Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 65

Thread: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

  1. Link to Post #21
    Avalon Member lightseeker's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st March 2010
    Location
    I live in Ottawa, Ontario Canada with my life partner.
    Age
    76
    Posts
    204
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 814 times in 159 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Thanks for your comments YvonneG, I agree that DW puts himself out there like many others who are trying to give us all some truth of what is going on everywhere. I respect DW very much and trust his work, it is well researched before he releases what he has to say. That does not mean he is infallible. None of us are. I do not know if all of what Drake said was truthful or not. I am not an American, and I have to consider this when I listen to someone like Drake, who to me, comes across as sincere and a patriot. Whether or not things play out the way he has suggested is anyones guess at this point. I believe he was painting a picture in very broad strokes. You do not want to provide the details to the powers that were. I would even go so far as saying he may have even slipped in some dis-info. deliberately to slip up the TPTW should they try to act on what he said. Again there is a lot of smoke and mirrors being reflected mixed in with truth. in this case it is my feeling that Drake was the real macoy . We must always consider that this sight of PA, could all be mined for info. by the PTW. I know that this has been mentioned on some of the threads on this sight. I hope they enjoy the clarity of mind of so many which contribute to this site. We are not all easily fooled. And when we think we are there are always some wonderful souls who contribute to the discussion with great clarity and bring us back on track

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to lightseeker For This Post:

    aranuk (11th April 2012), Bo Atkinson (11th April 2012), DreamsInDigital (11th April 2012), Kristin (11th April 2012), modwiz (11th April 2012)

  3. Link to Post #22
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    I have been at work and I'm posting from my phone, gotta keep it short so I'll just provide the link.

    http://www.republicoftheunitedstates.org/node/5

    How's that taste?

  4. Link to Post #23
    United States Avalon Member Bo Atkinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    8th January 2011
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    972
    Thanks
    2,741
    Thanked 3,733 times in 866 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Thanks Unified Serenity, for having guts enough to speak your thoughts. I admire strong women who analyze with care. Assertive Avolonian women are critically important, to help guide us all. I was listening to another two women dedicated to Gulf/ Afghan veteran issues and recovery--Revealing that military planning actually plans for vets as expendable equipment or commodities. I wonder if this implied malice of forethought, but will welcome hearing reactions of others. This subject is inherently complicated and requires balancing many POVs with multi-track discernment. Or else we will all loose. If totalitarianism wins out, due to isolationism, through self centered stubbornness.



    [Podcast] Warrior Connection - 03/18/12
    http://prn.fm/shows/lifestyle-shows/warrior-connection/
    Quote: "My guests were Major Denise Nichols, RN and Patricia Axelrod, Director, Desert Storm think tank. We discussed PTSD, accupuncture, patriot missile systems problems and solutions, remembered several who had died in last week, discussed recent events koran burning and civilian slaughter, update on congressional actions dear colleague letter on vet care research originated by Dennis Kucinich, general military operations, brain function, neurotoxicity, and resources."

    I think it was that podcast which even mentioned Ross Perot potentially helping the cause to reveal the disgrace of commodify-ing military personnel. in the series at: http://prn.fm/category/archives/warrior-connection/ (I mention this part due to the saying: "it is not what one knows, but rather who one knows)......Paraphrasing here... Apparently some gains were made until the competing interests pulled away the funding from integrated medicine protocols to instead bribe scientists, to say it was simply stress of war. Stress which prescribes pharmaceuticals, or death by medicine. Denying damage done by the occupational hazards of war and the negligence, of disregarding whistle blowers.

    I listened to your discussion on your Youtube, Unified Serenity . My feeling was 'fine', but we already have this Homeland Battlefield Bill for a totalitarian tango. Unless something powerful intercedes... Regardless of anything Drake said. Prayer makes sense, by each in their own way, their meditation or there intentionality or their personal way. You seemed to wonder why not have Chris Hedges do the task, which is purportedly assigned to Drake. But Drake described a very different sort of mission, where he really was/is needed to speak to more constitutionalist- independent minded and armed people. Chris Hedges already has hands full, speaking to more cosmopolitan, professionals, educators others and alternatives supporters: Chris Hedges: Quote:"Totalitarian Systems Always Begin by Rewriting the Law.... I spent four hours in a third-floor conference room at 86 Chambers St. in Manhattan on Friday as I underwent a government deposition. Benjamin H. Torrance, an assistant U.S. attorney, carried out the questioning as part of the government's effort to decide whether it will challenge my standing as a plaintiff in the lawsuit I have brought with others against President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta over the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), also known as the Homeland Battlefield Bill."
    http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/80...riting-the-law

    If his lawsuit fails, we will all likely experience directly: utterly totalitarian rule. Other nations will feel a domino effect.

