Religion

Was the U.S. Constitution Written to Protect “We the People” or “We the Globalists”? Were the Founding Fathers Godly Men or Servants of Satan?

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

Studying history is an interesting endeavor, because the people who lived during the historical time period one studies are generally no longer alive to affirm or deny how historical events unfolded.

We are generally left with the writings that were left behind, and the authors who interpret those writings, if written materials even still exist.

It generally comes down to faith, and who you believe to be giving an accurate account of historical facts.

When it comes to the history of the United States, and the activities of the “Founding Fathers” who drafted and wrote documents such as the Declaration of Independence in 1776, or The Constitution of the United States written more than a decade later in 1789, most public and private school educators in the United States are fairly unified in viewing this period of history very positively, as well as taking a positive view of the “Founding Fathers,” and the U.S. Constitution.

It makes perfect sense to have this kind of unified positive view so that the majority of the public in the U.S. will be agreeable to “patriotism” and the belief that the United States is the greatest nation in the world, which is then used to justify government actions such as funding the military to fight wars, and collecting taxes to fund the government.

I was brought up being taught “Conservative Christian” values, and was led to believe that the only way to view American history was from the “Christian” perspective, with the belief that the Founding Fathers were mostly Christians and “Godly men” who were escaping Europe to be able to practice “Freedom of Religion” here in America.

To study American history from any other perspective was considered “wrong”.

However, now that I am older and wiser, I like to seek out alternative views of American history to get a better understanding of the true historical facts, even if those other views of American history are considered the “minority” view.

If a person is so firm in their beliefs about things that happened in the past, then why fear reading alternative perspectives? When truth is the standard that guides us, discovering that truth and believing it should then be able to withstand other views that we believe are not based on the truth.

And if in our study of other perspectives we discover that those ideas that we have held as true, especially in regard to the founding of the United States, are actually not true, then should we not change our views?

Of course that will never happen if one is unwilling to look at the “other side,” which in my opinion is exactly what the Globalists who control the world’s financial system want us to do.

Recently I came across a book written by James A. Beard in 1914 titled: AN ECONOMIC INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

Beard was a professor of politics at Columbia University. Most conservatives and Christians, if they look up his bio, would probably choose not to read this book labeling it as “liberal.”

Another book I recently came across and have been reading and have found to be well-documented and well-written is Founding Fathers, Secret Societies : Freemasons, Illuminati, Rosicrucians, and the decoding of the Great Seal, written by Robert Hieronimus in 2006.

Again, if one were to look up the bio of this author, most Conservatives and Christians would probably choose not to read this one either, labeling the author as something like “New Age” and therefore discrediting everything he wrote.

I have dealt with this label of “New Age” since I started publishing on the Internet over 2 decades ago, and publishing the minority view on health and medicine, especially when I refer to older modalities of healing in things like Traditional Chinese Medicine, which has been around for over 5000 years, or Ayurveda healing from India, which has been around for over 4000 years.

Christians are taught that these modalities are “New Age” and that they need to trust in modern medicine and medical doctors instead.

But of course a body of teaching on health that is thousands of years old should certainly not be referred to as “New” anything, as the true “New Age” teaching on health is the pharmaceutical allopathic model, which has only been around since the late 19th Century.

So if you want to break out of your prejudices and “confirmation bias” ways and truly understand the world today, and especially the role that the United States plays in world events, I strongly encourage you to start reading alternative, less popular works such as these two.

I am going to provide a summary of the topics covered in these and some other works which presents evidence that what most of us have been taught about the founding of the United States and the original founders is probably not true.

The Constitution of the United States: The Country’s First “Reset” of the Financial System that Canceled Debts which Benefited the Globalists

Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States, by Howard Chandler Christy (1940). Source.

I was taught growing up that The Constitution of the United States was one of the greatest documents ever written, protecting the “rights” of “We the People,” and that therefore we are the greatest nation of the world because the laws defined in this document, and then with the later Bill of Rights, protect ordinary people from the over-reach of tyrannical Government actions.

However, James A. Beard in his 1914 book states that the evidence shows just the opposite.

He starts out where everyone should start out when trying to evaluate a legal document such as the U.S. Constitution: Who gets to define “justice” and “freedom”?

In the absence of a critical analysis of legal evolution, all sorts of vague abstractions dominate most of the thinking that is done in  the field of law. The characteristic view of the subject taken by American commentators and lawyers immersed in practical affairs  is perhaps summed up as finely by Carter as by any writer.

“In free, popular states,” he says, “the law springs from and is made by the people; and as the process of building it up consists in  applying, from time to time, to human actions the popular ideal or standard of justice, justice is only interest consulted in the work. . . . The law of England and America has been a pure development proceeding from a constant endeavor to apply to the civil  conduct of men the ever advancing standard of justice.”

In other words, law is made out of some abstract stuff known as “ justice.”

What set the standard in the beginning and why does it advance?

He writes that the purpose of the Constitution as stated by those proposing one was similar to this belief:

The Constitution proceeds from the whole people; the people are the original source of all political authority exercised under it; it  is founded on broad general principles of liberty and government entertained, for some reason, by the whole people and having no reference to the interest or advantage of any particular group or class.

He continues:

Nowhere in the commentaries is there any evidence of the fact that the rules of our fundamental law are designed to protect any  class in its rights, or secure the property of one group against the assaults of another.

“The Constitution,” declares Bancroft, “establishes nothing that interferes with equality and individuality. It knows nothing of  differences by descent, or opinions, of favored classes, or legalized religion, or the political power of property. It leaves the  individual along-side of the individual. … As the sea is made up of drops, American society is composed of separate, free, and  constantly moving atoms, ever in reciprocal action … so that the institutions and laws of the country rise out of the masses of  individual thought, which, like the waters of the ocean, are rolling evermore.”

Beard then brings up the rather obvious fact that not everyone in the American colonies agreed with the proposed Constitution at the time.

It will be admitted without controversy that the Constitution was the creation of a certain number of men, and it was opposed by a  certain number of men.

Suppose that substantially all of the merchants, money lenders, security holders, manufacturers, shippers,  capitalists, and financiers and their professional associates are to be found on one side in support of the Constitution and that  substantially all or the major portion of the opposition came from the non-slaveholding farmers and the debtors — would it not be pretty conclusively demonstrated that our fundamental law was not the product of an abstraction known as “the whole people,”  but of a group of economic interests which must have expected beneficial results from its adoption?

This then is the premise of his book, and the evidence he presents, that those who wrote and adopted The Constitution were those who would benefit from it, namely the “merchants, money lenders, security holders, manufacturers, shippers, and capitalists“, who I refer to as a group usually as “the Globalists”, namely, those who control the financial system.

