11/23/63 Bush & book depository

Is it coincidence that the elder bush, a CIA operative and avowed enemy of Kennedy was at the book depository, His tentcles have been involved in dirty politics since the bay of pigs, using his Oil company ships to support CIA's operations.bush has been instrumental in coup's to the seedy cocaine operation out of Mena, ark and Iran/contra with no reservations. But, this picture says's it all papa bush watching as the kill shot plugs JFK ; so he and his cronies and kill the soul of a country.

The Plumbers plugged JFK: the mysterious tramps

With H. Howard Hunt's confession , the powers that be that killed JFK have begun to lose thier grip on the secrets from the three tramps and the connection thr watergate. the secrecy from JFk to 911 are being exposed as the orginal conspirators face Death. and the power withers from thier grasp.

Nixon falsely claimed that the first he heard of Kennedy's death was during a taxi ride in New York City, however, a UPI photo reveals the truth. The photo shows a "shocked Richard Nixon" [HIS Dealy Plaza, 'hobo' act] having already learned of Kennedy's assassination upon his arrival at New York's Idlewild Airport --BEFORE his alleged taxi ride. Perhaps, Richard Nixon does not want us to know who picked him up at the airport, who he talked to or what he said, but he doesn't have to lie to us.
Many researchers have linked Richard Nixon to the assassination of John F. Kennedy because his outright lies, the secrecy and his selective amnesia is very telling. For example, as H.R. Haldeman indicates in his book, "The Ends of Power", Watergate was ultimately about a shocking scandal that preceded a simple burglary, and as Haldeman indicates:
In fact, I was puzzled when he [Nixon] told me, 'Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans [Watergate Burglars] is tied to the Bay of Pigs.' After a pause I said, 'The Bay of Pigs? What does that have to do with the Watergate Burglary?' But Nixon merely said, 'Ehrlichman will know what I mean,' and dropped the subject.It is now quite clear and obvious that the Watergate burglars were tied to the murder of John F. Kennedy, and Haldeman does not mince words when he says, "It seems that in all of those Nixon references to the Bay of Pigs, he was actually referring to the Kennedy assassination."
History is one big lie because we fail to expose the truth.
In his memoirs, Nixon said that "the factual truth [about Watergate] could probably never be completely reconstructed, because each of us had become involved in different ways and no one's knowledge at any given time exactly duplicated anyone else's." Richard Nixon was wrong.
High level obstructions of justice within the FBI made the Watergate investigation superficial, but the cover up ultimately exposed the truth. The Kennedy assassination investigation is no different because, having successfully obscurred what Nixon called "the factual truth," high level obstruction of justice within the FBI made the Kennedy assassination investigation an absolute whitewash, and the cover up is the crime. Indeed, the factual truth that Richard Nixon's estate is still trying to block, is no longer in doubt.
History is one big lie, when we fail to expose deception, time has a way of exposing all the factual truths that Richard Nixon thought he had buried.
First and foremost, we need to clearly appreciate the fact that Richard Nixon's greatest shortcoming was not Watergate, but his direct involvement in the domestic, assassination plots of the 1960's.
Indeed, it is a documented, proven fact that Nixon's cronies plotted outright political murder (Jack Anderson was lucky to survive.) He was scheming to have people beaten up. He associated with mobsters. Nazi propaganda films were being shown in the White House. His men schemed to burglarize Republican headquarters and blame it on the Democrats. They schemed to plant McGovern campaign literature in the apartment of Art Brehmer, the would-be assassin of George Wallace, and the evidence strongly suggests they probably even schemed to assassinate Ted Kennedy, and after having failed, they blamed the fortunate survivor for the death of unintended victim, Mary Jo Kopechne.
Indeed, Nixon's memoirs are littered with evidence that as far as he was concerned, Chappaquiddick was nothing more than an election issue, it had nothing to do with a tragic murder. To quote Richard Nixon directly:
In the short term, I knew that Chappaquiddick would undermine Kennedy's role as a leader of the opposition to the administration's policies. In the longer term, it would be one of his greatest liabilities if he decided to run for President in 1972.
It was clear that the full story of what had happened that night on Chappaquidick had not come out, [how did he know, did his plan misfire?] and I suspected that the press would not try very hard to uncover it. Therefore I told Ehrlichman to have someone investigate the case for us and get the real facts out. [we all know what that means in Nixon-speak.] "Don't let up on this for a minute," I said. "Just put yourself in their place if something like that happened to us." In fact, our private investigator was unable to turn out anything besides rumors. Needless to say, the truth was damaging to Richard Nixon, because if it wasn't, he would not have to rely on rumors about Chappaquiddick , for political advantage. The truth is, Nixon feared another Kennedy candidacy and Chappaquiddick was Richard Nixon's failed attempt to assassinate yet another political rival.
