No products in the cart.


Patrick Wood: Reflexive Law: New Legal System Driving Sustainable Development

Patrick Wood: Reflexive Law: New Legal System Driving Sustainable Development

San Pedro River, Hereford, Arizona
San Pedro River, Hereford, Arizona

 Written by Patrick Wood and published at  Technocracy dot News

Every society in history has been hinged on compatible systems of social structure, economics and politics. And, every unique society is regulated by a compatible legal system that settles all disputes between its citizens. In the Western world and especially in America, this is revered as the “Rule of Law”.

On August 26, 2014 the New York Times blasted out the head­line, Obama Pur­suing Cli­mate Accord in Lieu of Treaty. In short, Obama was to use Exec­u­tive Orders to entangle the U.S. in a global “treaty” on cli­mate change, without con­sulting the U.S. Senate. How­ever, the Con­sti­tu­tion requires the Senate to vote on all treaties and the bar is high: It takes a two-third vote to approve.

To the globalist, the Con­sti­tu­tion is out. The Rule of law has col­lapsed. Reflexive Law has sur­passed it all. The bal­ance of this article will show you how and why.

If you are saying “Huh?”, you had better read every word of this report and figure it out, because this might be the most impor­tant shard of evi­dence ever revealed about the wrenching trans­for­ma­tion of Amer­ican society.

Obama’s prin­cipal adviser and “nego­tiator” on this so-called cli­mate accord was John Podesta, and this whole treaty-by-executive-order debacle can be laid squarely at his feet. Until just recently, Podesta was a member of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. He was Bill Clinton’s chief-of-staff in the 1990s and the orig­inal insti­gator of Exec­u­tive Branch policy of using Exec­u­tive Orders to bypass Con­gress on cer­tain issues. Clinton, also a Tri­lat­eral member, cre­ated many such EO’s to side-step Con­gress, and Con­gress unfor­tu­nately let him get away with it.

Enough about Podesda. Just remember that he was the prime mover in what I am about to reveal.

The NYT article stated,

To side­step that require­ment [of a 2/3 Senate vote], Pres­i­dent Obama’s cli­mate nego­tia­tors are devising what they call a “polit­i­cally binding” deal that would “name and shame” coun­tries into cut­ting their emis­sions. The deal is likely to face strong objec­tions from Repub­li­cans on Capitol Hill and from poor coun­tries around the world, but nego­tia­tors say it may be the only real­istic path.


Please read entire article at Technocracy.News —

Thank you,


Elias Alias, editor






Elias Alias

Editor in Chief for Oath Keepers; Unemployed poet; Lover of Nature and Nature's beauty. Slave to all cats. Reading interests include study of hidden history, classical literature. Concerned Constitutional American. Honorably discharged USMC Viet Nam Veteran. Founder, TheMentalMilitia.Net



  1. Let me put it clearly, is it constitutional?

    There need be no other question asked here in America. Why not? Because they have DELEGATED authoritythat is delegated to the branch or position that is being occupied; never to the person who is at that time occupying it. They are allowed to use that authority as long as they do the duties AS assigned by the US Constitution, and KEEP the particular Oath they are under.

    For example, Obama (we are pretending that he was lawfully and legally a US president) is REQUIRED for the time he is in office to Preserve, Protect, and Defend the US Constitution as the contract that he is under, as the supreme LAW of THIS land, and as the definer of our government.

    He has not done so, and he needs to be fired. (This is ingoring his Treason against the American people, *Terrorism, First Degree Murder, etc etc for which he needs to be prosecuted. Nor does it address his political crimes of corruption, dereliction of constitutional duty, violation of limitations on the power of an office, Actively and knowingly going against the US Constitution and the citizens of the United States, Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office, Maladministration, Misapplication, etc, etc)

    Both the legislative and judicial branches are required to “Support and Defend” the US Constitution as their Oath and personal guarantee. They also have not done so, nor have they kept their Oath(s). They also have broken the contract that they are ALLOWED to serve under, so must be fired.