He then goes on to describe those living in the U.S. at the time who were not part of drafting and ratifying The Constitution from among “we the people“:

In an examination of the structure of American society in 1787, we first encounter four groups whose economic status had a  definite legal expression: the slaves, the indented servants, the mass of men who could not qualify for voting under the property  tests imposed by the state constitutions and laws, and women, disfranchised and subjected to the discriminations of the common  law.

These groups were, therefore, not represented in the Convention which drafted the Constitution…

I found Beard’s book fascinating and enlightening. He provides a lot of information about the financial status of the Founders, how much land they owned, and how much debt they had taken on to fund new enterprises, especially in the eastern coastal cities, and debt through buying up land in the West through “speculation.”

So one of the main benefits of abandoning what was the current law of the land at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and replacing it with The Constitution that established a Federal Government, is that they could trade in their state debts for new stock in the Federal Government.

Shortly after the federal government was established the old debt was converted into a new consolidated, or funded, debt; and holders of public securities, state and continental, brought their papers to their local loan office (one for each state) or to the  Treasury to have them recorded and transformed into the stocks of the new government.

If we may judge from the politics of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation, two related groups were most active: those working for the establishment of a revenue sufficient to discharge the interest and principal of the public debt, and those working for commercial regulations advantageous to personalty (personally owned assets) operations in shipping and manufacturing and in western land speculations.

So The Constitution was the first “Financial Reset” in U.S. history, with several more to come.

I have previously reported how David Webb, a former Freemason and author of The Great Taking, writes about how the Banks were “reset” during the Great Depression:

My Aunt Elizabeth had been ten years old when the banks were closed by executive order in 1933. When I asked her to tell me about the Great Depression, she said that suddenly no one had any money, that even wealthy families had no money and had to take their daughters out of private school because they could not pay the tuition.

I wondered why even these wealthy families could not send their children back to their schools after the banks were reopened.

The answer is that only the Federal Reserve Banks and banks selected by the Federal Reserve were allowed to reopen. (Source.)

Then in the 1970s President Nixon oversaw the next “Reset” of the financial system by taking the U.S. dollar off of the Gold Standard, and the Federal Reserve just printed more money instead.

The next “Great Reset” might be the largest of all. See:

The Beloved “Founding Fathers”

Here are some details about the “Founding Fathers” of the United States who wrote The Constitution with the concept of “Justice and Liberty for All” and are revered as great men, as is evidenced by all the statues and monuments in Washington D.C. and around the nation that bear their names, public holidays in their name, as well as names for schools, streets, etc. (I graduated from “James Madison” high school, for example.)

Everything I am going to reveal here is available publicly, although sometimes you need to do some digging to find it.

First, it is estimated that between 17 to 25 of the 55 delegates who signed The Constitution were owners of slaves. (I guess “justice and liberty for all” didn’t apply to them.)

According to the Gilder Lehrman Institute for American History, “about 25” delegates enslaved people, of the 55 who attended the convention’s proceedings in Philadelphia.

The Constitutional Rights Foundation asserts that 17 of the 55 delegates were enslavers and together held about 1,400 enslaved people.

In addition to identifying James Madison as an enslaver, Signers of the Constitution, published in 1976 by the National Park Service, notes that 11 other signers “owned or managed slave-operated plantations or large farms,” and then it names them: Richard Bassett, John Blair, William Blount, Pierce Butler, Daniel Carroll, Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, Charles Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, John Rutledge, Richard Dobbs Spaight, and George Washington.

It is also known that Benjamin Franklin enslaved people. (Source.)

Secondly, contrary to popular opinions among Conservatives and Christians who want to believe that the Founding Fathers were deeply religious men who were Christians, the evidence actually points to the fact that most of them were members of secret societies that provided the network needed to attain their wealth and political power.

This is where the book Founding Fathers, Secret Societies : Freemasons, Illuminati, Rosicrucians, and the decoding of the Great Seal written by Robert Hieronimus becomes particularly useful.

SECRET SOCIETIES AND THE FOUNDING OF A NATION

Although contemporary historians characterize the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment, respectively, not all of the mental energy of this period was spent in trying to prove that everything in the world operated under predictable laws.

In fact, other underestimated influences on the founders’ ideas were various forms of mysticism, occultism, and Illuminism, which used the tools of astrology, alchemy, and the Kabbalah.

In the colonies, watered-down versions of esoteric teachings could be found in publications known as almanacs. Although not of American origin, the almanacs became more popular here than in the Old World.

Tens of thousands of these almanacs, published  by Nathaniel Ames and Benjamin Franklin, found their way into almost every home, where they were consulted perhaps as  frequently as the Bible.

In fact, Franklin made his fortune through the extremely popular Poor Richard’s Almanac.

Besides  newspapers and the Bible, the almanacs were by and large the colonies’ only generally disseminated reading material. They  contained scientific and quasi-scientific medicine and Newtonian science for the common people, as well as a great deal of  astrology, which was of widespread public interest.

Almanacs carried yearly predictions of eclipses of the sun and moon as well as  the phases of the moon and weather forecasts, essential for the planting of crops.

While the general public had almanacs, those of the upper classes who wanted to gain more direct access to esoteric knowledge sought out the secret societies that protected it.

According to two major authorities in the esoteric tradition, Dane Rudhyar and Manly Palmer Hall, many of the Founding Fathers were active members of these organizations.

Many Founding Fathers were Freemasons

Hieronimus continues:

While some esoteric historians, including Hall, assert that fifty of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Freemasons, others, such as Ronald Heaton, who uses much stricter protocols to verify membership, place the number as low as nine.

The wide discrepancy in these figures is due to records missing or destroyed during the Revolutionary War and to the uneven quality of the remaining evidence of Masonic membership.

The date and lodge of initiation constitute the best and clearest evidence—which in the case of the signers yields a total of nine members. While some historians use dates of lodge attendance and attendance at Masonic functions as proof of membership, such evidence cannot be considered conclusive.

The “Church” in England was considered the “Reformed” church and separate from the Catholic Church ruled by the Pope in Rome.

Both were thoroughly corrupt, leading many to seek out “Secret Societies” instead.

The Knights Templar and other secret societies, rebelling against the corruption and misrule of the Church, would become as corrupt and powerful as those they sought to change. It has been shown that some secret orders were organizers of piracy, smuggling, drug trafficking, and the slave trade.