In 1980, when Ronald Reagan was asleep on the wheel and Richard Nixon pulled the strings, the cloak-and-dagger comeback kid claimed the life of John Lennon in a 60's style execution where a well placed patsy took all the blame. It happened with John F. Kennedy, it happened with Martin Luther King, it happened with Robert F. Kennedy, and as long as Richard Nixon was the cloak-and-dagger comeback kid, it happened with John Lennon.
The truth about Richard Nixon is routinely and aggressively distorted to justify every assault against a Democratic Party that is supposed to roll over and play dead, whenever the Conservative media flexes its political muscle.
In 2000, when Republican rioters managed to subvert the fair opportunity to challenge the election and used the Supreme Court to certify a dishonest count, they piously claimed that unlike Al Gore, Richard Nixon had graciously conceded in 1960.
The fact is, despite Nixonian tacticians like Karl Rove, Nixon DID NOT quickly concede the election to Kennedy. In true Nixon style, he was very careful not to put a public imprimatur on the concerted Republican effort to challenge the election results, but Richard Nixon actively encouraged it.
True to Nixon fashion, a conservative journalist and close Nixon friend, Earl Mazo, of the New York Herald Tribune, launched a press frenzy over possible voter fraud. [Mazo became Nixon's official biographer] and not only did Republican senators like Thruston Morton ask for recounts in 11 states just three days after the election, but Nixon aides Bob Finch and Len Hall personally did field checks of votes in almost a dozen states.
The Republicans obtained recounts, involved U.S. Attorneys and the FBI, and even impaneled grand juries in their quest to get a different election result. A slew of lawsuits were filed by Republicans, and unsuccessful appeals to state election commissions routinely followed.
Indeed, thanks to these overzealous efforts to prove otherwise, the popular claim that Kennedy stole the election in 1960, is absolutely fraudulent, and it is quite ironic that Karl Rove justified stealing election 2000 by claiming that John F. Kennedy did the very same thing in 1960.
We have all heard the popular claim that Sam Giancana won the election for John F. Kennedy, but that proved to be an erroneous conclusion. Sam Giancana may have supported Kennedy's re-election bid, but he did not influence the result. As a matter of fact, in Illonois, the final recount showed that Nixon's votes had been undercounted by 943 -- yet, in 40 percent of the rechecked precincts, it turned out that Nixon's vote had been overcounted. (Contrast this with Gore, whose vote total steadily climbed during the Florida recount.) Unhappy with the results, Republicans went to federal court, where their case was dismissed. They then appealed to the State Board of Elections, which also rejected their claims. It was not until Dec. 19 -- over a month after the election -- that the national Republican Party backed off its Illinois claims.
Similar results, and extended fights, took place in Texas and New Jersey among other states. In Hawaii, Republican efforts had the unintended result of reversing the state's electoral votes from Nixon to Kennedy.
Officially speaking, Richard Nixon removed himself from the fray, but he always had his hand on the trigger, and the suggestion that he conceded graciously in 1960 is pure misrepresentation.
The mainstream media occasionally paints a fair portrait of Richard Nixon. When the New York Times periodically exposes the fact that Nixon was somewhat "crazy" -- immensely intelligent, well organized and experienced, but at moments of stress or personal challenge unpredictable and capable of the bloodiest brutality" it exposes the genuine truth, but the fact that Richard Nixon was essentially a cold-hearted butcher who was capable of anything, has not been given the due it deserves. Clearly, it is utter madness to suggest that it is possible to understand anything about Richard Nixon if we ignore the fact that he consistently climbed over the dead bodies of his enemies, and it is time to unravel what Nixon called factual uncertainty, because his conclusion was based on a profound misunderstanding regarding the power of a reasonable, historical assessment.
It is not possible to make sense of Richard Nixon's life and to simultaneously ignore the fact that the Kennedys were always the target of the manevolent conspiracies he enthusiastically embraced. In the Watergate tapes of March 13, 1973, between 12:42 and 2pm, John Dean made a cryptic half-comment about Ted Kennedy's involvement in the accident at Chappaquidick, saying, "If Kennedy knew the bear trap he was walking into--"
What "bear trap" was Ted walking into? What did John Dean know, and when did he know it?
There are all kinds of hints about all kinds of treacherous operations that Nixon routinely engaged in a covert manner, but the crime that he was most heavily involved in, is the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
