America: The Real History

"WE ARE APT TO SHUT OUR EYES AGAINST A PAINFUL TRUTH...
FOR MY PART, I AM WILLING TO KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH;
TO KNOW THE WORST; AND TO PROVIDE FOR IT."
---- Patrick Henry

The True History of America

It amazes me how little people know about the history of their own country. If only they would pick up and read the founding documents of this country, including the original charters of the States, they would be shocked at what they were never taught in government schools. Now, I’m going to present some information here, provided with links to the original sources that prove what I’m saying here. I know that several of you that have been educated by the government will read the title and the first sentences of this post and then be tempted to flame against it. I suggest you read through everything I present very carefully before you respond. I won’t have patience for those that do not read, do not educate themselves, and use logical fallacies, such as ad hom in order to discredit, as opposed to disprove with the facts. The proof is in the pudding, if you have what it takes to study it, but if you don’t, then you’re better off leaving your comments to yourself. A good principle with which you should live your life is to never assume anything, but to find out for yourself. The only useful knowledge is first hand knowledge. Just remember that the truth is always buried beneath a mountain of lies… you will have to work for it.


1. The true history of America (United States of America) can be found in the original charters of the States, I.e., original equity chancery contracts between the Crown and her Crown states. These can be viewed at the Yale Law School Avalon Project website (a very interesting read, and highly recommended if you are to understand this system.) These are used within a system of commercial law, which governs corporations and the contractual agreements between them.

2. This true history reveals that America has been, and still is subject to the Crown under Admiralty Maritime Commercial Law, which is a branch of the International Law Merchant, which was codified into U.S. Law under the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code.) This essentially replaced Common Law (unwritten law based upon the laws of God) in America. The Bill of Rights are based on Common Law. The Declaration of Independence is a statement of the supremacy of Common Law, which states that all persons are born free, with certain God given rights, insofar as they do not violate the same God given rights of another person. The government, under Common Law, cannot interfere or violate these rights. The system of law and government in America were based upon these basic tenets.

[align=center]"It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch-treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences that have unhappily interrupted the good correspondence and friendship which they mutually wish to restore, and to establish such a beneficial and satisfactory intercourse." Treaty of Paris 1783[/align]

Two things should be noted here: King George III claimed to be the King of France, and claimed to work for the Holy Roman Empire. Why is this important? Because he would be financing both sides of the Revolutionary War, since under the Contract of 1782 the 13 Colonies were on the hook for war debts supposedly borrowed from France to the tune of 18 million livres, according to the Contract signed by the 13 colonies in 1782. Note the date that this contract became due (1788). That will become important later. Also, by being an agent (arch-treasurer) for the Holy Roman Empire, he would be collecting debts under Roman Civil Code, Justinian or Babylonian Code. These are the basis for the International Law Merchant and Equity Chancery Contracts, the means by which the Roman Empire extracted tribute from their conquered vassal states.

3. No real victory can be claimed by the 13 colonies in the Revolutionary War. This can be born out by reading the Treaty of Paris (1783). How can any victory be claimed when the States are ceding mineral rights, fishing rights, etc., while keeping the debts owed the Crown and the original Charters of the States current? Why would King George care about the 18 million livres that the States owed France? Why would he want these debts paid off? Wouldn't he want the colonies to not pay its debts to France, debts which helped them supposedly beat King George in the war? The answer is obvious.... King George considered himself King of France and the "arch-treasurer" for the Holy Roman Empire. The purpose of the Revolutionary War was to bankrupt the colonies, thus making them debt slaves to the Crown, and bring them under Roman Civil Law. This fact can also be born out by the historical record. The British never left the colonies after the war, and British troops were still quartered there long after the Revolution. Most of the privileges granted the colonists in the Treaty of Paris were repealed under the Jay Treaty. The Treaty of Paris was nothing more than a list of privileges granted the Crown subjects (colonists,) and not a surrender of the British for losing the War. British control of the colonies was now to be administered through the commercial code (Roman Civil Law), the law of merchants, i.e., international bankers, hence the creation of the first Bank of the US, which was totally owned by Britain.

