Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

We Have Met The Enemy

Expand Messages
  • Ron Branson
    We Have Met The Enemy by Ron Branson Arnie, there are two standards at play here. One is the correct and legal process, and the other is reality, i.e., the way
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 22, 2012
    • 0 Attachment

      We Have Met The Enemy
      by Ron Branson

      Arnie, there are two standards at play here. One is the correct and legal process, and the other is reality, i.e., the way things are. The bottom line is that when there is a conflict between these two wills, People vs. government, it is the will of the People that must prevails This is precisely what JAIL4judges assures when the People decide they want to take actually charge over their future affairs and not just; march on Washington, grandstand, make platitudes and speeches of high-sounding words, sable rattle, have meetings of Meet, Greet, Eat, Retreat, and Repeat, huff and puff to blow their enemies houses down, etc, et al.

      Now, let me talk practical (reality) about your below prescribed "remedy," on the truth of the matter and how it really is. You are correct that the judges and politicians are "bound" by their Oaths of Office, but who is going to enforce it? We would like to think  that it is enforceable by the courts and by the sheriffs. We hope that another judge will recognize our plight and pass down a judgment against the offender of their sacred duty. But we have to face reality.

      I have brought suit against the offender's bonds. So what happened? Reality was, the bondholders was dismissed from the lawsuit on the first court appearance, and that issue was  preserved for later on appeal.

      So everyone believes against reality that the Appellate Court will hear the argument on appeal. But, again, we have to face reality, a hearing for justice on reality is not going to happen.

      Oh sure you can take this petition on up further on appeal, but reality is, they are definitely not interested. Just how do you think we got in this mess anyway in the first place? It was not by the courts, Appellate Courts, and even the U.S. Supreme Court, listening to our petitions.

      From thereon, we can wish for justice until we get frustrated and decide to take matters into our own hands. JAIL4judges came about by this very means, i.e., someone (I think his name was Ron Branson) got frustrated and decided that we have to take matters into our own hands. This man developed a remedy, but what this man, Ron Branson, found out the People were not ready to exercise a remedy. Ron Branson found out that that it was not the judges that was the real problem, but dumb People. This cycle shall continue to go around in circles in frustration seeking a "legal" way out of their dilemma until they ultimately get more frustrated and decide to go to arms.

      This is the reality of where we are now, searching for a remedy that does not involve the principles set forth within JAIL4Judges. So we now have this guy, Ron Branson, sitting by watching People get frustrated in looking for a remedy. This cycle shall continue going around and around without a remedy until the People actually go to arms, not just talk about it, for lack of a remedy. But arms is not really a remedy, but the evidence of the lack of a remedy. But the reality is, we are not without an actual remedy, it is just that the People hope against hope that a revolution will be cheaper, faster, and more successful than the actual remedy proposed by this guy, Ron Branson.

      The following quote is credited to Pogo, "We have met the enemy and he is us." The remedy is, we must defeat this evil enemy spoken of by Pogo who stands in the way of victory. Until we do, we shall be like a jack ass pursuing a carrot dangling from a string, and continue to go around and around and around and ....."

      Ron Branson

      *   *   *

      Arnie wrote:

      Thank you for your feedback on this matter.  In conversations with many patriots, it appears that we the people must make demands to affect changes and ensure compliance with our wishes.

      This is based upon the fiduciary relationship between public servants and our employees.  By accepting their oath through a registered process we establish this relationship and a contract.  A contract that binds them to their oath through their bond.

      It is my understanding we can file a suit against the individual representative who by their actions or inactions violates this agreement or breaches the fiduciary responsibilities.  Monetary damages will be awarded to the successful litigant.  Further, two suits against a given elected official disqualifies them to run for future office as the bond issuers will not issue any further bonds.

      Is any of this consistent with your knowledge of the processes?

      Available 24/7 - Defending freedom has become a full-time job!
      714-501-8247 - mobile

      On Sep 22, 2012, at 12:42 AM, Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@...> wrote:

      Arnie, here is my take on this. We are in desperate times which calls for desperate measures. Since the laws and the Constitution is chosen to be ignored, I do not see any reason to believe that whatever measures we stake are "illegal." That being said, there is no such thing as a "Criminal/Civil" action.

      Are criminal proceedings are entered at the discretion of the prosecutor. All that part of the complain will return is that the court has no jurisdiction of honor such filing. I have gone through this before and that was exactly what I got. True, a Civil action may be filed, but you already know how I view the courts when it comes particularly to suing the government. But, what the hey, why not go for it?

      I still view that the only why to restore our government is through the Special Independent Grand Jury in making the judges accountable directly to the People.  The reason I say "Special" in reference to the Grand Jury is because with our current Grand Jury they my indict all they want, but it is still the prosecutor that has the last word on whether to prosecute. Within J.A.I.L. this matter is taken care of through a Special Prosecutor that works for the Grand Jury, and is independent of all governments.


      Arnie wrote:

      Please review.  Seems well presented but what do I know?  <LOL>

      Would you be in a position to modify the complaint to meet requirements for submission by Californians?

      Please advise.

      Message protected by MailGuard: e-mail anti-virus, anti-spam and content filtering.

      Reportthis message as spam  

      Message protected by MailGuard: e-mail anti-virus, anti-spam and content filtering.

      Report this message as spam  

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.