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” WE have been delving into what won’t work in order to find what will work. So far:

The List (simplified)

1.   Overthrow the government by a military coup or para-military militias?

2.   The 9/12 Project?

3.   Challenge ‘The Commerce Clause’? WE are here

WE are still dealing with challenging the Commerce Clause. Before the series concludes WE must first understand ten years in OUR history when history was re-written.

Today – Un-founding the U.S.A., building the trap

Building the Trap

“Which history do WE want, the truth or

whatever makes US feel good,  while WE are losing OUR Liberty?”

-dahni

To those of US that can physically see, do WE prefer to be blind or to see?

Have you ever peeled an onion? There are lots of layers to an onion correct? So does this subject have many, many layers! Is the first layer too difficult or make you so uncomfortable that you want to stop peeling?

The contrast between truth and fiction may be clearly seen in the almost cult following of Ernesto Guevara, commonly known as Che Guevara or just Che. His picture is found on everything from T-shirts and tattoos, to all manner of merchandise. The year? 2010!

“Hollywood, Madison Avenue, and the mainstream media celebrate Che as a saint and a sex symbol – a selfless martyr with a love of humanity second only to Jesus Christ’s.”

introduction: ‘Exposing the Real Che Guevara: And the Useful Idiots Who Idolize Him’

by Humberto Fontova

http://www.hfontova.com/

The term “useful idiots,” is the name Joseph Stalin gave to foolish Westerners who parroted his lies about communism’s successes. And Stalin is responsible for the murder of even more people in one year, than Adolph Hitler ever thought about or had time for, over the entire course of World War II. But you probably didn’t know that or you probably don’t believe that either right? But until each one of US wake up, WE are all just useful idiots parroting an United States of America that is nothing more than legal fiction!

Che is considered to be an icon for revolution and change, adored as a role model and honored by Rev. Jesse Jackson, Carlos Santana, Jay Z, Mike Tyson, Madonna, Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, the world’s top supermodel, Hollywood, The Cover of Time Magazine and the list goes on. Should Che, be so honored and worthy of  adulation and praise? If you desire, as he did, to destroy New York City with nuclear bombs, to promote book burning, to sign death warrants for authors that disagree with you; if you are a racist, and desire to persecute blacks, homosexuals, rock and roll and religious people; if you love material wealth at the expense of the poor; if you love murder and love to murder people yourself, then I guess Che’s your guy. So if this is really NOT your intention, how does one account for this cultural acceptance of Che? The simple answer is to hide the truth and then rewrite history. You cannot change history. History is what history is. So first, bury it then re-write it!

From about 1861 -1871 much of OUR history has been buried and rewritten and it still is being rewritten.

To begin, let US look at brief profile of President Abraham Lincoln.

For the most part, this is what WE have been taught about the man. He was ‘Honest Abe,’ a simple man from the backwoods, a rail-splitter; a man of great patience, the image on the one-cent penny, the man that freed the slaves and saved the Union. Maybe some even know that he suffered from depression for most of his life, but this in a nutshell, is what WE have been taught. But is this the whole truth or has history been rewritten?

Politics and religion is so often uninteresting and avoided, because they are divisive as when forced upon US, WE feel powerless to change anything.

Because of the immensity and detail of these times and for the sake of time, I’ll not dot every ‘i’ or cross every ‘t’ here. I will only document certain events from these time periods. But it is recommended that you research this information for yourself and prove it to yourselves or refute it, if this is your motivation. Either way, it will be found out to be the truth. I caution you however, this information cannot be found in mainstream media or from history books from elementary schools all the way through college. One needs to look to the Library of Congress, perhaps some public and private libraries located in major cities, some libraries of major universities, some very old archives of newspaper articles and even the Internet. Yes the Internet does, contrary to popular belief, contain much factual information.

Prior to 1861, the states in the Union were all sovereign states. Each was seen as any other foreign country and so was the Federal government. Each citizen was a citizen of their perspective sovereign and component commonwealth state. Each citizen was 1 of WE the People, of the United States of America.

After the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776, The Articles of Confederation of States was completed in 1781. There were problems and The Constitutional Congress convened later, to finalize the Constitution in 1789. One major provision however, was to continue to allow succession of the individual and separate sovereign states, as The Declaration of Independence defined. Lincoln argued that to separate from the union, all the states had to agree.

