It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

the usa is still owned by the crown

page: 3
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 


Is it really ALL LIES ?

Have you ever looked at the title to the home you supposedly own and why it says you are not owner but tenant ?

This leads back to the ownership of the land, now called the United States of America by the original Corporation who took ownership of the land when the first Virginia Settlement was funded by the British Crown.

Have you ever noticed the gold fringe on the Flag adorning our Military servicemen or found in any US Courtroom ?

Of what significance is the Gold Fringe bordering the flag?

It is our Military Flag.

The significance of this is that the flag of the military and those found in all US courtrooms are also bordered in Gold which represents not the original constitution and it's subsequent laws but what the flag represents is the court is representing Maritime Law.

Maritime Law or The law of Commerce, which being represented in all US courts, essentially supersedes our Constitution with Maritime Law, or The Uniform Commercial Code. Or at least whenever you enter a courtroom and upon answering the mere question as to stating your name, you are now contracted to the said court and it's subsequent laws. Or the UCC.

This is what ties back to what the video is inferring and the fact that our history of our nation and it being formed based upon corporations which were funded and owned by the British.

And still are today.

Here is a reference to UCC at Cornell Law School.
www.law.cornell.edu...

This is how many of our "Freedoms" have been taken away and why we have so many regulations and statutes ruling our lives today.

You can grab the scroll button with the mouse and slide it forward a few minutes past all of that annoying dribble.

I WOULD highly recommend at least listening to the information.
You do not have to BELIEVE it but in actuality , the ultimate form of Ignorance is rejection of something that you know nothing about.
If you sincerely doubt it then prove it wrong by researching it on your own.

The Truth Shall Set You Free




posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
This is absolutely true!

Apparently what we consider Independence Day is not actually a Declaration of Independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain. It was an "agreed" contract between USA/Britain.

Since USA was not able to win the war (out numbered by Britain’s army), they made an agreement which was based on USA accepting a contract where by the new government had to be created based on “debt”. This business (corporation) will require funding to be created and expanded. Britain made the biggest contract of it’s history, based on the agreement to end the war, USA “had” to borrow all it’s funding from Bank of England and had to pay back with interest (something to for every Pound USA had to pay back Pound and a half). This means that for how ever years this agreement was for, that USA is “technically” owned by the Bank of England.

Since the debt was never paid back (including interest rate). This was obviously known by both parties that for this to get paid back, USA HAS to be making tons of money (by exporting and what not). The problem is (which we can clearly see now) this debt is not will never bee paid back, since the interest rate is so high and USA has almost very little or no profit system. Most countries make profit by “exporting resources” say, China (products), India (services) and Middle East (oil and many other food resources), USA economy works opposite then majority of the countries, which is completely based on consumer products. Which is why materialism is so big in western world…. They depend on me and you to BUY their product… this will maintain the existence of current economy. The down fall is that this will not nearly create the full amount owed plus interest. Which means as long as USA foundation is created based on debt, the organization (Bank of England) owns the entire country.

Sounds fiction, but think about it. If you were to buy a house you don’t technically own your own home… the bank owns your home, until it’s paid back fully plus interest. There is massive 6-8 hour documentary that I posted a while back, a chapter in it discusses this in much more details and how about the USA was created…. Very… very interesting.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
If this is the case, why are we so broke? surely we should be living in luxury from all the massive debt payments the USA is pumping into our treasury?



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I was completely unfamiliar with the various statutes of independence until I read the OP, but it is probably true, but like a lot of legal truths, it doesn't actually amount to anything in reality.
Technically all land in Britain belongs to the Crown. If nobody holds title to a given piece of land it reverts to the Crown. However that is a very big "if". This situation almost never arises - I'm not certain but I suspect it hardly ever happens.
The Crown does not have any arbitrary powers to reclaim it's land, nor could it gain such powers without Act of Parliament. I really don't think American ATS members have much to worry about, HM the Queen will not be sailing up the Potomac wanting her turf back any time soon.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Ah this idea again, well first of all it's all bunk. If it wasn't however you Americans would owe us quite a bit in back taxes to be sure!

However as I said it's simply not true, not at all. The current monarch of Britain, Her Royal Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, is reigning queen of 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.

Furthermore she is the figurehead of all 54 sovereign nations of the Commonwealth, however the United States is covered under neither of these, and the Queen makes absolutely no claim to the US in any way. Thus, there is principally no relation of governance from the royalty at all.

Current relations between the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland and the United States of America are covered under the Special Relationship which is a system of alliances and partnerships that forms the strongest friendship between major powers in the world.