What is quite clear, despite all the secrecy and the deliberate amnesia, is that Richard Nixon was in the thick of every aspect of the Kennedy assassination, from foreknowledge [he fled the crime scene just before the assassination] to the silly deceptions of his criminal cohorts, Frank Sturgis and Howard Hunt, to the dealmaking with Kingmaker, J.Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon did not miss a beat. Everything was planned, staged, rehearsed and delivered in a manner that left nothing to chance.
Indeed, when Kennedy was murdered in 1963, Nixon did not oppose Johnson's political candidacy because Kingmaker Hoover called the shots, and feigned "continuity" with the Kennedy administration demanded a single, viable political candidate -Lyndon Johnson. If the obsession to cover up the Kennedy assassination did not dominate, Nixon would have opposed Johnson in 1964 and would have campaigned on the fear-mongering claim that Kennedy was soft on Communism. After all, despite Richard Nixon's persistent demands, John F. Kennedy refused to invade Cuba, and that is the only "pretense" that Nixon needed, to oppose Johnson in 1964, unless of course, the facts that we are not supposed to know about, are carefully considered.
Secrecy and deception distorts history and the need to determine the truth demands an objective, impartial and thorough analysis. In particular, it is folly to ignore the deception behind the assassination of Nixon's arch rival, John F. Kennedy.
Frank Sturgis, Howard Hunt and Richard Nixon had a huge steak in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and that is why they were in Dallas during, before and after the Kennedy assassination [their combined effort in terms of off-site and on-site involvement is well recorded] and while they may not remember exactly where they were when Kennedy was shot, they did not have to because they were arrested in Dealy Plaza.
Not surprisingly, in 1976, Frank Sturgis claimed that the assassination of John F. Kennedy had been organized by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. Like J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, who instantly [November 22nd, 1963] claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald, the Communist, was responsible for the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the telling diversions of Kenedy assassination co-conspirators and cover up artists speak for themselves.
Hunt had been a CIA employee in 1963, Sturgis, was not a CIA employee, but he had been involved in CIA-related activities, but as Watergate has aptly demonstrated, they were essentially "independent contractors" who worked with like-minded fanatics like Richard Nixon, they did not have a legitimate, official capacity. Richard Nixon's close association with J.Edgar Hoover was also an unofficial capacity that made it difficult to unravel all the secrecy and deception that is responsible for giving them the opportunity to get away with all the planning, the execution and the plot to cover up the truth about the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Howard Hunt's longterm connection to Frank Sturgis and Richard Nixon reflects the motley crew of Kennedy assassination co-conspirators who are repeatedly called suspects because there is good reason to be suspicious. Indeed, their subsequent, "Watergate" involvement provides a good insight into the scope and the nature of their operations, and as history betrays their consistent modus operandi, the fact that Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis were escorted through Dealey Plaza by Dallas police officers, on November 22nd, 1963, provides clear and convincing evidence about their involvement in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Like Richard Nixon, they were both front row, active participants in the plot to neutralize the Kennedy agenda, and the impatient firing squad executed the primary target when all the ducks were in a row [over the obsession to prosecute the Vietnam war].
It is difficult to trace these assassins but it is not impossible, despite the fact that Howard Hunt thinks that he is a real operational genius because he was off-site when he coordinated the physical break-in to the Democratic national party headquarters office at the Watergate hotel. They all tried to cover their tracks, but who can possibly imagine allowing the Kennedy assassination to go forward, without the enthusiastic support of Nixon cronies like Frank Sturgis and Howard Hunt? It is simply "un-patriotic" to suggest that they were not in the thick of the plot to assassinate the President, and if they did not fear criminal prosecution, they would have actively bragged about their contribution. Indeed, when Fidel Castro gained control of Cuba, Sturgis formed the Anti-Communist Brigade, and his gun-runnig activity in Cuba was a part of the initial activity that eventually morphed into the obsession to murder Kennedy because he was deemed to be soft on Communism. In particular, when President Kennedy began to talk about Vietnam in terms of being a civil war rather than a vital, American, the use of deadly force, to settle issues that were considered to be military rather than political, was not even an issue, hense the need to assassinate President John F. Kennedy was not seriously challenged.
These three men were directly involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The attractive, no-nonsence, GQ model-lookalike is Charles Harrelson the contract killer who looked out of place, in the company of the shabbily dressed, imposter hobos, Frank Sturgis and Howard Hunt.