At least two important references contemporaneous with the Founding Fathers sought to discredit the Masons and Illuminati. Mémoires pour servir a L’histoire du jacobinisme by Abbé Augustin de Barruel was published in 1797, and John Robison’s Proofs of a Conspiracy Against All the Religions and Governments of Europe Carried on in the Secret Meetings of Freemasons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies was published in 1798.

Barruel claimed to have been initiated as a Master Mason but, not having made a vow of secrecy, felt he should warn the public about the dangers he perceived in the order. It is important to note, however, that Barruel was educated by the Jesuits, who allegedly pledge to infiltrate other religious groups and cultures in order to better defend Catholicism.

John Robison was a professor of natural philosophy at the University of Edinburgh and had indeed been initiated as a Mason in the early 1770s, but discontinued his membership soon after. He was one of the first to allege there was a Masonic / Illuminati conspiracy behind the American Revolution.

Were the Native Americans Really “Savages”?

When the Founding Fathers wrote The Constitution, there was already an existing government in place among the Native Americans.

Robert Hieronimus devotes the first chapter of his book to the League of the Iroquois that was already in place before the Founders ever arrived, and suggests that the form of government used in this “League” between several Indian nations may have had an impact on the Founding Fathers.

It was a cooperation of nations that sought peace, and it was agriculturally-based and decentralized.

The League of the Iroquois

The Indians of the northeast corridor of North America were not always a peaceful race. In fact, they were perennially at war with one another until, as the Iroquois tradition states, Deganawidah, a Huron from what is now eastern Ontario, proposed the creation of a league of five Indian nations.

He found a spokesperson, Hiawatha, to undertake the arduous task of negotiating with the warring Indian nations.

Hiawatha succeeded in accomplishing Deganawidah’s dream, and the Senecas, Onondagas, Oneidas, Mohawks, and Cayugas ceased their struggle and formed a federal union.

A sixth nation, the Tuscaroras, moved northward from the Carolinas, joining the league around 1714.

Hieronimus provides ample evidence that Columbus was most certainly not the first person to “discover” America.

Consider the discovery and colonization of America. What confidence could we have in a professor who clung to the pronouncement that Columbus discovered America?

Not much, especially if we already knew that Leif Eric-son, the Vikings, and perhaps even the Phoenicians, Africans, and Jews visited America fifteen hundred years before Columbus arrived.

He then documents evidence that this North American Indian Confederacy might go back as far as to 1142.

Barbara Alice Mann and Jerry Fields have more or less established the date 1142 for the Senecas’ approval of the Great Law.

Arthur C. Parker placed the date at 1390  and others, such as Paul A. W. Wallace, at 1450.

Probably by at least 1450—forty-two years before Columbus’s voyage from the decadent Old World—the so-called savages of the New World had formed a federation that would be the envy of Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington.

Cadwallader Colden, a contemporary of Benjamin Franklin’s, wrote that the Iroquois had “outdone the Romans.”

As Bruce Johansen puts it:

Colden was writing of a social and political system so old that the immigrant Europeans knew nothing of its origins—a federal union of five (and later six) Indian nations that had put into practice concepts of popular participation and natural rights that the European savants had thus far only theorized.

The Iroquoian system, expressed through its constitution, “The Great Law of Peace,” rested on assumptions foreign to monarchies of Europe: it regarded leaders as servants of the people, rather than their masters, and made provisions for the leaders’ impeachment for errant behavior.

The Iroquois’ law and custom upheld freedom of expression in political and religious matters, and it forbade the unauthorized entry of homes. It provided for political participation by women and the relatively equitable distribution of wealth. . . .

Nineteenth-and twentieth-century historians supported Cadwallader Colden’s conclusions.

Lewis Henry Morgan, for example, observed in 1851, after a decade of close association with the Iroquois, that their civil policy prevented the concentration of power in the hands of any single individual and inclined rather to the division of power among many equals.

The Iroquois prized individual independence, and their government was set up so as to preserve that independence. The Iroquois confederation contained the “germ of modern parliament, congress and legislature.”

However, Hieronimus also documents how widespread Freemasonry may have been among the Indians as well, showing that there was contact with other nations long before Columbus and the Founding Fathers arrived.

Native Americans and Freemasonry

There are many anecdotes about American Indians responding to the secret distress signals from colonial Masons, leading to the conjecture of a link between the two groups.

The tales usually involve a Mason about to be put to death, only to be saved at the last minute by an Indian chief who recognized the hand gesture given by the Mason in desperation.

How did the Native Americans come to learn these Masonic secrets?

To date there has not been enough solid academic investigation of Native American rites and initiatory practices and their relationship to the West because most of this information comes in the form of oral tradition, which discourages modern scholars. Until a proper academic study is made, these anecdotal accounts should still be recorded.

One of the best-known accounts involves the Mohawk war chief Joseph Brant, an ally of the British who had become a Freemason during his first trip to England. As recounted in Sidney Morse’s Freemasonry in the American Revolution:

At the commencement of the Revolution, Colonel John McKinstry, a member of Hudson Lodge, No. 13, of New York, who had seen service in the French War, joined the American army.

He was at the battle of Bunker Hill and at many of the principal Northern battles. At the battle of the Cedars, on the St. Lawrence River, he was captured by the Indians under Brant, and came near losing his life to gratify savage revenge.

He was bound to a stake and the fagots piled around him when, remembering that Brant was a Freemason, he communicated to him a Masonic sign which caused his immediate release and subsequent good treatment.

From that time Brant and Colonel McKinstry were fast friends through life.

Another similar tale is told in the Masonic magazine The Builder (May 1916), featuring Indians in Nevada in 1867 responding to a Masonic signal:

About 2 o’clock in the afternoon a band of Indians, finely mounted, appeared on a ridge above the valley, and he saw they were in hostile array, and said he hardly knew what to do, but thought if the G.H.S. [a secret Masonic gesture] would ever do any good, now was the time to try it; so he gave it, and the leader of the Indians at once dismounted, stuck a spear he carried in the ground, and left the band, came down, took Heath by the hand, led him behind the wagon, and, as he expressed it, gave him more grips and signs than he knew, and gave him to understand that his party must leave and return to Virginia City.

The Indians then remained with them a day or two and escorted them out of the hostile country, and until they were safely on their journey and in sight of Virginia City, when the Chief parted with his white Brother, taking his men with him, and were soon out of sight.

During encounters when Masons had the opportunity to question various tribes or war parties about where they received their “Masonic” words, grips, and symbols, the answer was generally that the medicine men had received this knowledge from the Great Spirit.

It was unknown how long the natives had been initiated into these secrets, but they were never given to any member of the tribe below a subchief.

