The King’s Justice

Mr. Tibbetts has a problem with us discussing his daughter’s death. He feels the matter is none of our business and that the circumstances under which his daughter died were anathematic to her purpose in life. More accurately, he believes that our re-stating of the circumstances of her torture and murder are anathematic to her world-view. To state that she met an untimely demise experiencing the first-hand result of her pity and deference towards third-worlders who have no pity or humanity towards her would make it harder to put more third worlders in her murderer’s position. Thus, to even speak about the events which claimed her life is to “betray” her.

In the eyes of Mr. Tibbetts, he has the right to simply demand we halt our pursuit of justice against Mr. Christhian Bahena Rivera and all others like him because it is disgusting to his moral code and supposedly that of his daughter, who could not be reached for comment. This is patently incorrect. We live in a nation built on Common Law and English civil framework. This means that all serious crime is not just directed against the victim, but the People itself. You cannot pardon your assailant of rape, nor assault with a deadly weapon, nor grievous bodily injury or torture,  nor murder (also for more obvious reasons). These crimes are viewed as being committed “against the state.” You might recognize these from various US court cases that begin as “the People of…” or “the State of…” vs. “Mr. Smith/Johnson/Baker.”

This is a protection built into our law from the days of kings. For when you broke the law by committing a serious crime in the Kingdom of England, you were transgressing not just against a private person, but against the rule of law and the Royal Order itself. If a murder went unpunished, it was said that no man in England was safe. And we had the providence to shape American law this way as well. While citizens of the US have the right to determine all civil disputes by whatever means the parties involved agree to, matters of serious crime demand redress from the people and nothing short of justice will suffice.

In other words, what happened to Ms. Mollie Tibbetts is very much my business, your business, and the business of a just and legitimate State. Mr. Rivera committed a crime not just against Ms. Tibbetts and her family, but against the State of Iowa and the United States themselves. When you put it like that, it sounds like an act of war. And a criminal, by definition, engages in warfare against order, the public, and the legitimate state. It just so happens that many of Mr. Rivera’s co-belligerants on his war against the People of the United States happen to bear his identity, beliefs, and ethnicity. Our Common Law roots demand we start viewing these crimes against us as a pattern and one in need of formal action.

And so we will continue to discuss the death of Ms. Tibbetts and we will continue to discuss it in reference to the ongoing war against the People of the United States by La Raza and its affiliates. And if Mr. Tibbetts has a problem with this, I suggest he divest himself of his citizenship and enjoy the remainder of his life in a nation that lacks Common Law. Perhaps Mr. Rivera’s wonderful home of Mexico will suit him as they lack Common Law and possibly any law. As for the rest of us, we pray for the establishment and preservation of Order and the King’s Justice.

One comment

  1. It would only then be fitting that Mr. Tibbett be held totally responsible for the costs of imprisoning his daughter’s murderer and equally held accountable for financing reparations,etc., regarding any of the murderers acts, past,present and future.