NESARA @ GOVERMENT...saving our nation ?

[co-shoot]

DIVERSION? MAYBE - OR MAYBE IT GOES TO THE HEART OF THE PROBLEM

Posted By: hobie <Send E-Mail>
Date: Thursday, 30 October 2008, 12:06 a.m.

In Response To: Diversion: HOW A CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION WILL AFFECT EVERY FAMILY IN THE LAND (RumorMail) A Reader wrote:

: Marriage is a religious ceremony. It has nothing to
: do with government. The government should have NOTHING
: to do with marriage. And should not have the ability
: to pick and choose who should and should not get married.

(I couldn't agree more.

: Please spend your time and energy on saving our nation,
: not on diversions.

I empathize with you on that. But what you've done here is 'nail' the very heart of the problem we've been suffering under.

Chiefly this: THAT'S NOT THE GOVERNMENT. IT'S THE CORPORATION.

As you've said, marriage has nothing to do with government - unless one is "joined" under a Corp. US "marriage" ceremony involving a so-called judge (Corp. US administrator) and specific _legalisms_ that go along with it.

Why is this a political issue at all? Because, under the Corporation, there are privileges (mistakenly referred to as "rights") that Corp. US extends to its "employees". Some of those 'rights' are denied to same-gender couples even if the two had managed to find a church in which to marry - and it's thought, perhaps quite reasonably, that there's something "unfair" about this discriminatory practice on the part of Corp. US.

I expect I'd agree with that - but it's beside the point.

The real issue is, "Why the heck is there a populated Corp. US while the original jursdiction government offices remain vacant?"

And:

- Why is our 'money' debt-based instead of backed by precious metals as referred to in the Constitution?

- Why is our 'money' issued and regulated by a private entity (the so-called 'Federal Reserve') instead of government's fulfilling their specific responsibility in that regard?

- If someone did come up with a plan for "universal health coverage", what kind of "health coverage" are they talking about? Would things like chiropractic, acupuncture, naturopathic approaches, herbalism, nutritional supplementation, etc., be included? Or is this really a disguised lifelong "subsidy" for Big Pharma? Does the Constitution even _allow_ for this, or is it all a plan by Corp. US to insure we continue to "need" them to make our decisions and choices for us?

- How can it even be up for consideration that immigrants who have entered the country illegally should be able to get drivers' licenses? (Hint: The so-called "driver's license" is a feature of Corp. US, not a feature of the original jurisdiction Constitution.)

And so on. They've got us fighting each other over which of their two offered choices for "President of the Corporation" will be our preferred lesser of two evils - but choosing either one of them will _not_ get us back to original jurisdiction government reined-in by the original jurisdiction Constitution.

If you're gonna vote anyway, please read oliverhaddo's statement about what he plans to do:

HERE'S WHAT YOU AND I CAN DO:
oliverhaddo -- Wednesday, 29 October 2008, 11:20 p.m.

...and for lots more food for thought on this matter, try here:

http://www.teamlaw.org

--hobie

[co-shoot]

Jim
Sinclair,
Perhaps Taiwan read "GEAB N28 Global systemic crisis Alert - Summer 2009: The US government defaults on its debt."

Regards,
CIGA Bernie

Taiwan Dumps Fannie, Freddie. And Uncle Sam?
By RANDALL W. FORSYTH

Despite bailout, GSE debt is eschewed by major foreign investor, and ally.

WHO LOST TAIWAN? After Mao drove the Nationalists off the Mainland in 1949, the cry went up among U.S. conservatives, "Who lost China?"

Now Washington might well worry about who lost Taiwan as a major investor in U.S. agency securities as the Republic of China has openly questioned their credit quality -- even after the federal government has committed hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Beyond that, Washington might well worry that other nations also no longer view its agencies -- and now, by extension, the very credit of the United States of America -- beyond question.

Taiwan's financial regulators reportedly have ordered that nation's insurance companies to pare their holdings of the debt and mortgage-backed securities of Fannie Mae (ticker: FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and Ginnie Mae securities, according to a report on the Internet site of Asian Investor magazine.

Such an order would be a stunning rebuke to Washington, coming a little more than a month after the federal government effectively nationalized the mortgage giants. Fannie and Freddie last month were placed into conservatorships with the Treasury standing ready to inject up to $100 billion through purchases of preferred shares in the government sponsored enterprises.

More...