Some reports indicated that the Masons had been spared their lives because they were believed to be medicine men and had medicine secrets the Indians wished to obtain.

E. Cecil McGavin reports on an initiation ceremony of an Indian chief into Freemasonry during which the chief acted as though he was no stranger to the various aspects of the ritual.

Afterward, the chief thanked him and said he wanted to make the grand master a medicine man according to the rules of his tribe, the highest honor they can confer on any person.

Arthur C. Parker also noted the similarity of ceremonies and legends of the Freemasons and Indians.

One American Indian initiation ritual in particular contained many elements of the Hiramic legend.

The candidate assumed the role of Red Hand, a beloved chief with mystic powers who had been struck down by a poisoned arrow.

His assassin unsuccessfully demanded the secrets of his power and scalped him.

Denslow’s Freemasonry and the American Indian also publishes this account, which is remarkably similar to the Freemasonic Hiramic legend in which the beloved architect of Solomon’s temple is assassinated as he refuses to reveal the password to the master’s degree.

The Hopi, Zuni, and in particular the Pueblo tribes not only have fraternities, they also have lodge rooms, altars, and secret rites.

During colonial times Masonic emblems, including the royal arch and others hammered and cut from silver coins by Iroquois silversmiths, were procured from the Seneca Indians.

Theories abound as to how the American Indians may have been introduced to rites and rituals similar to Freemasonry.

Some say that Freemasonry ultimately originated in an Atlantean culture that spread both to the west and to the east at its destruction.

Alternatively, the Native Americans may have inherited these secret rites from one of the many preColumbian settlers of America.

As the field of archeology grows more sophisticated and open-minded, it becomes more evident that numerous Old World cultures visited and settled in the New World long before Columbus.

The Welsh bardic tale of Prince Madoc tells of just one such instance.

Prince Madoc was “lost at sea” in 1172, and some have supposed that the ocean currents carried him to North America. That is why in 1909, when two Welsh miners looking for gold in Arizona came across an Indian tribe rehearsing a Masonic ceremony in Welsh, they concluded that Madoc’s descendents were responsible.

While McGavin is open to the likelihood of an early emigration from Wales, he prefers the idea in James William S. Mitchell’s History of Freemasonry that the knowledge of Freemasonry possessed by these Inddians must have been derived from the Druids.

“The Menominees and Iroquois may have learned their mysteries from the Welch Indians; or, on the supposition that they did not, their knowledge of the mysterious might be traced to a more ancient source—even the same from which the Druids themselves derived them.”

Another theory has the American Indians descending from the Lost Tribes of Israel, pointing to the similarities between both groups’ ideas for a holy of holies sanctum; a succession of high priests; rituals of purification and anointing; and particular habiliments inherited from their fathers of remote antiquity.

Dr. Cyrus Gordon reported a successful translation of a stone found in Bat Creek, Tennessee, inscribed in Canaanite and translated “for the Land of Judah.”

Hebrew and Roman coins were also unearthed in three nearby Kentucky locations (Hopkinson, Louisville, and Clay City), indicating a date of 135 C.E. which corresponds with the refugees from Judea fleeing from the Romans during the first (66–70 C.E.) and second rebellions (132–135 C.E.).

After studying inscriptions on numerous coinsand artifacts, Dr. Barry Fell concluded that America’s visitations started by at least 325–250 B.C. with the Carthaginians and Phoenicians.

They were followed by Libyan Greeks in 264–241 B.C. and Roman traders from 100 B.C. to 400 C.E. (A.D.)

Jews settled in Kentucky and Tennessee by 69 C.E., with a second wave of refugees arriving in 132 C.E.

Frank Joseph lays a compelling case for the settlement of Africans from Mauritania around the same time.

Robert Schoch shows how “primeval sailors traveled from the Eastern continents, primarily southeast Asia, and spread the idea of pyramids across the Earth, involving the human species in a far greater degree of contact and exchange than experts have previously thought possible.”

Yet another theory suggests that the Native Americans obtained their Masonic knowledge from a renegade Mormon lodge in Idaho that lost its dispensation in 1842–43.

You didn’t learn or hear any of this in your American History classes? Yeah, neither did I….

The American Judiciary: Knights Templar and “The Crown”

In James A. Beard’s book, he notes that most of the signers of The Constitution were attorneys.

A survey of the economic interests of the members of the Convention presents certain conclusions: A majority of the members were lawyers by profession.

Most of the members came from towns, on or near the coast, that is, from the regions in which personalty (personal property) was largely concentrated.

Not one member represented in his immediate personal economic interests the small farming or mechanic classes.

Since there was not a Federal Constitution in place in the U.S. yet, this begs the question: attorneys authorized by whom?

I have been writing for years now that the crimes of the Globalists in the United States will never be prosecuted in the current American Judicial system, because they own it. See:

Justice for Sale – Why the Criminals Running the U.S. Will Continue to Operate Until the Corrupt Judicial System is Replaced

I have learned this through experience, in my many years of interacting with the American Judicial System.

And now, after doing research for this article, I am beginning to understand why.

What I am publishing here is a lengthy excerpt of some research published by Michael Edward, which I believe the original source is found here.

I don’t agree with everything Michael writes, like some of his views on the Bible, but what he writes about The Bar and its origins is documented very well, and in my opinion key to understanding jurisprudence in the United States.

(Note: this was written when Queen Elizabeth was still alive.)

The Crown Temple
By Rule of Mystery Babylon

The Templars of the Crown

The governmental and judicial systems within the United States of America, at both federal and local state levels, is owned by the “Crown,” which is a private foreign power.

Before jumping to conclusions about the Queen of England or the Royal Families of Britain owning the U.S.A., this is a different “Crown” and is fully exposed and explained below.

We are specifically referencing the established Templar Church, known for centuries by the world as the “Crown.”

From this point on, we will also refer to the Crown as the Crown Temple or Crown Templar, all three being synonymous.

First, a little historical background.

The Temple Church was built by the Knights Templar in two parts: the Round and the Chancel.

The Round Church was consecrated in 1185 and modeled after the circular Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. The Chancel was built in 1240.

The Temple Church serves both the Inner and Middle Temples (see below) and is located between Fleet Street and Victoria Embankment at the Thames River.

Its grounds also house the Crown Offices at Crown Office Row.

This Temple “Church” is outside any canonical jurisdiction. The Master of the Temple is appointed and takes his place by sealed (non-public) patent, without induction or institution.

All licensed Bar Attorneys – Attorners (see definitions below) – in the U.S. owe their allegiance and give their solemn oath in pledge to the Crown Temple, realizing this or not.

This is simply due to the fact that all Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the international Bar Association located at the Inns of Court at Crown Temple, which are physically located at Chancery Lane behind Fleet Street in London.

Although they vehemently deny it, all Bar Associations in the U.S., such as the American Bar Association, the Florida Bar, or California Bar Association, are franchises to the Crown.

The Inns of Court (see below, The Four Inns of Court) to the Crown Temple use the Banking and Judicial system of the City of London – a sovereign and independent territory which is not a part of Great Britain (just as Washington City, as DC was called in the 1800s, is not a part of the north American states, nor is it a state) to defraud, coerce, and manipulate the American people.

These Fleet Street bankers and lawyers are committing crimes in America under the guise and color of law (see definitions for legal and lawful below).

They are known collectively as the “Crown.” Their lawyers are actually Templar Bar Attornies, not lawyers.

The present Queen of England is not the “Crown,” as we have all been led to believe. Rather, it is the Bankers and Attornies (Attorneys) who are the actual Crown or Crown Temple.

The Monarch aristocrats of England have not been ruling sovereigns since the reign of King John, circa 1215. All royal sovereignty of the old British Crown since that time has passed to the Crown Temple in Chancery.

The U.S.A. is not the free and sovereign nation that our federal government tells us it is.

If this were true, we would not be dictated to by the Crown Temple through its bankers and attornies.

The U.S.A. is controlled and manipulated by this private foreign power and our unlawful Federal U.S. Government is their pawnbroker.

The bankers and Bar Attorneys in the U.S.A. are a franchise in oath and allegiance to the Crown at Chancery – the Crown Temple Church and its Chancel located at Chancery Lane – a manipulative body of elite bankers and attorners from the independent City of London who violate the law in America by imposing fraudulent “legal” – but totally unlawful – contracts on the American people.

The banks Rule the Temple Church and the Attorners carry out their Orders by controlling their victim’s judiciary.

Since the first Chancel of the Temple Church was built by the Knights Templar, this is not a new ruling system by any means.

The Chancel, or Chancery, of the Crown Inner Temple Court was where King John was, in January 1215, when the English barons demanded that he confirm the rights enshrined in the Magna Carta.

This City of London Temple was the headquarters of the Templar Knights in Great Britain where Order and Rule were first made, which became known as Code.

Remember all these terms, such as Crown, Temple, Templar, Knight, Chancel, Chancery, Court, Code, Order and Rule as we tie together their origins with the present American Temple Bar system of thievery by equity (chancery) contracts.

By what authority has the “Crown” usurped the natural sovereignty of the American people?

Is it acceptable that the U.S. Supreme Court decides constitutional issues in the U.S.A? How can it be considered in any manner as being “constitutional” when this same Supreme Court is appointed by (not elected) and paid by the Federal U.S. Government?

As you will soon see, the land called North America belongs to the Crown Temple.

The legal system (judiciary) of the U.S.A. is controlled by the Crown Temple from the independent and sovereign City of London.

The private Federal Reserve System, which issues fiat U.S. Federal Reserve Notes, is financially owned and controlled by the Crown from Switzerland, the home and legal origin for the charters of the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization, and most importantly, the Bank of International Settlements.

Even Hitler respected his Crown bankers by not bombing Switzerland. The Bank of International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland controls all the central banks of the G7 nations.

He who controls the gold rules the world.

Definitions you never knew:

ATTORN [e-‘tern] Anglo-French aturner to transfer (allegiance of a tenant to another lord), from Old French atorner to turn (to), arrange, from a- to + torner to turn: to agree to be the tenant of a new landlord or owner of the same property. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law ©1996.

ATTORN, v.i. [L. ad and torno.] In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another. This is the act of feudatories, vassals or tenants, upon the alienation of the estate.-Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

ESQUIRE, n [L. scutum, a shield; Gr. a hide, of which shields were anciently made.], a shield-bearer or armor-bearer, scutifer; an attendant on a knight. Hence in modern times, a title of dignity next in degree below a knight. In England, this title is given to the younger sons of noblemen, to officers of the king’s courts and of the household, to counselors at law, justices of the peace, while in commission, sheriffs, and other gentlemen. In the United States, the title is given to public officers of all degrees, from governors down to justices and attorneys.-Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

RULE, n. [L. regula, from regere, to govern, that is, to stretch, strain or make straight.] 1. Government; sway; empire; control; supreme command or authority. 6. In monasteries, corporations or societies, a law or regulation to be observed by the society and its particular members. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary

RULE n. 1 [C] a statement about what must or should be done, (syn.) a regulation.

REGULATION n. 1 [C] a rule, statement about what can be done and what cannot. 2 [U] the general condition of controlling any part of human life. -Newbury House Dictionary ©1999.

CODE n. 1 [C;U] a way of hiding the true meaning of communications from all except those people who have the keys to understand it. 2 [C] a written set of rules of behavior. 3 [C] a formal group of principles or laws. -v. coded, coding, codes to put into code, (syn.) to encode.ENCODE v. 1 to change written material into secret symbols. -Newbury House Dictionary ©1999.

CURTAIN n. [OE. cortin, curtin, fr. OF. cortine, curtine, F. courtine, LL. cortina, also, small court, small inclosure surrounded by walls, from cortis court. See Court.] 4 A flag; an ensign; — in contempt. [Obs.] Shak. Behind the curtain, in concealment; in secret. -1913 Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary.

COURT, n. 3. A palace; the place of residence of a king or sovereign prince. 5. Persons who compose the retinue or council of a king or emperor. 9. The tabernacle had one court; the temple, three. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

COURT n. 2 the place where a king or queen lives or meets others. -The Newbury House Dictionary ©1999.

TEMPLAR, n. [from the Temple, a house near the Thames, which originally belonged to the knights Templars. The latter took their denomination from an apartment of the palace of Baldwin II in Jerusalem, near the temple.] 1. A student of the law. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

TEMPLE, n. [L. templum.] 1. A public edifice erected in honor of some deity. Among pagans, a building erected to some pretended deity, and in which the people assembled to worship. Originally, temples were open places, as the Stonehenge in England. 4. In England, the Temples are two inns of court, thus called because anciently the dwellings of the knights Templars. They are called the Inner and the Middle Temple. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

CAPITOL, n. 1. The temple of Jupiter in Rome, and a fort or castle, on the Mons Capitolinus. In this, the Senate of Rome anciently assembled; and on the same place, is still the city hall or town-house, where the conservators of the Romans hold their meetings. The same name was given to the principal temples of the Romans in their colonies.

