CRACKING THE CULT OF THE CONSTITUTION The Canon Is Loaded (PART 7)

CRACKING THE CULT OF THE CONSTITUTION

The Canon Is Loaded (PART 7)

We can see the law of Canons throughout all major religions, all incorporating their political governments under these laws through their sacrament constitutions. These contractual constitutions, even as they pretend to be opposed to one another, all pledge allegiance to the same corporation of Church and State, not to God or the people.

The most common misconception with the people of America is that the constitution of the United States gives individual rights to man. But the constitution only gives the government rights and then limits those rights, for the constitution was not voted on by and was not ever for the common people. Again, people came before the constitution, and derive the natural rights from God/nature. No man derives a right from any paper that is not issued and granted by permissive acceptance through contract by government. Thus, the people consent to the unnatural political rights provided and granted by the government, while government takes its political right to assign those rights from its founding constitution and the legislation it passes.

Again, a constitution only gives rights to an incorporated body politic, not to natural men. A natural man cannot use political rights any more than his corporate artificial person can claim natural rights.

But the constitution does allow for government to bestow and revoke privileges and benefits to those people who take its mark (number) through the statutory legislative process.

When in history a country and its government (a political corporation) was newly created, expanding the land and empire of the international theocratic society of bloodline kings who funded those new government ventures, they were all started by constituting a compact of debt of allegiance to that Monarchy, which was called a “constitution”. In the United States, the people were taxed and indentured from their labors and estates, because those estates were of England and its Divine Rite through subjection. Thus, the men who came to America always claimed their rights as Englishmen under the Crown of England and not at all independent from that kingdom and its rule, which of course acted with God’s authority (permission).

As it turns out, everything that our “Founding Fathers” did in their Declaration of Independence was specifically to preserve their “natural-born rights as Englishmen“, which was in fact a perfectly legal pursuit as a crown colony.

We must discover what this dualistic word independence actually means:

INDEPENDENCE. A state of perfect irresponsibility to any superior; the United States are free and independent of all earthly power. 2. Independence may be divided into political and natural independence. By the former (political independence) is to be understood that we have contracted no tie except those which flow from the three great natural rights of safety, liberty and property. The latter (natural independence) consists in the power of being able to enjoy a permanent well-being, whatever may be the disposition of those from whom we call ourselves independent. In that sense a nation may be independent with regard to most people, but not independent of the whole world. —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

But let’s not forget… England was not just an “Earthly Power”, for it was ordained by the authority of God. Thus a natural independence literally could not exist at that time, as the King was God incarnate, and God was nature.

It is also important to point out the following, which lead to many other such constitutions in the colonies:

In Hartford, Connecticut, the first constitution in the American colonies, called the “Fundamental Orders,” is adopted by representatives of Wethersfield, Windsor, and Hartford.

The Dutch discovered the Connecticut River in 1614, but English Puritans from Massachusetts largely accomplished European settlement of the region. During the 1630s, they flocked to the Connecticut valley from the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and in 1638 representatives from the three major Puritan settlements in Connecticut met to set up a unified government for the new colony.

Roger Ludlow, a lawyer, wrote much of the Fundamental Orders, and presented a binding and compact frame of government that put the welfare of the community above that of individuals. It was also the first written constitution in the world to declare the modern idea that “the foundation of authority is in the free consent of the people.” In 1662, the Charter of Connecticut superseded the Fundamental Orders; though the majority of the original document’s laws and statutes remained in force until 1818.

(Source–> http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-first-colonial-constitution)

The word charter, as in the “Charter of Connecticut”, was just the next constitution. It was an amended version of the first. And of course the Articles of Confederation were the constitution until the U.S. constitution replaced it. So to claim that the 1789 constitution was original or unique is patently false. It simply set up and chartered “govern-ment” control of the people. And it was again replaced after the civil war, though made to look the same, to attempt to legitimize a replacement de facto government under military rule..

What did Thomas Jefferson have to say about the Declaration of Independence? Only that…

“…an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c..” –Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Henry Lee on May 8, 1825

And of course as a mere “declaration”, this document had absolutely no legal authority. It was just a poetic “justification” for the creation of a debt compact for a central government called the U.S. constitution. It might as well have simply been an op-ed in the local newspaper, but is instead cherished as God-sent. And yet the tenets of the constitution, in case you haven’t noticed, are inherently opposed to the ones in the Declaration. The declaration talks about natural rights whereas the constitution sets up political ones, and political rights are always unnecessary unless their goal is to trample upon natural rights. And this “trick” of using some cause to justify tyrannies and more government has been used by that “constituted” government ever since.

As for just what is political independence, this is more difficult to grasp.