    To: sdv, I don't see why Drake is supposed to address intellectuals or if anyone would gain from his ID at this point, (besides totalitarians). Chompsky said: "What I talk about are the liberal intellectuals, the ones who portray themselves and perceive themselves as challenging power, as courageous, as standing up for truth and justice. They are basically the guardians of the faith. They set the limits. They tell us how far we can go. They say, ‘Look how courageous I am.’ But do not go one millimeter beyond that. At least for the educated sectors, they are the most dangerous in supporting power.”
    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...this_20100419/
    "Chomsky reserves his fiercest venom for the liberal elite in the press, the universities and the political system who serve as a smoke screen for the cruelty of unchecked capitalism and imperial war. He exposes their moral and intellectual posturing as a fraud. And this is why Chomsky is hated, and perhaps feared, more among liberal elites than among the right wing he also excoriates."

    Drake and Chompsky are in two extremely different spheres of influence, but both spheres of influence are utterly vital to outcomes. We need to study the fruits of their deeds and unfolding action.
    Last edited by Bo Atkinson; 11th April 2012 at 05:02. Reason: spelling corrector + the situation

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bo Atkinson For This Post:

    9eagle9 (11th April 2012), Alie (11th April 2012), Kristin (11th April 2012)

  6. Link to Post #24
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    We have been under martial law since Lincoln.
    Last edited by Jeffrey; 11th April 2012 at 03:41.

  7. Link to Post #25
    Morocco Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    18th January 2011
    Location
    With friends
    Age
    73
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    45,848
    Thanked 45,191 times in 5,447 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Vivek (here)
    We have been under martial law since Lincoln.
    Your assertion about being under martial law since Lincoln appears correct.
    Last edited by modwiz; 11th April 2012 at 15:44.

  8. Link to Post #26
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Ouch, you got me and I'm big on holding myself to correct grammar/spelling (unless I'm writing colloquially), so thank you sir.

    And yes, the poor guy was assassinated before he had a chance to reverse it.

  9. Link to Post #27
    Unsubscribed 9eagle9's Avatar
    Join Date
    11th January 2011
    Location
    In-the-woods, SE Michigan
    Posts
    4,179
    Thanks
    3,603
    Thanked 23,024 times in 3,784 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    David W's episode on the radio showed me that he's being used as a tool to leverage his fans who can't keep from getting emotionally self identified with the teacher. If the teacher is threatened so thus must be the student. Leverage.

    Basic psychological terrorism 101 and still no one sees it yet, even though its been occuring for thousands of years.

  10. Link to Post #28
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Vivek (here)
    I have been at work and I'm posting from my phone, gotta keep it short so I'll just provide the link.

    http://www.republicoftheunitedstates.org/node/5

    How's that taste?
    Okay, I've got me hands on a real compooter, so let me add some snippets from this link.

    First of all, there's a speech from former Congressman James Traficant Jr. addressing Congress about the bankruptcy of the united states of America and the consequential birth of the U.S. Corporation that followed it.

    Quote ...It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

    The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States...

    Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens of mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the Federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. Citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the Federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets, and labor of their “subjects,” the 14th Amendment U.S. Citizen to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States Corporation all of the credit “money substitute” it needed.

    Like any debtor, the Federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the Federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves,” the U.S. Citizens, as collateral against the federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks, forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

    Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the People have exchanged one master for another.
    Now, considering what Drake said that Pennsyvania had done relating to reestablishing it's sovereignty, I invite you to read this excerpt from the site I linked to previously.

    Quote Let’s talk about how we are now the Republic for the united States of America.

    On July 21, 2010 “We the People” of the de jure government proclaimed worldwide and made our “Declaration of Sovereignty for the Republic for the united States of America” to The Hague (a.k.a. the International Court of Justice), the Universal Postal Union (UPU) and the United Nations (UN).