The disjointed picture of Frank Sturgis, Howard Hunt and Charles Harrelson is quite comical. As Howard grimaces and Sturgis sports his shabby pants, the carefree, catwalk strutting Harrelson stands in stark contrast, probably because the independent contractor did not care to act or dress like a hobo imposter.

Charles Harrelson was a contract killer and according to Jack Anderson, whom Nixon tried to have killed, he was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Harrelson is believed to be one of the gunmen behind the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll. Harrelson was one of the three tramps arrested in Dealey Plaza on 22nd November, 1963, along with Frank Sturgis and Howard Hunt. In 1992, the Dallas Police Department claimed that the three tramps were Gus Abrams, John F. Gedney and Harold Doyle, but their photographs do not match.
In 1968 Harrelson was convicted of the murder of businessman, Sam Degelia, in a contract killing in South Texas. After serving time he was released, and in 1979 Harrelson was paid $250,000 by drug dealers to assassinate Federal Judge John H. Wood. On 29th May, 1979, Wood was shot dead, the first federal judge to be murdered in the 20th century.
When he was arrested for murdering a federal judge he confessed to being one of the gunmen who shot at President John F. Kennedy. He later withdrew this confession, but the admission is more credible than the denial. He received two life sentences for the murder of Wood in a criminal investigation which proved to be more expensive than the investigation in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
In 1995 Harrelson attempted to break out of Atlanta Federal Prison. He was recaptured and moved to Florence Administrative Maximum Penitentiary in Colorado.
Charles Harrelson is also a former Jack Ruby Strip Bar Bouncer, and if that doesn't push all the skeptics over the fence, nothing ever will. In retrospect, if Jack Ruby could not rely on the man who committed paid murders for the mob, it is because Charles Harrelson had met his quota for November, 1963.

Chuck Cook, a reporter for the Dallas morning news interviewed Harrelson on the judge Wood case and subsequently asked him about his claims of murdering the President. Cook said that Harrelson ‘got this sly little grin on his face, Harrelson is very intelligent and has a way of not answering when it suits him.’ At a later interview Cook brought the subject up again and at that point Harrelson became very serious, Cook quoted Harrelson as saying "Listen, if and when I get out of here (prison) and feel free to talk, I will have something that will be the biggest story you ever had" and added "November 22, 1963. You remember that!". Most of the time, when Harrelson has been questioned with regard to the assassination he has emphatically denied it, but Cook showed the photos of the three tramps to Harrison’s wife Jo Ann Harrelson who was "amazed at the similarities." Indeed, even aging has not affected the resemblance.


