Feb 16, 2023·edited Feb 16, 2023Liked by American Hypnotist
Yes in the course of being in the midst of a historical reveal of sorts...I was not shocked but I suspected during the course of my lifetime. What shocks me more is We the People were willing to put up with it and did not stand up against this sooner. I have learned more in this movement than in school. That reveals another problem of our systems failure. At 69 years od age I pray I can see the people grow a backbone. Now we need ro be busy restoring our republic and booting these no good pecker heads out and putting them behind the bars they so richly deserve. God Bless Ameria and the patriots
To the author of "Is The Federal Reserve a British Institution?" You have many facts correct, however there is a disconnect that you missed that might show up a missing element of your research. I am not saying this to shoot you down but more as a method of pointing out a common misconception that seems to be prevalent in some who are researching what has happened in the history of our country.
Case in point, under the picture of the Declaration of Independence you state: "They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" but when you click on that same picture of the Declaration of Independence it reads: "They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights"...
If you use a Legal Dictionary such as Black's Law Dictionary, after about the 3rd or 4ed. that dictionary implies that "inalienable" and "unalienable" mean essentially the same thing.
Research in old US History books printed after 1871 up until about 1892 or 1895 tells a much different story.
The original word in the Declaration of Independence was "unalienable" pronounced "un-a-lien-able" with the root word being "lien" which means someone has a higher claim that you do to something you refer to as yours, for example your house if it has a mortgage on it or your car if it has a "lien" on it. You call it yours but until the mortgage or lien is paid off completely the bank or mortgage company has a higher claim to that house or car that you do. To test this out and see if it is true, just miss 3 or 4 payments on either the house or car and see what happens!
When the original word was "unalienable" it meant "no one could have a higher claim, a lien, on those rights than you have because those rights were given you by the Creator (God). In that case you never entrusted your "rights" to anyone else, such as a trustee, because you could not do so since they were given you by the Creator.
But in 1871, Congress in D.C. changed the "u" to an "i" and the word became "inalienable" pronunced
"in-alien-able" with the root word being "alien" which means someone who is not a natural born citizen of a country but wishes to become a citizen by naturalization. Naturalized citizens are granted citizenship by the government and instead of "rights" they are given by government "privileges and immunities" which government can remove at will.
The same flaw is also found in the post Civil War 14th Amendment which removes "rights" and replaces them with "privileges and immunities" even for those "born". Go look it up and read for yourself.
When the change of the "u" to an "i" in the Declaration of Independence is understood it makes your series of articles even more believable and when coupled with the loans the U.S. Grant administration received from the London Banks in his last term of office. This, I believe will fit into what I believe you're going to explain like a hand fits into a proper sized glove.
This is an interesting topic and it appears as if we have an excellent army of fact checkers. I use the term fact checkers in a good way here, when looking down a deep dark tunnel, it’s helpful to have many holding lights opposed to one. This topic on the federal reserve has been carelessly addressed by many recently, look forward to your journey, now our journey, and I hope the fact checkers come along too. Thank you for your effort and intent. We need to educate ourselves!
The problem is deeper than the FED being a British corporation. Changes were unlawfully made to the constitution in 1871 at the behest of the Bank of England during the first bankruptcy. They changed the title of the constitution so that it would not be a controlling document for the USA corporation that was formed at that time. Since then, the owners of the USA company have hidden the real controlling documents and perhaps a royal charter for the USA company. Our constitution today is titled The Constitution Of The USA. Before 1871 it read, The Constitution For The USA. This was the trick of the Bank of England to make Americans believe that their government was based on our constitution, when in fact it is not. This is why the owners of the USA company (Bank of England) pay lip service to the constitution but the company's policies don't have anything to do with the constitution. This is why the USA company does not enforce its laws (such as cannabis prohibition) and does not enforce its borders. Corporations don't have laws or borders. All they have are policies that are set by their board at the behest of their owners. We've been living in a fake republic for 150 years and its all based on fraud (the breach of contract law where the title and contents of the constitution were unlawfully changed). All the modern wars have been based on this fraud. All the dead service men and women who died in these wars were murdered by this company, the USA, and now this company has used its DOD to attack America with chemical and biological weapons, and it continues to attack our nation's food supply in acts of war against us. This is the reality. The USA company is at war with America. The USA company is like the Dutch India Company and the Hudson Bay Company in that it has done egregious harm to people who are not British subjects. Not only is the Federal Reserve British, the USA inc. is a private British corporation. When people ask me for proof of this I tell them to look at the original constitution and the one we have today. NOTE: Also in 1871, the entire 13th Amendment to the constitution was removed. It said that no one holding foreign titles could hold federal office. This was so that people registered with the BAR association (British Accredited Registary) could hold federal office. It was too visibly unconstitutional to leave that language in there.
This is why DJT had Jackson up in the Oval office, and why Jefferson was the man while Hamilton, the new lib/left 'favorite founder' is not. The best thing about the writings of the anti Federalists like Mason. Monroe, Sam Adams are so important today.
They were aware the Crown would try to sneak back in whenever possible. Ergo the Fed, IRS, and so on.
The Board of Governors, which lies atop the Federal Reserve system, is an arm of the US government. Its employees are government employees. The bulk of the decision makers of the Fed - the vast majority of the Open Market Committee for example - are on the Board of Governors, are nominated by the president and confirmed y the Senate - just like any other political office.
The Federal Reserve Banks are owned (not necessarily controlled) by the national and state member banks in each district. Each national/state member bank buys the stock of the local FRB bank totaling 3% of the capital stock and surplus account.
Bottom line - the Fed is an ungainly and extra-constitutional kludge - a corporate and government marriage - with the soul of a big bureaucracy. It is not run by the British, and the degree to which it is controlled by the large US Banks is overstated.
The British Crown, realizing that military conquest was too expensive and probably impossible anyway (after all, the colonists didn't even fight fair!), decided instead to conquer her petulant American colonies through the gradual importation of her barristers and her Bank of England, a fractional-reserve, debt-usury-based, banking system. The "problem" with the lawyer/bankster class had become enough of a threat by 1810 that a 13th Amendment was proposed and ratified by a number of States (arguments regarding whether the threshold number of States was achieved continue to this day although extant copies of the Constitution dating as late as the 1850's include the amendment) which sought to impose loss of Citizenship and exclusion from public office upon any Citizen who accepted, among other things, a title of nobility or honor from a foreign king or power. Many lawyers to this day place "Esq." behind their names. Modern dictionaries define “esquire” as an unofficial title of respect, but by 1810 most attorneys were English barristers who were granted the nobility title of 'Esquire', and were considered to be working with and for the powerful European bankers, who also were awarded the title of 'Esquire'.
Whether or not the original 13th Amendment was properly ratified, it is overwhelmingly evident by now that lawyers, who have chosen careers as members of the judiciary, should stay there; electing or appointing them to legislative or executive offices is not only unwise, it should be vigorously prohibited for obvious reasons. The separation of powers deemed so important by the founders and so critical to the proper functioning of a constitutional republic is a delicate balancing act at best. It will eventually topple if one branch accrues too much power at the expense of the other two, as the Executive branch has already proven. But it will also fail if one class of licensed men are allowed to write the laws, enact the laws, adjudicate the laws, and enforce the laws. We are a nation of laws, NOT of men. The law is too important to be the sole plaything of a pack of sworn agents of the British Accredited Registry (otherwise known as the BAR Association).
What an incredible history lesson about an American institution most Americans know very little about, let alone understand, including me! Looking forward to future articles! Thank you!
Real freedom for Humanity will be done when the Federal Reserve is burned to ashes buried in a pit of hell ! WWG1WGA ! NCSWIC NOTHING ! GOD BLESS AMERICA !
Excellent Hypnotist! Looking forward to your future installments!
Yes in the course of being in the midst of a historical reveal of sorts...I was not shocked but I suspected during the course of my lifetime. What shocks me more is We the People were willing to put up with it and did not stand up against this sooner. I have learned more in this movement than in school. That reveals another problem of our systems failure. At 69 years od age I pray I can see the people grow a backbone. Now we need ro be busy restoring our republic and booting these no good pecker heads out and putting them behind the bars they so richly deserve. God Bless Ameria and the patriots
To the author of "Is The Federal Reserve a British Institution?" You have many facts correct, however there is a disconnect that you missed that might show up a missing element of your research. I am not saying this to shoot you down but more as a method of pointing out a common misconception that seems to be prevalent in some who are researching what has happened in the history of our country.
Case in point, under the picture of the Declaration of Independence you state: "They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" but when you click on that same picture of the Declaration of Independence it reads: "They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights"...
If you use a Legal Dictionary such as Black's Law Dictionary, after about the 3rd or 4ed. that dictionary implies that "inalienable" and "unalienable" mean essentially the same thing.
Research in old US History books printed after 1871 up until about 1892 or 1895 tells a much different story.
The original word in the Declaration of Independence was "unalienable" pronounced "un-a-lien-able" with the root word being "lien" which means someone has a higher claim that you do to something you refer to as yours, for example your house if it has a mortgage on it or your car if it has a "lien" on it. You call it yours but until the mortgage or lien is paid off completely the bank or mortgage company has a higher claim to that house or car that you do. To test this out and see if it is true, just miss 3 or 4 payments on either the house or car and see what happens!
When the original word was "unalienable" it meant "no one could have a higher claim, a lien, on those rights than you have because those rights were given you by the Creator (God). In that case you never entrusted your "rights" to anyone else, such as a trustee, because you could not do so since they were given you by the Creator.
But in 1871, Congress in D.C. changed the "u" to an "i" and the word became "inalienable" pronunced
"in-alien-able" with the root word being "alien" which means someone who is not a natural born citizen of a country but wishes to become a citizen by naturalization. Naturalized citizens are granted citizenship by the government and instead of "rights" they are given by government "privileges and immunities" which government can remove at will.
The same flaw is also found in the post Civil War 14th Amendment which removes "rights" and replaces them with "privileges and immunities" even for those "born". Go look it up and read for yourself.
When the change of the "u" to an "i" in the Declaration of Independence is understood it makes your series of articles even more believable and when coupled with the loans the U.S. Grant administration received from the London Banks in his last term of office. This, I believe will fit into what I believe you're going to explain like a hand fits into a proper sized glove.
Blessings to you and on your series of articles.
This is an interesting topic and it appears as if we have an excellent army of fact checkers. I use the term fact checkers in a good way here, when looking down a deep dark tunnel, it’s helpful to have many holding lights opposed to one. This topic on the federal reserve has been carelessly addressed by many recently, look forward to your journey, now our journey, and I hope the fact checkers come along too. Thank you for your effort and intent. We need to educate ourselves!
The problem is deeper than the FED being a British corporation. Changes were unlawfully made to the constitution in 1871 at the behest of the Bank of England during the first bankruptcy. They changed the title of the constitution so that it would not be a controlling document for the USA corporation that was formed at that time. Since then, the owners of the USA company have hidden the real controlling documents and perhaps a royal charter for the USA company. Our constitution today is titled The Constitution Of The USA. Before 1871 it read, The Constitution For The USA. This was the trick of the Bank of England to make Americans believe that their government was based on our constitution, when in fact it is not. This is why the owners of the USA company (Bank of England) pay lip service to the constitution but the company's policies don't have anything to do with the constitution. This is why the USA company does not enforce its laws (such as cannabis prohibition) and does not enforce its borders. Corporations don't have laws or borders. All they have are policies that are set by their board at the behest of their owners. We've been living in a fake republic for 150 years and its all based on fraud (the breach of contract law where the title and contents of the constitution were unlawfully changed). All the modern wars have been based on this fraud. All the dead service men and women who died in these wars were murdered by this company, the USA, and now this company has used its DOD to attack America with chemical and biological weapons, and it continues to attack our nation's food supply in acts of war against us. This is the reality. The USA company is at war with America. The USA company is like the Dutch India Company and the Hudson Bay Company in that it has done egregious harm to people who are not British subjects. Not only is the Federal Reserve British, the USA inc. is a private British corporation. When people ask me for proof of this I tell them to look at the original constitution and the one we have today. NOTE: Also in 1871, the entire 13th Amendment to the constitution was removed. It said that no one holding foreign titles could hold federal office. This was so that people registered with the BAR association (British Accredited Registary) could hold federal office. It was too visibly unconstitutional to leave that language in there.
Knowledge is good. Thank you.
well researched and reasoned.
This is why DJT had Jackson up in the Oval office, and why Jefferson was the man while Hamilton, the new lib/left 'favorite founder' is not. The best thing about the writings of the anti Federalists like Mason. Monroe, Sam Adams are so important today.
They were aware the Crown would try to sneak back in whenever possible. Ergo the Fed, IRS, and so on.
https://odysee.com/@thetruerepublic1776:8/the-wizard-of-oz-what-it's-really-about:8
https://www.eastonspectator.com/2021/03/01/the-titanic-was-sunk-deliberately-to-create-the-federal-reserve/
Bring the heat! Dutch East India and the Silk Road
The Board of Governors, which lies atop the Federal Reserve system, is an arm of the US government. Its employees are government employees. The bulk of the decision makers of the Fed - the vast majority of the Open Market Committee for example - are on the Board of Governors, are nominated by the president and confirmed y the Senate - just like any other political office.
The Federal Reserve Banks are owned (not necessarily controlled) by the national and state member banks in each district. Each national/state member bank buys the stock of the local FRB bank totaling 3% of the capital stock and surplus account.
Bottom line - the Fed is an ungainly and extra-constitutional kludge - a corporate and government marriage - with the soul of a big bureaucracy. It is not run by the British, and the degree to which it is controlled by the large US Banks is overstated.
Awesome work.. thank you
The British Crown, realizing that military conquest was too expensive and probably impossible anyway (after all, the colonists didn't even fight fair!), decided instead to conquer her petulant American colonies through the gradual importation of her barristers and her Bank of England, a fractional-reserve, debt-usury-based, banking system. The "problem" with the lawyer/bankster class had become enough of a threat by 1810 that a 13th Amendment was proposed and ratified by a number of States (arguments regarding whether the threshold number of States was achieved continue to this day although extant copies of the Constitution dating as late as the 1850's include the amendment) which sought to impose loss of Citizenship and exclusion from public office upon any Citizen who accepted, among other things, a title of nobility or honor from a foreign king or power. Many lawyers to this day place "Esq." behind their names. Modern dictionaries define “esquire” as an unofficial title of respect, but by 1810 most attorneys were English barristers who were granted the nobility title of 'Esquire', and were considered to be working with and for the powerful European bankers, who also were awarded the title of 'Esquire'.
Whether or not the original 13th Amendment was properly ratified, it is overwhelmingly evident by now that lawyers, who have chosen careers as members of the judiciary, should stay there; electing or appointing them to legislative or executive offices is not only unwise, it should be vigorously prohibited for obvious reasons. The separation of powers deemed so important by the founders and so critical to the proper functioning of a constitutional republic is a delicate balancing act at best. It will eventually topple if one branch accrues too much power at the expense of the other two, as the Executive branch has already proven. But it will also fail if one class of licensed men are allowed to write the laws, enact the laws, adjudicate the laws, and enforce the laws. We are a nation of laws, NOT of men. The law is too important to be the sole plaything of a pack of sworn agents of the British Accredited Registry (otherwise known as the BAR Association).
What an incredible history lesson about an American institution most Americans know very little about, let alone understand, including me! Looking forward to future articles! Thank you!
Real freedom for Humanity will be done when the Federal Reserve is burned to ashes buried in a pit of hell ! WWG1WGA ! NCSWIC NOTHING ! GOD BLESS AMERICA !
Hamilton was the top British spy during and after the American Revolution and he loved national banks.
Trump moved the Federal Reserve into the Treasury Department. How that helps, I don’t know.
5% inflation for the Nations first 150 years Then in the last 110 years, our dollar has decreased in worth less than one penny.