Source: https://www.newhumannewearthcommunities.com/united-states-vs-united-states-of-america/archives/05-2018
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:24:12+00:00

Document:
My comments in reply to this latest "close but no banana" analysis of historical documents are shown in slightly larger bold print. This is what happens when people either do not know "the Code" or choose not to. Either way, the result is the same. We miss the Truth.
It is interesting to note that the interpretation Mr. Montgomery gives to this argument which is basically in support of the King's claim to the [Territorial] United States which was never at issue, is precisely the same argument that understands our claims in the same regard ---- land held in trust like assets possessed by pirates --- does not change ownership.
heirs and successors, as well as the main party of interest, the Pope.
them.” Declaration of Rights 1776, North Carolina Constitution.
15, 1213 to the Pope.
demur.” Concessions of May 15, 1213 to the Pope.
never owned it to begin with?
and from tenants who never held under it?” MARSHALL v. LOVELESS, 1 N.C.
412 (1801), 2 S.A. 70.
money to the U.S. government with the debt reaching 18 million dollars.
you will see this is in fact what took place.
retain his land under the corporate trust.
Rothschilds, however he stands to gain no matter what happens.
House of Commons December 1913.
the history of the United States, money began to be based on debt.
the defect of alienage.” The Society for Propagating the Gospel, &c v.
v. The Town of New Haven. Et Al. 8 Wheat. 464; 5 Cond. Rep. 489.
does the Pope, under British-made International law.
parliament unless he be named therein by special and particular words.
they may tend to restrain or diminish any of his rights and interests.
He may even take the benefit of any particular act, though not named.
principles of the British Constitution.” U.S. v. Chamberlin, 219 U.S.
250 (1911), “Dollar Sav. Bank v. United States, supra”.
Do the king and the Pope have proper claims to their land holdings? No.
sons, could not be overturned by the Conquest of William the Conqueror.
reclaimed by Jesus Christ as the second Adam.
king is taxing us for a trust he created, based on an earlier conquest.
learned from the American Indian, that no man owns the land.
made….” The Society, &c., v. The Town of New Haven. Et Al. 8 Wheat.
464; 5 Cond. Rep. 489.
nothing concerning the king’s investment and creation of America Inc.
&c., v. The Town of New Haven. Et Al. 8 Wheat. 464; 5 Cond. Rep. 489.
America what about that? “You have been conned” do you not understand?
or just don’t have time.
and the prosecutions so commenced be discontinued.
corporation, or of its property.
Society, &c., v. The Town of New Haven. Et Al. 8 Wheat. 464; 5 Cond.
crown….”The Society, &c., v. The Town of New Haven. Et Al. 8 Wheat.
speech on conciliation with America, pages 71-72, March 22, 1775.
Speech of Sir Edmund Burke, before the House of Commons, March 22, 1775.
you, and serve you essentially.
towards the support of the empire cannot be considered as provinces.
Record of that time period up to 1934, it’s there.
naturally unpopular, even where they are neither insolent nor corrupt.
is not near so great an evil as a very small degree of uncertainty.
which it is most likely to be convenient for the contributor to pay it.
than it brings into the public treasury, in the four following ways.
whose perquisites may impose another additional tax upon the people.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.