It is not really certain whether Harrelson was successful in his mission to kill the President. He could have fired the shot that missed. What is absolutely certain is that he was with Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis at the scene of the crime, that Nixon was evidently an off-site operative and 'Watergate' is merely an act that includes many crimes, including the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
The battle between Nixon loyalists and Nixon targets is still a huge factor in American politics. When Bill Clinton was elected President, Nixon loyalists adopted the mantra "if the press can impeach Nixon, the press can impeach Clinton" and they stuck to it, to provoke the greatest constitutional crisis since Watergate. Nobody blamed the media because former Nixon spies like Lucianne Goldberg are no longer called spies, they are called "the media", and the phony distinction between the "Liberal" media and the "Conservative" media has become a license to distort the truth without the need to act like a treacherous spy. Why pretend to be a journalist to spy on your opponent, when you can call yourself a "Conservative journalist" and lie about your opponent with impunity?
In actual fact the media should not be "Liberal" or "Conservative", it should be reliable, but when Richard Nixon was forced to resign, he blamed the liberal media for his predicament and he spent the rest of his life cultivating the power to do the same to his enemies.
The climax of the plot to impeach President Clinton was April 1, 1998, when Dick Morris foamed around the mouth on national television and vehemently condemned what he called, the "Nixonian creep that we have seen in the Clinton White House." Dick Morris called himself a journalist, but in fact, he was acting like Lucianne Goldberg who had pretended to be a journalist in the 1970's, because she was trying to gain political advantage for Richard Nixon.
Moreover, the very same money that was responsible for backing Richard Nixon in the 1970's was responsible for attacking Bill Clinton, and a memo dated May 12, 1971, from Charles Colson to H. R. Haldeman, identified the long-standing, finanial, Scaife/Nixon relationship. According to the memo: "...Dick Scaife is feeling very down on the administration at the moment. Inasmuch as Scaife has been one of our biggest financial backers, I think we need to consider perhaps some unusual steps to rebuild relationships."
Thankfully, Richard Nixon's financial backers did not make him President of the United States, in 1960, because he would have probably invaded Cuba and triggered a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, in the process. As a matter of fact, that is exactly what Richard Nixon advised Kennedy to do. In his own words, speaking to Kennedy about Cuba, Richard Nixon said, "I would find a proper legal cover and I would go in. There are several justifications that could be used, like protecting American citizens living in Cuba and defending our base at Guatanamo. I believe that the most important thing at this point is that we do whatever is necessary to get Castro and communism out of Cuba." Fortunately, John F. Kennedy was the President of the United States, in 1960.
Unfortunately for the President however, Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson were reading from the same page, regarding the obsession to prosecute the Vietnam war, and that became absolutely clear when Richard Nixon did not challenge Johnson's political candidacy in 1964. In other words, while Lyndon Johnson publicly promised to maintain the Kennedy agenda, he had privately reached a secret deal which Nixon, and that was the real, credibility gap of the Johnson White House. Needless to say, Nixon did not oppose Lyndon Johnson in 1964 because his choices were determined by the "politics" of the Kennedy assassination. Everybody who had a hand in the plot to assassinate Kennedy had his role defined for him, Richard Nixon did not have unilateral authority over a diverse, group efort. If that were the case, he would have opposed Lyndon Johnson's political candidacy in 1964, but he did not.
Case Closed: Charles V. Harrelson was found Dead in his cell of "natural causes" on March 15, 2007, just days after E. Howard Hunt confessed to being one of the shooters on the Grassy Knoll. Harrelson reportedly died very suddenly, in his sleep, giving those who are so inclined, the opportunity to deny the obvious.
According to California Private Investigator, Paul Kangas, and he is one of the best, FBI documents prove that Jack Ruby had been an employee of Richard Nixon since 1947. Jack Ruby was allegedly listed as working as a spy & hit man for Nixon. On November 22, 1963 Ruby was seen by a women who knew him well, Julian Ann Mercer, approximately an hour before the arrival of JFK's motorcade, unloading a man carrying a rifle in a case at the Grassy Knoll from his car. Ruby was later seen on national TV killing a witness who could link Nixon and Johnson to the killing of JFK. Richard Nixon was Vice President from 1952 until 1960 and is credited with planning Operation 40, the secret 1961 invasion of Cuba. The glove fits.

Dedicated to Guy Fawkes, May the Rebellious plot never cease!