INN, n. [Hebrew, To dwell or to pitch a tent.] 2. In England, a college of municipal or common law professors and students; formerly, the town-house of a nobleman, bishop or other distinguished personage, in which he resided when he attended the court. Inns of court, colleges in which students of law reside and are instructed. The principal are the Inner Temple, the Middle Temple, Lincoln’s Inn, and Gray’s Inn. Inns of chancery, colleges in which young students formerly began their law studies. These are now occupied chiefly by attorneys, solicitors, etc.

INNER, a. [from in.] Interior; farther inward than something else, as an inner chamber; the inner court of a temple or palace. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

CROWN, n. 4. Imperial or regal power or dominion; sovereignty. There is a power behind the crown greater than the crown itself. Junius. 19. A coin stamped with the image of a crown; hence, a denomination of money; as, the English crown. — Crown land, land belonging to the crown, that is, to the sovereign. — Crown law, the law which governs criminal prosecutions. — Crown lawyer, one employed by the crown, as in criminal cases. v.t. 1. To cover, decorate, or invest with a crown; hence, to invest with royal dignity and power. -1913 Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary.

COLONY, n. 1. A company [i.e. legal corporation] or body of people transplanted from their mother country to a remote province or country to cultivate and inhabit it, and remaining subject to the jurisdiction of the parent state; as the British colonies in America or the Indies; the Spanish colonies in South America. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

STATE, n. [L., to stand, to be fixed.] 1. Condition; the circumstances of a being or thing at any given time. These circumstances may be internal, constitutional or peculiar to the being, or they may have relation to other beings. 4. Estate; possession. [See Estate.] -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

ESTATE, n. [L. status, from sto, to stand. The roots stb, std and stg, have nearly the same signification, to set, to fix. It is probable that the L. sto is contracted from stad, as it forms steti.] 1. In a general sense, fixedness; a fixed condition; 5. Fortune; possessions; property in general. 6. The general business or interest of government; hence, a political body; a commonwealth; a republic. But in this sense, we now use State.

ESTATE, v.t. To settle as a fortune. 1. To establish. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.

PATENT, a. [L. patens, from pateo, to open.] 3. Appropriated by letters patent. 4. Apparent; conspicuous. PATENT, n. A writing given by the proper authority and duly authenticated, granting a privilege to some person or persons. By patent, or letters patent, that is, open letters, the king of Great Britain grants lands, honors and franchises.

PATENT, v.t. To grant by patent. 1. To secure the exclusive right of a thing to a person

LAWFUL. In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal” process however defective. – A Dictionary of Law 1893.

LEGAL. Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual.

“Legal” looks more to the letter, and “Lawful” to the spirit, of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle. “Legal” imports rather that the forms of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed; “Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral quality is secured. “Legal” is the antithesis of “equitable”, and the equivalent of “constructive”. – 2 Abbott’s Law Dict. 24; A Dictionary of Law (1893).

STATUS IN QUO, STATUS QUO. [L., state in which.] The state in which anything is already. The phrase is also used retrospectively, as when, on a treaty of place, matters return to the status quo ante bellum, or are left in statu quo ante bellum, i.e., the state (or, in the state) before the war. -1913 Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary

The Four Inns of Court to the unholy Temple

Globally, all the legalistic scams promoted by the exclusive monopoly of the Temple Bar and their Bar Association franchises come from four Inns or Temples of Court: the Inner Temple, the Middle Temple,Lincoln’s Inn, and Gray’s Inn.

These Inns/Temples are exclusive and private country clubs; secret societies of world power in commerce.

They are well established, some having been founded in the early 1200’s. The Queen and Queen Mother of England are current members of both the Inner Temple and Middle Temple. Gray’s Inn specializes in Taxation legalities by Rule and Code for the Crown.

Lincoln’s Inn received its name from the Third Earl of Lincoln (circa 1300).

Just like all U.S. based franchise Bar Associations, none of the Four Inns of the Temple are incorporated – for a definite and purposeful reason: You can’t make claim against a non-entity and a non-being.

They are private societies without charters or statutes, and their so-called constitutions are based solely on custom and self-regulation.

In other words, they exist as secret societies without a public “front door” unless you’re a private member called to their Bar.

While the Inner Temple holds the legal system franchise by license to steal from Canada and Great Britain, it is the Middle Temple that has legal license to steal from America. This comes about directly via their Bar Association franchises to the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple through the Crown Temple.

From THE HISTORY OF THE INN, Later Centuries, [p.6], written by the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple, we can see a direct tie to the Bar Association franchises and its Crown signatories in America:

“Call to the Bar or keeping terms in one of the four Inns a pre-requisite to Call at King’s Inns until late in the 19th century. In the 17th and 18th centuries, students came from the American colonies and from many of the West Indian islands. The Inn’s records would lead one to suppose that for a time there was hardly a young gentleman in Charleston who had not studied here. Five of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence were Middle Templars, and notwithstanding it and its consequences, Americans continued to come here until the War of 1812”.

All Bar Association licensed Attorneys must keep the terms of their oath to the Crown Temple in order to be accepted or “called to Bar” at any of the King’s Inns. Their oath, pledge, and terms of allegiance are made to the Crown Temple.

It’s a real eye opener to know that the Middle Inn of the Crown Temple has publicly acknowledged there were at least five Templar Bar Attornies, under solemn oath only to the Crown, who signed what was alleged to be an American Declaration of Independence.

This simply means that both parties to the Declaration agreement were of the same origin, the Crown Temple.

In case you don’t understand the importance of this, there is no international agreement or treaty that will ever be honored, or will ever have lawful effect, when the same party signs as both the first and second parties. It’s merely a worthless piece of paper with no lawful authority when both sides to any agreement are actually the same.

In reality, the American Declaration of Independence was nothing more than an internal memo of the Crown Temple made among its private members.

By example, Alexander Hamilton was one of those numerous Crown Templars who was called to their Bar. In 1774, he entered King’s College in New York City, which was funded by members of the London King’s Inns, now named Columbia University. In 1777, he became a personal aide and private secretary to George Washington during the American Revolution.

In May of 1782, Hamilton began studying law in Albany, New York, and within six months had completed a three year course of studies, passed his examinations, and was admitted to the New York Bar.

Of course, the New York Bar Association was/is a franchise of the Crown Temple through the Middle Inn. After a year’s service in Congress during the 1782-1783 session, he settled down to legal practice in New York City as Alexander Hamilton, Esqr.

In February of 1784, he wrote the charter for, and became a founding member of, the Bank of New York, the State’s first bank.

