The United States is Still a British Colony!

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
The red pill if you dare... I have been asked about the assertion that the British Crown owns the Corporation known as the "United States" that is acting as the De facto government and most believe it is the lawful constitutional government. Note that America is absent from the title. I posted a link to this on another thread but thought this deserved its own thread.

Also note this is not an attack on the British people per say for they are our brethren and subject to the same deceptions and controls we are. This is focused on TPTB who have deceived us and control our lives more then most realize and have been for generations.

This site compiles the evidence for this assertion and is well researched and quit compelling for those who have a desire to search for truth.

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...

"The term citizen was used in Rome to indicate the possession of private civil rights, including those accruing under the Roman family and inheritance law and the Roman contract and property law. All other subjects were peregrines. But in the beginning of the 3d century the distinction was abolished and all subjects were citizens; 1 sel. Essays in Anglo-Amer. L. H. 578." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914.

The king was making a commercial venture when he sent his subjects to America, and used his money and resources to do so. I think you would admit the king had a lawful right to receive gain and prosper from his venture. In the Virginia Charter he declares his sovereignty over the land and his subjects and in paragraph 9 he declares the amount of gold, silver and copper he is to receive if any is found by his subjects. There could have just as easily been none, or his subjects could have been killed by the Indians. This is why this was a valid right of the king (Jure Coronae, "In right of the crown," Black's forth Ed.), the king expended his resources with the risk of total loss.

If you'll notice in paragraph 9 the king declares that all his heirs and successors were to also receive the same amount of gold, silver and copper that he claimed with this Charter. The gold that remained in the colonies was also the kings. He provided the remainder as a benefit for his subjects, which amounted to further use of his capital. You will see in this paper that not only is this valid, but it is still in effect today. If you will read the rest of the Virginia Charter you will see that the king declared the right and exercised the power to regulate every aspect of commerce in his new colony. A license had to be granted for travel connected with transfer of goods (commerce) right down to the furniture they sat on. A great deal of the king's declared property was ceded to America in the Treaty of 1783. I want you to stay focused on the money and the commerce which was not ceded to America.

This brings us to the Declaration of Independence. Our freedom was declared because the king did not fulfill his end of the covenant between king and subject. The main complaint was taxation without representation, which was reaffirmed in the early 1606 Charter granted by the king. It was not a revolt over being subject to the king of England, most wanted the protection and benefits provided by the king. Because of the kings refusal to hear their demands and grant relief, separation from England became the lesser of two evils. The cry of freedom and self determination became the rallying cry for the colonist. The slogan "Don't Tread On Me" was the standard borne by the militias.

The Revolutionary War was fought and concluded when Cornwallis surrendered to Washington at Yorktown. As Americans we have been taught that we defeated the king and won our freedom. The next document I will use is the Treaty of 1783, which will totally contradict our having won the Revolutionary War. (footnote 2).

I want you to notice in the first paragraph that the king refers to himself as prince of the Holy Roman Empire and of the United States. You know from this that the United States did not negotiate this Treaty of peace in a position of strength and victory, but it is obvious that Benjamin Franklin, John Jay and John Adams negotiated a Treaty of further granted privileges from the king of England. Keep this in mind as you study these documents. You also need to understand the players of those that negotiated this Treaty. For the Americans it was Benjamin Franklin Esgr., a great patriot and standard bearer of freedom. Or was he? His title includes Esquire...


Go to the link to read the entire book if you dare...

This book will also make a lot of things that seem backwards make sense, like why BP has free rein in our coastal waters and why our government always seems to do the opposite of what makes sense to us. It is because they do not serve us but thier only loyalty is to their major share holders...

Update: Here is another link to the book also along with some other stuff:

www.atgpress.com...


[edit on 20-6-2010 by hawkiye]




posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
The big white elephant in the room with this conspiracy theory, is that even if this were true, it would have no actual practical impact.

Contracts and Agreements rely on agreement and an executable authority not just for legitimacy, but more importantly, to be enforcable.

So even if someone had a piece of paper stating they owned the USA, it would mean nothing.

What a silly, half baked theory. All it does is draw you in with a long chain of carefully chosen half truths and out of context facts untill you are so convinced and/or confused, that you forget that it would be meaningless.

About as much use as the native americans claim.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
If you're still our colony, you owe us a lot of back taxes haha! Seriously though this has been gone over before and it's not the case. Currently HRM Queen Elizabeth II is monarch of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and Saint Kitts and Nevis. She makes no claim to the United States and the United States does not recognize her as queen.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   
something like that:
www.serendipity.li...



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.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReluctantShaman
The big white elephant in the room with this conspiracy theory, is that even if this were true, it would have no actual practical impact.

Contracts and Agreements rely on agreement and an executable authority not just for legitimacy, but more importantly, to be enforcable.

So even if someone had a piece of paper stating they owned the USA, it would mean nothing.

