Fox sanitizes 9/11 video archive to conceal perp?

Originally posted by SPreston
reply to post by evil incarnate

 

Can't you read? That is Lieutenant Colonel Riggle's own bio on his own website stating he was stationed in Manhatted on 9-11 and working the bucket brigades at the WTC.

Uh huh and.....?

Does it say that he also posed as a guy on the street in a staged interview in there somewhere? I am not finding that part, perhaps you can put it in bold for me.

For evil incarnate, here is a link to the voice analysis done by Lombardi:

Voice Analysis

Lombardi believed that the voices did match, however, he wanted to get second opinions from some other people he works with. If you have voice and face recognition software, perhaps you can do your own analysis to compare.

People seem to forget that even if this Harley Man is proven to be Rob Riggle, it does not prove he was in on any conspiracy, nor does it prove he was guilty of anything. People on here are losing sight of this fact. There is no evidence or proof Harley Man is a government plant or deliberate disinformation agent. It is just as likely that Harley Man was simply relaying information that he either heard from others, or was told by someone and accepted it at face value.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Actually if Harley Guy was done on a green screen aboard a Rick Leventhal video as letthereaderunderstand claims; then the person playing Harley Guy may be an innocent tool just reading a script for the CIA video propagandists also. The voice seems syncronized to the video very well in some versions. But even Harley Guy's face is heavily photoshopped.

However the Harley Guy video is proof of a 9-11 Perp deliberate psyops disinformation skit played on the day of 9-11 to a live audience of hundreds of millions worldwide. Apparently Rick Leventhal is part of it, because there is no evidence that he has objected to the unethical use of his person in a propaganda video. Leventhal would surely remember if he actually hosted that video or not. It would seem the networks were not too careful about airing a fake video; but maybe they do it all the time.

You guys, I would say that this whole Harley guy Video first of all was not shot live. It is a matted scene against a green screen.

When the Black man walks up behind them it is weird. Also look at Harley guys hand when he throws it back discribing the buildings collapse. They literally painted it purple.

I don't even think his hat is real. If you guys can goo frame by frame it is so crazy how manipulated that scene is.

1. Background moves and Jumps.
2. No depth of field. The background is as focused as the foreground.
3. Harley Guys whole entire face is altered in 90% of the shot.
4. No shadows from the Guys standing behind them, plus he is just creepy and hiding the rest of the static scene, hence his curiosity in their interview

post by letthereaderunderstand

 

Digitizing won't change his height, but a green screen will.

Leventhal is the only real person in that shot that is actually on the street. He is the only one with actual sun light on his face. They took his footage from an interview and put harley man in, hence the weird black guy who comes up and hangs out in the scene. Leventhal doesn't even react to him (the black guy) and he turns as if he is going to brawl, yet leventhal doesn't even flinch, nor have any shadow cast on him from the black gentleman. He was inserted to hide the green screen shadowing from Riggle.

When you green screen you have to do a thing called keying, hence the green screen. You want your back ground to be all the same color, but shadows can bleed if you don't key them perfectly. They did not have time to do that, so they put in the black guy to stand where Harleys shadow is, layering over it with the the Black guy to cover it. It worked, accept they didn't count on people finding the footage and going through it frame by frame...big mistake on their part.

Harley could have been 4 feet tall, it wouldn't of mattered because he is inserted.

post by letthereaderunderstand

 

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4f8d9edb26aa.gif[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/919af92e1b5f.gif[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8a8b6a94dadb.gif[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/29ee1b5952b0.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by SPreston


Explain how Harley Man is "proof" that he is a disinformation distributor, and not some guy simply parroting what he might have heard elsewhere. I don't see how it is proof of anything.

I would be more interested in where Harley Man got his information. If I remember correctly, the video was taken barely minutes after the first collapse?

reply to post by SPreston


You are not helping yourself at all. Not only do you keep showing pictures that look less like Riggle each time you show them but also you need to understand something. Greenscreens do not cause green shadows.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Thanks. I guess what I meant to be asking is where is the credible voice analysis and not just someone running two different clips through a program they have on their home pc. I did not hear the compared clips either. The base line being read could easily be the base level of the ambient sound of both clips. I know he did not isolate anything from the fox clip. I want to know where the believable and credible voice analysis proof is, but thank you anyway for linking me back to what he thought was proof. I do not know why Lettherhead does not want to tell me what software was in used there but it brings up another interesting point. If, and this is a big if, the results are accurate, correct, and meaningful - then how many men speak with a base level in the 120 - 600 khz range? I did not see his explanation of what was used as control or anything like that.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by evil incarnate]

has anyone bothered to just compare the heights of the two men in question? I am fairly certain that Riggle is far taller than Leventhal.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Can't you read? The Harley Guy video is a fake. It was not broadcast live with Rick Leventhal on 9-11. Somebody photoshopped the video on top of a Leventhal interview and the networks broadcast that faked video live on 9-11. It was a propaganda tool to spread the script for the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY worldwide early in the attack. That was the same reason Anthrax Guy Jerome Hauer was live on Dan Rather the morning of 9-11 to spread the same message.