Revolt, and Rebellion and the Joy of Restoration and Revelation: the Age of Arum or the Next United States: by Manticore

Why? The word that causes so much grief and also realization of what destruction is abound currently. Why is our nation destabilizing as our citizens are so blind to the powers of slavery and tyranny. A revolt is a word that is a necessary evil against evil. It is as potent as civil war or insurrection a revolt poses fundamental questions about the veneer of democracy and totalitarianism. Are they twins that hold a the same blood of a country of soldiers that are used as fodder for imperialism or the a war for democracy. I can’t see the validity to have war when there is no threat to our country, except to force our culture on a republic, such as ourselves. But, this rash, irrational act of war, has caused our government to become a creature of fear, loathing, greed, and repression. This is identified in the department of homeland security. A symbol of totalitarianism, under the guise of patriotism . If the government begins to unleash pogroms of control on our constitutional freedom, than we must examine the powers that we elected . Why are thy fundamentally working to subjugate our freedom for this mythic security. Is it for our way of life, or the illusion of our freedom. Is democracy a velvet glove, on an iron fist called totalitarianism. Democracy is flawed, as is our republic. Our freedom is hanging on a thread with a noose. This thread is the thread that has allowed America to thrive as a bastion of freedom; but if it falls we will live a world of oppression and war. It is important to examine and assault the forces of the encroaching forces of repression. We must be aware that our government must fear us, for we also are a nation of that is sick of being lied too, and being misused for the government that is about to serve us, again. The government has to be grounded back to reality, to serve us, or be destroyed, and restored to it’s proper position as a land of freedom and hope. I am not for the peaceful protests of Martian Luther King or Gandhi. I consider it a weak and useless act. Rebellion and revolt are a willingness to use every fibre of the soul of man to strike into the heart of a corrupt system and destroy it, like st. Charles slaying the dragon.



The act of rebellion and revolt, is important to freedom and liberty. It is creating a balance and equilibrium to the adverse forms of government. A rebellion can be seen in philosophical and symbolic, but, not it is time to act in the literal fashion. No more special interests groups, but a convergence of people as a force. To revolt in a act that will make any tyrant feel fear. Feel fear, and wonder what is next. Revolting is to revolt against all forms of control and powers that are misused. Our nation is complacent, in it’s comfortable living; they don’t look ahead twenty years or five hundred. Well, some of us; do and America is looking more and more grim. A revolt is an act of purification and restoration. All nation go through revolts, revolutions and civil wars. It is an natural act of a nation to cleanse the old and restore it with new ideals, and ideas. It is an active act of purging the system that has become a disease and affected the nervous system of the body of man. Our government is that a maligned tumor, and has poisoned the body of freedom, free will and liberty. Terms I consider our country has forgotten; and now it’s time to restore the sons of liberty , by an act of force.
A revolt as I stated is natural mechanism to purge the political body of a country. It also causes a restoration of cultural ideals, and societal redistribution of wealth. This restoration will cause more sociatal examination of the cancer of corruption in our complacent culturee that I persoanly refuse to live by. This refusal of mine is a personal rebellion, and revolt. It is a cause that most men can’t comprehend. I’ve attuned my will to actualized freedom, by any method from wealth to politics to protocols of secret societies. Yes, I want and will create the right environment for a rebellion and revolt. But, with this comes a responsibility of restoration of the once great nation called America.

The revolt is something power structures fear , because they can’t control society when the linchpin, is pulled. It is chaos, and disorder that they fear. They will be hunted, down the streets and strung up. If it happens , than a public safety committee1 can resolve the violence. And yes, their will be violence. All acts of rebellion cause violence, so a new government can be restored with a constitution built with principles and respect. As a constitutionalist, I am for a restoration of our constitutional system and the bill of rights. And swift acts of justice on the traitors within our state. A revolt has to be planned and executed with a single intent. A counter to the treasoneous act that caused 911 and beyond. This act has to compound all actions to bring forth an examination of America as a nation and country. What we are? Who are we and what is our future? Do we want to save our nation and it’s envoroment, and begin to stride into the futre as a guiding light of creativity in energy and space, and social cohesion. A trye freedom of relgion and freedom of speech, separate from the bigots and zealots that cause terror and hatred. The nation has lost it’s illuminating lustre, in the mass that has lost it’s focus. I am disgusted by this trend that has consumed them in blind materialism, and the growing imperial junta that is slowly ooozing the scent of oligrachy and treachery. To remedy this we have to remedy the actions of despots through terror for by terror, as used by the ones in government inflicting terror.
"But when, by prodigious efforts of courage and reason, a people breaks the chains of despotism to make them into trophies of liberty; when by the force of its moral temperament it comes, as it were, out of the arms of the death, to recapture all the vigor of youth; when by tums it is sensitive and proud, intrepid and docile, and can be stopped neither by impregnable ramparts nor by the innumerable ammies of the tyrants armed against it, but stops of itself upon confronting the law's image; then if it does not climb rapidly to the summit of its destinies, this can only be the fault of those who govern it."2

