Monday, 29 August 2016

A Visitation

‘Nice to have you back, sir.  We’ve missed you.’

’As it would appear.’

‘ - Um; would you, care to… ‘

‘Let me ask you something.’

‘Yes, sir.’

‘You here in this country have a constitution.’

‘Oh, yes, sir.  Indeed, sir.’

‘Which you call ‘the law of the land’.’

‘Yes sir.’

‘Except when it isn’t.’

‘ - Um…would to…’

‘Elaborate a bit on the impression.  Yes, I certainly would care to.

‘I understand that it is a contract.  Between the several states and the federal government.’

‘..Yes; sir…’

‘You hesitate.’

‘Well; you see, we wouldn’t call it, quite, a ‘contact’.  Sir.’

‘What would you call it.’

‘…Well; it’s...uh…’

‘An agreement.’

‘Yes.  Sir.  That would..cover it.  I would think.’

‘An agreement, between two parties.’

‘Yes, sir.’

’So, if one party to the agreement changes its meaning…’

‘…Uh...would to…’

‘I most certainly would.  

‘You have a phrase called ’original intent,’ or ‘original understanding’.  Is that correct.’

‘..Yes, sir.  It - ‘

’So that you understand, that the words in the ’agreement’ mean what they meant to the parties to the agreement.  is that correct.’

‘… - I see where you are going with this, sir.’

You do.’

‘Yes, sir.  And I would just say, that, you must understand, that meanings of words can change, over time.’

‘Yes, they can.  I understand that.  So, how do you deal with that.’

‘ - Why, we..just…deal.  With it.  We…come to an understanding.’

‘An understanding of the new meaning of words.  Tell me, who decides this new meaning of the words of the agreement?’

‘Why, the lawyers.  And the judges.’

‘The judges. Yes, I understand that you have a body called the Supreme Court.  So, you are saying, that this body is the ultimate arbiter, of the meaning of words in the agreement.’

‘Uh - why; yes.  That’s…’

‘So, words mean what they say they mean.’

‘…Um..why, yes.  In a sense.  It’s called ‘interpreting the law’ .’

‘Based on what.  Their personal socio-political proclivities?’

‘ - Well.  Not…really.  It’s based on…their…wisdom.  In a sense.’

‘In a sense.  Well, let me say, at this point, that, ‘in a sense,’ I’m out of here.’

‘Wait!  - Sir!  Where - what…’

‘You people are still too primitive for me to be able to take, with me, to the higher realms.  This isn’t going to work at this time.  A shame.  We were preparing for you.  But it has been your choice.  

’So: Goodbye.  Good luck.  You’ll need it, if you continue down the road that you are on.  Which may end, at any moment.  For what you have engendered.  By not being able to live by, and under, The Law.’

‘The law.  What law is that, sir?’

‘The Law of reaping the consequences of your actions.  It’s 101, really.

’Well.  See you next tine around.’

‘What - how do you mean that?  Sir?’

‘Not based on my personal socio-political proclivities, that’s for sure.   Anyway: You’ll get it, sooner or later.  That

‘we’ve been here before.’

‘I don’t understand.  Sir.’

‘You will.  When it’s your time to.’

And time to leave the lower grades behind.


And speaking of lower-grades stuff:

from ‘Obama and Johnson Want to “Help” States “Protect Election Integrity”’ - Rick Wells - August 29
(Some 'foreign' hackers got into the voting system of a couple of states.  Leading to: The Obama admin/DHS wanting to insert themselves into state elections?  As Good Guys??  Yeah, ri-i-i-ight…  This is the same federal govt. that has been suing states to keep them from establishing voter photo ID requirements, because it is supposedly 'voter suppression'......I smell a rat.  As if we don't have enough of them in the system already...)

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

This is smoke-and-mirrors stuff. The elections are already being stolen by unclean voter registration rolls. We need CERTIFIEDLY CLEANSED voter reg rolls, of all ineligible voters, dead voters, and duplicate voters. Plus mandatory photo ID cards, and mandatory exit polls, to check the official results against. And banning the electronic voting machines, which have proven to be hackable in a number of ways. Not just a paper backup system: back to paper ballots to begin with, for a clear paper trail.

CLEAN ELECTIONS OR NO ELECTIONS. This is worse than a banana republic – at least there, the voters have a finger dipped in purple dye. If we’re going to act like children, we should be treated like children.

No comments: