I appreciate the follow up. I watched the money masters quite a while ago. My follow up research suggests they missed a lot of the bigger picture, but it is still a great introduction to the topic. Some elaboration on that "missing context" will be found in upcoming sections of my report.
With respect to the other, I agree with all except this sentence:
The United States was meant from the beginning to be a nation of sovereigns as the government was meant to operate with the consent of the governed.
The US gov. was not meant to be a nation of sovereigns, or at least it was not intended that all people who lived in the United States were meant to be recognized as sovereign. It was sold as that, but from the beginning it contained a great deal of fuckery to ensure that that could not ever happen.
As an example of fuckery, look at the end of the 5th amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This makes perfectly clear that the government has the right to take your property. It places the governmental corporation (legal entity) strictly above all of We The People (what you are calling a citizen) of the Treaty's jurisdiction (generally called a "country"). From this precedence all future similar fuckery of claims over a persons inalienable Rights (such as mandatory vaccines) becomes trivially simple.
For an example of how they could have made it actually what you suggest, an explicit statement of "all signatories to this treaty, present and future, are recognized as sovereign." That plus explicit statements of everyone (all of We The People) being a signatory (given the option to enter into the treaty) along with a reasonable exit clause would have prevented almost every single thing that has been tacked on to our system since then.
I appreciate the follow up. I watched the money masters quite a while ago. My follow up research suggests they missed a lot of the bigger picture, but it is still a great introduction to the topic. Some elaboration on that "missing context" will be found in upcoming sections of my report.
With respect to the other, I agree with all except this sentence:
The United States was meant from the beginning to be a nation of sovereigns as the government was meant to operate with the consent of the governed.
The US gov. was not meant to be a nation of sovereigns, or at least it was not intended that all people who lived in the United States were meant to be recognized as sovereign. It was sold as that, but from the beginning it contained a great deal of fuckery to ensure that that could not ever happen.
As an example of fuckery, look at the end of the 5th amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This makes perfectly clear that the government has the right to take your property. It places the governmental corporation (legal entity) strictly above all of We The People (what you are calling a citizen) of the Treaty's jurisdiction (generally called a "country"). From this precedence all future similar fuckery of claims over a persons inalienable Rights (such as mandatory vaccines) becomes trivially simple.
For example of how they could have made it actually what you suggest, an explicit statement of "all signatories to this treaty, present and future, are recognized as sovereign." That plus explicit statements of everyone (all of We The People) being a signatory (given the option to enter into the treaty) along with a reasonable exit clause would have prevented almost every single thing that has been tacked on to our system since then.
I appreciate the follow up. I watched the money masters quite a while ago. My follow up research suggests they missed a lot of the bigger picture, but it is still a great introduction to the topic. Some elaboration on that "missing context" will be found in upcoming sections of my report.
With respect to the other, I agree with all except this sentence:
The United States was meant from the beginning to be a nation of sovereigns as the government was meant to operate with the consent of the governed.
The US gov. was not meant to be a nation of sovereigns, or at least it was not intended that all people who lived in the United States were meant to be recognized as sovereign. It was sold as that, but from the beginning it contained a great deal of fuckery to ensure that that could not ever happen.
As an example of fuckery, look at the end of the 5th amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This makes perfectly clear that the government has the right to take your property. It places the governmental corporation strictly above all of We The People (what you are calling a citizen) of the Treaty's jurisdiction (generally called a "country"). From this precedence all future similar fuckery of claims over a persons inalienable Rights (such as mandatory vaccines) becomes trivially simple.
For example of how they could have made it actually what you suggest, an explicit statement of "all signatories to this treaty, present and future, are recognized as sovereign." That plus explicit statements of everyone (all of We The People) being a signatory (given the option to enter into the treaty) along with a reasonable exit clause would have prevented almost every single thing that has been tacked on to our system since then.
I appreciate the follow up. I watched the money masters quite a while ago. My follow up research suggests they missed a lot of the bigger picture, but it is still a great introduction to the topic. Some elaboration on that "missing context" will be found in upcoming sections of my report.
With respect to the other, I agree with all except this sentence:
The United States was meant from the beginning to be a nation of sovereigns as the government was meant to operate with the consent of the governed.
The US gov. was not meant to be a nation of sovereigns, or at least it was not intended that all people who lived in the United States were meant to be recognized as sovereign. It was sold as that, but from the beginning it contained a great deal of fuckery to ensure that that could not ever happen.
As an example of fuckery, look at the end of the 5th amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This makes perfectly clear that the government has the right to take your property. It places the government strictly above all of We The People (what you are calling a citizen) of the Treaty's jurisdiction (generally called a "country"). From this precedence all future similar fuckery of claims over a persons inalienable Rights (such as mandatory vaccines) becomes trivially simple.
For example of how they could have made it actually what you suggest, an explicit statement of "all signatories to this treaty, present and future, are recognized as sovereign." That plus explicit statements of everyone (all of We The People) being a signatory (given the option to enter into the treaty) along with a reasonable exit clause would have prevented almost every single thing that has been tacked on to our system since then.
I appreciate the follow up. I watched the money masters quite a while ago. My follow up research suggests they missed a lot of the bigger picture, but it is still a great introduction to the topic. Some elaboration on that "missing context" will be found in upcoming sections of my report.
With respect to the other, I agree with all except this sentence:
The United States was meant from the beginning to be a nation of sovereigns as the government was meant to operate with the consent of the governed.
The US gov. was not meant to be a nation of sovereigns, or at least it was not intended that all people who lived in the United States were meant to be recognized as sovereign. It was sold as that, but from the beginning it contained a great deal of fuckery to ensure that that could not ever happen.
As an example of fuckery, look at the end of the 5th amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This makes perfectly clear that the government has the right to take your property. It places the government strictly above all of We The People of the "country" (what you are calling a citizen). From this precedence all future similar fuckery of claims over a persons inalienable Rights (such as mandatory vaccines) becomes trivially simple.
For example of how they could have made it actually what you suggest, an explicit statement of "all signatories to this treaty, present and future, are recognized as sovereign." That plus explicit statements of everyone (all of We The People) being a signatory (given the option to enter into the treaty) along with a reasonable exit clause would have prevented almost every single thing that has been tacked on to our system since then.
I appreciate the follow up. I watched the money masters quite a while ago. My follow up research suggests they missed a lot of the bigger picture, but it is still a great introduction to the topic. Some elaboration on that "missing context" will be found in upcoming sections of my report.
With respect to the other, I agree with all except this sentence:
The United States was meant from the beginning to be a nation of sovereigns as the government was meant to operate with the consent of the governed.
The US gov. was not meant to be a nation of sovereigns, or at least it was not intended that all people who lived in the United States were meant to be recognized as sovereign. It was sold as that, but from the beginning it contained a great deal of fuckery to ensure that that could not ever happen.
As an example of fuckery, look at the end of the 5th amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This makes perfectly clear that the government has the right to take your property. It places the government strictly above all of We The People of the "country" (what you are calling a citizen). From this precedence all future similar fuckery of claims over a persons inalienable Rights (such as mandatory vaccines) becomes trivially simple.
For example of how they could have made it actually what you suggest, an explicit statement of "all signatories to this treaty, present and future, are recognized as sovereign." That plus explicit statements of everyone (all of We The People) being a signatory (given the option to enter into the treaty) along with a reasonable exit clause would have prevented almost every single thing that has been tacked on to our system since then.