4. Why was there a swift move for a Constitutional Convention in 1787? Because, according to the Contract of 1782, the war debts owed the King were coming due in 1788. The emergency actions by the Federalists for a Constitution, which would create a powerful Federal Government, thus allowing for the collection of these debts for the Crown from the Crown subjects under the original corporate Charters of the States.

To be Continued:

“By which receipts the said Minister has promised, in the name of Congress and in behalf of the thirteen United States, to cause to be paid and reimbursed to the royal treasury of His Majesty, on the 1st of January, 1788, at the house of his Grand Banker at Paris, the said sum of eighteen millions, money of France, with interest at five per cent per annum.” Contract of 1782

Thus the move for a powerful Federal Government in 1787 was nothing more than a move for reorganization for bankruptcy, so as to allow for the imposition and collection of this debt from the colonial Crown subjects, to be paid into the Crown coffers with interest.

Jonathan Williams recorded in his book, Legions of Satan, 1781, that Cornwallis revealed to Washington during his surrender that "a holy war will now begin on America, and when it is ended America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown."...."in less than two hundred years the whole nation will be working for divine world government. That government that they believe to be divine will be the British Empire."

“1. All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this constitution, as under the confederation.
2. This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.” __ Article Six, Section One of the U.S. Constitution



Most people have no clue that the original ten Bill of Rights, that everyone refers to as the seat of freedom and liberty in this country, were not a part of the original Constitution, as drawn up by the Federalists. In fact, they were a last minute concession made to a strong faction of anti-Federalists, mostly from Virginia, when it became apparent that the Constitution, as originally drawn up, would not pass in all 13 States. You can thank these, mostly unheard of, anti-Federalists for the so-called rights that are so championed, yet mostly meaningless, today. This is why one of those anti-Federalists, Patrick Henry, refused to represent his State of Virginia at the Constitutional Convention with his famous retort: “I smell a rat.” The Federalists that were responsible for this push for a Constitution were never for the Bill of Rights, and, in fact, feared them. Why? They were trying to create a Federal Zone, by which they could rule the colonies and collect their substance for the Crown. Most of these Federalists were esquires (lawyers) which were still officers of the King’s Court (Crown). The Bill of Rights were a thorn in the Federalist side that they sought to undermine from day one. Eventually, they were successful, as these rights are largely ignored by our courts and governments to this day. It was not the Framers of the Constitutional that secured our God given Rights, but those that opposed the Constitution, who were able to secure them for a short time.

“The Constitution is swollen with dangerous doctrine; doctrine that will be taken advantage of by the Federalists, a faction of monarchy men, military men, aristocrats and drones whose noise, impudence and zeal exceeds all belief."Richard Henry Lee, letter to George Mason, 1 October 1787

According to Article One, Clause 15, the militia is responsible for executing the laws of the land. Also, notice Clause 16, which states that it is Congress that has the power to arm and organize the militia. Make no bones about it folks! The militia (police, IRS, etc.) are not here for our protection. The Constitution never provided for our protection, but for the collection of our substance and the maintenance of plantation America for her creditors.

The fact of the matter is that the King of England allowed the colonists of America to falsely believe that they were free, just as he did with the British people under the Magna Carta of 1215 and the Declaration of Rights of 1689. It's the same old game, but we are too ignorant about our history to figure it out.


5. President George Washington created the Federal Zone, known as the District of Columbia, and then created the District states, and District courts (Judiciary Act of 1789) to be governed exclusively by the Federal Zone of the District of Columbia. Those that contract within the Federal Zone are subject to the laws of that Zone, and have no Rights under the Constitution, but are subject to the rule of the District of Columbia. This is how they have fooled us all… There are, in fact, two United States and two states for each State. There’s the Corporate United States (the District of Columbia and its insular territories) and the Continental United States of America. There is the State of Missouri, part of the Continental United States of America, and there is the state of MO with a postal code that is a part of the Federal Zone known as the District of Columbia. Confused? You’re supposed to be. This system is based on fraud and deceit.