    Every single person serving within our government that is not being hit as a “whistle blower” or prosecuted, or imprisoned as one are Traitors at most, and broke their contract at the least (felony and the crime of Perjury) – state and general (federal).

    Stop showing your education for a time, and understand the US Constitution and all state Constitutions are black and white, simple. They are exactly as written, and one must not perform convoluted explanations for explaining it or expanding it. It says exactly what it says. “No” means no, none, never, etc and that is in any language.

    When the US Constitution, state Constitution, requires a person to take an Oath in order to be allowed to serve within a position, the words of that Oath means exactly what they say, and it IS a requirement to keep it.

    It IS significant that the oath is to support and defend (preserve, protect, and defend) the Constitution and NOT an individual, leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is because the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals – who are inconsistent, fallible, corruptible, and often prone to error – too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other as we can see today.

    The words of the Oath have meaning and are a LAW that has specific requirements that must be met for the person who takes it, and it IS a felony plus the crime of Perjury to not keep it. Here is the meaning of the words within the Oath.

    “I”- an individual, person, citizen, one member of the whole, officer;
    “do” – perform, accomplish, act, carry out, complete, achieve, execute;
    “solemnly”- somberly, gravely, seriously, earnestly, sincerely, firmly, fervently, with thought and ceremony;
    “swear (or affirm)” – vow, pledge, promise, guarantee;
    “that I will” – a positive phrase confirming present and future action, momentum, determination, resolve, responsibility, willpower, and intention;
    “support” – uphold, bear, carry, sustain, maintain;
    “and defend” – protect, guard, preserve, secure, shield, look after;
    “the Constitution of the United States.”

    Pretty simple, huh?

    The peoples sovereignty came from the Declaration of Independence when we separated from England and became our own nation.

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

    The Preamble sets forth the goals or purposes of the Constitution. The opening and closing words of the Preamble, “We the people of the United States … do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”, describe a government ordained and established by the consent of the people.

    WE are not a ruled people, we are a people that agreed to certain laws and actions and that through those we put into office to carry out speicfic duties that SUPPORT our liberties not to destroy them. America is a constitutional republic where elected representatives swear to uphold the Constitution as they serve at the will and by the consent of the people.

    Since these, and many past, have not done the duty as they are required to do, they have NO LAWFUL authority because the ONLY lawful authority that any person serves within our government comes from the US Constitution and each state Constitution and it IS DELEGATED to that branch/position. Dr. Edwin Vieira said it well here:

    “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides…

    The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights…
    The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.” (end quote)

    Currently we have people pretending to be operating as our government, yet they are not using authority as it is granted in writing to the position or branch they occupy, which makes them, and every single thing they do in our name a “legal fiction”. Powers/authority not delegated are not theirs to use however much the person wants to, and can get a lawyer to “back him up” up with convolutions worthy of a human pretze in a sideshow.

    NO, the US Constitution says exactly what it it means, and it needs not be “interpreted” by any, and that does include those who serve within the judicial branch as they well know, or should know.

    It is imporatnt to realize that the structure of the Constitution emphasizes the principle of separation of powers. Article I established the legislative branch with the power to make laws; Article II, the executive branch with the authority to enforce the laws; and Article III, the judicial branch with jurisdiction over legal disputes. “It is VERY important to note that the Constitution in no way granted the federal courts the power of judicial review, or an ultimate interpretive power over the constitutional issues”. That was inserted later by the justices themselves which is a usurpation, a crime.

    Another very important aspect of, and the foundation upon which our government is built, is the separation of powers which is the principle of federalism. Federalism is a legal and political system where the national or federal government shares power with the state governments while each maintains some degree of sovereignty and each has delegated powers covering different areas and where those areas might overlap the general government is supreme as long as what it does is delegated through the US Constitution.

    The Constitution helps to delineate the roles of the federal government by spelling out its limited powers, which are outlined in the first three Articles. Section 10 of Article I also places specific, limited restrictions on the states; however, these restrictions actually serve to emphasize the powers reserved exclusively to the federal government (e.g., the power to make treaties with other nations).