    On September 23, 2010, the first session of congress was convened by the united free state Republics of the re-inhabited united States of America. The seating of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the Republic government were successfully established. This was completed by more than the required two-thirds majority vote of “We the People” on the land of the independent free state Republics. Delegates from more than 42 free state Republics attended, and officers for all three branches of our government have been officially sworn into office, lawfully electing interim President James Timothy Turner and interim Vice President Charles Eugene Wright, along with other established cabinet members with a presiding majority vote of 94% approval. Thus, the Republic government is officially re-inhabited and staffed for the first time since 1868 by the will of “We the People”.
    Now, this is all great, but digging a little more into the website one can see that it has a touted Christian core. That's all fine and dandy, but our Nation was founded under God, and for me God is not exclusive to any one religion. Albeit I am against secular government, I am also against a government claiming one religion over another -- especially if that religion adheres to the same manifest destiny mentality as the PNAC. I was about to go on a rant, but I digress for topics sake.

  11. Link to Post #29
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Vivek (here)
    Quote Posted by Vivek (here)
    I have been at work and I'm posting from my phone, gotta keep it short so I'll just provide the link.

    http://www.republicoftheunitedstates.org/node/5

    How's that taste?
    Okay, I've got me hands on a real compooter, so let me add some snippets from this link.

    First of all, there's a speech from former Congressman James Traficant Jr. addressing Congress about the bankruptcy of the united states of America and the consequential birth of the U.S. Corporation that followed it.

    Quote ...It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

    The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States...

    Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens of mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the Federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. Citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the Federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets, and labor of their “subjects,” the 14th Amendment U.S. Citizen to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States Corporation all of the credit “money substitute” it needed.

    Like any debtor, the Federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the Federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves,” the U.S. Citizens, as collateral against the federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks, forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

    Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the People have exchanged one master for another.
    Now, considering what Drake said that Pennsyvania had done relating to reestablishing it's sovereignty, I invite you to read this excerpt from the site I linked to previously.

    Quote Let’s talk about how we are now the Republic for the united States of America.

    On July 21, 2010 “We the People” of the de jure government proclaimed worldwide and made our “Declaration of Sovereignty for the Republic for the united States of America” to The Hague (a.k.a. the International Court of Justice), the Universal Postal Union (UPU) and the United Nations (UN).

    On September 23, 2010, the first session of congress was convened by the united free state Republics of the re-inhabited united States of America. The seating of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the Republic government were successfully established. This was completed by more than the required two-thirds majority vote of “We the People” on the land of the independent free state Republics. Delegates from more than 42 free state Republics attended, and officers for all three branches of our government have been officially sworn into office, lawfully electing interim President James Timothy Turner and interim Vice President Charles Eugene Wright, along with other established cabinet members with a presiding majority vote of 94% approval. Thus, the Republic government is officially re-inhabited and staffed for the first time since 1868 by the will of “We the People”.
    Now, this is all great, but digging a little more into the website one can see that it has a touted Christian core. That's all fine and dandy, but our Nation was founded under God, and for me God is not exclusive to any one religion. Albeit I am against secular government, I am also against a government claiming one religion over another -- especially if that religion adheres to the same manifest destiny mentality as the PNAC. I was about to go on a rant, but I digress for topics sake.
    Whoa, Terry addressed this particular movement and Tim Turner in this interview with Drake, so that clears some things up about that for me.

    Interview: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/freedom...freedom-reigns

  12. Link to Post #30
    Germany Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    18th April 2010
    Location
    NE England
    Age
    61
    Posts
    2,513
    Thanks
    13,928
    Thanked 6,221 times in 898 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Here the image of the congressional record from my trusted source:
    Attached Images  

  13. Link to Post #31
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by karelia (here)
    Here the image of the congressional record from my trusted source:
    It is too small to read... I see that it is the congressional record at the page where Traficant delivers his speech, but I cannot read what is in the box. What does it say?

  14. Link to Post #32
    Germany Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    18th April 2010
    Location
    NE England
    Age
    61
    Posts
    2,513
    Thanks
    13,928
    Thanked 6,221 times in 898 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Vivek (here)
    It is too small to read... I see that it is the congressional record at the page where Traficant delivers his speech, but I cannot read what is in the box. What does it say?
    This is what the box says:

    Quote Mr TRAFICANT, Mr Speaker, we are here now in Chapter 11.
    Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government.
    We are setting forth hopefully a blue-print for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner's report that will lead to our demise.

  15. Link to Post #33
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Here is the most complete version of Traficant's actual speech that I could find. It is extremely informative.