On January 24, 1791, it was announced by George Washington the creation of the District of Columbia as the seat of the new government. This district, consisting of 10 square miles within the state of Virginia, was incorporated after the Civil War in 1871. Just like any other corporation, its operation is for that of profit. As most of you have learned in school, this district is it's own little country unto itself:

The Constitution of the United States of America, Article I, Section 8, Clause 17:
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;


[edit on 7-4-2010 by HothSnake]

Like "The City" is to London, the District of Columbia is the secret conclave that rules America under the law merchant. The corporate district that houses the seat of our government and carries on the Roman commercial tradition, which makes our laws compatible with the Crown, while keeping the obligations and charters between the Crown and her incorporated District States valid.

"In reading the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. I, 1789-1897, I discovered the following:
Gentlemen of the Senate:
Pursuant to the powers vested in me by the act entitled "An act repealing after the last day of June next the duties heretofore laid upon distilled spirits imported from abroad and laying others in their stead, and also upon spirits distilled within the United States, and for appropriating the same," I have thought fit to divide the United States into the following districts, namely:
The district of New Hampshire, to consist of the State of New Hampshire; the district of Massachusetts, to consist of the State of Massachusetts; the district of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, to consist of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations; the district of Connecticut, to consist of the State of Connecticut; the district of Vermont, to consist of the State of Vermont; the district of New York, to consist of the State of New York; the district of New Jersey, to consist of the State of New Jersey; the district of Pennsylvania, to consist of the State of Pennsylvania; the district of Delaware, to consist of the State of Delaware; the district of Maryland, to consist of the State of Maryland; the district of Virginia, to consist of the State of Virginia; the district of North Carolina, to consist of the State of North Carolina; the district of South Carolina, to consist of the State of South Carolina; and the district of Georgia, to consist of the State of Georgia." March 4, 1791 (page 99).[4]

You've heard the term "District Courts". These were established by the Judiciary Act of 1789, which was necessarily passed in order to make our legal system compatible with the Roman/Babylonian system used by the Crown. Washington followed this salvo with the division of the entire country into districts to be under the authority of the District of Columbia, and not the Constitution of the United States, which effectively does nothing, except provide for the creation and authority of the corporate charters of the District of Columbia. All that is needed now is a declaration of martial law, like we had during the Civil War, and these contracts can all be called in, i.e., the privileges granted the Crown subjects can be revoked.

It is no coincidence that 1791 also saw the creation of the Bank of the U.S. (England), and a few years later the newly formed districts were called upon to use their new authority under Presidential order to call in the King's ransom (whiskey rebellion). Washington, who said that he did not want to be King, dissolved the Union of states under the Federation, and replaced it with District States under his authority, granted by the Crown (Congress) in the District of Columbia. This obviously abolished the sovereignty of the states, and created the United District States of Amerika.

It would appear that the creditors ("Arch-Treasurer and Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire and of the United States of America," i.e., King George III, according to the Paris Peace Treaty of 1783) of the newly reorganized "United States" wanted the interest on the loans that they had given the colonists (Contract of 1782), so Alexander Hamilton (Federalist extraordinaire) came up with an ingenious plan for taxing alcohol. The people resisted and George Washington sent the militia out to collect this tax, an event known by historians as the Whiskey Rebellion. And collect this tax he did.


“The Constitution was the formative document for a new Crown colony, placed in the united States on a piece of ground ceded by Virginia. This gives the United States the same status under International Law as Canada. This was done by men who had no desire to see the "colonies" separate from Britain. Men who deeply felt the need for a "king".-- David Gould

6. After the Civil War, a permanent state of war was declared by the passage of the Reconstruction Acts and thus a military puppet government was established within the conquered Southern States in order to get the 14th Amendment ratified in those States. This Amendment established a dictatorship under the authority of Congress within the District of Columbia and her chartered District States, by redefining the term "Citizen" and granting conditional privileges to United States "citizens". In other words, it completely changed the Constitution. Soon, the IRS was established to extract tribute from the conquered Southern States and the first Social Security (Identification Numbers) were issued to black slaves under Martial Law, as the entire country was, in subsequent years, to be placed under the military control of the District of Columbia. The death of Lincoln paved the way for all of this. In 1933, FDR declared war against all American citizens under the Trading With The Enemies Act, effectively completing what Washington and Lincoln had begun.