Despostism has to resolved by subtle, silent methods, as akin to a virus, always adapting to the enviroment, as martial law looms to a global war. The remedy of depotism is to reinstitiute tyranncide and ponder the consequences of the political forces that have ruled the nation for multiple centureies. These despots are the true enemies of the nation, traitors with their titles and illusory image. This act of treachery is the act to their demise.3
"The one is the mass of citizens, pure, simple thirsting for justice and friends of liberty. It is this virtuous people that spills all its blood to found the republic that is imposing to internal enemies and shakes the thrones of tyrants. these repulsive tyrants with hereditary driven nepotism and the megalomania to establish ruel over the communiity reflect how the general populas has a true fear of freedom. As thomas paine sated succinctly a moanrcy or oligracy is a moackery of freewill.4"To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession; and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second, claimed as a matter of right, is an insult and imposition on posterity. For all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever, and tho' himself might deserve some decent degree of honours of his contemporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them. One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in Kings, is that nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule, by giving mankind an ASS FOR A LION.
Secondly, as no man at first could possess any other public honors than were bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honors could have no power to give away the right of posterity, and though they might say "We choose you for our head," they could not without manifest injustice to their children say "that your children and your children's children shall reign over ours forever." Because such an unwise, unjust, unnatural compact might (perhaps) in the next succession put them under the government of a rogue or a fool. Most wise men in their private sentiments have ever treated hereditary right with contempt; yet it is one of those evils which when once established is not easily removed: many submit from fear, others from superstition, and the more powerful part shares with the king the plunder of the rest."
The other is a mass of the ambitious and intriguers, it’s the chatting, charlatan, artificial people who show themselves everywhere, who persecute patriotism, who grab onto the tribunes and often the public functions; who abuse the learning that the advantages of the ancien regime gave them in order to fool public opinion. It’s this people of rogues, of foreigners, of hypocritical counter-revolutionaries who place themselves between the people and their representatives in order to fool the one and slander the other; to block their operations, to turn against the public good the most useful laws and the most salutary truths.
As long as this impure race exists the Republic will be unhappy and precarious. It’s up to you to deliver it by an imposing energy and an unalterable concert.
Those who seek to divide us, those who stop the march of the government, those who slander it every day among you by perfidious insinuations, those who seek to form against it a dangerous coalition of all the evil passions, of irascible pride, of all the interests opposed to the public interest are your enemies and those of the fatherland. They are foreign agents.
They are the successors of Brissot, of Hebert, of Danton. If they were to reign one day the Fatherland would be lost.
In saying these things I sharpen daggers against myself, and it is precisely for this that I say them.
You will persevere in your principles and in your triumphal march. You will put down crime and you will save the fatherland...
I have lived long enough... I saw the French people rise up from degradation and servitude to the heights of Glory and Freedom. I saw the chains broken and the guilty thrones that weigh upon the earth near to being overthrown by triumphant hands.
I saw a yet more astonishing marvel, a marvel that monarchical corruption and the experience of the first period of our Revolution barely allowed to be seen as possible: an assembly invested with the strength of the French nation, marching with a rapid and firm step towards public happiness, devoted to the cause of the people and to the triumph of equality, worthy of giving to the world the signal of Liberty and the example of all the virtues.
Accomplish, Citizens, accomplish your sublime destiny. You have placed us in the vanguard to bear up under the first efforts of the enemies of Liberty; we will be worthy of this honor, and with our blood we will trace the route of immortality.
May you constantly deploy that unquenchable energy which you need to put down the monsters of the universe that conspire against you, and to then enjoy in peace the benedictions of the people and of the fruits of your virtues."