He secured a place on the New York delegation to the Federal Convention of 1787 at Philadelphia.

In a five hour speech on June 18th, he stated “an Executive for life will be an elective Monarch”.

When all his anti-Federalist New York colleagues withdrew from the Convention in protest, he alone signed the Constitution for the United States of America representing New York State, one of the legal Crown States (Colonies).

One should particularly notice that a lawful state is made up of the people, but a State is a legal entity of the Crown – a Crown Colony. This is an example of the deceptive ways the Crown Temple – Middle Templars – have taken control of America since the beginning of our settlements.

Later, as President Washington’s U.S. Treasury Secretary, Hamilton alone laid the foundation of the first Federal U.S. Central Bank, secured credit loans through Crown banks in France and the Netherlands, and increased the power of the Federal Government over the hoodwinked nation-states of the Union.

Hamilton had never made a secret of the fact that he admired the government and fiscal policies of Great Britain.

Americans were fooled into believing that the legal Crown Colonies comprising New England were independent nation states, but they never were nor are today.

They were and still are Colonies of the Crown Temple, through letters patent and charters, who have no legal authority to be independent from the Rule and Order of the Crown Temple. A legal State is a Crown Temple Colony.

Neither the American people nor the Queen of Britain own America.

The Crown Temple owns America through the deception of those who have sworn their allegiance by oath to the Middle Templar Bar.

The Crown Bankers and their Middle Templar Attornies Rule America through unlawful contracts, unlawful taxes, and contract documents of false equity through debt deceit, all strictly enforced by their completely unlawful, but “legal”, Orders, Rules and Codes of the Crown Temple Courts, our so-called “judiciary” in America.

This is because the Crown Temple holds the land titles and estate deeds to all of North America.

The biggest lie is what the Crown and its agents refer to as “the rule of law”.

In reality, it is not about law at all, but solely about the Crown Rule of all nations.

For example, just read what President Bush stated on November 13, 2001, regarding the “rule of law:”

“Our countries are embarked on a new relationship for the 21st century, founded on a commitment to the values of democracy, the free market, and the rule of law.” – Joint Statement by President George W. Bush and President Vladimir V. Putin on 11/13/01, spoken from the White House, Washington D.C.

What happened in 1776?

“Whoever owns the soil, owns all the way to the heavens and to the depths of the earth.” – Old Latin maxim and Roman expression.

1776 is the year that will truly live in infamy for all Americans. It is the year that the Crown Colonies became legal Crown States.

The Declaration of Independence was a legal, not lawful, document.

It was signed on both sides by representatives of the Crown Temple.

Legally, it announced the status quo of the Crown Colonies to that of the new legal name called “States” as direct possessive estates of the Crown (see the definitions above to understand the legal trickery that was done).

The American people were hoodwinked into thinking they were declaring lawful independence from the Crown.

Proof that the Colonies are still in Crown possession is the use of the word “State” to signify a “legal estate of possession.”

Had this been a document of and by the people, both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution would have been written using the word “states”.

By the use of “State,” the significance of a government of estate possession was legally established.

All of the North American States are Crown Templar possessions through their legal document, signed by their representation of both parties to the contract, known as the Constitution of the United States of America.

All “Constitutional Rights” in America are simply those dictated by the Crown Temple and enforced by the Middle Inn Templars (Bar Attorners) through their franchise and corporate government entity, the federal United States Government.

When a “State Citizen” attempts to invoke his “constitutional”, natural, or common law “rights” in Chancery (equity courts), he is told they don’t apply.

Why? Simply because a State citizen has no rights outside of the Rule and Codes of Crown “law”. Only a state citizen has natural and common law rights by the paramount authority of God’s Law.

The people who comprise the citizenry of a state are recognized only within natural and common law as is already established by God’s Law.

Only a State Citizen can be a party to an action within a State Court. A common state citizen cannot be recognized in that court because he doesn’t legally exist in Crown Chancery Courts. In order to be recognized in their State Courts, the common man must be converted to that of a corporate or legal entity (a legal fiction).

Now you know why they create such an entity using all capital letters within Birth Certificates issued by the State.

They convert the common lawful man of God into a fictional legal entity subject to Administration by State Rules, Orders and Codes (there is no “law” within any Rule or Code).

Of course, Rules, Codes, etc. do not apply to the lawful common man of the Lord of lords, so the man with inherent Godly law and rights must be converted into a legal “Person” of fictional “status” (another legal term) in order for their legal – but completely unlawful – State Judiciary (Chancery Courts) to have authority over him.

Chancery Courts are tribunal courts where the decisions of “justice” are decided by 3 “judges”.

This is a direct result of the Crown Temple having invoked their Rule and Code over all judicial courts.

It is held to be a settled Rule, that our courts can not take notice of any title to land not derived from the State or Colonial government, and duly verified by patent.” -4 Johns. Rep. 163. Jackson v. Waters, 12 Johns. Rep. 365. S.P.

The Crown Temple was granted Letters Patent (see definition above) and Charters (definition below) for all the land (Colonies) of New England by the King of England, a sworn member of the Middle Temple (as the Queen is now).

Since the people were giving the patent/charter corporations and Colonial Governours such a hard time, especially concerning Crown taxation, a scheme was devised to allow the Americans to believe they were being granted “independence.”

Remember, the Crown Templars represented both parties to the 1776 Declaration of Independence; and, as we are about to see, the latter 1787 U.S. Constitution.

To have this “Declaration” recognized by international treaty law, and in order to establish the new legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, Middle Templar King George III agreed to the Treaty of Paris on September 3, 1783, “between the Crown of Great Britain and the said United States”.

The Crown of Great Britain legally was, then and now, the Crown Temple.

This formally gave international recognition to the corporate “United States”, the new Crown Temple States (Colonies).

Most important is to know who the actual signatories to the Treaty of Paris were.

Take particular note to the abbreviation “Esqr.” following their names (see above definition for ESQUIRE) as this legally signifies “Officers of the King’s Courts”, which we now know were Templar Courts or Crown Courts.

This is the same Crown Templar Title given to Alexander Hamilton (see above).

The Crown was represented in signature by “David Hartley, Esqr.”, a Middle Templar of the King’s Court.

Representing the United States (a Crown franchise) by signature was “John Adams, Esqr”, “Benjamin Franklin, Esqr.” and “John Jay, Esqr.”

The signatories for the “United States” were also Middle Templars of the King’s Court through Bar Association membership.

What is plainly written in history proves, once again, that the Crown Temple was representing both parties to the agreement. What a perfect and elaborate scam the people of North America had pulled on them!