    Quote The Bankruptcy of The United States United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303 The Speaker is Rep. James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House:

    "Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11... Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner's report that will lead to our demise. It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congressional session, June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend the Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

    The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

    All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers.

    With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States.

    This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: "The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States?' . . .

    Gold and silver were such a powerful money during the founding of the united states of America that the founding fathers declared that only gold or silver coins can be 'money' in America. Since gold and silver coinage were heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored in banks and a claim check was issued as a money substitute.

    People traded their coupons as money, or 'currency.' Currency is not money, but a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money.
    Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) make no such promises and are not 'money.'

    A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States Government, not 'money.' The federal United States Government and the U.S. Congress were not and have never been
    authorized by the Constitution for the united states of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money - gold and silver coin.

    It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitute. One cannot get rich by accumulating money substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the
    People no longer have any 'money.'

    Most Americans have not been paid any 'money' for a very long time, perhaps not in their entire life. Now do you comprehend why you feel broke? Now do you understand why you are 'bankrupt,' along with the rest of the country?

    Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) are unsigned checks written on a closed account. FRNs are an inflatable paper system designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). Whenever there is an increase of the supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.

    Inflation is an invisible form of taxation that irresponsible governments inflict on their citizens. The Federal Reserve Bank who controls the supply and movement of FRNs has everybody fooled.
    They have access to an unlimited supply of FRNs, paying only for the printing costs of what they need. FRNs are nothing more than promissory notes for U.S. Treasury securities (T-bills) - a promise to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bank.

    There is a fundamental difference between 'paying' and 'discharging' a debt. To pay a debt, you must pay with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter or a commodity). With FRNs, you
    can only discharge a debt. You cannot pay a debt with a debt currency system. You cannot service a debt with a currency that has no backing in value or substance. No contract in Common Law is valid unless it involves an exchange of 'good and valuable consideration."

    Unpayable debt transfers power and control to the sovereign power structure that has no interest in money, law, equity, or justice because they have so much wealth already.

    Their lust is for power and control.

    Since the inception of central banking, they have controlled the fates of nations. .The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty protected in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a 'Canon Law' as their model, adding stock and naming it a 'Joint Stock Trust' in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post facto (to 1870), although post facto laws are strictly forbidden by the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 3). . .

    The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the federal United States government. . . The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender or underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or premiums, are the same.

    Assets of the debtor can also be hypothecated (to pledge something as a security without taking possession of it) as security by the lender or underwriter. The Federal Reserve Act stipulated that the interest on the debt was to be paid in Gold. There was no stipulation in the Federal Reserve Act for ever paying the principal.

    Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) "hypothecated" all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, -in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title.

    The U.S. citizen (tenant,franchisee) was registered as a "beneficiary" of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their "subjects," the 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit "money substitute" it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn't have any assets, they assigned the private property of their "economic slaves", the U.S. citizens as collateral against the unpayable federal debt.

    They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

    Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution, feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property.

    Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank.

    We the people have exchanged one master for another.

    This has been going on for over eighty years without the "informed knowledge" of the American people, without a voice protesting loud enough.

    Now it's easy to grasp why America is fundamentally bankrupt. Why don't more people own their properties outright? Why are 90% of Americans mortgaged to the hilt and have little or no assets after all debts and liabilities have been paid? Why does it feel like you are working harder and harder and getting less and less?

    We are reaping what has been sown, and the results of our harvest isa painful bankruptcy, and a foreclosure on American property, precious liberties, and a way of life. Few of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C. have dared to tell the truth.

    The federal United States is bankrupt. Our children will inherit this unpayable debt, and the tyranny to enforce paying it. America has become completely bankrupt in world leadership, financial credit and its reputation for courage, vision and human rights. This is an undeclared economic war, bankruptcy, and economic slavery of the most corrupt order! Wake up America! Take back your Country."

    -- END OF TRAFICANT'S REMARKS --
    Source: http://thehive.modbee.com/node/21677
    Last edited by Jeffrey; 11th April 2012 at 17:24.

  16. Link to Post #34
    United States Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    16th March 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    60
    Posts
    2,944
    Thanks
    5,907
    Thanked 12,350 times in 2,555 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    This is all great information, but I wonder if it means a hill of beans if it's not acted upon. I go back to my previous statement that much of this is distraction. Until we force change then nothing has changed. The elites control the media, the courts, government, and big industry. The image that really smacks me in the face is the frog slowly dying as the water comes to a boil. DISTRACTION keeps the people numb.