What a silly, half baked theory. All it does is draw you in with a long chain of carefully chosen half truths and out of context facts untill you are so convinced and/or confused, that you forget that it would be meaningless.

About as much use as the native americans claim.


I love it when people claim something is untrue without reading it nor even attempting to refute the evidence. America was a business venture for the Crown pure and simple and still is, not so hard to fathom.

The contracts are being inforced every day, did you file your taxes?

And to the poster who said if true we owe a lot of back taxes well your not far off except we have been paying them since the late 1700's but in this day and age it's called income tax.



[edit on 20-6-2010 by hawkiye]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I'll be reading this.

Be back some day with an opinion...



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   
To all you Brits out there....I dont know if we are still your colony or not, but that whole revolutionary war thing....settled 200 years ago, ok? You didn't have to go all Sadam Hussein Scortched Earth tactic and ruin our beautiful gulf.

Bad form sir, bad form!



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   


I love it when people claim something is untrue without reading it and even attempting to refute the evidence. America was a business venture for the Crown pure and simple and still is, not so hard to fathom.



And with the US owning the largest military on the globe, how is this supposed to work? What exactly does the British crown threaten the USA with, should it fail to honour this business venture?



The contracts are being unforced every day, did you file your taxes?


No. I do not live in the US. Why would you automatically assume so when this is a pretty international board?



And to the poster who said if true we owe a lot of back taxes well your not far off except we have been paying them since the late 1700's it's called income tax.


And you believe these taxes are then sent to the British royal family??



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by conspiracyguru
To all you Brits out there....I dont know if we are still your colony or not, but that whole revolutionary war thing....settled 200 years ago, ok? You didn't have to go all Sadam Hussein Scortched Earth tactic and ruin our beautiful gulf.

Bad form sir, bad form!


Was it settled? If we won the war for independence why did Britain dictates terms and demand war reparations and payment for existing contracts and we agreed to pay? If we just won our independence the slate should have been wiped clean as the spoils of victory no one should have been dictating terms to us much less the losers. What happened is Britain realized it was getting too expensive so agreed to cease physical hostilities if we would pay the agreed amounts on the contracts starting with the Virgina Charter and several other.

Why did Britain come against us again in 1812? Because we were going to renege on the original agreement and so they resumed the physical war and burned our capital to the ground along with all our founding documents. So we acquiesced again.

[edit on 20-6-2010 by hawkiye]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Good thread Hawkiye! I must confess though, it doesn't matter particularly whether our country is technically still a British colony. I still have my natural rights which no man or woman can ever take from myself or anyone else. They are not given by men nor can they be taken by men. They are my rights as a human being. Of course they include my right to happiness which in my case means I follow my own rules
Good thread nonetheless thanks for the reading material! S&F.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ReluctantShaman
 



And with the US owning the largest military on the globe, how is this supposed to work? What exactly does the British crown threaten the USA with, should it fail to honour this business venture?


With economic meltdown via the banking cartels which we are seeing they have the power to do now, albeit it is to implement world government this time but never the less we see the power wielded by controlling the monetary systems of the world. The British Crown learned that they can control the world more easily through financial means and contracts then via war. Now they enlist Americans to fight thier wars and have them believing they are fighting for thier own freedom. But that facad is finally starting to crack.


No. I do not live in the US. Why would you automatically assume so when this is a pretty international board?


But you still pay taxes don't you? America is not he only country owned By Britain. Most of the world is.



And you believe these taxes are then sent to the British royal family??


This is why it is prudent to read something first before trying to argue against it without garnering it's knowledge and evidence then you can attempt an informed argument instead of shooting from the hip so to speak.


[edit on 20-6-2010 by hawkiye]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Is the USA a British Colony? not quite, but your still not going to like the answer.
The Crown that owns Virginia(USA) is the administrative corporation of the City of London, a state independent of Great Britain and wholly owned by the Pontiff of Rome.
The Crown of Great Britain is a sub-corporation of the Crown of the City of London.
The CEO of the Crown of the City of London is the Pontifex Maximus.
The land of Virginia(USA) is leased to the United States of America.
The United States of America is a corporation.
When you agree to take a social security number, you have agreed to surrender your sovereignty to become a franchise of the United States.
So you see the Pope owns the USA!
If you want to know more of where you stand you should read Jordan Maxwell.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   
This is something that has apparently been widely misinterpreted and taken out of context.

I'm working on better understanding it myself but information is kind of scarce on the subject.

But "United States", as defined in that title pertains to federal, while "United States of America" pertains to states. Thats a US Marshal, not a USA Marshal. US Post Office, not USA Post Office. Federal entities, not state entities.

"Corporation" does not explicitly mean a business.


corporation - A group of persons acting under a legal charter recognizing them as a separate unit with rights, privileges, and liabilities to act as if they were a single person


Do some research, this has been going around since atleast 1997 and noone has figured this out?