During the Civil War Congress was proclaimed "sine die" and effectively abolished by Abraham Lincoln, after the war a new contract was made between the subjects (citizens) of the United States as contracted with the District of Columbia called the 14th Amendment. Along with establishing the "constructive trust" (a legal device used to enslave others by granting them certain privileges, that when accepted, binds them in other, usually secret, ways) that the subjects were hereby held accountable to. It provided this little gem for the debt slaves contracted to the corporation of the District of Columbia:

“Section 4: The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned…”
14th Amendment

One only has to look at the actions of a certain "Esqr." Alexander Hamilton in the creation of the United States (central) Bank of 1791, in order to witness the fruit born of the Federalists. This, of course, was a private bank, of which 18,000 of the 25,000 shares were owned by England. This bank led to so much economic turmoil and rampant corruption that its charter was not renewed in 1811, leading to the War of 1812. Soon, the second BUS was chartered just after the war, until it was put down by Andrew Jackson, who exclaimed: "You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, by the Eternal God, I will rout you out!" In 1913, England cemented its control over our monetary system with the creation of the Federal Reserve System, culminating in the second reorganization for bankruptcy under FDR.

7. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was rammed through Congress, much the same way that the new Healthcare Bill has been rammed through the current Congress, which led to the Great Depression and subsequent bankruptcy of America under FDR in 1933.

“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; Declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H. J. R. 192, 73rd. Congress in session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Government Offices, Officers and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.--
Representative Traficant Reports On The Bankruptcy Of The United States, United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 VOL. 33, page H-1303

"In 1933 the U.S. declared bankruptcy, as expressed in Roosevelt's Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111, and 6260, House Joint Resolution 192 of June 5, 1933 confirmed in "Perry v. U.S. (1935) 294 U.S. 330-381, 79 LEd 912, as well as 31 United States Code (USC) 5112, 5119 and 12 USC 95a."[2]

In 1928 the world powers started meetings with the international bankers in Geneva, Switzerland in order to plan for their bankruptcies. These conventions, known as The Geneva Conventions, ran for five years ending in 1932. The U.S. was declared bankrupt by FDR in 1933. The U.S., Great Britain, Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal all declared bankruptcy in the 1930’s, immediately following these conventions. Immediately following his election in 1933, FDR declared bankruptcy, a banking holiday, abrogated the gold standard, then issued an Executive Order demanding that the American people turn over all of their gold to the banksters.

On April 5, 1933, President and Traitor Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the following Executive Order: "By virtue of the authority vested in me by Section 5 (B) of the Act of Oct. 6, 1917, as amended by Section 2 of the Act of March 9, 1933, entitled `An Act to provide relief in the existing national emergency in banking and for other purposes', in which a mandatory Act Congress declared that a serious emergency exists, I Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, do declare that said national emergency still continues to exist and pursuant to said section do hereby prohibit the hoarding of gold coins, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States by individuals and corporations . . .
All persons are hereby required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933 to a Federal Reserve bank or agency thereof or any member bank of the Federal Reserve System all gold coin, gold bullion and gold certificates now owned by them or coming into their ownership on or before April 28, 1933, except the following:
(b) Gold coin or gold certificates in an amount not exceeding in the aggregate $100.00 belonging to any one person; and gold coins having been recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins . .
Section 9; Whoever willfully violates any provisions of this Executive Order or of these regulations or of any rule, regulations, or license issued there under may be fined not more than $10,000, or, if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than ten years, or both . . ."

Once the banksters had the gold of America, every American was now indebted to them (the government immediately borrowed credit from the international bankers with you and your property as the collateral.) With no way to lawfully discharge their debts (lawfully, one can only pay his debts with REAL money (gold or silver) and not a money substitute, such as a Federal Reserve IOU), the American citizen was forced into debt slavery (usury) to the corporate international bankers. This is what happened in 1933 with the confiscation of American gold and the declared bankruptcy of our Federal Government, which is why we have a national debt (interest owed to the bankers) to the tune of 8.1 trillion dollars. This is why America is the largest debtor nation in the world, and our society is completely based on debt and credit. It is all smoke and mirrors, which has made possible the Agricultural Depression of 1920-21, the Great Depression of the 1930's, and the market crashes of 1962, 1974, 1987, and 2000. We are well over due for the largest one yet. It is only a matter of time.