Look at the video closely and compare it to the animations letthereaderunderstand made for us.

Originally posted by SPreston
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

 

Can't you read? The Harley Guy video is a fake. It was not broadcast live with Rick Leventhal on 9-11. Somebody photoshopped the video on top of a Leventhal interview and the networks broadcast that faked video live on 9-11. It was a propaganda tool to spread the script for the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY worldwide early in the attack. That was the same reason Anthrax Guy Jerome Hauer was live on Dan Rather the morning of 9-11 to spread the same message.

Look at the video closely and compare it to the animations letthereaderunderstand made for us.

So, why has Leventhal not had an issue with this fake interview that was "photoshopped" over his? I am sure there is some grand conspiracy at work as well to silence Rick as well as the person he was really interviewing that morning as well as all the people in the background? Chances are, they have all seen this by now so why are so many people not speaking up about the fact that another person saying different things is now in the video they remember being in?

P.S. You should really stop asking people if they can read or not. It is childish and does much to take away your credibility and make you sound more like a basement dwelling conspiracy theorist who either is or is in love with letherheadedassumptionbadthreadcrappyposter.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by evil incarnate]

reply to post by evil incarnate


I understand what you are getting at. I have no knowledge or expertise in video/audio stuff. I just linked to the Voice Analysis done here on ATS, because you had asked for the link. Given Lombardi's experience and knowledge of audio stuff, I found his own analysis very interesting and compelling, but even he said he wanted a second opinion to be certain. That's what I have been waiting on the most. that, and someone on here who has facial recognition expertise or software.

Regardless, it matters not to me if it is Rob Riggle, or someone else, the identity of Harley Man. If it was Rob Riggle, it would be an interesting footnote, but unless hard evidence was presented, it would mean little else. What would interest me more is the source of Harley Man's information, whther he was told what had supposedly happened, or the source where he retrieved such information from. Harley Man, in my own research involving 9/11, plays little to no part, nor is he as an individual extremely important. I personally think that if it is simply some guy off the street who is excited by the opportunity to appear on camera sounding smart, it might be interesting to find out where he heard his info from.

If it is Rob Riggle, I still do not believe that he would be directly involved in anything. Being the PRO for his unit, it is more likely that he is either relaying info from higher up, or info he recieved elsewhere.

I suppose what I am saying is that it is not Harley Man who I find suspect. The video to me, after viewing it several more times, does not seem to me to be Mr. Riggle, though as I said, I'm not good with video and audio stuff. The audio analysis is quite interesting, and Lombardi seems to be quite taken and surprised by the results. He knows more than I in this respect. I would be receptive to other views and opinions coming from other persons who analyize this footage.

What I would consider most interesting is if Harley man turned out to be Rob Riggle, then I would wish to find out the channels and who delivered what for his statement to be delivered on national telivision, not the messanger himself.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by evil incarnate

 

I understand what you are getting at. I have no knowledge or expertise in video/audio stuff. I just linked to the Voice Analysis done here on ATS, because you had asked for the link.

I know and I appreciate it. The rest of the nonsense was not really meant for you, just the thanks part. My appologies.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by stealthyaroura
Great job on both threads, to me the resemblance to riggle is astounding, everything from his hair/sideburns his cheekbones his nose even the way he wares his cap with the rim bent is telling me this is one and the same person,

Sorry but this seemed like a big joke at first but now it's fantasy turning to deception.

It's clear to me in that last image letthereaderunderstand actually photoshopped the Harley Guy image to stretch his head to make it fit Riggle's more.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/74ce989837f5.jpg[/atsimg]

The shapes of their heads are NOTHING alike so he had to alter the image.

Please be truthful "letthereaderunderstand " and answer whether or not you altered that image to change the shape of his head.

In fact you don't even need to answer becuase it's 100% obvious that you DID.

Why would you do that?