  17. Link to Post #35
    Avalon Member peace's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th December 2010
    Posts
    418
    Thanks
    385
    Thanked 2,086 times in 344 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    the crying was fake. he's a liar. he admits to recording people without their knowledge in the same interview he 'cried.' i cry. i'm not saying it's a sign of weakness. like others have said, he can't keep his stories straight. in the dk interview he reads as if he's not afraid of anything.
    the dude is false.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to peace For This Post:

    Seikou-Kishi (11th April 2012), Unified Serenity (11th April 2012)

  19. Link to Post #36
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th March 2011
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Posts
    445
    Thanks
    163
    Thanked 1,148 times in 324 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Personally, I always ask this question. And I am just guessing that many more people who participate on this website always ask this question as well. In fact, it is usually one of the first questions, isn't it? To figure out where might the mis- or dis-information be? How would what benefit who the most?

    So, for me, yes, I always consider this. But it seems I do not often arrive at the same conclusions as many others.

    It is a bit aggravating to so often be told I have not considered this, when I have, I have, and have. I always do. And I never am positive about my conclusions. I may decide to accept this or that as probably, or possibly being true, but never absolutely.... That would be rather foolish.

    But so many times, actually, most of the time, a goodly number of other posters make the wrong leap there as well, and speak out as if folks (this would be the folks they disagree with, like me, normally; the ones often referred to as "positives") take everything on faith alone, while it seems to me that quite often those positives are the very ones who actually do apply qualifications to their statements of belief, as to being, variously, just their opinion; what they hope to be true, but may or may not be likely; what they judge to be true, but do not see it as absolutely proven; what they judge to be true, and see as likely, but not definite; or any one of a number of other possibilities.

    Just my opinion.

    Have thought about it. It's a conundrum, certainly, but that conundrum does not in and of itself make a negative outcome any more likely.

    ETM





    a) their opnion
    b) their belief, givequalify their statements as being

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to etm567 For This Post:

    Alie (12th April 2012), xbusymom (12th April 2012)

  21. Link to Post #37
    Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,616
    Thanks
    15,960
    Thanked 15,009 times in 2,541 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Vivek,
    I'm listening to your above link right now. Thanks for the intel.
    From the Heart,
    Kris

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kristin For This Post:

    Jeffrey (12th April 2012), modwiz (12th April 2012)

  23. Link to Post #38
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Kristin (here)
    Vivek,
    I'm listening to your above link right now. Thanks for the intel.
    From the Heart,
    Kris
    Here's the most recent show with Freedom Reigns and Drake. Terry and Drake talk about the birth and death of America. I was listening to it last night and fell asleep half way through I was so tired but I'm about to listen to the second half now.

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/freedom...freedom-reigns

  24. Link to Post #39
    United States Avalon Member Dennis Leahy's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Language
    English
    Age
    71
    Posts
    6,865
    Thanks
    48,684
    Thanked 50,133 times in 5,941 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Unified Serenity (here)
    Until we force change then nothing has changed.
    I agree. I am ready.

    Of our only 'action' is words, the stone will not budge. We have to be brilliant chess masters, make (non-violent) moves that force the change.

    Dennis


  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dennis Leahy For This Post:

    Jeffrey (12th April 2012), Unified Serenity (12th April 2012), xbusymom (12th April 2012)

  26. Link to Post #40
    Ecuador Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    3rd February 2011
    Location
    California
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    3,721
    Thanked 10,195 times in 1,429 posts

    Default Re: Sovereignty - An analysis of the Wilcock interview with Drake

    Quote Posted by Vivek (here)
    Here's the most recent show with Freedom Reigns and Drake. Terry and Drake talk about the birth and death of America. I was listening to it last night and fell asleep half way through I was so tired but I'm about to listen to the second half now.

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/freedom...freedom-reigns
    At around 95 minutes Drake starts to talk about the resignations starting the first day that the declaration of sovereignty went out (in the proper manner). He doesn't know if his tongue will survive this stage because it's already hurting from biting it because it's so hard to keep this sensitive/priviliged infromation secret. He did give a time line though. He said he knows what our military backing is waiting on, he said that by the end of April (this month) a combination of things will come to pass that will change the basis of everything that we are dealing with... and it cannot be stopped.

    EDIT: He said within 30 days and this interview was from April 8th.
    Last edited by Jeffrey; 12th April 2012 at 14:49.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 4 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts