Supreme Justice Scalia was here in Knoxville on April 15th 2014 to speak at the University of Tennessee for the annual Rose Lecture. At the end of his speech he took questions.
One question has been covered by Fox news and other MSM outlets. It was about high taxes, his answer is what has made the rounds, where even Rand Paul was asked about Scalia's answer on Fox news.
It just so happens it was a friend of mine from the Liberty movement is the one who asked Scalia the question.
He sent me the audio recording of his question and answer from Scalia, besides the exact transcript. He also sent me the full lecture that Scalia did at UT, which he recorded. I will put that on youtube too.
Here are some of the Media's coverage of Scalia's answer for people to 'revolt' if they reach a certain point.
Washington - CBS article
Politics USA
Huffington Post
Christian Post
The transcript of what is being said is in the video as it is being said.
I wonder if anyone bothered to questioned him about the ruling of corporations being people, money being a form of free speech or about telling the government to use the IRS to strong-arm people into purchasing Obamacare? When the SHTF, I hope the masses don't forget about these government-criminals.
ReplyDeleteREVOLT NOT, WHAT IS NOT YOURS TO REVOLT AGAINST
ReplyDeleteJustice Scalia's remarks were not directed to the 'establishment' and 'the nature of constitutions' as 'written instruments', but to that of constitutionality.
The remark he made, was therefore framed and limited within the bounds of what a constitution as a 'written instrument' presents - as to its effect, validity, prescriptions, contradictions, and so on.
When the term [un]constitutionality is taken, it can only be supposed that the only means by which a 'written instrument', which includes a constitution, can be professed to have such a quality, is when it attempts to extend its 'presumed and supposed', or even accepted, authority to include the jurisdiction of the physical world and those that are found in that same jurisdiction.
Once the nature of a constitution is understood, and that it is seen that its pronouncements can only extend to the territorial jurisdiction of a world 'fictitious' in nature, that is, a world that is of the creation of the mind or figment of the imagination, then it can be seen, and quite rightly so, for whom Justice Scalia's remarks are directed.
However, the good Justice phrased his words, when it came to 'revolt', with great care. The care he took can be found in the term, 'perhaps'.
It is assumed that he did so, and this suggests no impropriety on his part, that it was because he would surely know that no individual or group of individuals are entitled to revolt against something that is not theirs to revolt against, unless of course, theirs remained a decision for them alone, and that they expressed this revolt by simply 'leaving' the jurisdiction of the federal government, state government and in turn their 'fictitious' country and states.
The choice of the term, 'perhaps', being indeed a wise one, since such decisions of revolt would not be his to make but the individuals. And also, that he could not call for a 'revolt' to the very 'instrument' for which he serves.
UNRAVELING THE MYSTERY
There is much confusion in the area of law, when it comes to people and the relationships they have with each other, and most importantly with governments of countries and as well as that of states.
The law seems to be made complicated so that it cannot be understood, suggesting there maybe something simpler that remains hidden.
That being the case, then what is presented as the law, forms a distractive cloak to prevent commonsense from discovering and seeing the law, and so confusion abounds.
The confusion that needs to be unraveled lies in the question, what is the nature of countries and states ?
Once this is discovered, then understanding the law becomes obvious, and all that remains is to propagate the understanding of how to arrive at the law, since it requires great numbers of people to ensure it is defended against, particular from those who would see to its demise.
Although the remarks concerning Justice Scalia and the constitution appear somewhat cryptic, the mystery unravels once an opportunity is taken to read, the information provided for, by the subtitled heading, given part way down the source document link, as the -
'SEQUENCE OF DOING BUSINESS USING WRITTEN INSTRUMENTS AS CONTRACTS'
SOURCE:
THE BUSINESS OF KNOWING YOUR PLACE
http://thereisnodebt.wordpress.com/2014/04/05/the-business-of-knowing-your-place/