To negate this was the Treaty of 1783 declaring independence from Great Britain. However, this Treaty identifies the King/Queen of England as the Prince of the United States
This is pure bullshit.
A simple text analysis will show that. Especially, when one would take into consideration certain title conventions. (See Entitlement to rule by Stephen Baca) The peace treaty of Paris, finalized in 1789 was a reconciliation where the independence was acknowledged, but eh .... unfortunately, the operations from the City of London in relation to the revolutionary debt were already in operation. Enter: Hamilton.
I'm a layman in this sphere so I defer to your ability to delve into the minutiae. Much of the article certainly aligned with what I've picked up in adjacent works (Tragedy & Hope, Creature from Jekyll Island) as well as from learned associates who study the ways of the world in much more depth than me (particularly those dangerous Fabian and communist ways of the world). I have also done my own explorations down the secret society and power family rabbit holes etc. I knew there would be much more detail that could be picked apart and as it happens, your observation is also one that stood out for me because regardless of the historical and legal abomination that is DC, I understand and hope that the real United States still are free, and united.
His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.
In this sense the sentence:
It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch- treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings....
In international law (Vattel) reconciliation is everything. As Baca recounts regarding international law sovereignty can be lost in several ways: alienation, acknowledgement, prescription.
Makes much more sense when we simply discard the titles:
It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the [...] Prince George the Third, [...] etc, and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings.
That most elusive of grammar issues: the comma.
For if the claim of being prince of America really would have held true, there are two observations to be made:
The actual title would then have been arch-treasurer and prince elector of the United States. This is a title Georgy never held.
Who is the counter party in the treaty? Nobody?
When a research article on the subject of Cabal (note C. A. B. A. L. as in the 5 ministers of the privy council of Charles the II first letter of their last names, also know as Cabal Cabinet) makes glaring mistakes like this, parroting internet first rate punk idiocies, it does not bode well for the quality of more poignant issues.
As they say: credit comes on foot, goes out by horseback.
When you read the text of the treaty more closely, you will find that the conclusion of the settlement of the war debts was at issue.
An interesting view on this particular issue can be found in this book:
A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind by Stephen Mitford Goodson Page 48.
In 1786 Prime Minister William PiTT the Younger tried to abolish the
national debt with a sinking fund which generated interest of £1
million pounds per annum to repay the debt.[58] This scheme was
soon abandoned because of the enormous increase in loans incurred
to finance the war against Napoléon.
The main actors were the Bank of England in the City of London.
After the American War of Independence (1775-83), which had been fought after the colonists had been forced to replace their debt – and largely interest-free colonial scrip with English money and had resulted in 50% unemployment, the national debt soared to £176 million. (from 50 million!!!! my comment)
So, basically, George was not that potent a Prince after all and tried to safe his ass and throne from the Jewish vulture fraudsters. Deals had to be made. Not only with the English Crown, but also with other royal houses. The effect was both freedom republics: the United States and the Dutch Republic of the 7 Provinces were de facto enslaved to the money master. Hence I mentioned: enter Hamilton, a Rothschild puppet.
This is pure bullshit.
A simple text analysis will show that. Especially, when one would take into consideration certain title conventions. (See Entitlement to rule by Stephen Baca) The peace treaty of Paris, finalized in 1789 was a reconciliation where the independence was acknowledged, but eh .... unfortunately, the operations from the City of London in relation to the revolutionary debt were already in operation. Enter: Hamilton.
I'm a layman in this sphere so I defer to your ability to delve into the minutiae. Much of the article certainly aligned with what I've picked up in adjacent works (Tragedy & Hope, Creature from Jekyll Island) as well as from learned associates who study the ways of the world in much more depth than me (particularly those dangerous Fabian and communist ways of the world). I have also done my own explorations down the secret society and power family rabbit holes etc. I knew there would be much more detail that could be picked apart and as it happens, your observation is also one that stood out for me because regardless of the historical and legal abomination that is DC, I understand and hope that the real United States still are free, and united.
It is so glaringly obvious:
article 1:
In this sense the sentence:
In international law (Vattel) reconciliation is everything. As Baca recounts regarding international law sovereignty can be lost in several ways: alienation, acknowledgement, prescription.
Makes much more sense when we simply discard the titles:
That most elusive of grammar issues: the comma.
For if the claim of being prince of America really would have held true, there are two observations to be made:
When a research article on the subject of Cabal (note C. A. B. A. L. as in the 5 ministers of the privy council of Charles the II first letter of their last names, also know as Cabal Cabinet) makes glaring mistakes like this, parroting internet first rate punk idiocies, it does not bode well for the quality of more poignant issues.
As they say: credit comes on foot, goes out by horseback.
When you read the text of the treaty more closely, you will find that the conclusion of the settlement of the war debts was at issue.
An interesting view on this particular issue can be found in this book: A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind by Stephen Mitford Goodson Page 48.
The main actors were the Bank of England in the City of London.
So, basically, George was not that potent a Prince after all and tried to safe his ass and throne from the Jewish vulture fraudsters. Deals had to be made. Not only with the English Crown, but also with other royal houses. The effect was both freedom republics: the United States and the Dutch Republic of the 7 Provinces were de facto enslaved to the money master. Hence I mentioned: enter Hamilton, a Rothschild puppet.