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.

 

Corporations: Not Persons, but Kings

page: 1
23
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+7 more 
posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Oh, and when convenient, they can also squish themselves down into miniature form and masquerade as actual people.

But they are not people. They fake it, by using corporate defense lawyers.

In fact, since actual breathing and en-souled people like you and me, cannot inflate ourselves to the level of these great companies as Plymouth Company and so forth, then it is absurd to allow them, to occupy our humble station. They are Bishops, Barons and Kings, and they are above us.

And that is why the American Revolution Part Deux, will cast off all Kings, just like the first one did. No person or gathering of persons, is allowed to achieve a station higher than any other person, in America. That is the way of the Native systems of peace as Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine borrowed from the Algonquin Great Peacemaker and the peaceful first nations --who did NOT need the "help" of King James or any of his witchburning ilk.

So this nobility called corporations or "company", is a titled being, totally unwelcome in America, where we do not have titles. Yes I know I sound crazy, but titles today come through corporate jobs (read: selling your soul for money) which is anathema to the original nations of this land. Selling ones soul for gold or title, is not the way of the original Americans, and so this trans-oceanic royalty that changes shape into modern form, will have no purchase in the future. Too much damage has been done by these "superior persons" called corporations and/or companies. And as history shows, they were funded by Jewish Barons (Hoffjude on Wiki) and the Kings like Charles and James, who were clearly out of their loving minds.

So rather than play into the media by accepting their framing of the "are corporations persons?" debate, call their bluff and answer "Corporations are Kings(Bondsman-class) with Human Resources(Bonded Slaves) for motive power." because that is the truth. And last time I checked, we do not allow titled persons to be part of America, nor should we.
edit on 15-8-2011 by smallpeeps because: splng




posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
All corporatism is can be considered the ribirth of the monarchies.
The gap between rich and poor and the control by govts, corporations and banking systems mirrors the old monarch systems of old almost perfectly.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
No person or gathering of persons, is allowed to achieve a station higher than any other person


*APPLAUSE*

i'll star and flag you for this alone


beautiful how you worded this



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Notice please, that witchburnings in scotland and copenhagen, were the direct genesis, via the madness of King James, to what became "US History".

This thing we call "US History" is all due to the mad mind of one King, James I, who essentially said in his own writings, that the people should obey all tyrants gladly and with a smile (1598 "True Law of Free Monarchies"). If you do not know this, then I ask you to please take a vow of silence and never speak about anything ever again until you understand this fact.

The Plymouth "Adventures" --which is legally and truthfully what they were, pure adventure, were based on mental illness, which could not be diagnosed until our time, using the scalpel and diagnosis tool called "The Internet". Essentially the Internet is the tool by which we can easily NOW AND FINALLY diagnose that the Kings of Europe were lunatics. They decided to wage adventure and witchburning, on a pristine land they called "Virgin-yeah!" and they proceeded to rape that virgin, via the machine called "The Company". The King, creates The Company.

Witchburnings as what James I of England (Protestant) began in his own country around 1590, and later his US adventure companies (Plymouth Company 1606, Royal African Company 1660, etc), are the indicators of a sick mind. But you must understand that both James and his Catholic nemeses agreed that witches needed to be burned, just that the Catholics went about it in a much more legalistic way (inquisitions). Well also it was a fight for the witch-blood, because as you may know, gold can be coined from bloood, and of course the Pope and the King must fight for that gold that drips from the witch and her severed limbs. Yes, it is the ruin of any justice on Earth, to misunderstand this coining of gold from human blood.

So the whole manufactured Jacobean "Reprisal" wave against the Catholics which James wrought, is merely just a disagreement about HOW and with what legal proceedings, witches may be burned. That's all, it is never a question of "Shall we burn other humans?" NO it is never a question of that.

Person-hunts, burnings, incapacitation/incarcerations, pogroms and organized hate-fests be they political, or religious or corporate (infighting and horrible humans within these corporations) are all designed to produce a state in the adherent, volitionally participating human, a mental trance state of obedience. It is meant to produce a certain mindset, in those doing the hunting. And it was this kind of deep illness, which floated onto the US territories, in seek of corporate and therefore royally funded "adventure".

The Plymouth Company was a joint stock company formed by James around 1606, he was envious of the Dutch West India Comapny and went to war with the Dutch for the right to exploit African slaves and gold. Anyway, the King, has the ultimate racket. And that racket, is the company form. The stock markets are where that form hangs its skin. Through this puppet, the King and his court do act.

And James was a crafty Scot, so he unleashed two Companies, and overlapped their jurisdiction so as to create a tag-team effect on the natives. If you examine the crest of the Plymouth Company you will see the Massachusett's indian but in the Plymouth crest there is a banner over his head that says "Please come help us!" ...And that is what the indian in the Massachusetts flag is meant to mean: We were supposed to help the indians.

So have we done that? Have we helped the indians which was ostensibly the goal of the companies?

No, for the rise of the post civil-war corporate forms, have created the most bloody and violent century ever known to man, with the enablement of titanic-sized sacrificial altars called global battlefields, where the brightest young live were snuffed out, from Gettysburg to Iwo to Da Nang to Falujah --All wars funded by the same bankers that fund both sides as if Kings, and using their instrument, the company/corporation.

It is the Kingly power (illegal in America and forbidden by law), that these corporate persons grab for. It is the ultimate power of the feifdom-state, that these collections of "boardmembers and shareholders" adhere to, in their quest for a slightly bigger government cracker than their neighbor. They do not seek to be equal to the common man and woman --except to defraud these same. They are titled, illegal powers operating cruelly and are the enemies of humanity and of the Earth.

There are some ideas that are just plain lies. One of those is that "idle hands do the devil's work." No, for as you can see over the last 500 years, it is busy hands that do the devil's work. And so when you realize that King James and everything about him and all his peers, was designed to work evil on the US lands. And today, one must have a SSN to have a job, if they are lucky. Slavery is a cherished gem by people like James, and like his merchant-class barons. They lost slavery for a brief moment but it has only taken new forms called corporations and the future of slavery look very bright, wouldn't you say? Here's hoping you get a job because those who donot have one may as well be runaway slaves or outlaws like Robin Hood, in the future now forming.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
I was thinking about this earlier today, and it really pisses me off. Corporations are not people, they are demigods. They have the power of 100,000 giants!

They don't need a degree, they don't need to eat, they don't need a doctor, but boy do they need lawyers! They have the power to enslave the "little people" as they chant the corporate hymn "You deserve a break today!"

I have been thinking about the defunding of NASA and the privatization of space. It is a scarey thought to think that Haliburton could control the moon or the resources collected, in the future of course, from asteroids or even Mars. There is no "freedom of information" from corporations. Anything discovered in space by a private corporation isn't required to be releaed to the public, heck not even their stockholders are required disclosure of their discoveries.

The pharmacudicals aren't required to release "the cure" if they have one.

If Bank of America sees someone drowning they have no responsibilty to aid them. Corporations are imune from human emotion and any sense of religious morality that our governments promote so intensly. They have no need for the 10 Commanments that our politicians want posted in public court houses.

It really gets my dander up when I think about the Supreme Court's ruling. I feel ripped off as an American and the future of our youth looks bleak, to say the least, at the hands of corporations.

Let the revolution begin!



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Thought this was apt.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Made more relevant when a leading candidate for POTUS exclaims "corporations are people, too".

Romney: ‘Corporations Are People, My Friend’

Sure, really really powerful people that can subvert government for it's own purposes.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by kn0wh0w

Originally posted by smallpeeps
No person or gathering of persons, is allowed to achieve a station higher than any other person


*APPLAUSE*

i'll star and flag you for this alone


beautiful how you worded this




Thanks!

Oh yes, for it is simply not possible for me to give up my power, therefore, how can the government claim that they represent me, versus you? I did not give them that power, so from where do they claim it? It is silly.

My feeling is that no person can ever give up their power, slavery is coercion. Even indentured servants have chosen volitionally, to cooperate. Whenever you are not setting the masters house on fire, you are relenting somewhat. PROOF of this idea is that when the system (all corporations, no actual people) sends you a notice via the courts (collection, etc, etc,) it starts a clock that you MUST rebutt or respond to. They can attach the flypaper of "the people" onto you, and make you come into court, or face theft of your property, attachments to wages, etc. They use this idea of "the people" as a weapon, and yet you and I, ARE THE PEOPLE.