8. By 1933 the Executive and Legislative branches (Congress was officially abolished during the Civil War by being pronounced sine die by Abraham Lincoln) to our government had been successfully taken over, thus the only impediment standing in their way was the Judicial branch. FDR had several public battles with the Supreme Court, which up until 1938, did their jobs by upholding the Constitutional Rights of the people. He tried everything from stacking the courts and threatening the Supreme Court into submission. By 1938 he had sufficiently bullied and stacked the highest court in the land into submission, and they were finally going along with his unconstitutional programs. They needed a case by which they could institute the new law of the land, now known the Uniform Commercial Code.

"With the Erie RR v. Thompkins case of 1938, the Supreme Court confirmed their success. We are now in an international private commercial jurisdiction in colorable admiralty-maritime under the Law Merchant. We have been conned and betrayed out of our sovereignty, rights, property, freedom, common law, Article III courts, and Republic. The Bill of Rights has been statutized into "civil rights" in commerce.

America has been stolen. We have been made slaves: permanent debtors, bankrupt, in legal incapacity, rendered "commercial persons", "residents", and corporate franchisees known as "citizens of the United States" under the so-called "14th Amendment". Said "Amendment" (which was never ratified - see Congressional Record, June 13, 1967; Dyett v. Turner, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267; State v. Phillips, (1975) affirmed a citizenship ???."[2

This is why you are not allowed to site any Supreme Court decisions prior to 1938 in defense of your liberty within the current judicial system. A judge will simply tell you that those cases no longer apply. The reason for this is that since 1938 our courts have been operating under “public policy”, ie., statutory law, ie., the Uniform Commercial Code and not Common Law (Bill of Rights.)
For an excellent explanation of this see The UCC: Free Yourself From Legal Tyranny by Howard Freeman. You will also find the Recourse and Remedie for freeing yourself from the UCC.

“Later, when I went to visit the judge, I told him of my problem with the supreme Court cases dealing with Public Policy rather than Public Law. He said, "In 1938, all the higher judges, the top attorneys and the U.S. attorneys were called into a secret meeting and this is what we were told: America is a bankrupt nation -- it is owned completely by its creditors. The creditors own the Congress, they own the Executive, they own the Judiciary and they own all the State governments. Take silent judicial notice of this fact, but never reveal it openly. Your court is operating in an Admiralty Jurisdiction -- call it anything you want, but do not call it Admiralty.” Howard Freeman

The Judicial branch of our Government has been usurped by a private corporation known as the American Bar Association (a franchise of the Lawyer's Guild of Great Britain), a process that started in the 1920's. Once the international banksters controlled America's money with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, they proceeded to bankrupt America, a process that was completed from 1930 to 1933, and was laid out at the Geneva Conventions of 1930. Once the bankruptcy of our Government was completed, the reorganization of America in favor of her creditors was under way, part of which involved the establishment of admiralty-maritime commercial law, i.e., Uniform Commercial Code, as the new law of the land in order to legally recognize this bankruptcy against her collateralized debtors, heretofore known as "citizens" of the United States Corporation (14th Amendment). This is why the Government Corporation can levee fines against your person for the abuse of your "privileges" as a Corporate citizen, why the IRS can confiscate your property without due process of law, why you are held liable for more taxes than you can count, and why the Government can force you to carry a Social Security Number establishing your Corporate Straw Man identity (your name in all caps). In other words, we have been forced into debt slavery to the international banking cartel, through a virulent take over of our Government and legal system.



Now that you know the truth, what will you do with it?

[edit on 7-4-2010 by HothSnake]

"The People's History Of The United States" by Howard Zinn. An invaluable tome and a refreshingly topical perspective on your and my place in the grand design of the United States. This is a tale best told by the stories of the least in the nations and not by those who occupied seats of power and influence!

"The amendment (fourteenth) reversed and annulled the original policy of the constitution," United States v. Rhodes, 27 Federal Cases, 785, 794.

Citizen: One who, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, or of a particular state, is a member of the political community, owing allegiance and being entitled to the enjoyment of full civil rights. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the state wherein they reside. U.S. Const., 14th Amend. See Citizenship.