Harley Guy looks more like Peter Brady or the creator of family guy, Seth McFarland than he does Riggle with his big pear shaped head.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fcc0d316af60.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/861753857a49.jpg[/atsimg]

Hell he looks more like Stewie!
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4d1b65d6ceba.jpg[/atsimg]


Don't you guys realize?

It does not even matter who Harley Guy is because he did nothing wrong.

He merely repeated the story that the entire world bought hook line and sinker as if he was deceived by the perps as intended.

Sure he may have been a plant but that is 100% unprovable.

EVEN IF it was Riggle (all though it clearly it is NOT) he would have nothing to lose by admitting it.

There is zero evidence that implicates harley guy.

We HAVE hard evidence implicating a lot of people in fact we have hard evidence that PROVES the cab driver, Lloyde England, was involved.

Not only that but we have his virtual CONFESSION that he was involved and of course we already know his identity.

Zero guesswork.

Search all of Hollywood for Harley Guy look-alikes all you want but once you start photoshopping to make your point and I see it convincing others I can't remain silent.

I'm really suspicious of the motives of the above poster.

As someone who had never heard of 'reggie' before today and has spent a considerable amount of time analysing body movement, gaze and gesture I would say that the harley guy is this 'reggie', even in the photo the above questionable poster posted you can still see the similarities.

The voice analysis did it for me also.

Regards.

reply to post by Loopdaloop


I am extremely suspicious of the folks that read this thread and purposely ignore things like the heights of the two men in question or the simple fact that green screens to not create green shadows. I guess everyone will just believe what they want to and damn the facts if they get in the way.

Originally posted by evil incarnate

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

Harley could have been 4 feet tall, it wouldn't of mattered because he is inserted. Check out Basic Keying by my man Andrew Kramer to see how this is accomplished by even an amateur video enthusiast, though he is not, to get the idea of what is happening in the harley man footage.

Peace

Allright. Here is my last word on this. Do not try to explain green screens to me. You have a website to reference. I can only assume it is because you needed to look for one. Do you know what I do for a living? Let me just say that your little speach is great for someone who just got a copy of adobe after effects but I do not need a lecture on things I have been doing for years from an armchair amature.

Believe whatever you like. I am not telling you what to believe.

My problem is with this one single statement -"Harley man is Rob Riggle." That is guilt without due process. That is libel. That is something he can sue you for saying. Why? Because it is against the law to state that someone has done something they have not.

Here in America, we are innocent until proven guilty. I think you guys need to move to a country that adheres to your guilt until proven innocent ways.

I truly hope you either figure out what it means to be American or get out of my country.

Thank you.

I'm really interested why this guy ^ "evil incarnate" has registered 5 days after the beginning of this thread to rubbish it all.

I sense a guilty conscience coming from here?

Hello Reggie aka harley man? ?

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by Loopdaloop

 

I am extremely suspicious of the folks that read this thread and purposely ignore things like the heights of the two men in question or the simple fact that green screens to not create green shadows. I guess everyone will just believe what they want to and damn the facts if they get in the way.

How can you judge height when you can not see the whole person?
Television cameras distort? There are a whole number of variables that could explain any perceived height distortions.

I am however, more suspicious of you - Mr "don't lecture me, you don't know what I do for a living" registering after this thread had started to rubbish the ideas very adamantly.

PS: With regards to "in america you are innocent until proven guilty" - tell that to those at guantanamo bay.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by Loopdaloop]

reply to post by evil incarnate


Evil, I was actually in the middle of a big long rant about you when I posted my last. I went into my OP on the subject on another tab looking for a quote and saw this Ozzy fellow telling everyone how hard he had worked to prove Humphrey was the guy and that I was a disinfo agent on a disinfo campaign. I don't mean to talk bad against this guy, but his motivation was obvious to me and that is what made me quit.

The truth! I'm a 35 yo man that is unemployed with more problems then anyone wants to hear about. I've sat at this f-ing computer for 2 years searching for the truth. The truth of 911, the truth about God, the truth about anything I could soak up, all except the truth about myself.

A lot of good people are working hard on 9/11. They are doing it for noble causes, but most are doing it for nothing more then their 15 minutes of fame and that is something I can not participate in. I'd be more then happy to exchange my evidence with you if that is what you would like or others privately. I haven't changed what I believe. My senses don't lie to me.

The truth is that in a moment of clarity and retrospect, my agenda was for no one but me, it just wasn't apparent to me until after seeing that guys post, thinking about what you said evil, that I wasn't helping anyone. I have hurt people, especially with my attitude and that is not who I truly am. I love people and I want to help. Repaying evil for evil doesn't work, it just passes the blame.

