Once upon a time before the year 1066 the people
of England held Allodial title to their land. Not even the
king could take the land for not paying a tithe. William the
Conquer came in 1066 and stole the Kings Title and took the
land of the people. From William I, 1066, to King John, 1199,
England was in dire straits. It was bankrupt.
The King invoked the Law of Mortmain, the dead
man's hand, so people couldn't pass their land on to the church
or anyone else without the King's permission, (modern day
probate?). Without Mortmain the King would lose the land he
controlled. The Vatican didn't like that because the King
owed a lot of pounds to the Vatican.(WHY?)(1). King John refused
to accept The Vatican's representative, Stephen Langton, whom
Pope Innocent III installed to rule England(religious or in
fact?)(2) In 1208 England was placed under Papal interdict(?).
Interdict means a prohibition.)
King John was excommunicated and in trying to regain his
stature he groveled before the Pope and returned the title
to his kingdoms of England and Ireland to the Pope as vassals,
and swore submission and loyalty to him. King John accepted
Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, and offered the Pope
a vassal's bond of fealty and homage. Two months later, in
July of 1213, King John was absolved of excommunication, at
Winchester, by the returned Archbishop of Canterbury, Langton.
On October 3, 1213, by treaty, King John ratified his surrender
of his kingdoms to the Pope, as Vicar of Christ who claimed
ownership of everything and everyone on earth as tradition.
Question 1. Where in the Bible did Jesus give any man this
kind of power over all men and land? He didn't. He did not
create a religion nor did he create the office of Pope.
Question 2. Can you have a third party break a contract
between you and another person under duress..? Don't those
of you who are forced into a contract reserve all your rights
under modern UCC 1-207 and claim UCC 1-103?
The contract (treaty of 1213) was between two parties. Now
the Barons of England would not put up with being slaves anymore
so they took to the sword and made King John sign the Magna
Charta. So doesn't this act of the Barons violate the principle
of natural law, when they created the Magna Charta, as having
no force and effect upon a contract between two parties? Well
Pope Innocent III, the other contracting party thought so,
for he declared the Magna Charta to be: ". . .unlawful
and unjust as it is base and shameful. . . whereby the Apostolic
See is brought into contempt, the Royal Prerogative diminished,
the English outraged, and the whole enterprise of the Crusade
greatly imperiled." Quoted from G.R.C. Davis: Magna Charta.
Trustee of the British Museum. London. 1965.
The Pope, in order to introduce strife in England and Ireland
that would help him, used Jesus teachings to his advantage
that is verified in the Gospels by two of His Apostles. So
St. Levy (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27), alias Matthew, cites Jesus
at Matthew 10::34-36 and Luke 12:49, 51-3. Nothing reveals
the antithesis of government and religion more clearly than
these facts.
Question 3. What did the contract of 1213 A.D. create? A
TRUST or CONTRACT. Only the two parties, the King's heirs
and the Pope, can break the contract. For the Trust /Contract
cannot be broken as long as there are heirs to both sides
of the contract.
At this time in history we now know who controlled the Kings
of England and the land of the world. For Now we have the
Pope claiming the whole Western Hemisphere besides Europe.
The Holy See of Antioch ruled all the easterly side and the
Holy See of Alexandria ruled the western side, so there was
a conflict. (3)
So, on with the story. The King's explorers had come to America
to claim dominion over land by deceiving and murdering the natives,
the American Indians. The King operated under the treaty of
1213 and everything was going along okay until the 1770's when
the bunch of rogues called the "Founding Fathers"
decided they wanted the benefits but not pay the taxes to the
King. They, being lawyers, and professional educated men, didn't
know they were still under the Pope's control? Their lies and
fraud now would affect the American colonies and the people
who lived on the land.
Those common people who fought in the American Revolution were
unaware that the 1213 treaty still ruled despite the fact they
THOUGHT the Magna Charta was a viable piece of work.(4) The
Declaration of Rights in 1689 declared the Rights of the British
subjects in England. At the end of the English Declaration it
stated at Section III " ...that should any of the Rights
just mentioned be in violation of the HOLY ALLIANCE (1213 Treaty),
...it is as if this Declaration was never written".
So we know that the English Declaration didn't fly, so what
makes you think the 1774 Declaration of Rights in this British
Colony would work. Weren't these people doing the same thing
as the Barons did in 1215 A.D. to King John? A contract is
a contract. Look at Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 of the
U.S. Constitution. Can anyone obligate a contract? Were the
"founding fathers" trying to obligate a contract
between two parties that still have heirs living today?
Question 4. How important is the "ultimate benefactor",
the Pope, The HOLY SEE, in the scheme of things? Move through
history till modern times and pull Public Law 88-244, which
follows Public Law 88-243 - the institution of the law- merchants
Uniform Commercial Code. Are you shocked that the Pope is
listed in this Public Law?
Doesn't the United States have an ambassador in the Vatican?
Why? Is it a government like all other nations such as France,
Japan, Spain or Brazil? The Vatican runs the world, it controls
the British Crown. Is it any wonder they separate man's Church
and government? They don't talk about the Lord Almighty's Church
(government) do they.(5) "Organized churches" are
given special tax privileges because the Vatican dictates to
the sixty United States trustees through the trust document,
the U.S. Constitution created by the 1783 treaty between the
King, frontman for the Vatican, and Adams, Hartly, Laurens,
& Franklin who were operating for the King and not the people
of America. Look at Article VI of the Constitution for the United
States for your answer as stated in the "New History of
America".(6)
You see we are still under the Pope who rules over all nations
as he declared he did back in 1213. The 1783 Treaty did say
in the opening statement quoted exactly as it appears in olde
English; "It having pleafed the Divine Providence to
difpofe the hearts of the Moft Serene and Moft Porent Prince,
George the Third, by the grace of God, King of the Great Britain,
France and Ireland, Defender, of the Faith , Duke of Brunfwick
and Laurenberg, Arch-Treafurer and PRINCE ELECTOR OF THE HOLY
ROMAN EMPIRE, & C. AND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
. . .."
(Emphasis added in caps).
Did you catch the last few words? This is from a King (man)
who can supposedly make no claim over the United States of America
because he was defeated? The King claims God gave him the almighty
power to say that no man can ever own property because it, "goes
against the tenets of his church, the Vatican/Holy Roman Empire,
because the King is the "Elector of the Holy Roman Empire’"
What about the secret Treaty of Verona, made the 22nd of November,
1822, which shows the power of the Pope and the Vatican's interest
in the US Republic.
Here is part of The Secret Treaty of Verona. "The undersigned
specially authorized to make some additions to the treaty
of the Holy Alliance, after having exchanged their respective
credentials, have agreed as follows:
ARTICLE I. The high contracting powers being convinced that
the system of representative government is equally as incompatible
with the monarchial principles as the maxim of the sovereignty
of the people with the divine right, engage mutually, in the
most solemn manner to use all their efforts to put an end
to the system of representative governments, in what ever
country it may exist in Europe, and to prevent its being introduced
in those countries where it is not yet known.
ARTICLE 2. As it cannot be doubted that the liberty of the
press is the most powerful means used by the pretended supporters
of the rights of nations to the detriment of those of princes,
the high contracting parties promise reciprocally to adopt
all proper measures to suppress it, not only in their own
state but also in the rest of Europe.
ARTICLE 3. Convinced that the principles of religion contribute
most powerfully to keep nations in the state of passive obedience
which they owe to their princes, the high contracting parties
declare it to be their intention to sustain in their respective
states, those measures which the clergy may adopt with the
aim of ameliorating their own interests, so intimately connected
with the preservation of the authority of the princes; and
the contracting powers join in offering their thanks to the
Pope for what he has already done for them, and solicit his
constant cooperation in their views of submitting the nations."
Do we have a false God before us and worship him and his church
instead of the real Lord, Jesus and his government. The divine
right of kings exists in Clinton and every Governor of the states
in corporate Union. Well let me go on record and say that the
Lord gave me the same right as the Pope claims was given to
him. Am I not a Steward upon the land of the Lord as a mere
sojourner, the same as the Pope? Are not you also a Steward?
Did the Lord make a covenant with Adam and Eve to subdue the
earth and reign over the animals and to populate the earth?
Doesn't that contract still exist? And doesn't it exist with
you also? And we, the true believers in that contract, can we
take all the nations (mans) laws in the world and dump them
in the ocean to regain our rightful place on this earth under
the Lord's Natural Law to thwart the contract between King John
and the Pope that appears to defeat the original contract the
Lord made with man?
Yes, let us go back to the original contract and destroy the
Vatican's control over everybody. Before 1066 the Pope did not
claim all the land as the people claimed the land and didn't
pay taxes on it to anybody. Didn't the Lord say to the people
after coming out of Egypt, "why do you want a king when
you have me and my contract?" Which Lord do you want to
live under, a Pope, a King, President, Governors, Senators,
Representatives, or a real Lord called Jesus Christ. "Christians,"
are ridiculed and put down because they read the Word of the
Lord correctly and could defeat even the best the Pope has to
throw at them.
The King James version of the Bible is just that. A version
concocted by the King under the guidance of the Pope so as to
hide the real truth. I was taught by the church I went to, which
is government controlled as it has to be by the treaty of 1213
and reiterated in the 1783 Treaty between The Pope's Elector,
King John and the First President of the United States, Sam
Huntington and Charles Thompson, Secretary. I read the passage,
when Jesus was on the cross, from a very old manuscript that
said, "Forgive them NOT, for they know what they do."
This is different than what most people believe he said, "Forgive
them for they know not what they do." Bottom line is that
when men write, transcribe, translate, update, and copy over
thousands of years they always alter the interpretation, words
and insert their own meanings. You can see this in just the
200 years that our country became separated from England, but
still remains a colony under different compact and use of clever
wording. But that is another whole subject that you do not know
about.
Eminent domain and Allodial title:
Why and where did "eminent domain" rear its ugly
head? Right after the King's government was formed here in
America. Eminent domain replaced the Law of Mortmain of England
and when government wanted your land they claimed eminent
domain thereby destroying that to what people think they have
allodial title. Allodial title only existed in America when
the King granted the use of the land to the likes of William
Penn, .........
But it could be taken at any time. Are you or were your great,
great, great grandfathers ever free to hold land that could
never be taken away? Ask some of today's farmers and see how
many lost their farms to the government that belonged to their
past family and I'll bet none of the land goes back to the 1789
era. Well it's a wonderful world to live in the end times, isn't
it. Read Revelations to see where the false preachers come from.
Who is the "Harlot" in Revelations?
Does the Vatican come close with a mortal calling himself the
"vicar" of Christ?
Here is the definition of vicar in Webster's 1828 American
Dictionary of the English Language.
Vicar: "In a general sense, a person deputed or authorized
to perform the functions of another; a substitute in office."
The Pope PRETENDS to be vicar of Jesus Christ on earth.
Pretend; To hold out as a false appearance; to offer something
feigned instead of that which is real; To exhibit as a cover
for something hidden."
You bet your life the Pope has something to hide. He is no
more powerful than You. The King is no more powerful than You.
The American President and Governor's are no more powerful than
You. You allow THEM run your lives ...WHY.?
Thinkers, you cannot fight the Pope or the King on their contract
even though you are affected by the contract. You must go elsewhere
for relief. Remember the first contract in history, God with
Adam and Eve? You had better because you were a part of it as
an heir and it is your saving grace. Why do you think the "courts
of common law" are despised and Government and States are
taking action to stop them? See where the power lies when this
happens? Clinton, the Governors, and Congress of the United
States and the Legislatures of the several states are only following
orders and delegate to the 60 U.S. Trustees, who always show
up in bankruptcy generated mostly by IRS actions. Isn't that
a starting point?
What do Trustees administer? A trust? The Constitution is a
trust, correct? It was created by the 1783 Treaty, correct?
It is not the private man's trust contract, correct? Only those
entering into the contract are UNDER the constitution and are
bound by it, correct? Look up the definition of "under"
in words and phrases and a good dictionary such as Webster's
1828 at Vol. II, 101. I, my dear readers, am not "under"
some damn corporate trust (constitution) drafted in secrecy
by the King and corporate lawyer esquires (you call them the
"Founding Fathers") whom were controlled by the Treaty
of 1213, wherein the Vatican still ruled over all. It was never
"my constitution" and never will be. The Constitution
does not apply to me nor will it ever.
However, some of the states' representatives in 1776 realized
that the Constitution was a commercial contract among the Founding
Fathers to protect their financial interests in the Americas
and in Europe. The Articles of the Bill of Rights is designed
to keep those United States citizens whom are bound by the Constitution
(contract) from encroaching upon my natural Law Rights, (With
this hint in mind you may discover where the IRS gets its purported
power that makes you liable, because you claim to be UNDER the
constitution, but they will never admit it because only a few
know the real reason and they are not about to tell their agents.
The same goes for any license issued to you by the corporate
States). I hope you have read the Supreme Court cases of State
and United States cited in my previous books that prove beyond
any shadow of a doubt I am correct in my previous two sentences.
Yet you always fall back into the trap by claiming citizenship
of the United States AND THE STATES.
No! You are not a citizen of the corporate or organic State
if you want to be free. You cannot claim it is your constitution
and remain free. You cannot claim representatives in the legislatures
and remain free. How about your estate? State and Estate come
from the same contract.
Webster's 1828 Dictionary defines it;
"ESTA'TE, n. 1. In a general sense, fixedness; a condition;
now generally written and pronounced state. (6) The general
interest of business or government; hence a political body;
a commonwealth; a republic.
But in this sense, we now use State." Get the picture?
We are the ryots tenure holding the "estate" of the
King called your estate. Belong to a body politic and you are
a slave. In my previous books I told the people a "republic"
is a fraud, for then you belong to the estate of the King which
makes you a law-merchant holding as a trustee the King's land
that he is holding in trust for the Vatican. The States are
the "estate " of the Vatican/King cabal with the money
changers along for the ride are a full blown consortium which
includes the Congress/President/ Governors et al. I don't want
to drive you crazy, since you might not comprehend all that
is here. Once you know the truth and let go of all you were
taught by the government and the preachers you don't become
the drowning man grasping at the lies to stay afloat. Have you
ever wondered why you were sinking while pleading case law and
their constitution to protect you?
Bye till next time,
The Informer
(1)(WHY?). Because the Pope claimed all lands as the vicar
of Christ and the king owed money from the Vatican that was
to be collected by the Church of England. The church reduced
their parishioners to mere serfdom. When they died the church
got the property and the King, in order to preserve what property
he had instituted the law of Mortmain. This prevented the people
from willing the land to the Pope. When the pope got wind of
this he excommunicated the King. That's the explanation for
the Why?
(2) This is a fact that is documented in the English documents
of History at the Leeds Library.
(3)The conflict between each of the Holy Sees, one controlling
the western front (America) and the other controlling the China
side with the dividing line somewhere in Spain and France through
Germany. The Pope is the figurehead, remember and the best way
to explain it is Congress is Alexandria and the Senate is Antioch.
(4) (Why doesn't the Magna Charta hold more force and effect
than a later contract between the king and the Pope? Because
the Pope decreed it null and void as it would break the contract
he had initiated with the King. The Magna Charta was a contract
breaker by third parties and that was a no-no in any law. Besides
the Pope owned England and how could the Barons take the land
that the King pledged let alone all the surfs that the Pope
still controlled through the church of England? He can't and
so the Magna Charta was declared Void. Now the Pope, through
the front man, The King, could create the other contracts called
treaties and no one is the wiser. Remember, the Pope was being
controlled by the creditor, The Rothschilds to whom the Pope
was indebted.
(5) Why? It is clear as a bell. The "church" of GOD
is 'Government of GOD and man created all these religions and
made churches for them. They, man, cannot allow the Government
of the Lord "Church upon this rock" to get in the
way of the government of men, now can they?
(6) "New History of America", by The Informer
People you can read this for yourself in American Council of
Christian Laymen: "How Red Is The Federal Council of Churches",
Madison, Wisconsin, 1949. Now you may better understand James
Montgomery's latest as to why all the declarations, Magna Charta,
etc. have no effect. Read on to see why.
See: James Montgomery's - "British Colony III" on
the Internet. To further prove what I say that the declared
rights were also at the mercy of any previous charters or
grants from the king of England you must read section 25 of
the 1776 North Carolina Constitution, Declaration of Rights
which states;09"And provided further, that nothing herein
contained shall affect the titles or possessions of individuals
holding or claiming under the laws heretofore in force, or
grants heretofore made by the late King George II, or his
predecessors, or the late lords proprietors, or any of them."
{c 1998 all rights reserved - reprinted by permission}