"It is quite clear then that there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a State, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual." Slaughter House Cases, 83 US 395, 407.-- U.S Supreme Court

"...the first eight amendments have uniformly been held not be protected from state action by the privileges and immunities clause (of the fourteenth amendment)." Hague v. CIO, 307 US 496, 520.

"The right to trial by jury in civil cases, guaranteed by the Seventh Amendment...and the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment...have been distinctly held not to be privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment ...and in effect the same decision was made in respect of the guarantee against prosecution, except by indictment of a grand jury, contained in the Fifth Amendment...and in respect of the right to be confronted with witnesses, contained in the Sixth Amendment... it was held that the indictment, made indispensable by the Fifth Amendment, and the trial by jury guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, were no privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as those words were used in the fourteenth Amendment. We conclude, therefore, that the exemption from compulsory self-incrimination is not a privilege or immunity of National citizenship guaranteed by this clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." Twining v. New Jersey, 211 US 78, 98-99.

For more information on this subject and much more, visit my website.

Basically what you are saying' is that America's balls are in Britain's hands?
I mean should we start calling "balls" "bollucks" over here in the US?
(to my fellow Americans, that's what they call "balls" across the pond)
(to my fellow Americans , "across the pond" means on the other side of the Atlantic)

Star and Flag, I'm wondering though...I mean I love my Black Adder and my BBC but this sounds sort of crazy. Britain owns me?
Actually I should say " The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" as was recently discussed by ATS members on both sides of the pond.

Also , Op, on that same thread I read about some ATS members joking about trading Texas for Scotland. How even more ironic if what you say here is true. The jokes not even funny now. Texas belongs to "The United Kingdom... " already.

I will have to get back to this but so far :+1:

So the 'crown' did not owe the colonies any monies after WW2? Its all a ruse?

Originally posted by HothSnake

2. This true history reveals that America has been, and still is subject to the Crown under Admiralty Maritime Commercial Law, which is a branch of the International Law Merchant,

Anytime I see the Admiralty Law mentioned, I go back to the 70's John Birch meetings with the "gold fringed" flags in courtroom arguments.

"So the 'crown' did not owe the colonies any monies after WW2? Its all a ruse?"

To the contrary, we were put on the hook for paying for both WWI and WWII for the Crown.. Remember the Marshal Plan?

Very interesting However, perhaps I can help offer a little bit of information you might not know, or indeed be able to find..

This titbit of info refers to the Bank of England.. Now I worked there for a while in the Building known as KAYs.. the KAYs stands for Kings Arms Yard.. it i one of those things you won't find in any Wiki..

But this was NOT a place the CROWN put it's soldiers to PROTECT the bank, but rather a place the Crown put it's soldiers to try to get money OUT of the banker..

If the Crown proposal (for Wars etc) was not a profitable one, the Crown did not get the cash... for my mind this is where you need to be looking at, not so much the Crown but who financed these things, since they are the one who hold the debt, if anyone owns anyone, it would be the bankers.

Which I think most people already realise that we now live a modern form of serfdom with the yoke of debt seritude hanging around our necks..

If England owns the United States, we certainly haven't noticed.
Given the large war-debts owing from the 20th century, some of us thought it was the other way round.

I'd like to examine a couple of points about this logic.

In the first post, the OP cites US debt to England as evidence that England owned the US.
In a later post, he cites English debt to the US (eg the Marshall Plan) as evidence that England owns the US.
Now come on, it can't be both ways round.
Either the creditor owns the debtor or the debtor owns the creditor, you should choose one or the other. Either way, the "ownership" has clearly swapped from one to the other in the course of the history.

Also, the first post set much store on George's claims to be "King of France" and "Treasurer of the Holy Roman Empire". At that stage in history, these were both empty titles, which gave him no practical or financial advantage. You musn't assume that people control things just because they claim to control them.







[edit on 8-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

[edit on 8-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

Originally posted by DISRAELI
If England owns the United States, we certainly haven't noticed.
Given the large war-debts owing from the 20th century, some of us thought it was the other way round.

I'd like to examine a couple of points about this logic.

In the first post, the OP cites US debt to England as evidence that England owned the US.
In a later post, he cites English debt to the US (eg the Marshall Plan) as evidence that England owns the US.
Now come on, it can't be both ways round.
Either the creditor owns the debtor or the debtor owns the creditor, you should choose one or the other. Either way, the "ownership" has clearly swapped from one to the other in the course of the history.

Also, the first post set much store on George's claims to be "King of France" and "Treasurer of the Holy Roman Empire". At that stage in history, these were both empty titles, which gave him no practical or financial advantage. You musn't assume that people control things just because they claim to control them.







[edit on 8-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

[edit on 8-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

First off, there seems to be a misunderstanding here. I get this a lot... "England doesn't own the US, the US is more powerul and owns England," etc., etc.

I meant to do this, but just ran out of time, but I need to define what I mean by "Crown".

Don't get me wrong.. I am not saying that Great Britain still owns the colonies, nor am I saying that they ever really did. In fact, Great Britain is owned by the Crown. Remember, it was the corporate Charters that originally set up the colonies, and these Charters were to the Crown, through the King.

What the Crown is, and I referred to it in an earlier post on this thread, is a domecile within London, referred to as "The City". It is not part of London, nor is it part of England, but it is much like the District of Columbia is in America, a seperate domecile not part of the United States, which is why the Congressman from Washington, D.C. is not allowed to vote on anything. Only State Congressman can vote in the United States, and D.C. is not a State, and not part of the United States. The same goes with "The City" that is within London.

What "The City" is is the financial center, where most of the international banksters are located and do business, and it is also where the Crown Templar Bar is located, which is the legal (not lawful) arm of the commercial banking empire. Remember, this is all about Commercial Law, Admiralty Maritime, ie, international Law Merchant, etc...

These are the creditors that own us all... Not the King of England, France, or whatever.... They are just agents of the Crown, like the President of the US is an agent for the Crown... Don't get me wrong here, I am saying that the Banksters... The financial centers of London and Geneva, Switzerland own us, including Britain.. The British are as much serfs as the rest of us.

I'll add more when I get more time.

Originally posted by HothSnake

What the Crown is, and I referred to it in an earlier post on this thread, is a domecile within London, referred to as "The City". It is not part of London, nor is it part of England, but it is much like the District of Columbia is in America,

What "The City" is is the financial center, where most of the international banksters are located and do business, and it is also where the Crown Templar Bar is located, which is the legal (not lawful) arm of the commercial banking empire.

Why do you want to identify "The Crown" and "The City"?

"The City" is, as you say, the shorthand term for the financial centre.

"The Crown", on the other hand, is a shorthand term meaning "That sovereign authority which nominally belongs to the monarch", and it is in that sense that "The Crown" owns Britain. If I'm described as a "subject of the British Crown", that's a metaphor meaning I owe allegiance to Queen Elizabeth.

For some reason you want to identify the two, and this identification seems to be based on this "Crown Templar Bar" you mention. No, the fact that "Crown" is part of the name does not make it the place where "The crown"is located.

You can talk about the power of the financial world, but if you try to supplement that by drawing in documentary references to what the British "Crown" owns or does, this will not be good reasoning. They are two different things.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

[edit on 8-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

Originally posted by HothSnake
Like "The City" is to London, the District of Columbia is the secret conclave that rules America under the law merchant. The corporate district that houses the seat of our government and carries on the Roman commercial tradition, which makes our laws compatible with the Crown, while keeping the obligations and charters between the Crown and her incorporated District States valid.

Folks would do well to look into Georgetown University and why its there and what its all about.

The histroy behind the War of 1812 may give your points some good looks.

Brilliant! Brilliant! Brilliant!

1,002,122 flags and stars for you, my friend.

Great job getting information out there!
I'm still reading and visiting your site.



(1000x)

Haven't finished reading yet but it looks good.

I believe the Templars found America first and eventually passed the direction down to Colombus, it makes sense also as the cross was on his sails.

reply to post by DISRAELI

In the first post, the OP cites US debt to England as evidence that England owned the US.
In a later post, he cites English debt to the US (eg the Marshall Plan) as evidence that England owns the US.

I think that you're a bit confused here.. The Marshall plan was the recovery aid program from the United States to Europe for the recovery and reconstruction after the war. It was not a debt that was intended to be repaid. Incase you haven't noticed, the U.S. almost never lends money, we just give it away, usually as a payoff or bribe in the form of aid, unless the CIA is lending money to Central and Southern America. In which case, we are playing much the same ruse as the international bankster in that we are trying to bankrupt them, get them on the hook, and then take over their countries, but I digress. No one was on the hook for the Marshall plan, but the United States. You're mixing apples and oranges here in a vein attempt to make what point? I'm not quite sure... I'm not sure that you're sure?

You're right, however, in that I should have clarified what I meant by the "Crown". I meant to do this, but given the lengthy nature of this post, and my crazy life at the moment, I ran out of time. Thanks for busting my chops.. geez.. But I must ask, did you read the entire post, visit the links, etc.? Out of all of the above information, I find it odd that you got hung up on some trivial semantics at the beginning of my post. Like I said at the beginning, read and then comment... not the other way around.

Why do you want to identify "The Crown" and "The City"?

"The City" is, as you say, the shorthand term for the financial centre.

"The Crown", on the other hand, is a shorthand term meaning "That sovereign authority which nominally belongs to the monarch", and it is in that sense that "The Crown" owns Britain. If I'm described as a "subject of the British Crown", that's a metaphor meaning I owe allegiance to Queen Elizabeth.

For some reason you want to identify the two, and this identification seems to be based on this "Crown Templar Bar" you mention. No, the fact that "Crown" is part of the name does not make it the place where "The crown"is located.

You can talk about the power of the financial world, but if you try to supplement that by drawing in documentary references to what the British "Crown" owns or does, this will not be good reasoning. They are two different things.

"THE CROWN TEMPLE

The governmental and judicial systems within the United States of America, at both federal and local state levels, is owned by the “Crown,” which is a private foreign power. Before jumping to conclusions about the Queen of England or the Royal Families of Britain owning the U.S.A., this is a different “Crown” and is fully exposed and explained below. We are specifically referencing the established Templar Church, known for centuries by the world as the “Crown.” From this point on, we will also refer to the Crown as the Crown Temple or Crown Templar, all three being synonymous.

All licensed Bar Attorneys in the U.S. owe their allegiance and give their solemn oath in pledge to the Crown Temple, realizing this or not. This is simply due to the fact that all Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the international Bar Association located at the Inns of Court at Crown Temple, which are physically located at Chancery Lane behind Fleet Street in London. Although they vehemently deny it, all Bar Associations in the U.S., such as the American Bar Association, the Florida Bar, or California Bar Association, are franchises to the Crown.

The present Queen of England is not the “Crown,” as we have all been led to believe. Rather, it is the Bankers and Attorneys who are the actual Crown or Crown Temple. The Monarch aristocrats of England have not been ruling sovereigns since the reign of King John, circa 1215. All royal sovereignty of the old British Crown since that time has passed to the Crown Temple in Chancery." The rest of this is here

I find this tidbit interesting:

Note from Ed:
Although I agree almost totally with the above information, as my understanding goes, the Vatican fell into the hands of the Satanic banking family of Rothschild around 200 years ago. So although there are many out there who point the finger at the Vatican or the Jesuits as the real powerhouse that controls all, as stated in the info above "He who controls the gold rules the world", which means if the Rothschild hold the papal gold and control his purse strings - who indeed is the more powerful? "Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS), a City of London Rothschild-controlled international bank and the biggest bank in Europe. (The logo of UBS is three keys in the form of the Star of David or hexagram. In reality, it is the bastardized Vatican logo, incorporating the two keys of Vatican with the Crown of the Pope removed, signifying City of London Jewry’s Masonic control of the Vatican and Vatican Bank."

This goes along with what I stated earlier about the 1215 compact that allowed the Pope to usurp the Crown, thus becoming the real Crown, and with King George being the "arch-treasurer of the Holy Roman Empire", thus an agent for the Crown (Vatican, World Banksters, whatever).






[edit on 8-4-2010 by HothSnake]

reply to post by hinky


"Anytime I see the Admiralty Law mentioned, I go back to the 70's John Birch meetings with the "gold fringed" flags in courtroom arguments."

Actually, there's some truth to that. The gold fringed flag is the flag of the Executive Branch. What is the flag of the Executive doing flying in the Judiciary? I think that the answer is provided above.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.