In the United States, for instance, our government has created many independent agencies of government. The Post Office, the Social Security Department, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Reserve System are all independent agencies of government. Remember that the word of means belonging to. These are all political agencies of government, given the power by congress to make rules and act independently of day to day oversight of that congress. But in no way are they not agencies of government. They are politically independent but certainly not naturally so. And just like Congress, the King of England and the Crown’s world empire at the time simply did not have time or ability to govern America from his throne in England. Thus each nation within the kingdom was allowed to partially govern itself (to make its own rules) while still being subjected to the laws and tithing (debt) of the Crown Temple of England.

In this way, the corporation of the United States was and is politically independent, while still run (governed) by the blood relations and great grandsons of that same King listed in the Declaration of Independence.

Do you really believe you have a “choice” in these United States family elections?

“The presidential candidate with the most royal genes and
chromosomes has, up to now, always won the White House…”

Burke’s Peerage researchers

“[Bush] is closely related to every European Monarch
both on and off the throne… Not one member of his family was
working class, middle class, or even middle, middle class…”

–Harold Brooks-Baker, Burke’s Peerage publishing director–

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=82279&page=1

“Believe it or not, Mitt Romney and George W. Bush
are cousins — 10th cousins, twice removed, that is.”

“Romney is actually related to six past presidents —
more than any other 2012 GOP contestant. Franklin D. Roosevelt
is his eighth cousin, twice removed,
and both Calvin Coolidge and
Herbert Hoover are his 10th cousins.
Then there is his
sixth cousin (four times removed) Franklin Pierce,
and both 10th cousins Bush I and II.

Three out of these six were even (gasp!) Democrats.”

–Time Magazine–

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/12/20/family-ties-ancestry-com-finds-that-romney-and-george-w-are-cousins/#ixzz2BTniuh5C

“Obama and Palin are 10th cousins through a common ancestor
named John Smith… As for [Rush] Limbaugh, he’s also a
10th cousin of the president – one time removed…”

“President George W. Bush? He’s related to both Obama and Palin,
the site found.
Obama and Bush are 11th cousins through
common ancestor Samuel Hinckley,
and Bush and Palin are
10th cousins one time removed, also through Hinckley –

who, and stay with us now, was John Smith’s father-in-law.”

“Obama is related to investor Warren Buffett and actor Brad Pitt.”

“Palin, the former Alaska governor and Republican
vice presidential candidate, is a distant cousin of
both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Princess Diana.”

“In 2007, Cheney’s wife, Lynne, discovered ancestral ties between
former Vice President Dick Cheney and Obama while researching
her book.
She said the relationship was eighth cousin…”

“Palin is distant cousins with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
and conservative author and pundit Ann Coulter…”

–Ancestry.com, via Anastasia Tyler–

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-distant-cousins-palin-limbaugh-bush

“[Bush’s] royal kin include Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II, the Queen Mother,
Duchess Sarah “Fergy” Ferguson and even the late Princess Diana.
His most prominent ancestor may be England’s King Charles II”

“Bill Clinton and Bob Dole have more in common than
wanting to be president. They are distant cousins!
However, Clinton has bluer blood, giving him an election edge”

“Bill Clinton was born William Jefferson Blythe, but took his
stepfather’s name as a teenager.
Clinton’s ancestry can be traced back,
on his mother’s side, to King Henry III
who ruled England
from 1227 to 1272. He is descended from King Robert I of France.
Furthermore, he is related to every Scottish monarch to the
current British royal family…
Clinton is related to
every ancient aristocratic family in Britain today.”

“As for John Kerry, “the 60-year-old can trace his roots back
to the first Massachusetts governor,
John Winthrop,
to every great family in Boston and to a host of royals in Europe.

Kerry can almost certainly be traced back to King James I
and to the bloodlines
straight through the Windsor and
Hanover families,” Brooks-Baker said.
“ But both candidates
have a remarkable number of royal connections
and both are related to Queen Elizabeth.”

http://thecounterpunch.hubpages.com/hub/Nearly-all-US-Presidents-are-descendant-from-the-British-and-French-Royal-Families

Anyone reading this who claims the fact that all presidents of the United States are direct descendants of the Plantagenet kings of England, including Obama, is just a coincidence or some silly degree of separation, then you may as well stop reading and go back to the enter-tain-ment that govern-ment provides as a service to its subjects right now.

But why were the bloodline colonists of America even to this day so interested in retaining their English-born rights ordained by the Church (Canons) to rule the common man?

Because that’s where their inherent and inseparable divine right and rite to rule under God comes from!

Samuel Adams wrote in 1772:

“All persons born in the British American Colonies are, by the laws of God and nature and by the common law of England, exclusive (subjects) of all charters from the Crown, well entitled, and by acts of the British Parliament are declared to be entitled, to all the natural, essential, inherent, and inseparable rights, liberties, and privileges of subjects born in Great Britain or within the realm. – The Rights of the Colonists: The Report of the Committee of Correspondence to the Boston Town Meeting, Nov. 20, 1772.