The info is out there now and if it turns out to be something that can help justice to come about for the ones who have truly lost loved ones, then I hope they receive peace and the justice they see fit. I didn't think about the implications, about the trouble, about the negativity this could cause. I didn't think about hurting Mr. Riggles career or his reputation if he wasn't involved. I didn't think.

I don't care about my freedoms, I'd trade them all if one person could have their family member back....my life isn't worth anything close to one of those firemen or one of those sons or daughters or mothers or fathers that died, not even close. It's not fair that anyone of them who are survived by, go a day in agony while I sit here and argue with you over this while you want proof that can not be provided because the evidence is tampered with. The video is altered and was from the start. Last I checked, tampered evidence doesn't hold up regardless of what "I think".

You are right evil. I've never had a hard time saying I'm wrong when I see it. I strive to be the first one to see it, but I don't always get the first punch. I should not call someone out without absolute concrete evidence and I don't have it, or at least not enough to convince you. If everyone can't be convinced, then there is doubt. No one will ever be able to identify him visually because his face is altered, which you yourself have admitted (that his face is altered), but regardless it doesn't matter, because he is not going to make a difference one way or the other. The only thing good, that I believe could come out of it is that people will know that the media, an arm of our government, doesn't play fair and hopefully be wiser for the next time we are told to squeal like pigs while some guy with a shotgun is calling us boy.

I personally believe it wouldn't matter if we had the past 60 years of conspiracy from Pearl Harbor to Hiroshima, JFK to RFK, The Apollo Missions to the ISS, if all came out this moment for people to know the truth. Nothing is going to change, it's going to get worse until people stop believing what they see on TV, what they see in pictures, what politicians tell them and wake up to the world that they alone can verify for themselves, giving no credence nor garnering an opinion over things that they have no part in.

As long as we shift responsibility away from what we alone affect, we affect nothing and are as "clay in the potters hand". People crusade in the name of invisible men and kill real men fighting over invisible ones. People believe in disclosure of alien life, but don't believe aliens with the technology to travel billions of years to get here, wouldn't or couldn't just disclose themselves, as if they would need an alliance with anyone to appear. People believe the earth is a ball, completely going against everything that their senses tell them to be true, nor can verify with their own eyes, because the government says it is so. To question the obvious is a no no and we are so well trained and conditioned to accept after only 60 years of Television, it slides right in. You can't rape the willing, it's all consensual, we just thought they would leave a little cash on night stand or maybe buy us a new outfit, but we saw what happened to the DC madam.

What do we do when the government is gone? What do we do when justice is granted? Zeitgeist is a nice thought, but it starts with the individual. It starts with me is what people should be saying, not with removing the head, but planting the feet.

My favorite invisible man has some good advice. Build on a solid foundation. That is what has been destroyed in this country and until we recognize the head is nothing with out the feet, we are the hand of our own destruction. I've got bigger fish to fry, then Harley man. I need to start with me....

Peace

Originally posted by Loopdaloop

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by Loopdaloop

 

I am extremely suspicious of the folks that read this thread and purposely ignore things like the heights of the two men in question or the simple fact that green screens to not create green shadows. I guess everyone will just believe what they want to and damn the facts if they get in the way.

How can you judge height when you can not see the whole person?
Television cameras distort? There are a whole number of variables that could explain any perceived height distortions.

Both of the men in question are well known. Their heights can be looked up somewhere I am sure but I have seen both of them many times standing in full shots. I know Rob is far taller. Why would you just toss that out without seriously looking into it yourself?

I am however, more suspicious of you - Mr "don't lecture me, you don't know what I do for a living" registering after this thread had started to rubbish the ideas very adamantly.

Huh?

PS: With regards to "in america you are innocent until proven guilty" - tell that to those at guantanamo bay.

I am so sick of people saying crap like that. I know that it does not always happen and that our justice system is extremely flawed. Unfortunately, I love this country and what it stands for. Just because others are willing to ignore the principles that we stand for does not mean that I should. Do you think that it is ok for you to abuse people because others do it too?

Originally posted by Loopdaloop
I'm really interested why this guy ^ "evil incarnate" has registered 5 days after the beginning of this thread to rubbish it all.

I sense a guilty conscience coming from here?

Hello Reggie aka harley man? ?

Really?

How and why is that suspicious?

I could have registered 3 days after. Would that have been different? How about 10 days? Why is 5 so special? I do not get how you come to you conclusions but if you are trying to call me on something, just man up and do it.

reply to post by letthereaderunderstand


That is all I wanted to hear. You are not certain because you have no proof. I only objected to the fact that people such as you were simply stating he was Rob Riggle. Looks like would have been fine but you said it was with no proof. It is that kind of thinking that puts innocent people in jail. America is dying slowly and you seem more than willing to help it sink.

Originally posted by evil incarnate
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

That is all I wanted to hear. You are not certain because you have no proof. I only objected to the fact that people such as you were simply stating he was Rob Riggle. Looks like would have been fine but you said it was with no proof. It is that kind of thinking that puts innocent people in jail. America is dying slowly and you seem more than willing to help it sink.

I know that is what you wanted to hear...that's why I said it. "Thinking" doesn't put people in jail, corruption does.

America isn't sinking friend, she is 20000 leagues under the sea and as dead as a corps...pun fully intended.

The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone's pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

"The Constitution for the united states of America".

The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.

Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn't. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment.

Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me — and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the "organic" Constitution, we now have "relative" rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereign's right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a "privilege" which we must be licensed to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution.

So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word "Sovereign," we must think about what the word means.

According to Webster's Dictionary, "sovereign" is defined as: 1. chief or highest; supreme. 2. Supreme in power, superior in position to all others. 3. Independent of, and unlimited by, any other, possessing or entitled to, original and independent authority or jurisdiction.

In other words, our government was created by and for "sovereigns" — the free citizens who were deemed the highest authority. Only the People can be sovereign — remember that. Government cannot be sovereign. We can also look to the Declaration of Independence, where we read: "government is subject to the consent of the governed" — that's supposed to be us, the sovereigns. Do you feel like a sovereign nowadays? I don't.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a constitutional historian to figure out that this is not what is happening in our country today. Government in these times is NOT subject to the consent of the governed. Rather, the governed are subject to the whim and greed of the corporation, which has stretched its tentacles beyond the ten-mile-square parcel of land known as the District of Columbia — encroaching into every state of the Republic. Mind you, the corporation has NO jurisdiction outside of the District of Columbia. THEY just want you to think it does.

You see, you are presumed to know the law. This is ironic because as a people, we are taught basically nothing about the law in school. We are made to memorize obscure factoids and paragraphs here and there, such as the Preamble, and they gloss over the Bill of Rights. But we are not told about the law. Nor do our corporate government schools delve into the Constitution in any great depth. After all, they were put into place to indoctrinate and dumb down the masses — not to teach us anything. We were not told that we were sold-out to foreign interests and made beneficiaries of the debt incurred by Congress to the international bankers. For generations, American citizens have had the bulk of their earnings confiscated to pay on a massive debt that they, as a People, did not incur. There are many, many things the People have not been told. How do you feel about being made a beneficiary of somebody else's massive debt without your knowledge or consent? Are we gonna keep going along with this??

When you hear some individuals say that the Constitution is null and void, think about how our government has transformed over time from a municipal or service-oriented entity to a corporate or profit-oriented entity. We are living under the myth that this is lawful, but it is not. We are being ruled by a "de facto," or unlawful, form of government — the corporate body of the death-mongers — The Controllers.

With the passage of the Act of 1871, a series of subtle and overt deceptions were set in motion — all in conjunction and collusion with the Congress, who knowingly and deliberately sold the People down the river. Did they tell you this in government school? I doubt it. They were too busy drumming the fictional version of history into your brain — and mine. By failing to disclose what THEY did to the American People, the people became ignorant of what was happening. Over time, the Republic took it on the chin to the point of a knockdown. With the surrender of their gold in 1933, the People essentially surrendered their law. I don't suppose you were taught THAT in school either. That's because our REAL history is hidden from us. This is the way Roman Civil Law works — and our form of governance today is based upon Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law — better known as the "Divine Right of Kings" and "Law of the Seas", respectively. This explains a lot. Roman Civil Law was fully established in the original colonies even before our nation began and is also known as private international law.

The government which was created for the District of Columbia via the Act of 1871 operates under Private International Law, and not Common Law, which was the law of the Constitutional Republic. This is very important to note since it impacts all Americans in concrete ways. You must recognize that private international law is only applicable within the District of Columbia and NOT in the other states of the Union. The various arms of the corporation are known as "departments" such as the Judiciary, Justice and Treasury. You recognize those names? Yes, you do! But they are not what you assume them to be. These "departments" all belong to the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. They do NOT belong to you and me under the corporate constitution and its various amendments that operate outside of the Constitutional Republic.

Who owns you.
continued...