It becomes even more obvious when you read Article 5, which states in part,

“to provide for the Restitution of all Estates, Rights, and Properties which have been confiscated, belonging to real British Subjects.”

The Crown Colonies were granted to “persons” and corporations of the Crown Temple through Letters Patent and Charters, and the North American Colonial land was owned by the Crown.

Now, here’s a real catch-all in Article 4:

“It is agreed that creditors on either side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the full value in sterling money of all bona fide debts heretofore contracted.”

Since the Crown and its Templars represented both the United States, as the debtors, and the Crown, as the creditors, then they became the creditor of the American people by owning all debts of the former Colonies, now called the legal Crown States.

This sounds too good to be true, but these are the facts. The words SCAM and HOODWINKED can’t begin to describe what had taken place.

So then, what debts were owed to the Crown Temple and their banks as of 1883? In the Contract Between the King and the Thirteen United States of North America, signed at Versailles July 16, 1782, Article I states,

“It is agreed and certified that the sums advanced by His Majesty to the Congress of the United States under the title of a loan, in the years 1778, 1779, 1780, 1781, and the present 1782, amount to the sum of eighteen million of livres, money of France, according to the following twenty-one receipts of the above-mentioned underwritten Minister of Congress, given in virtue of his full powers, to wit … “

That amount equals about $18 million dollars, plus interest, that Hamilton’s U.S. Central Bank owed the Crown through Crown Bank loans in France. This was signed, on behalf of the United States, by an already familiar Middle Templar, Benjamin Franklin, Esquire.

An additional $6 million dollars (six million livres) was loaned to the United States at 5% interest by the same parties in a similar Contract signed on February 25, 1783. The Crown Bankers in the Netherlands and France were calling in their debts for payment by future generations of Americans.

The Fiscal Agents of Mystery Babylon

Since its beginnings, the Temple Church at the City of London has been a Knight Templar secret society. It was built and established by the same Temple Knights who were given their Rule and Order by the Roman Pope. It’s very important to know how the British Royal Crown was placed into the hands of the Knights Templars, and how the Crown Templars became the fiscal and military agents for the Pope of the Roman Church.

This all becomes very clear through the Concession Of England To The Pope on May 15, 1213.charter was sworn in fealty by England’s King John to Pope Innocent and the Roman Church. It was witnessed before the Crown Templars, as King John stated upon sealing the same,

“I myself bearing witness in the house of the Knights Templars.”

Pay particular attention to the words being used that we have defined below, especially charter, fealty, demur, and concession:

We wish it to be known to all of you, through this our charter, furnished with our seal … not induced by force or compelled by fear, but of our own good and spontaneous will and by the common counsel of our barons, do offer and freely concede to God and His holy apostles Peter and Paul and to our mother the holy Roman church, and to our lord pope Innocent and to his Catholic successors, the whole kingdom of England and the whole kingdom Ireland, with all their rights and appurtenances … we perform and swear fealty for them to him our aforesaid lord pope Innocent, and his catholic successors and the Roman church … binding our successors and our heirs by our wife forever, in similar manner to perform fealty and show homage to him who shall be chief pontiff at that time, and to the Roman church without demur.

As a sign … we will and establish perpetual obligation and concession … from the proper and especial revenues of our aforesaid kingdoms … the Roman church shall receive yearly a thousand marks sterling … saving to us and to our heirs our rights, liberties and regalia; all of which things, as they have been described above, we wish to have perpetually valid and firm; and we bind ourselves and our successors not to act counter to them.

And if we or any one of our successors shall presume to attempt this, whoever he be, unless being duly warned he come to his kingdom, and this senses, be shall lose his right to the kingdom, and this charter of our obligation and concession shall always remain firm.

Most who have commented on this charter only emphasize the payments due the Pope and the Roman Church.

What should be emphasized is the fact that King John broke the terms of this charter by signing the Magna Carta on June 15, 1215.

Remember; the penalty for breaking the 1213 agreement was the loss of the Crown (right to the kingdom) to the Pope and his Roman Church.

It says so quite plainly. To formally and lawfully take the Crown from the royal monarchs of England by an act of declaration, on August 24, 1215, Pope Innocent III annulled the Magna Carta; later in the year, he placed an Interdict (prohibition) on the entire British empire.

From that time until today, the English monarchy and the entire British Crown belonged to the Pope.

By agreeing to the Magna Carta, King John had broken the agreement terms of his fealty with Rome and the Pope.

The Pope and his Roman Church control the Crown Temple because his Knights established it under his Orders. He who controls the gold controls the world.

The Crown Temple Today

The workings of the Crown Temple in this day and age is moreso obvious, yet somewhat hidden. The Crown Templars have many names and many symbols to signify their private and unholy Temple. Take a close look at the (alleged) one dollar $1 private Federal Reserve System (a Crown banking franchise) Debt Note.

Notice in the base of the pyramid the Roman date MDCCLXXVI which is written in Roman numerals for the year 1776.

The words ANNUIT COEPTIS NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM are Roman Latin for ANNOUNCING THE BIRTH OF THE NEW ORDER OF THE WORLD.

1776 signifies the birth of the New World Order under the Crown Temple.

That’s when their American Crown Colonies became the chartered government called the United States, thanks to the Declaration of Independence.

Since that date, the United Nations (another legal Crown Temple by charter) rose up and refers to every nation as a State member.

Conclusion: The United States is not a “Righteous” or “Godly” Nation and Never Was

If you have made it this far, I hope you can see how utterly useless it is to participate in American politics and expect any politician to do anything that could actually change this system of government, and the “rule of law” in the American judiciary.

If you claim to be a “believer” and a disciple of Jesus Christ, you are committing idolatry every time you put your hand over your heart and “pledge” allegiance to the United States of America.

You might as well pledge your allegiance to Satan himself.

Further Recommended Reading:

The American Revolution: When the Bankers Destroyed the Economy – History Repeating Itself?

F. Tupper Saussy’s book, Rulers of Evil goes into great detail documenting who the Jesuits are and their role in the Founding Fathers of the United States. See:

Download and/or print out these resources while they are still available, as well as this article.

If you are a homeschooling parent, teach this to your children along with the Bible, so they can escape the propaganda taught in Public Education and in the Christian Schools about the history of the United States.

This is what the LORD Almighty says: “Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor.” (Zechariah 7:9-10)

The post Was the U.S. Constitution Written to Protect “We the People” or “We the Globalists”? Were the Founding Fathers Godly Men or Servants of Satan? first appeared on Created4Health.

Related Articles

Back to top button