In fact, it is folly and stupidness, to suggest that there can ever be anything such as a social contract. Contract law precedes Constitutional Law and a good contract must have disclosure, that is never going to be altered because everyone knows an oath and a handshake is the basis for any contract. But these corporate systems, violate contract law, because none of us have agreed to give up our power, so they simply cannot operate on any presumed social contract.

And presumption, of course, is the name of the game. It is a fact that these muni-bank-courts all presume in their actions. They presume as a rule, and it is up to you, to rebut them or reply. They will eventually force every American to testify against themselves, without that American ever having uttered a single word. You see, we testify against ourselves when we use Federal Reserve Notes. Every time you accept a FRN, you accept the debt of a foreign corporation who has subsumed our Treasury. Check it out on the web, Federal Reserve Bank is a Company owned by Rothschild, Warburg, Lazard --foreign companies that only pretend masquerade as families and humans. They are ruled by their own lust for power.

I was born onto American lands and all we had was FRNs. I have learned that companies rule this world, including theone that took over our nation's money and convinced us that debt is more useful and empowering than value. Debt is not value, and yet this "corporate person" group, can buy YOUR personal debt and trade it (therefore trading YOU) like an asset!

I will go on if anyone likes. There are a lot of ways to take this thread. I'd like to discuss Congress adjourning Sin Die in 1861 because I do believe the civil war never officially ended. The Civil War was won by the US Corporation, but what gives that corporation the power over the US? Isn't it just another form of Kingly power?

And also, why does this group called the "Bar-risters Association" which seems to be totally un American in nature and genesis, get to control our courts from the bench and the bar? What gives these men through their fraternity, the right to use companys as weapons against us? Wouldn't we like court to be a place where good things happen? In fact, the courts are where the victim's wounds are sold like a marketplace. There are many ways to coin gold from blood.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
I was thinking about this earlier today, and it really pisses me off. Corporations are not people, they are demigods. They have the power of 100,000 giants!

[...]

Let the revolution begin!


Yes indeed, just as you say. But of course that is the right of higher classes of "persons", that they get the advantage of so-called "limited liability".

Who wants liability, right? It sucks!

Then somebody chimes in, "Oh but limited liability forms, allow investment and building which otherwise could not get funded!" to which I say GOOD because these buildings and crap should not be done, particularly if empowered by an evil spirit!

Let us ask ourselves if going as fast as possible is always the best route. I say, no, it is better to take a slow and measured route. When you are an Indian chief trying to see your tribe onward, you need to set a pace that the grannies and the older horses and kids can all keep up with. So I would say that we need to pace ourselves, but first we need to dis-empower any class of persons who thinks they are better than a single human being.

I left in your final comment about "revolution". I'd like to hear your thoughts on the subject. Because whereas the company forms are a tool of the rich, "revolutions" are the tools of the nihilist, so in both cases, watch for game being played by both forces.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
The "revolution" has to occur in the halls of justice and at the ballot box. SCOTUS ruled that corporations are people. SCOTUS is appointed by the president elect, with the approval of congress. This is where the revolution must begin.

We need to put people in power who will not be swayed by corporations to create laws that beniefit them and only them. It's a long shot, but hopefully the future will force these issues of corruption to the light of day, so blatantly, that the cycle will turn.

Fingers crossed for wishing, not lying!



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
As for a revolution, the focus needs to be on corporations accepting their social responsibility www.nancho.net... . Obama has tried to introduce this, but the courts and oligarchy have been shutting him down. The issue of impact studies before gas drilling is one example of this. Public elections are not going to make much a difference when the president is already ignored.

Getting 9/11 reinvestigated will get a lot of the rot and corruption out of the system and give the public the wake up call it so desperately needs. Otherwise as the law of the jungle takes over the law of reason there will not be much of a public left.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by smallpeeps
 

Normally I would read through the thread before replying.
But before I do I just want to say, off with their heads.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by TerryMcGuire
reply to post by smallpeeps
 

Normally I would read through the thread before replying.
But before I do I just want to say, off with their heads.


Haha, its okay, I read it for you.

But as for the beheadings, well, it's not my way personally, to deprive people of their head, and I hope they will leave me mine. Well, ACTUAL PEOPLE I mean.

But to behead corporations, sounds fun. This would entail, what, a boardroom-sized guillotine that severs the empowered (and consciounce-free) boardroom from the actual company? Nah, even then it wouldn't work, because these boardmembers are like roaches who will scurry into some other corporate persons' head. They constantly fellate each other and protect each other, these boardmembers and shareholders.

In essence, the NYSE is a dead thing. Goldman Suck frontruns the market with superfast computers. Also, once stock in a company wasn't about owning that company, but became all about trading shares (speculation on price) then the market itself, became a casino, nothing to do with the rules on their face.

I was a licensed stockbroker before I was 20 years old and I left that business in my first year, walking away from a future of enrichment-via-theft. I couldn't steal money from people, so I left that trade completely. I saw the feebleness of the SEC firsthand. Most stocks are manipulated by the brokerage houses and fund managers anyway. The whole concept of a market as it stands today, where people trade "shares" in company-devouring behemoths like Google and M$, is a giant casino. Even when Bernie Made-off with his particular loot-bag, people stil don't get wise. As Bernie says "The whole thing is a pyramid scheme".

So what can you do if the company you like, is populated with Bernies at the top teir? You have to know that only the soulless scumsucking types attain the levels of super rich. That is the way of Mammon, the God of Gold. You may also understand that Mammon is the same as Molech, that is to say, your children become a sacrifice for Mammon, if you follow them. Like how House Rothschild requires its human resources (their children) to join the cause. If a Rothschild scion does not engage in destroying the world by raising tyrants and supporting both sides in war (as is their modus operandi), then they would be shunned and castigated within their own family no doubt. So really, rather than the guillotine for these confused ones, I think maybe they should be shown how to love, and how to create a good family free from love of money. Love of money as a central family tenet, produces a sick kind of family. Notice in the Godfather movies that for all the blah blah about "family", the whole family of Corleones gets decimated, Sonny, Freido, Papa and even the granddaughter, all gunned down mercilessly. Is that what families aspire to? It really is a tragic set of films those three. But at least a decent gangster like Michael Corleone can achieve his final goal: He becomes a Knight of Malta! Haha, priceless.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
ESSENTIAL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS POST.



Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Made more relevant when a leading candidate for POTUS exclaims "corporations are people, too".

Romney: ‘Corporations Are People, My Friend’

Sure, really really powerful people that can subvert government for it's own purposes.
t'


That's true. They use a different language but don't tell us. That language is legalese. 'Person' in legalese means 'a legal entity' - hence, a corporation is a 'person' in legalese. It's all part of the web of deceit which has been woven to trick us into doing their bidding. In legalese the name registered on our birth certificate is also a 'legal entity', it's not us, we are 'man' but when they register the birth the government creates a 'legal entity' with our name. That 'legal entity' is also a 'corporation'.

They don't tell us this, of course, because that bc is also our share certificate - we're all shareholders in the 'common wealth'

It's really important that people learn about this huge scam which is designed to keep us ignorant of the truth, of our real role in the US/UK Corporations, and keep us believing they have authority over us.

See these videos to start to get an idea of basics of what's really going on here. It cuts through a lot of the confusion.


edit on 16-8-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-8-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-8-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Good stuff there about Sovereignty, thanks!

I figured I'd flesh out the stuff I mentioned above:

King James Holding the sword and the Holy Hand Grenade:

^^^ Does this guy look like someone you can trust not to be totally insane?

The Seal of the Massachusetts Bay Colony

"Come Over Here And Help Us!" ...YEAH RIGHT. Exactly what did they need help with? Well Escaping damnation of course, according to the mental illnesses present in Europe at that time! Sick minds obsessed with the Calvin/Luther/Papist dialectic and the fraudulent "splitting" which was done to encircle the globe in this BS conflict between insane people.

4 Dudes dressed like Indians carrying the "burning heart" of John Calvin, a horrific person, also mentally sick with visions of hellfire and urgent salvation schemes upon everyone but himselfe. Asshead!


And to explain the graphic above, here is some context:


en.wikipedia.org...

Calvin's theology is best known for his doctrine of (double) predestination, which held that God had, from all eternity, providentially foreordained who would be saved (the elect) and likewise who would be damned (the reprobate). Predestination was not the dominant idea in Calvin's works, but it would seemingly become so for many of his Reformed successors.[49]

^^^ You read that part above? What a moron! It's like he's creating a Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme based on HEAVEN? The nerve of this man and all who adhere to him! God is very angry at all this I assume, but God is also merciful to the mentally ill, to a point...

And here is a great one, the Virginia State Seal, where the Roman Goddess (same as on many State Seals like California for example) of wisdom, Minerva, or in this case, is "virtu" (point is that its all Romanic in nature) is humbling the British Kingly powers who disallowed Westward "adventure". So when James became King of England around 1603, it was "Dvininty" that had made it happen (inside his sick head I mean), and that gave him a mandate --an ORDER FROM GOD in his sick mind, to go "help" the natives of the New World. Oh I mean, use them for "Adventures"...





en.wikipedia.org...

The obverse of the seal is the official seal of Virginia and is used on all the official papers and documents of the Commonwealth's government, as well as on its flag. On this side, a female figure personifying the Roman virtue of Virtus was selected to represent the genius of the new Commonwealth. Virginia's Virtus is a figure of peace, standing in a pose which indicates a battle already won. She rests on her long spear, its point turned downward to the ground. Her other weapon, a parazonium, is sheathed; it is the sword of authority rather than that of combat. Virtus is typically shown with a bare left breast; this is commonly recognized as the only use of nudity among the seals of the U.S. states.

Tyranny lies prostrate beneath the foot of Virtus, symbolizing Great Britain's defeat by Virginia. The royal crown which has fallen to the ground beside him symbolizes the new republic's release from the monarchical control of Great Britain; Virginia and New York are the only U.S. states with a flag or seal displaying a crown. The broken chain in Tyranny's left hand represents Virginia's freedom from Britain's restriction of colonial trade and westward expansion. The useless whip in his right hand signifies Virginia's relief from the torturing whip of acts of punishment such as the Intolerable Acts. His robe is purple, a reference to Julius Caesar and the Etruscan king of Rome, Tarquinius Priscus.


Haha, can you see the absurdity of the drama in the words above?

It is King versus King. And the "Companies of Adventure" which accomplished all this, are the same in form and goals and manners, as the corporations of today.

Corporations are the super-human, and we regular little folks had best toe the line, OR ELSE the madness of King James, or worse, his nemesis the Pope, will rain down on our heads.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen


Hey thanks for this video, good stuff!

However, I would caution people to take at least a few years of research, before stepping in front of any court and using advanced self defense tactics. However, since you are giving me seriously awesome wood to carve here, I will carve it as I see it.

He mentions that there's "800 gurus on youtube" and so forth ..So he correctly identifies the current pool of available info. I am glad for that, and also that he is correctly explaining basic points.

He is right first premise which is that man is created sovereign by the Creator of nature, earth, all that we see. If you stick with that, the rest falls into place. This is because, Marxists tactics are by their nature, obverse to this idea. They cannot ever agree with you, if you state your first premise as "creator made you sovereign". Nature says it is so (though Kings deny it), but nature itself is the nemesis of Karl Marx. [Also Marx was secretly a Jesuit agent imo. No way he wrote that manifesto, he and Engels were King-killing agents inserted into Russia, and they removed one of the most powerful dynasties on Earth. The papists had wanted to accomplish that objective (removing the Tzar) for centuries and they used non-belief to do it.]

So on his first point, I agree, rights come from nature which says we are all equal, nobody can compel or be compelled. As I explained above, I cannot give up my self, so no body can represent "the people" with me in that set of persons, against you, because the "me" part of those "people" whose mantle is taken up against you, didn't agree to that. I have no problem with you, so no court can call me as part of the people who have a problem with you. Nobody can compel or be compelled to testify against themselves, certainly not the people as an imagined "whole" being used in this way against the individual components called "individuals".

He mentions very correctly that CONTRACT LAW is whole basis for human relations, not to mention any Constitutions or Compacts. He is also correct @ 9:20 when he says the so called "straw man" is actual all based on presumption, he is correct. I agree with this man 100% as he describes the presumption. It can mean ANYTHING, until they get you to agree to their presumption. He describes it correctly, very nice.

Also he then goes to the word "person", and explains that they have redefined it. Now in my opinion, it's essentially "verbal combat via definition", which only lawyers enjoy, meaning it is harrassment against the non-titled, regular people (lawyers have illegal titles given by foreign powers). Destruction of the language of the people, imo, is war against the people. But yep, this guy's right about irrelevancy of these side issues. It is all about presumed authority, which we then buy into.

He is correct to say, "Until rebutted, all presumptions stand." That's the violence of the courts, they take the power of the people and then use it against the individual people. Unless you rebutt their presumptions. But the true violence of the law-weapon is discovered when you rebutt the presumptions, and learn how to do that, they will quickly be forced to rebutt EVERYTHING and they will put you on thier little list that brings more presumption down onto you. The minute you choose to un-relent or to resist, then it brings a whole heap of hell down onto you, so my advice is to be like doves, and play it cool. If you know you are right, then it is no cost to let the cop or judge have their ego.

So good video here, but I would caution against outright intellectual warfare as this man is explaining, until you are prepared to go to jail for two or three days, as he says he was willing to do. That's basically the rubber-meets-the-road moment of his battle plan. Once they arrest and book you, yet you hold your ground and you insist on the right grounds that they don't have jurisdiction because you do not consent to the presumptions being made, they must release you. However the authority (those who get a mortgage and jetski from this process, aka clerks, cops, judges, lawyers, etc, etc anyone who gets PAID for this evil) knows that they can use threats of prison rape, and of further charges, and so forth, they use the fear in the system, to make you relent to their presumptions. It's all they have, if you look closely. but yes, if you are not afraid and you hold your ground, you can squeak through and they'll leave you alone, like this dude in the video.

However, if you trip up anywhere along the way, they will hurt you severely. This is subtle violence, and they use Sheriffs (all paid legally) to take your stuff, hassle you, etc. A lot of people are happy to have a King, if he pays them a suitable paycheck.

That means that calling out to God, you'll then take on the same fight as Jesus himself, which is to resist the lawyers. However Jesus said his yoke is light, so I feel that by resisting the lawyers as he did, we gain a much higher awareness of being free. That is why he was called Phos Anthropos, the light inside mankind. If you have that light, you do not need legal advisers or Pharisees of any kind.

Also please not that Satan offered Jesus, the whole world which obviously meant Jerusalem as well. Jesus' beloved city, could have been saved if he would just play ball with Satan. Satan's offer was very cheap! One act of worship for the whole world?! Wow! But Jesus told him to step off, because God was in control of Earth, not him. Satan then proceeded to use his Roman army to destroy Jerusalem, just to spite Jesus. And the lawyers of Jesus' time, did not listen to his encouragement to NOT bond with Satan. Jesus (likely a rabbi himself) said "Flee you morons!" and they didn't. In fact they told the people to stay in the city, and they were utterly ravaged as a result. And then these pharisees led their few followers up to a "Jonestown" type place called "Masada" where they had no choice but to finally jump off the cliffs.

Funny though, that after this, Rabbi Akiva and Co. managed to rebuild the Jerusalem >< Babylon silk roads and they built the Babylon talmud and their hatred of Jesus, into an even higher pitch. Did they feel any remorse for leading their own people to utter devestation? No they did not. And today, many people are destined for a "Masada" type feeling, and if they would just detatch from the lawyers, they'd probably find safer roads.

Well anyway, to bring it back to the point: Kings used companies as tools and they still do today. Just ask Michael Corleone in Godfather Part III where the vatican bank is used to launder the mob's money! That was a true story if you've done your history work. And what did Jesus do with the moneychangers in his father's temple? Hmm. I only mention is because King James was such a burning "Christian". I would like to keep it non-religious like all the Marxist atmospheres of these corporations of today, you know, religion ain't cool at work. But since King James, original CEO, was so big on Jesus (or so he claimed) then I feel its topical.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by smallpeeps
 


Relatively unmentioned in all our talk above is the role of the "Court Jesters" and courtly festival events, the jousts and races.

Our "hero" worship is a heavy burden which though tantalizing, shackles us to this system of titles. The big title I see is the title of "Best" The best singer, the best swimmer, the best at anything. This term is drummed into us all day throughout our lives.

There are the coordinated jousts, which easily determine the best at something. We all line up and agree that the best football team wins the Super Bowl. The winner of the race is the best. These are simple coronations which appeal to a certain element of the hero worshiper.

The title of "Best Court Jester" is not so easily determined. The coronation of these people is ever more insidious.
The best singer has not in the past been such a clear hero as the best runner. The best singer demands a personal relationship with the hero. I know you are the best even though others may not. This is because I have a better understanding of what good is, of what best means. Elvis was the best. The Beatles were the best. Both judgments based on the worshipers own sense of self value. As we become judges we then become part of the court and give the crown more authority over us.

The crown uses this system of entertainment to enslave us. Queen for a Day. Would this not be a good place to start in throwing off the yoke of the kings system? Rejecting the star system?

I have my heros and I thrill to the talent of many. I even buy cds and go to the movies. Guilty. But I am no fan of this system which filters that talent through the lens profitability. Geesssee, what a scam.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Hmm okay I have watched this ^^^ dude's second video, and I have two issues with his presentation.

1: He says in his second video "The Courts KNOW you are sovereign by God" and he dismisses this as something irrelevant to the court testimony. I disagree with him here, though I know he would clarify, and so we are not really in disagreement except that as I explained, Marxist philosophy of dis-belief in nature, means that his presumption about the posture or attitude of the court, is hopeful and I think, naive.

2: Then he says "Corporations derive from "trust law", which the Romans had long ago" and on this point he is right. I would like to comment on this however. First, let me say I am not an attorney and this is not legal advice. But I am allowed to give spiritual advice. So when we consider a thing, we must consider the word. Here the word is "trust". Let us consider what wiki says under trust law:



en.wikipedia.org...

History

Roman law had a well-developed concept of the trust (fideicommissum) in terms of "testamentary trusts" created by wills but never developed the concept of the "inter vivos trust" that applied while the creator was still alive. This was created by later common law jurisdictions.


Okay let's stop right there. First, you can see the origin here of why people used the word trust or fidei (Latin for trust I guess) when it comes to what happens to your wealth when you die. FIRST POINT HERE: Trust has its primary definition in human death. First, one must be removed from the picture, to invoke the need for trust, for if i were not dead, then I do not need to trust. Please understand this core maxim of the origin of so called trust law: It is basically a shackle against those who would steal from dead men's estates. TRUTH. And later on, it became a tool to be used on behalf of the living. The trick is explained right here in the above paragraph.

So continuing on through this Wiki entry...



Personal trust law developed in England at the time of the Crusades, during the 12th and 13th centuries.[citation needed]

At the time, land ownership in England was based on the feudal system. When a landowner left England to fight in the Crusades, he needed someone to run his estate in his absence, often to pay and receive feudal dues. To achieve this, he would convey ownership of his lands to an acquaintance, on the understanding that the ownership would be conveyed back on his return. However, Crusaders would often return to find the legal owners' refusal to hand over the property.

Unfortunately for the Crusader, English law did not recognize his claim. As far as the courts were concerned, the land belonged to the trustee, who was under no obligation to return it. The Crusader had no legal claim. The disgruntled Crusader would then petition the king, who would refer the matter to his Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor could do what was "just" and "equitable", and had the power to decide a case according to his conscience. At this time, the principle of equity was born.

The Lord Chancellor would consider it unjust that the legal owner could deny the claims of the Crusader (the "true" owner). Therefore, he would find in favor of the returning Crusader. Over time, it became known that the Lord Chancellor's court (the Court of Chancery) would continually recognize the claim of a returning Crusader. The legal owner would hold the land for the benefit of the original owner, and would be compelled to convey it back to him when requested. The Crusader was the "beneficiary" and the friend the "trustee". The term use of land was coined, and in time developed into what we now know as a trust.


Okay so obviously then, the simple way to sketch truth is to say that the Crusades (Abrahamic BS war Jesus-versus Mohammed) were the genesis of the other religious crusades like what James I waged against the native Americans. Probably James and his backers would have preferred a Saladin-type like Crazy Horse to row out to their ships and start lobbing disease --surely they had the same battleplan. But no, it was just a bunch of peaceful and jolly naked indians. I am sure they were both disappointed and bemused.

Continuing on through this Wiki entry [posted here for criticism only, all rights reserved by all applicable and enforceable statues and codes of course]



Also, the Primogeniture system could be considered as a form of trust. In Primogeniture system, the first born male inherited all the property and "usually assumes the responsibility of trusteeship of the property and of adjudicating attendant disputes." [1]

The waqf is an equivalent institution in Islamic law, restricted to charitable trusts.


Interesting points above, about primogeniture, which is not really the tradition of all human tribes. Let us consider the biblical example of the "birthright" of Isaac, which Rebekka assisted her favorite son (Jacob) to gain? Now tell me: If the mother conspires to support her favorite son, is it primogeniture? Also please note that my question pertains to Sharia Law as Isaac's birthright might be seen as a corrolary to his brother (Ishmael)'s birthright, yes? And then we must ask quite plainly, what birthright is this, and what kinds of birthrights can exist? I am sure King James the Scotland Chieftain could prattle on for days about his own birthright, but what was Isaac's birthright. And most importantly, what is YOUR birthright?

And so what is the significance of these matters?



Significance

The trust is widely considered to be the most innovative contribution to the English legal system.[4] Today, trusts play a significant role in all common law systems, and their success has led some civil law jurisdictions to incorporate trusts into their civil codes. France, for example, recently added a similar though-not-quite-comparable notion to its own law with la fiducie,[5] which was modified in 2009;[6] la fiducie, unlike the trust, is a contract. Trusts are recognized internationally under the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition which also regulates conflict of trusts.

Although trusts are often associated with intrafamily wealth transfers, they have become very important in American capital markets, particularly through pension funds (essentially always trusts) and mutual funds (often trusts).[2]


Okay so as you can see, the nature of the snake, is to take the mangled term "trust" and then further mangle it into a contract. It is no surprise that the French lead the way, as they did with their original Code-Tyrant Napoleon, tool of Rothschild. Napoleon, like all stupid tyrants, caused him own grand army to be destroyed due to his foolishness. His own country: Destroyed. Yet to his talmud-loving backers whose original intent was more law more codes more globo-control, the results were quite profitable. Have you heard that Napoleon was said to have considered hiding out in Louis-iana? I could go into which Kings were madder, Louis or the Stuarts, but as a Scot ancestor myself, it is inappropriate for me to side against my own countrymen in the matter, so I exclude myself from that question. Suffice it to say that all those monarchs were nuts, and let's now move into the modern age, free from witch burnings of any kind, and where courts and companies are always beneficial to all humans. We can accomplish this goal easily. Feel free to ask me any questions you like, if no questions I'll use this dude's videos to make my point because he is sticking to the facts pretty much and is explaining company forms.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TerryMcGuire
reply to post by smallpeeps
 

Relatively unmentioned in all our talk above is the role of the "Court Jesters"


Funny you should mention that! I have a bottom-dwelling thread on ATS somewhere titled "Conspiracy Against the Jesters". I will dredge it up for you. Thanks, awesome post I agree with you! Ren-fest can basically become a new type of American government, as strange as that sounds!




posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by smallpeeps
 


Yes they sure are. And like Kings they make average people break their own morals and values, in the promise for a paycheck. A paycheck to feed your family. So we break our morals and values to feed our families. If we are really good we can be rewarded when we lie for the company under oath in a lawsuit. We may even get a promotion.

Corporations are like the exact system of the beast described in the bible. It has the ability to deceive and enslave you to doing harm to each other.




top topics



 
23
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join