    Article IV delineates a few fundamental requirements incumbent upon state governments, as well as guaranteeing to each state a republican form of government. Other than the limited guidance given to the states, and the requirement that all must be in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution, it does not direct the states on the establishment and functions of state governments. The idea is that there are certain limited activities the federal government is best situated to handle such as dealing with foreign matters as a central agency for all the states by their representatives sent there. The US Constitution makes it clear that there are other activities that are best left to the states; and still others best dealt with by counties, cities, families, and individuals themselves.

    Under this system of government, our founding fathers realized that conflicts between state and federal jurisdiction would arise. Accordingly, in Article VI of the Constitution, they designated the Constitution itself and other federal laws that are in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution as “the supreme Law of the Land.” This clause (known as the supremacy clause) serves as a “conflict-of-laws rule specifying that certain national acts take priority over any state acts that conflict with national law.

    The general (federal) government was intended to be a government of limited powers, there were many who feared the inevitable expansion of those powers, particularly in light of the supremacy clause. Without the promise of a Bill of Rights making clear the limitations placed upon the power delegated to the general government, the Constitution never would have been ratified.

    The founding fathers also had the foresight to build a system of checks and balances into the Constitution itself, whereby the executive, legislative, and judiciary would check and balance each other and state governments would balance the federal while it, in turn, would maintain a check on the states. The people would check and balance all of it. Make sense yet?

    The most fundamental of the many checks and balances placed within our system of government is the power to control oneself. At no time is a commitment to this principle more eloquently, and importantly, expressed than when individual law enforcement officers and those starting to serve within the US military raise their hands and solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. May all do so WITH A FIRM UNDERSTANDING OF THE PRINCIPLES THAT THOSE POSITIONS REQUIRE OF THEM to defend, and a clear recognition of the people, states, and nation promised to protect.

    “Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence… Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.” Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution

    This is a long way of saying that none of that matters IF we do as we are required to do, Support and Defend the US Constitution, use it in EVERY legal battle as IT is the supreme law, not the people serving.
    Use it to show who are Traitors serving within our nation, and use it to remove them as WE ARE REQUIRED as creators and sovereigns of this nation.
    WE must use the Militia as the US Constitution requires to protect our borders, to remove illegals, to arrest and prosecute Traitors who “serve” within OUR governments.
    None of that other BS matters as it is NOT constitutional.
    Kick out UN troops with Americn troops as there is no one serving within our government at any level today that has the authority to invite them here.
    Remove the Federal Reserve because it was not only NOT delegated, it was FORBIDDEN, and every person who served since had the duty to REMOVE it and did not.
    Where in the US Constitution does it allow us to join a UN/NATO? I have yet to find it within the US Constitution.
    Where does it say that foreign entities or countries, or whatever can have any authority above the US Constitutionand the people? No where.

    We are our own nation, and the onkly affect, or even effect that other nations/entities have on ours is if we allow it to go on. Lawfully they have none, and for any within our nation, serving within governmetn or not, to propse that they do makes and shows that person to be a TRAITOR.

    Those are the ONLY facts that matter. Tear down what the NSA has built, tear down spy towers, etc used AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

    Want the best evidence for the ending of the TSA, DHS, etc? Open Borders, yet Aemricans are stopped and searched. Anyone who does this is a TRAITOR to the American people and the US Constitution and they took the OATH to not ever do such things. This is the real story, not the rest of that bs.

    Support the US Constitution in every way, everything. That is the American way, and THIS IS our nation, our government.

  2. WOW…..Them is some powerful words CAL. I couldn’t agree more. Those who make up the current federal government are nothing more than criminals and as you say…NEED TO BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW.
    I do consider “THIER” Government to be null and void as they have violated OUR rules under OUR constitution which outlines OUR government. They are completely outside OUR constitution which is the SUPREME law of OUR land. therefore I do not consider them to exist with any legitimacy at all.

  3. Fantastic article. These words need to be spread like wildfire to our younger generation, many of whom have no idea what we, as a collective, have already lost.

Comments are closed.