Under the Special Relationship the US and UK recognize each other as fully separate and sovereign nations related only through close partnership in all fields, military alliance and friendship that extends only through international relations.

It is further expected through social more that the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom should strive in earnest effort to form a personal friendship that is largely symbolic of the relations between the US and UK as a whole. This particular tradition extends as far back as Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and has remained unbroken since.

Let me reiterate the key points here:

HRM Queen Elizabeth II does not claim any power over the United States whatsoever

The US and UK recognize each other as fully separate, sovereign countries and nations.

Current UK/US relations are covered under the Special Relationship not any previous agreement prior to that.

Any questions?

Edit: It has been suggested by the United States since President Regan that the Special Relationship is an unbreakable pact, this has been restated by every president subsequent.

In the UK, the view has been constant since WWII that the Special Relationship is the most important bilateral relationship in UK international policy and is the equal to if not superior even to the UK's inclusion in the European Union.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by ProjectJimmy]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


The evidence shows different.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


The evidence shows different.


What evidence? Seriously I am talking about standing international treaties, alliances and other deals, as well as what exactly the Queen has claimed.

I would love to see how your "evidence" is superior to reality. Show me where the Queen claims you, Americans. Show me where the Special Agreement is void. Show me where it states that you are a subject to The Crown.

Where in practice are any of the things you've stated taking place?

Your entire conspiracy is based on smoke and mirrors. The Special Relationship, The Commonwealth Of Nations, those things are real, and in practice.

The evidence of day-to-day workings, as well as all of the current standing relations, show you are wrong. That's a real body of evidence.

Refute me, show me, argue your point. That is how debate works. Do not just dismiss fact by saying you do not like it in one line.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


This seems to be taken from the history of the UK and other nations from the first chapter of a history book. It would suggest that those who have spent years and years researching things, and not via the internet, would have a more in depth analysis of the situation. While it may not be obvious that the crown controls its members states the way it used to, it does not mean it still doesn't. The US, the policeman (policy man) for the world controls entire nations through methods not outlined it its history books (see Perkins' books for insight).

Protoplasmic traveler talks about looking at the language, not what it has morphed into today, but what it meant when the documents are agreements were written. The language tells all, yet for some inexplicable reason folks think the language is the very last thing to mean something, they think the War On Drugs was chosen because it means business, it strikes fear into criminals. It never occurs to them that the choice of the word "war" means something concerning funding, executive orders etc. They just think "war" is a euphemism. If you have ever been to court, you would know there is no such thing as a legal euphemism in any document that is meant to control someone.

When a word is change from "of" to "from" or vice versa it means something!



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by XPLodER
 



hi this is worth a watch


No, it really wasn't. It was more anti-american propaganda.


the information wasnt meant to offend only to open the eyes of people that they do need to study the laws of their country to be able to make it the country it should be

the land of the free and the home of the brave

i think basis in civil and judicial law should be taught in all schools

im in new zealand we are under direct crown control our independance is fake as all decitions are run passed the governer general

please debate the laws and educate people of the results

xploder



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by crankyoldman
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


This seems to be taken from the history of the UK and other nations from the first chapter of a history book. It would suggest that those who have spent years and years researching things, and not via the internet, would have a more in depth analysis of the situation. While it may not be obvious that the crown controls its members states the way it used to, it does not mean it still doesn't. The US, the policeman (policy man) for the world controls entire nations through methods not outlined it its history books (see Perkins' books for insight).

Protoplasmic traveler talks about looking at the language, not what it has morphed into today, but what it meant when the documents are agreements were written. The language tells all, yet for some inexplicable reason folks think the language is the very last thing to mean something, they think the War On Drugs was chosen because it means business, it strikes fear into criminals. It never occurs to them that the choice of the word "war" means something concerning funding, executive orders etc. They just think "war" is a euphemism. If you have ever been to court, you would know there is no such thing as a legal euphemism in any document that is meant to control someone.

When a word is change from "of" to "from" or vice versa it means something!


First and foremost, yes I would say that people whom have spent years studying history, law and politics in a scholarly setting would know far more than someone whom has studied such things on the internet. I would absolutely say that this is true.

I work as a research journalist, primarily in international affairs for a major news organization. To get this job, I went to college and graduate school, I spent years studying, and I spend most of my days now continuing to study.

I write the first draft of history for a living, perhaps that's why my writing sounds so bookish.

I am telling you exactly how the relations between the United Kingdom and United States take place. HRM The Queen has nothing to do with it, either officially or unofficially, and to say that I have to read between the lines on such is simply irresponsible.

What you are asking people to do is to create a conspiracy out of paranoia. You are asking people to believe a delusion because of laziness and fear not out of any facts or realities on relations.

If you start with the pretext of looking for a conspiracy, you're going to find one because your mind is predisposed to do so.

The truth however, can sometimes be exactly what it seems to be, and wrapping your mind around that is often a very difficult thing to do.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by X9ballX
the big question is this. how can we break free from this


you win the prize
how do you make changes to this system

make the next election about these principals
1.corperations may only exist for the benifit of the people
2.treasury must print its own money (end the fed)
3.re ratify the articals of constitution as highest law in the land
4.make people aware some of their tax money is a tribute to crown
5.never allow more than 5% debt to any other forign nation
6.teach basic civil judicial and ucc law in school
7.ban any round table or think tank groups that have tittle over the people

please feel free to debate my opinion

XPLODER



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   
I'd love to think the UK was the puppet-masters of the world. That would be great. Peachy in fact.

Unfortunately, back on planet earth, the UK is a small post imperial democracy, in hock to its eyeballs, suffering all manner of social ills and a bad demographic trend.

If you want to know who owns who and who runs what look at the outcome of the 2nd world war. We only stopped paying off our WW2 financial debt to the US in 2006.

The war debt from the 1st world war still hasn't been paid of and would amount to about 100 billion.

news.bbc.co.uk...

You own us and China owns you thanks to your friend The Fed.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


try looking up the human definition not person

note you may need to look at previous versions as public outrage has caused a change in recent blacks law dictionarys

please dont be offended
study the case law and debate the outcome

i like america

xploder



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Did they already take down the video? Your video seems to be no longer working. did you happen to capture it or even the title in case it pops up somewhere else?

--airspoon



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


heres the link to the original video
www.youtube.com...

and for all others here is another way of understanding this topic
in a less contravertial manner
external linky
www.youtube.com...

we are human stock (capital to be grown traded)

xploder



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
second video on subject more subjective


this is intended to open opinion to the legal points in the first video
if you are offended im sorry this is for educational purposes



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Are you one of the Freemen, or are you just posting a video you found?

It's all pure nonsense. Not to mention the Freemen, the group that spawns most of these nearly identical videos, share nearly all members with groups like the Aryan Nation, the Aryan Brotherhood and operate as organized crime organizations.

This stuff has been around since I was a child through the John Birch Society and more recently the Montana Freemen and Freeman in other areas.

I've dealt with these creeps directly while working in Montana. They are nothing more than a bunch of thieves and liars. Whenever you see these arguments that refer to things like Maritime Law or Admiralty Law, those people are the source.

They flooded me with meaningless books and tapes with the same message, spewed their Racial hatred and bragged about their criminal exploits to me. Why they took such an interest in me I'm unsure, but I had my fill of them really quickly. I had to demand they leave me alone. They threatened my life and ran like scared little girls.

Do some research about them and you will find who and what they really are. High School Diplomas are rare among that bunch. They were doing things like printing fake Deeds to property to try and get out of paying their Mortgages and they even printed fake money a time or three.

They had a terrible time getting them out of Northern Idaho and they still are active in Montana. You will find more than a few of them in the Seattle area as well. Some started out as LaRouche followers.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
in new zealand no one ownes there house its an indefinate lease
but if no will is left aand no one contests the crown reclaims the property

when land becomes a national park it is given to the crown

in america the land is held in trust by the govenment and you are tenants and the reason given is so that clear tittle can be given when sold bought or inhearated

the corperation THE UNITED STATES of AMERICA (caps to denote legal standing) acually owns all the land in the continental united states
eminent domain proves this

the federal reserve was given the right to counterfeit your money for you and charge interest (ie debt money) instead of a soverign money

this federal reserve is a corperation with share holders being some of your (american) banks but who ownes these banks ?

we in new zealand are farmed as human capital
and without most people knowing we pay tribute to the crown

you call it the irs
we call it ird

xploder



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER


this is intended to open opinion to the legal points in the first video
if you are offended im sorry this is for educational purposes


So your not just the messenger as you implied in the OP. Just saying.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


no im not part of any group
just found some videos did a quick cheak on the first few facts and posted to create a debate on subjective interpretation of the information as presented

the eleites in this world are masterful at creating laws and then creating myths to cover these laws up

but the world is still a lawful place we need to self educate to be able to have the rights we think we have

most laws we are entittle to have been miss represented to us and i think some education and debate is required for people to ask

are we the supreame legal entity in the land?
or are we just ships crew on the water?
do we have the right to claim constitutional rights?
does common law still apply to you?

im not trying to push an agenda here just ask questions that may open up a debate that educates or interests people in there legal system

xploder




top topics



 
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join