Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Laurie Atkinson on May 13, 2012 at 9:28pm

http://tehrantimes.com/opinion/97842-bush-finally-found-guilty-of-w...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Oliver on May 14, 2012 at 4:54am

Nice find Laurie. Don't wait for the "mass arrests" displaying people being moved to the FEMA camps. People are being arrested but released for trials as Timothy Geitner most probably.

Eventually people will be arrested publicly.....

check out the link Pat posted above.. ;o)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Larry Martz on May 14, 2012 at 10:59am

I got a "403 Forbidden" "You are not authorized to access..." page from this link several times. Didn't matter whether or not I was logged in. This must have changed in the last hours since others have implied that they read this report, or maybe I mis-understood. On another matter, I saw a Youtube (which was audio only, I think), that included a statement from a US military man in Afghanistan who publicly offered to Orly Taitz to be a co-plaintiff in one of her lawsuits regarding the fact that BHO is not constitutionally qualified to be President. He said that he and other military people had an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and that the President has the same oath, I think. That includes the natural born citizen clause in the Constitution, or words to that effect. I don't think he said this, but, if our military are acting under the direction of a Non-president, they could be considered to be mercenaries. This technicality may not be significant as to the mercenary thing, but the fact that BHO is not qualified (along with the Muslim Brotherhood connection, etc., etc.) could snowball into the situation that we have been discussing for a while. I don't have time, now, to link the above information, but someone may do this. Remember what I said some while ago, this story of Drake's may or may not be for real, but even if it is not, the idea may get around enough (along with the apparent wide support for it) to make it catch on with enough people with the capability and resources to make it happen. Our forefathers were concerned that a "standing army" could and would be used by tyrants in our national gov. to oppress the people (and it has been to a great extent if you call ATF, CIA, FBI, etc, as part of the standing army), but the opposite could happen if enough of our citizens who are serving in our "armies" (AF, Navy, MC, CG, NG, ANG, included, respectfully, as I have and many others reading this), would decide to do something like Drake says is in the works. This could backfire on the crooks who have stolen our Republic. In other words, Drake's "plan" could materialize even if it was only a pipe dream when he started to talk about it. The main things are to be ready to help it work if it goes like we want it to go (like Drake has been saying) and to make it right if it doesn't go the way we want, in the beginning.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by joseph cronin on May 14, 2012 at 4:11pm

Again Exactily .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Oliver on May 14, 2012 at 6:48am

Wow is this true guys? I made and exerpt of the article... http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

"The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone's pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

"The Constitution for the united states of America".

The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.

Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn't. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment.

Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me — and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the "organic" Constitution, we now have "relative" rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereign's right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a "privilege" which we must be licensed to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution.

So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word "Sovereign," we must think about what the word means.

According to Webster's Dictionary, "sovereign" is defined as: 1. chief or highest; supreme. 2. Supreme in power, superior in position to all others. 3. Independent of, and unlimited by, any other, possessing or entitled to, original and independent authority or jurisdiction.

In other words, our government was created by and for "sovereigns" — the free citizens who were deemed the highest authority. Only the People can be sovereign — remember that. Government cannot be sovereign. We can also look to the Declaration of Independence, where we read: "government is subject to the consent of the governed" — that's supposed to be us, the sovereigns. Do you feel like a sovereign nowadays? I don't.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a constitutional historian to figure out that this is not what is happening in our country today. Government in these times is NOT subject to the consent of the governed. Rather, the governed are subject to the whim and greed of the corporation, which has stretched its tentacles beyond the ten-mile-square parcel of land known as the District of Columbia — encroaching into every state of the Republic. Mind you, the corporation has NO jurisdiction outside of the District of Columbia. THEY just want you to think it does."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by joseph cronin on May 14, 2012 at 7:40am

Thanks Oliver ; basically what this means is the District of Columbia is a foreign enemy of the US of A ; a constitutional dictatorship inside our state republics . Two nations in one place . That's what it sounds like anyway .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Oliver on May 14, 2012 at 11:03am

Joseph youre welcome, I've read about this before but cant remember where sure sounds resonable
to me! Very nice spelled out and explained...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Captain Huggy on May 14, 2012 at 11:13am

I copied this from the FreedomReigns Facebook newsfed:

>>>HEADS UP ON THIS OFFICIAL RELEASE FROM "Drake"...< There have been developments that might 'alter' the execution of the general plan. This all depends on what those in position to make the decisions decide... -IT AIN"T UP TO ME-
At this point I am NOT a 'controller' at any level, Remember That.
The info indicates one of two things, or a combination.
I heard a few weeks ago that the 'take down' would be on a one by one basis. Specific arrests, etc.
A few days after that I'm told that these would be key individuals behind the scenes...?
Where does that leave all of us?
I got no answer to that question...
IF the mass arrests are still in the plan is questionable at this point. Reason being that arrests and law suits are underway that might take care of that idea altogether.
The 'case' against the federal reserve needs another set of legalities before those things happen...I understand that this is in progress.
>In order to avoid confusion, AND offer real time honest facts, I will offer no more specifics as far as general time periods or dates, etc. "Soon" is all there is...
>>>I was hoping that our military would abide by the original agreement.< -Terri and others were told that when the majority of states completed the paperwork, the military would take the actions I have talked about on the radio. Civilian authority was given through that paperwork. -To date, and for whatever reason, our military have NOT performed as agreed. I do not take being put in harms way lightly. I offer that many believe that We The People could count on our military...? I strongly suggest that 'The Military' keep its promises, the sooner the better.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rikki Heinis on May 14, 2012 at 11:23am

Well, if the 'plan' fails to come through and the military refuse to adhere to their promise, the rest of us may have to step up and do the job for them. I refuse to allow my children to be ruled by this type of corruption. It is absolutely NOT an option.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Captain Huggy on May 14, 2012 at 11:31am

Yes, I agree. There is just too much innuendo being put out by Drake. If he is merely a spokesman and it is turning bad, where are the ones that he is speaking for? Why haven't they stepped up? I mean, surely it is not a secret any longer that they are plotting to take down a lot of important people. So, why all the pussy-footing around?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rikki Heinis on May 14, 2012 at 11:36am

Exactly. And if there really is a legitimate plan, maybe the people need to step in and back up those officers who are willing to make these arrests. Something needs to be done one way or the other. This 'plan' was my one last hope of correcting the situation. Now I feel the need to regroup and reconsider what needs to take place in order to ensure our freedom.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Captain Huggy on May 14, 2012 at 11:38am

Indeed, I think the people would step up and back up the military, if the people knew who was running the operation. I have folks say that Drake was coordinating with the militias, but I have yet to find anyone who has had direct contact with anyone to make plans and gather intell

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 68
• 69
• 70
• 71
• 72
• …
• 135
• Next ›
• Page