The media center of the day in the 1860’s was New York City, New York. Even then, the New York Times existed. They published many articles in support of the states’ right to secede from the Union. These ideas, plans and actions were in process long before Lincoln was ever nominated or inaugurated as president of the United States. True history will show that southern states rejected the whole idea of slavery before it was accepted. Initially, it was the Northern States that profited the most in the slave market. It was mostly Northern ships that brought slaves and sold them to the southern states. Industry was the dominating force in the North whereas agriculture, was chief among the Southern states. In the north, many types of people worked side by side in industry. The south primarily switched to the single crop, cotton. To compete with automation in the north, cheap labor was required in the south. So these two cultures were different, the several classes of the north and the plantation culture of master-slave in the south.

For the same reasons the colonists wanted to secede from England in the 1700’s “taxation without representation,” the south felt the same need. The Republican Party and Lincoln were believed to support more federal control over the states as opposed to the states having the right to their own affairs.

A supporter of the south’s legal right to secede from the Union and sympathetic to their stand for state rights was an Englishman.  John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, was an English historian and moralist. Although many may not know this man or what he did, quite often one of the quotes attributed to him is remembered. In a letter to a Bishop of Rome in 1887, he challenged the new doctrine of papal infallibility of 1870. Part of his ‘Dictum’ read:

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

No other words than these, are more proper and fitting here for this subject.

WE have been taught that this conflict among the states was called ‘The Civil War.’ There was neither anything ‘civil’ about it nor was it technically a ‘war.’ It was a suppression of a rebellion; not a war, as only Congress can declare war. It sure looked like, smelled like, sounded like, tasted like and felt like a war, especially to those that died, were injured or lost much from it.

Before Lincoln ever took office, states had already begun to secede. As in any war or conflict, plans must be drawn and implemented to regain control and restore order. The propaganda machine was in full effect. Lincoln knew or should have known that the states’ legal right to secede was without question. The federal government could not through coercion or force, keep the states or get them back into the Union. So the suppression of an unlawful rebellion must be devised and perceived by public opinion.

Other causes for this revolt must be fabricated, even if there was some element of fact. The conflict was called the Civil War, implying that the South was uncivil and unwilling to work out their differences with the Union. Slavery became another issue and that the Southerners were evil in their ownership and treatment of people as property. This was all happening, even while the White House had slaves and the northern shipping industry protected the slave trade. All Lincoln had to do now was either to wait and see or to somehow manipulate southern aggression and get them to fire first. To be fair, the south wanted the North to fire first too. Either side would be seen as justified in defending itself. This orchestration was principally enacted by Lincoln through a veiled threat against the Maryland Legislature by presidential order and his handling of Fort Sumter.

Maryland was a strategic location and Lincoln could not risk losing it with Baltimore being so close to Washington, D.C. If it was taken by the south, the entire area would be surrounded by hostile forces. In a presidential order, Lincoln advised the military not to get involved in the affairs of Maryland, even while Union forces were lined up on the border. The legislature was to meet for one reason alone. It was to answer the question as to whether they should secede. Pro-union thinking compelled them to move the session to Fredericksburg, in order for a more fair and honest vote to be taken. It was left undecided, but a day to reconvene was. That never happened and the union forces moved in. Habeas corpus was suspended and Marshall Law went into effect.

Lincoln believed Fort Sumter was Federal Property and this infuriated the South. Military advisers concluded that Lincoln had two options: let it go or defend it. To hold the fort, 20,000 soldiers were needed inside and outside the areas and shorelines surrounding it. But there were most likely only 16,000 soldiers in the entire Union army at the time. Lincoln saw a third option. He ordered food and provisions to be delivered to the fort. I have no idea what his true motivation was for this, to hunker down and hope that the fort could just wait it out or was it for some other reason? Would you have trusted the North to have not concealed soldiers and arms in that ship? What happened next was that the South with no apparent opposition from the North seized the opportunity and fired upon the fort. The effect was that the South fired first, so the north appeared to be justified, in defense of the union and in putting down the revolt.

Congress had adjourned sine die (pronounced sign-e die-e, Latin “without a day”), to reconvene. Lincoln summoned them back by presidential order April 15, 1861, which despite references to his constitutional authority to do so, he had no constitutional authority. Congress returned, fearing reprisals from the government if they did not. But at this point, there was no legitimate Congress. To this day, there is no legitimate legislative branch of government as required by the constitution. It just appears to be legitimate. You may think that this is merely a technicality, but our government is based on a constitution and Parliamentary Rules of Order. Only Congress may set their day to convene and to adjourn. It may only be argued that Lincoln’s authority was that of putting down an unlawful rebellion.

The act of Congress, admitting West Virginia was passed December 31st, 1862. It did not go into effect until June of 1863, bringing the total number of states at the time to 35.

While the country was focused on conflict, another United States and another 35 states all baring the same names and physical boundaries were created, so apparently no one would notice the change. This is called, legal fiction.

In the common law tradition, legal fictions are suppositions of fact taken to be true by the courts of law, but which are not necessarily true. They typically are used to evade archaic rules of procedure or to extend the jurisdiction of the courts in ways that were considered useful, but not strictly authorized by the old rule.

Legal fictions were used by courts prior to the existence of handling offences. In a situation where one person sells stolen property to another person, they can then be accused of handling stolen property. Legal fiction has been used to declare that: as the first person did not have the power to sell the property to the second person, the second person in possession of stolen property was considered to have also stolen the property, and was therefore guilty of theft.

The term “legal fiction” is not usually used in a pejorative way in spite of the negative connotation of the phrase, and has been characterized as scaffolding around a building under construction. So what was being constructed here, a new government? It just had to be ENFORCED and it was and it is, to this day.

Lincoln, as Commander and Chief of the military, according to the Constitution, was charged as president of the United States to put-down an unlawful revolt as it was perceived to be. He therefore, had every right and the authority to suspend habeas corpus and declare Marshall Law. But Marshall Law is only intended for a period of time and not indefinitely. Simply put, restore order then return to the Constitution’s original intent of the balance of powers and the rights of the individual states and individuals. Marshall Law was suspended, but Missouri apparently liked Marshall Law and did not want to let it go. Lincoln knew this and plans were made for the military to take back Missouri and restore order. Lincoln was assassinated before this took place, but it was later accomplished after his death. Marshall Law or not, the entire country had been redefined in 1861 with legal fictions employed, to make: (2) separate United States and (2) sets of states with the same names and geographical boundaries. The government had only the need to make it all appear legal and get it into law.

In 1863, there were two extremely important acts by President Lincoln, important to OUR subject here.

The first event of 1863 as many people understand, was the Emancipation Proclamation, which supposedly freed the slaves. It actually came in two parts.

The first part came on September 22nd, 1862 which freed ALL the slaves of the 10 southern states that were not as of that date, under Federal control. This was nothing more than a military tactic, endeavoring to hurt the south by adversely affecting their economy.

The second part was issued January 1^st, 1863. This is no doubt what most of us refer to as, The Emancipation Proclamation. But I challenge anyone to actually read it word for word, as word for word copies are readily available. In so doing, you will come to understand that not all slaves were freed. The slave trade was still being protected by Union forces. There were slaves still un-freed in Lincoln’s own White House, even after he signed it.

What was the second important act in 1863?

A large contingency of immigrants had fled their homeland, fraught with famine and disease. They came to the land of Opportunity and Liberty. The first glimpse they had of what would become their new home was not yet she, who would one day stand as a beacon in the harbor, the Statue of Liberty. What they actually saw and found were often worse than what they left in their homeland of Ireland. Housing was deplorable. Disease was rampant. Opportunity was almost non-existent. Exploitation was benefiting those which had, at the expense of those which, had not.

For a visual idea of these times, rent or watch the movie, ‘Gangs of New York.’ I will caution you however, on two points. This movie depicts extreme violence, BUT IT DOES NOT SHOW HOW MUCH WORSE, IT REALLY WAS!!!!

The hidden powder keg was packed with explosives by an act of Congress and lit by the signature of President Lincoln, March 3rd, 1863.

The Enrollment act or Conscription Act of 1863 required every suitable male citizen and those immigrants who had filed for citizenship, between the ages of twenty and forty-five, to enroll for military service. Immigrants filed for citizenship because, they wanted something more! They desired as all people do, to hold the precious rights of Liberty and Opportunity. But many of them barely off the boat, barely existing, and with ink still wet on their filings for citizenship, were now compelled to fight. Fight for what?

There were compassionate exceptions to the Conscription Act, but two were not and it infuriated the masses. If you could pay $300 or send in a suitable replacement, you could be an exception and not required to serve. But who could afford $300? Who could find a suitable replacement?

According to the website, www.measuringworth.com, there are six ways to determine what $300 in 1863 would have been worth in 2008. Figures range upward from more than $4,000.00 to over $500,000.00.  Here is the same question, who could have afforded this amount in 1863 or the adjusted amount in 2008? The answer is those of means and wealth or those that could lay hands on it.

Who could you send as a suitable replacement for yourself, not already required to enroll? I’ll leave it you to ponder the possible answers. But it eventually must get to, who could have afforded to send a suitable replacement?

Shortly after the Conscription Act went into effect; was published and known among the masses, there were revolts with violence across the country. There were none worse than that in New York City. In fact, there had never been before this time or since, a worse riot in the entire history of this country!

Were there gangs? Of course there were gangs, but it was not the gangs of New York that were solely the source of the riot. Almost the entire city erupted into violence as if some alien and reptilian monster emerged from hiding in the sewers beneath the city. Those associated with or those believed to have money were called ‘$300 men’ or simply, “money men.” The mob was loose and they ran with a single mind to destroy anything and everyone associated with exemption from the draft and the forcing of the rest, to be drafted against their will.

Many thought this whole thing was about ‘freeing the blacks’ or a conflict to secure power for the few and the privileged at the expense of the masses and the poor.

The mob looted and lynched blacks and whites. At least one bed containing a sleeping black child was picked up and thrown from an upper floor window of an orphanage. The awakened child screamed in horror as she plunged to her death. Next, it was reported that the mob shouted, “Burn the nigger’s nest!” This orphanage, the enrollment office and other buildings were set on fire.

General Robert E. Lee was in route to New York City. It was considered to be the financial capital of the day, as it arguably is today. Inefficient resources for insufficient numbers of troops were dispatched (many from N.Y. City), to meet Lee, even though it was believed that they most likely would have been defeated. Suddenly, they were ordered back to N.Y. City and commanded to, “take back the city at all costs.”  Ships in the harbor fired upon the infrastructure and people, destroying much and killing many. Troops fired upon the masses in the streets and in many cases, brothers literally killed their own brothers. After the riot was put down days later, much of the city was destroyed and many were dead and still lying in the streets – new immigrants, black and white, men, women and children. A famous and articulate poet awoke to a city still burning and smoldering. The smoke nearly hid all the light from the sun. He could only write three words to describe the horror he felt and saw, “Black, Black, Black!”

Had not the inclement weather bogged down Lee’s forces, they may have been able to take N.Y. City, without having to fire a single shot.

Many people may know some of this history and even know about the Conscription Act of 1863, but not about how it was to be enforced.

The exact same act sets a structure for filling quotas and for the enforcement of this act as the President deemed necessary; as he required and at his sole discretion. All states (under the control of the north and of the south if and when defeated by union forces), were set under districts. These ‘districts’ would appear to be the congressional districts of each separate state. However, to enforce the Conscription Act, the districts were to be controlled by a military provost, with each district having their jurisdiction controlled by the Federal Government and ultimately by the President of the United States. This is exactly what was drawn up in 1861, referred to as ‘legal fiction,’ and now purported to be legal and enforced by law, by the Conscription Act of 1863.

WE know that sometime after the Vietnam War and to this day, the military is an all-volunteer service. But it is important to understand, that no president or congress (Democrat, Republican or otherwise), has EVER rescinded, or repealed this order and the Supreme Court has never overturned this order of 1863! So technically, it is still in force. Therefore, anyone, according to the wording in the act can be drafted today, and the jurisdiction of all the states, rests with the Federal government and the president.

I find it interesting how President Lincoln was assassinated. As we all have most likely been taught, Lincoln was seated in Ford’s Theater to watch a play, April 14, 1865.

By most reports, John Wilkes Booth was a gifted actor, believed to have performed in 83 plays, just in 1858 alone. Among these plays he appeared in were, ‘William Wallace’ and ‘Brutus.’ The themes of these two plays were the killing or the overthrow of an unjust ruler. Booth said that of all the Shakespearean characters, his favorite role was Brutus – the slayer of a tyrant.

Early 1863, Booth was arrested in St. Louis, Missouri while on a theatre tour. He was heard saying he, “wished the President and the whole damned government would go to hell.” He was charged with making “treasonous” remarks against the government. He was released, but only after he was compelled to take an oath of allegiance to the Union and pay a substantial fine. Was Booth exercising freedom of speech or were his words treasonous and threatening to the president? I however, do see a cause for this event to be remembered without fondness by Booth.