These thugs with their consolidated power are the true disease that have raped liberty and providence for their own personal interests. In that I declare a sovereign revolt to dissolve the unlawful nation of the United States; until a rightful government can be properly restored under the premises of divine laws of man and sovereign compact dedicated to illumination and freewill or the the preamble to the US constitution. That all men are created equal. All men are equal bu t some men have to alter the current inverse governance that has restored man into chains" Government undergoes contraction when it passes from the many to the few, that is, from democracy to aristocracy, and from aristocracy to royalty. To do so is its natural propensity."
The dissolution of their illegitimate of government, by honorable means or means to institute a formal revolt that will dissolve the corrupt government that has to be restored by any justifiable means or it will crumble into chaos.5"First, when the prince ceases to administer the State in accordance with the laws, and usurps the Sovereign power. A remarkable change then occurs: not the government, but the State, undergoes contraction; I mean that the great State is dissolved, and another is formed within it, composed solely of the members of the government, which becomes for the rest of the people merely master and tyrant. So that the moment the government usurps the Sovereignty, the social compact is broken, and all private citizens recover by right their natural liberty, and are forced, but not bound, to obey.
The same thing happens when the members of the government severally usurp the power they should exercise only as a body; this is as great an infraction of the laws, and results in even greater disorders. There are then, so to speak, as many princes as there are magistrates, and the State, no less divided than the government, either perishes or changes its form".
This act of dissolution has to realized as a ct of true sovereignty with effects of freewill or anarchy. People will have to rely on their own, with no form of law to use until there is a recognition of a civil compact that allows people to have governance and respect of their will, property and happiness with-out inflicting harm or acts of despotism than a government will be recognized.6"In these, and the like cases, when the government is dissolved, the people are at liberty to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative differing from the other by the change of persons, or form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good. For the society can never, by the fault of another, lose the native and original right it has to preserve itself, which can only be done by a settled legislative and a fair and impartial execution of the laws made by it. But the state of mankind is not so miserable that they are not capable of using this remedy till it be too late to look for any. To tell people they may provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative, when, by oppression, artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power, their old one is gone, is only to tell them they may expect relief when it is too late, and the evil is past cure. This is, in effect, no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care of their liberty, and, when their chains are on, tell them they may act like free men. This, if barely so, is rather mockery than relief, and men can never be secure from tyranny if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly der it; and, therefore, it is that they have not only a right to get out of it, but to prevent it"

With the verge of political turmoil in this besieged country, a popular uprising could cause the necessary tide of true patriotism or political blasphemy that separates the freedom fighters from the true terrorists that currently inflict psychological warfare on the citizens of this nation. As a uprising festers and boils , it will allow for the true rage of the nation to obtain a vengeance on the corruption of the politicians that have lied to us, through their cruel posturing and hypocrisy. It is the action that allows man to conquer the demon of despotism. The cause of the uprising is the abuse and suppression of freedoms , by the politicians that are the catalyst to the uprising. It isn’t baseless wars or manipulated economies; no it’s the ethical reasoning of the uprising. The loss of freedom makes men become warriors that will kill for theit rights, and protect their family, even if it involves the ultimate sacrafice. Our nation that excessively abuses it’s power and is obsessed with material possessions has forgotten self-providence and Liberty; due to the growing malfeasance of the specter of government corruption and restrictions on personal freedoms i.e.. Rights. The current democracy we live in seems fleeting from the living document that has been abused and misinterpreted as a document of fragmented rights. A tolerant nation must live by it’s laws or changed through rebellion and revolution to instill a just government. Not a citizenry that is made paranoid and driven by fear by policies of the corrupt party system and fear-mongering of the Executive department on issues of war, terror, fiscal responsibility and other responsibilities of the citizenry. But, the government has allowed the Populus to become lazy and greedy thus allowing the government to put fear into the hearts of men, but the government should fear the populous. And the republic and democracy are fleeting towards a disaster of fascism, totalitarianism and corruption.


To resolve current actions of the aristocracy either two things can occur a revolt or a purge. A purge is a aristocratic cleansing of all families and heads of any oligarical claims and aristocratic heirs. Therefore restoring t he democratic governance after a temporary goverenment is restored under the articles of confederation. It is understandable not all aristocrats follow the strong arm tactics of the government and it’s corporate partners. . also oligarches use jingoism and nepotism to continue their control of all branches of government. A purge will essentially kill the family bloodline from the first to the last. It is a tyrannicide that may have to be utilized to restore this country to it’s greatness.