I know legal documents can get confusing with wording. But you have to learn to dig on your own, the information I found wasn't easy to find. But the truth rarely is.

The United States of America is not a corporation. The United States, is.

[edit on 6/20/2010 by ThaLoccster]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Is the USA a British Colony? not quite, but your still not going to like the answer.
The Crown that owns Virginia(USA) is the administrative corporation of the City of London, a state independent of Great Britain and wholly owned by the Pontiff of Rome.
The Crown of Great Britain is a sub-corporation of the Crown of the City of London.
The CEO of the Crown of the City of London is the Pontifex Maximus.
The land of Virginia(USA) is leased to the United States of America.
The United States of America is a corporation.
When you agree to take a social security number, you have agreed to surrender your sovereignty to become a franchise of the United States.
So you see the Pope owns the USA!
If you want to know more of where you stand you should read Jordan Maxwell.


I don't know if you have read the book or not but chances are good a large portion of the information you state had it origins in this book.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


that site is one fo the most laughable things i've read in a long time.

The united states declared its own independence.

Say what you will, but it's not a British colony...i'd say every historical document in existence can back that up.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by hawkiye
 

The United States of America is a corporation.


If its a corperation, it must have owners, a board of directors, etc. and those owners must recieve shares of the profit of the corperation.

Who Are the Owners? Who Inherited the Ownership? Where are the certificates of ownership?

I tried studying this a little bit and I could only get so far...the corperation in legal documents is designated as such by being placed in CAPITAL LETTERS. I tried to trace instances of the use of this as far back as I could and it appears the official name was changed to THE UNITED STATES or THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA from its former name which was THE UNITED COLONIES or THE UNITED COLONIES OF AMERICA. The references to this entity..THE UNITED COLONIES...are buried in the journals and minutes of the continental congress...which is not wholly complete.

However there is an entity called THE UNITED COLONIES that involved Massachuttsettes and a few others from the 1600's which is detailed here...is it the origin? I don't know...so the quest for the and owners of this Corpus or legal entity continues...

avalon.law.yale.edu...



[edit on 20-6-2010 by conspiracyguru]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiyeWhy did Britain come against us again in 1812? Because we were going to renege on the original agreement and so they resumed the physical war and burned our capital to the ground along with all our founding documents. So we acquiesced again.


I always thought that the US declared war on Britain in 1812, following a string of ill-advised naval cock-ups such as the firing of the Leopard on the Chesapeake when she tried to stop the British Captain from pressing American seamen.

Having started doing a little more reading on the subject, a period I find fascinating mainly because of the naval dimension, I find that it was a lot more complicated than that. Still, it was a declaration of war from Congress that sealed the deal, mainly in an attempt to take what became Canada from British control.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by hawkiye
 


that site is one fo the most laughable things i've read in a long time.

The united states declared its own independence.

Say what you will, but it's not a British colony...i'd say every historical document in existence can back that up.


So perhaps you could be more specific about the sites references and evidence as to what you feel is incorrect and why? It would help to actually read the book instead of dismissing it out of hand and making blanket statements based on lack of information.


[edit on 20-6-2010 by hawkiye]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Nope haven't read the book.
Just recommending that you do.
I know this from my studies into the origins of common law, the law of the land and the law of the sea.
US laws are derived from British laws.
The information has been around long before the books of Jordan Maxwell.
I will ignore your roundabout way of accusing me of plagiarism.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Here is another site with a load more information for you Hawkiye. Some of the connections seem a little tenuous, on the face of it (still have to read the whole thing) but though you might be interested.....

www.lifeinthemix2.co.uk...

The government and legal system of the United States is totally controlled by the Crown. I have also stated that the British Monarch is not the Crown. The Crown is the Inner City of London, which is an independent State in London belonging to the Vatican system. It is a banking cartel which has a massive system around and beneath, which hides its true power The City is in fact the Knights Templar Church, also known as the Crown Temple or Crown Templar, and is located between Fleet Street and Victoria Embankment. The Temple grounds are also home to the Crown Offices at Crown Office Row.

The CrownTemple controls the Global ‘Legal’ system, including those in the United States, Canada, Australia, and much more; this is because all Bar Associations are franchises of the International Bar Association at the Inns of Court at CrownTemple based at Chancery Lane in London. All Bar Associations are franchises of the Crown and all Bar Attorneys/ Barristers throughout the world pledge a solemn oath to the Temple, even though many may not be aware that this is what they are doing. Bar Association ‘licensed’ Solicitors / Barristers must keep to their Oath, Pledge and terms of allegiance to the CrownTemple if they are to be “called to the Bar” and work in the legal profession. The ruling Monarch is also subordinate to the Crown Temple, this as been so since the reign of King John in the 13th century when Royal Sovereignty was transferred to the Crown Temple and, through this, to the Roman Church. King John 1167-1216 is the key to this deception.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join