The United States of America never won it's freedom.
18 2017-09-01 by Putin_loves_cats
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi
UN, is not coming for your guns, they already own them. You have no rights. People bickering. lmao... Read that a few times... Everything is smoke and mirrors... How "patriotic" do you feel?
47 comments
1 bradok 2017-09-01
You and I may be politically at odds PLC but I enjoy your contributions to this sub. Here's an interesting video I came across theorizing that the US is actually still a Crown Colony.
Link- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AT6eodnYZGg
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
I really have no allegiances or political leanings, tbh. This is what people do not get or understand. I want the truth. Your video link is a good introduction, but I've already been there. People watch it, but it's far deeper...
1 bradok 2017-09-01
I only said that because you and I once had a rousing discussion about the role of the state and government in general in which we didn't agree on almost anything :) Glad you are still around, fuck the haters.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
lol, thanks. I don't remember, tbh, but I don't doubt it. I've spat with many over the years, here. Some more legit, than others. You're positive in my RES ;).
You too, and yes. Fuck em'.
1 CaptainApollyon 2017-09-01
lol now I get why his guy called me plc
https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6x8066/this_was_the_offer_on_the_table_when_all_the_mods/dmdv9g2/
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Ignore that person, or don't. Up to you :). You associate with me? You're literally Hitler!!! There are ~8 accounts targeting me, lmao....
1 OB1_kenobi 2017-09-01
Left wing and right wing both attached to the same bird. But people vote and then wonder why the bird never stops crapping on them.
1 thisisnotmyreality 2017-09-01
Funny, I looked in my gun safe... no UN. Just guns.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Did you register them? Did you get a background check?
1 ChadluvsZion 2017-09-01
That's a weird thing to ask someone on a conspiracy sub.
1 overtaxedoverworked 2017-09-01
This person has been trying to lure people into submitting their SSNs while committing illegal acts ... something fucky is going on lately.
1 YoureAllRobots 2017-09-01
Yeah, God forbid the people find out about their accounts huh?
1 overtaxedoverworked 2017-09-01
They aren't any accounts. It's a honeypot designed to get "free thinkers" to commit wire fraud while simultaneously submitting their identities to the authorities ...
1 YoureAllRobots 2017-09-01
Yeah, I'm sure that's what you'd like people to believe. The truth is the accounts are real, though. That's just reality.
1 overtaxedoverworked 2017-09-01
They're as real as putting an empty envelope into a deposit bank machine, saying you've deposited $100, then withdrawing that money. It's fraud.
Not to mention that that the idea stems from the idea that the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 somehow still applies, when clearly There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666.
1 YoureAllRobots 2017-09-01
That's just where the idea was originally implemented. For you to suggest the most successful business model in the history of the world has not been employed by other entities since then is farcical. The strawman is real, the accounts exist, and I have physical evidence that they work; despite the continual lying and fraud carried out by the courts and corporations.
Thus, it's not an issue if you say it is a honeypot because I have researched this on my own and no amount of thought control bullshit on your part is going to change that. You may as well try to convince me that the sky is green, because it will have the same effect.
1 overtaxedoverworked 2017-09-01
No you don't, you are lying.
You are lying. If you weren't, you could point to a single applicable court case that demonstrates the current validity of the law.
You can't and won't, because it doesn't exist. You'll just keep saying that you've done it and it's real, with no proof. Lying, trying to get people to submit personal information while committing wire fraud.
1 YoureAllRobots 2017-09-01
Liar, liar, pants on fire is the best you've got? Well, the important thing is if they do come and arrest me they will have to falsify documents, lie under oath, and break their oath to the Constitution to hide the physical evidence from the court. Yeah, sounds like I am lying my ass off, right? lmao
I'm done with this transparent back and forth. Good bye and may your chains lay lightly upon you.
1 overtaxedoverworked 2017-09-01
We both know none of that is going to happen because you've never done it. People who have presented your claims in court have been praised by judges for exercising their democratic rights but have had their claims dismissed because there is no factual basis for them.
You on the other hand have absolutely no relevant legal citations and are basing your entire concept off of disinfo Youtube videos. So yes, you are spreading lies.
Thankfully it is absolutely transparent so people who look through it can see that one side has literal legal documentation to support their claims while the other is effectively asking people to participate in fraud.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
The point was, you have to register them and go through a background check. The constitution has no such limitations. Natural law says we have inherit rights, but this is not the case in the US. It was more of a rhetorical question to get you (people) to think.
1 jubway 2017-09-01
Which of those inherit rights is for gun ownership?
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
The right to protect ones life.
1 jubway 2017-09-01
In what way does that require a gun?
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
In what way does that exclude a gun?
1 jubway 2017-09-01
You're trying to say that having the gun is a right. As in, there is no way that the same effect could be achieved without it. It is not necessary to explain why guns can be excluded, it is necessary to explain why guns are required.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Sounds like you are just jumping through mental gymnastics.
1 jubway 2017-09-01
Sounds like you don't have an argument.
1 YoureAllRobots 2017-09-01
You sure?
1 pby1000 2017-09-01
Does our income tax go the the Bank of England, and the Vatican?
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Frankly, doesn't matter where it goes, at this point. We can all chase smoke, and that is what they want us to do. Read the actual documents, people... There is a reason they do not teach this in school and why lawyers are daft as fuck specializing in x,y, or z. Read the documents.
1 Tall_Trombone_Guy 2017-09-01
Im glad you're here to tell me the important stuff man, I won't worry about where those taxes go anymore!
1 pby1000 2017-09-01
It is too late? I am hoping that we can make the change that needs to be made sometime in my lifetime.
I know that the Cabal has felt that they cannot be stopped since 1968-1969. It may have been because Nixon was elected.
1 Illinois_Jones 2017-09-01
What I don't understand here is even if you're right (you're not), what is the point?
1 raygun_cisnut 2017-09-01
Article VI of the Constitution is not evidence that the USA never won it's freedom. You have presented no valid interpretation to support this claim.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Do explain, because the Treaty of Paris, and furthermore, the treaty of UN would disagree. I gave you the exact words of the article.
1 raygun_cisnut 2017-09-01
So your argument, then - is that because all debt and engagements were not absolved and reneged upon, that therefore the USA never won it's Freedom.
I summarize this for you, to demonstrate that I in fact understand your position - but do not hold the same interpretation of conclusion of meaning. In the traditionally accepted historical view - this is just the USA communicating to all that it will continue to act in good faith. To read anything more into it seems pure fantasy, but please - do explain.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi
UN, is not coming for your guns, they already own them. You have no rights. People bickering. lmao... Read that a few times... Everything is smoke and mirrors... How "patriotic" do you feel?
1 raygun_cisnut 2017-09-01
The bold part says that The Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. What part of that is not winning Freedom?
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;
1 raygun_cisnut 2017-09-01
This is a declarative statement to the effect that all treaties, existing or future, will be in pursuit of ( comply with ) the laws of the Constitution - not that existing or future treaties are the supreme law of the land.
1 Kolyin 2017-09-01
Treaties don't trump the Constitution. See Reid v Covert, 354 US 1 (1957).
You know, you can read books about law to learn more about it.
1 ChadluvsZion 2017-09-01
Ha! But not your guns right? Living up north you're so free but but us down here are not.
1 drwooo 2017-09-01
fuck patritosm bro
only in america
and where else you call them nazis
america == nazi
1 TotesMessenger 2017-09-01
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
1 Moelah 2017-09-01
You know the United states of America is a corporation right?
1 ragegenx 2017-09-01
I have played with this idea for a while. What if the US never really got out from under the crown's thumb?
1 ragegenx 2017-09-01
I have played with this idea for a while. What if the US never really got out from under the crown's thumb?
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Frankly, doesn't matter where it goes, at this point. We can all chase smoke, and that is what they want us to do. Read the actual documents, people... There is a reason they do not teach this in school and why lawyers are daft as fuck specializing in x,y, or z. Read the documents.
1 overtaxedoverworked 2017-09-01
This person has been trying to lure people into submitting their SSNs while committing illegal acts ... something fucky is going on lately.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
The point was, you have to register them and go through a background check. The constitution has no such limitations. Natural law says we have inherit rights, but this is not the case in the US. It was more of a rhetorical question to get you (people) to think.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2017-09-01
Sounds like you are just jumping through mental gymnastics.