On November 25, 1864, Booth performed for the only time with his two brothers, Edwin and Junius, in a single engagement production of Julius Caesar at the Winter Garden Theatre in New York. He played Mark Anthony and his brother Edwin had the larger role of Brutus in a performance acclaimed as “the greatest theatrical event in New York history”

In his 2005 analysis of Lincoln’s assassination, Thomas Goodrich wrote,

“All the elements in Booth’s nature came together at once – his hatred of tyranny, his love of liberty; his passion for the stage, his sense of drama, and his lifelong quest to become immortal.”

Booth, after shooting the president jumped from the President’s box to the stage, where he raised his knife and shouted “Sic semper tyrannis” (Latin for “Thus always to tyrants,” attributed to Brutus at Caesar’s assassination and the Virginia state motto which to this day, still appears on the state flag.

Others have said that Booth added,

“I have done it, the South is avenged!”

To be fair, in addition to what may have justifiably been Booth’s true intentions or his rationalizations if you prefer, he was also known to be strongly opposed to the abolition of slavery and Lincoln’s proposal to extend voting rights to recently emancipated slaves. To be fair, the southern states were not totally innocent before, during or after the conflict among the states, even though they had every right to secede. To also be fair, I do not know the heart of Lincoln. I do not know if his love for the entire country was genuine and misguided or whether it was his desire to hold power and secure it in a centralized government.

But I do know that the redistricting of the states and the formation of a legal fiction United States with legal fiction states in 1861 and the Conscription Act of 1863 were wholly unconstitutional! The effects took control from WE the People and placed it into the jurisdiction of a federal government and ultimately its chief executive, the president.

This is precisely what our founders were in opposition to, when they declared independence from the tyrant King of England in 1776. Many of the same reasons existed as causes for the southern states to secede from the union and form a confederation of states.

The Centralization of government (power and control of resources and people), is not new. The history of human kind and at the present time is full of tyrants, kings, Queens, despots and no matter what you want to call the rulers or leaders that control all others. The ends are ultimately always the same, no matter what good intentions there might have been or that might exist today. A populous that has no liberty would not be willing or able to fight for one tyrant against another tyrant wanting to conquer them, just acquiesce or give up for the single purpose of self-preservation of life.

WE the People here are not so constituted under the control of a few. At least this is what WE think and believe and appears to be evidently so, by OUR choice for party and OUR casting of individual votes.

For over 200 years, OUR constitution has stood. It cannot be changed. It is written and it is clear. All that can be done is to bury it; then re-write history and illegally amend it until such time that it becomes too late and our constitution is eliminated. WE are nearing this crucial moment in history, right now!

So if the constitution cannot be changed, only one thing was needed it was thought, to secure this control in perpetuity over WE the People. This is to give the appearance that all has proceeded legally and according to the constitution.

After the conflict among the states had mostly concluded with Lee’s surrender at the McLean House in the village of Appomattox Court House in Northern Virginia on April 9, 1865, just four days later, Lincoln was shot and died the following day. Conflicts continued for a time and the military later was dispatched to Missouri to lift Marshall Law and restore order. The Union was under re-construction. Legal fiction was the scaffolding!

The trap has been constructed. All that remains is, for it to be baited and sprung.

Next Time –  ‘Un-founding the U.S.A., setting the trap

Check out the other blogs listed to the right. Come often. Bring others. Get involved. Do something. Even if it is just leaving a comment, that’s doing something. But don’t bother in telling me how stupid I am, this won’t work or that you hate my guts and things like that. Been there, done that and heard that all before and then some. Be original. Be different.

Ask not what your country can do for you

or what you can do for your country,

but what can WE do for each other!”

1 of WE,

Dahni

An Amer-I-Can eagle

Next Post - UN-founding the U.S.A., setting the trap

Previous Post - Getting OUR Heads Out of the Sand

Front Page - Welcome & Introduction

Tags: 9.12 Project, Alice in Wonderland, Declaration of Independence, Democracy, Democrat, Freedom, Independence, Libertarian, Liberty, Parties, Party, Political, Politics, Republic, Serve, SERVICE, The Commerce Clause, The Matrix, U.S. Constitution, WE the People