Resolution #2 of the Declaration of Rights of the Stamp Act Congress on October 19, 1765, was written:

“That His Majesty’s liege subjects in these colonies are entitled to all the inherent rights and privileges of his natural born subjects within the kingdom of Great Britain.

The “Charter of Massachusetts Bay (colony)” issued by the king in 1629 proclaimed that the people of the colony:

…shall have and enjoy all liberties and Immunities of free and naturall Subjects within any of the Domynions of Us, our Heires or Successors, to all Intents, Constructions, and Purposes whatsoever, as if they and everie of them were borne within the Realme of England.

And today, Americans claim rights from a paper constitution chartered and paid for by Britain and Her subjects who rule by blood relation to that Crown Temple. And like fools we call this independence and freedom.

The colonists who came to America wanted nothing more than and in fact insisted upon being treated as natural-born Englishmen with all rights and privileges thereof and under the king but in the King’s land of America. This was reflected in every facet of the New America (New England). And it is part of the basis of the falsity of sentiment of the time in the term God-given natural rights, as the “king” was considered to be of “God” – the “divine” right of kings – under which rights were granted to the King’s (God’s) subjects.

Today, the people still believe that the constitution is divine, and that like the divine rite of kings, somehow that divine constitution gives them rights over and despite God and nature.

Perhaps it is easier to understand the sentiment of the time towards breaking away from that kingdom of Britain by the actual people of the colonies if we consider the sentiment of the people of the Untied States today being forced into the international body politic of the United Nations and excepting its own “constitution” – The International Declaration of Human Rights. This is the incremental process of constitutionalism that for centuries has conquered nations, America included. Our leaders tell us its good to be a member of the U.N. just as the same bloodline Masons and cousins of our current government told the colonists back in the late 1780’s that membership in the “United States” as a “federation” under a “constitution” was good for them. And though the people still believe that their rights are derived from the constitution that founded the United States instead of realizing they come from God (nature) and that a constitution is opposed to natural rights, they are being dragged into that United Nations as their new sovereign world government without a fight, like sheep to the slaughter. And the people of the United States of America who fight in the military are now fighting not to preserve the United States of America, but to preserve the transference of America into that international government even when it is against their best interests. For the United States military is now the “peace-keeping” military of the world, attacking all manner of nations around the world to ensure United Nations world governance friendly governments can be constituted throughout all the world’s people. This is the cause used to declare the right to constitute new govern-ments and charter new debt compacts (constitutions) all across the world. And the people, as with the colonists, blindly follow their Masonic leaders and died for their causes, most believing that their actions were ordained by God Himself. And they never comprehend that all the world is just a stage, and that these wars are all funded by the same central government that has always controlled (governed) the minds of men through ritual and ceremony.

“Every Masonic lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instruction in religion… Masonry, like all religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to misleadto conceal the Truth, which it calls Light, from them, and to draw them away from it… The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason… every man’s conception of God must be proportioned to his mental cultivation, and intellectual powers, and moral excellence. God is, as man conceives him, the reflected image of man himself… The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black godLucifer, the Light Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light… Doubt it not!”

–Albert Pike, Morals And Dogma

This process of Masonic constitutionalism that thus formed the new corporation of the United States can be seen not only in the founding of most other political governments, but also in the religions/churches that prop them up.

For instance, the Protestant Episcopal Church was incorporated into the United States in the year 1789, just months after the United States was created through its own legal constitution. Of course a constitution, as we will soon learn, is actually a pledge to another entity – in this case a pledge as a member of the See of Canterbury by this United States corporation of religion – and was a pledge of allegiance and of financial responsibility to fund and support the crown of England as head of that church.

And none dare call it treason…

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the senior primate and chief religious figure of the Church of England (where the current queen Elizabeth II is the British sovereign and Supreme governor of the church). The Archbishop chairs the General Synod, sits or chairs many of the church’s important boards and committees, and plays a central part in national ceremonies such as coronations – the anointment of Monarchs to God-like (Christos) status. As holder of one of the “five great sees” (the others being York, London, Durham, and Winchester), the Archbishop of Canterbury is ex officio (by virtue of that office) one of the Lords Spiritual of the House of Lords. He is one of the highest-ranking men in England and the highest ranking non-royal in the United Kingdom’s order of precedence. Since Henry VIII broke with Rome, the Archbishops of Canterbury have been selected by the English (British since the Act of Union in 1707) monarch. Today the choice is made in the name of the monarch by the prime minister, from a shortlist of two selected by an ad-hoc committee called the Crown Nominations Commission.

Here is the preamble of the constitution for the Episcopal Church that was formed in the United States:

10 13 11 flagbar

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: