Missing 13th amendment and other stuff by Judge Dale.

[mrsat_98]

http://www.shiftfrequency.com/judge-...3th-amendment/

Judge Dale, Ret’d ~ The Missing 13th Amendment
Shift Frequency April 15 2013

On or about March 20, 2013, the New Hampshire Legislature passed HB 638, recognizing Article XIII, known by few as: “The Missing 13TH Amendment,” missing from the organic Constitution of the United States of America. The legislative analysis offered described a trite but secret history of this mystical amendment, which I have encapsulated as follows:

During the American Civil War, the country was under Marshal Law by President Lincoln and after the War, Lincoln’s policies were to be abated and everything was supposed to return to normal but it didn’t happen quite that way. Congress passed the Organic Act of 1871, which created a government corporation within the District of Columbia, called: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. This new government corporation replaced the Municipal Charter for the District of Columbia, a move that egregiously led to the fraudulent rewrite and adoption of what appeared to be the organic American Constitution. This erroneous rewrite is described as a corporate “mission statement” with the original 13TH Amendment “omitted” and it was this Constitutional rewrite that was inadvertently published for all to see.

Members of royalty, PhD’s, lawyers, squires and bankers, “Titles of Nobility,” have left a historic wake of deceit, destruction and corruption behind them on this planet. I would like to believe it was the majority intent of the Founding Fathers and the first federal convention to shield America from those proven elements of destruction and corruption. In so doing they proposed and ratified several amendments, one being Article XIII or the 13th Amendment, specifically designed to bar candidates who held such “Titles of Nobility,” from ever holding a seat in government! Each year since 1871, Lincoln’s Martial Law has been renewed by Congress and currently, all state and federal governments are dominated by legislators with “Titles of Nobility.” What was once regarded as a service to country is now a political career.

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens at all, you can bet it was planned that way.” Franklin D. Roosevelt

The described “omission” of Article XIII [the missing 13th Amendment] and the “mission statement” – the fraudulent copy of the organic constitution – initiates the following ten [10] questions, which I answer as succinctly as I can.

1: How do you “omit” a Constitutional Article when they are all sequentially numbered?

Obviously this is a lawyer’s response by the New Hampshire Legislature because you cannot simply “omit” a Constitutional Amendment. They are sequentially numbered.

The original Article XIII was intentionally and methodically removed from existence, which took a number of years to complete and was NOT simply “omitted.” It required a conspiracy; a federal rewrite; the removal of all former texts and references to the original Article XIII and the domination of all the various state government legislatures by candidates holding “Titles of Nobility,” who would be willing to save their careers at any cost. This was all intentional on their part to complete and sustain its demise.

2: Why didn’t Lincoln’s Martial Law policies abate and the government return back to normal following the Civil War?

The federal government for the American Republic had imploded when the southern states decided to secede from the Union and walk out while Congress was still in session. Absent the presence of those southern state delegates, Congress could not adjourn and could not move forward for lack of a quorum! President Lincoln became the federal law under martial law until a new federal government could be assembled.

3: President Lincoln was a lawyer, a Title of Nobility, and several delegates and predecessors’ were lawyers. How can that be, given that the original 13th Amendment prohibited persons possessing a “Title of Nobility” from ever holding a seat in government and given that the 13th Amendment had not been “omitted” until 1871, during the Lincoln Administration?

The truth is the American Republic never enjoyed a Constitutional government, beginning with the election of George Washington. George took office one year before the Constitution permitted. He subsequently

overthrew the organic Constitution
reinstated the British-owned Virginia Colony Corporation
altered the Oath of Office requirements
installed a corporate military government in place of a civilian government and replaced the Common Law with a commercial law known as “Admiralty” or “the law of the sea.” George then declared that: “All of America is now under water!”
George was a 32nd Degree Freemason and a descendant of William, the Prince of Orange, the Sovereign King of America, according to the signed copy of the “Paris Treaty of 1783.” This gave him the notion that he too could become King of America.

We have been taught to think and believe that George Washington was this great military man of honor, a hero and “The father of this country.” If you were a Congressman and part of that great political conspiracy squirreling away approximately three to four million a year, you might be inclined to believe that hogwash. But in actuality George was the first traitor to the American Republic. He was memorialized by Congress in the Washington Monument, a 555 foot tall sea level obelisk, representing that “America is now under water!”

4: Why was President Lincoln forced to declare martial law and exercise Executive Privilege to create policy during and after the Civil War, when martial law was always intended to be a temporary solution?

Martial law was imposed rather than admit that the Union was dissolved. Under martial law the Executive branch executed federal edicts until the Executive branch and Congress regrouped. War was declared as a distraction.

(As an aside) the Civil War was never about the slave question. What we learned in school concealed the truth that the Union was dissolved. Hiding that truth makes Lincoln the second traitor to the American Republic.

I cannot find any evidence to support my belief that southern state governments were a part of this grand conspiracy. However their secession and attack on Fort Sumter was both convenient and timely. And when the southern delegates rejoined the corporate federal government they shared in the fruit of the piracy of American labor and industry.

5: Why did Congress feel the need to renew Lincoln’s Order of Marshal Law, every year since the Civil War?

The federal government has committed an ongoing treason against the American Republic from day one. The organic Constitution would have severely restricted Congress and the President. Under martial law those restrictions are suspended, which in turn grants the Corporate “alleged” President the power of Executive Privilege too create policy without Congressional oversight. Since Martial law can only be invoked during War or during Acts of Civil disobedience, the corporate federal government has obviously declared War upon the American Republic ever since 1781. Hence, their reason to renew Lincoln’s Martial law each year.

By 1933, the Roosevelt Administration passed the Emergency Banking Act. Concealed within this act is a modification of the Trading with the Enemy Act, wherein Congress has declared that the American people are the enemy of the federal government. Also concealed within this Act, Roosevelt dissolved the Virginia Colony Corporation.

6: How could Congress pass the Organic Act of 1871, when the US Constitution absolutely prohibited government corporations?

The Organic Act set the stage for a new federal corporation and prevented the Lincoln Administration from having to disclose to the American public that the federal government was dissolved and never was constitutional, which would have exposed that the Civil War was used as a distraction and Treasonous solution to their problem.

I believe that Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address was completely heartfelt and was the act of a repentant man who felt totally responsible for all the death and destruction that had occurred. I also believe that a guilt ridden Lincoln constantly placed himself in harms way, hoping that he would be dispatched with prejudice.

7: Why did Congress feel the need to create a new Municipal Charter for the District of Columbia?

Had Congress disclosed that secession by the south had legally dissolved the federal government, the American public probably would have demanded that a new Constitutional government be created, with new elections held because of a lack of faith in the previous delegates and that would have destroyed their federal careers; positions of power and visions of grandeur. So the Organic Act was passed and a new commercial corporation created having a Constitutional appearance and reference (ie) United States Of America, under which was concealed the original private foreign Virginia Colony Corporation. Under this new corporation, all of them could profit from the commercial piracy of American labor and industry.

8: Why did Congress copy and modify the organic Constitution to create a “mission statement”?

Congress was better able to maintain the “illusion” of a constitutional government for the American Republic, by using and modifying the organic Constitution as a “mission statement” without officially touching the organic Constitution. The federal officials regarded this plan as plausible deniability and business as usual. All they ever had to claim was that a mistake had been made by omitting Article XIII. Congress’s new “mission statement” can also be easily modified to suit their collective preference without convening a Constitutional Convention. Hence: The adoption of the Civil Rights Act and Tax Laws, etc. were all a corporate ruse. It was the corporate “mission statement” that was actually being modified by all their new amendments and NOT the organic Constitution and this is how it appears lately that Congress has unlawfully repealed several Constitutional amendments without convening a Constitutional Convention. Everything that has happened in government during the past 224 years has been an “illusion” and the original organic Constitution remains in tact and valid.

Every four years The US Printing Office reprints the organic Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, the Declaration of Independence and the Northwest Territorial Treaty. These four documents are the laws of the land or the foundation of all American law and can be researched at the US Printing Office.

9: Why was this “mission statement” published and taught by all government controlled public and parochial schools, as the one and only organic Constitution of America?

The purpose behind this decision and their procuring educational control, was to dumb down the American public and control what we are taught, know and believe using fraudulent information and various other constructive forms of propaganda through altered publications, the media, the press and movies.

The organic Constitution needed stricter controls but would have actually prevented the federal usurpation, propaganda, oppression, fraud, commercial slavery and theft that has occurred throughout the years. But Americans did not notice what was happening and placed far too much trust in their elected representatives.

In all fairness, we were a nation of immigrants and the bulk of our ancestors were illiterate. So it was actually quite easy for Congress to carry out this usurpation and conspiracy.

10: Up to the year 1871, why is it that out of the sixteen US Presidents, who had previously served, was Washington and Lincoln, the only US Presidents memorialized by the Congress?

The corrupt Washington and Lincoln’s administrations did the most to undermine the American Republic and further the goals of the private foreign corporate partnership and their commercial piracy of American labor and industry. That made Washington and Lincoln heroes in the eyes of Congress. The nobility regard the citizenry as slaves and we are conditioned to celebrate their beliefs, holidays and heroes.

How could this have happened, you ask? Certainly somebody should have caught on to this federal plot before now? Well they did, and all it took was a little government propaganda claiming these individuals were mentally ill, or drug dealers, or involved in a terrorist organization and plot to destroy this country. Once that it done the authorities use government agencies like the FBI to place these clear-seeing individuals into custody on false charges. Soon everyone stops paying attention to the message and evidence these patriots exposed.

Still don’t believe that this was all possible? Well, consider this: What is the first thing we do when a baby cries? We distract them with funny faces, baby talk, rocking or play peek-a-boo. When we discover the right distraction the baby stops crying. This is exactly how state and federal politicians “handle” us. The three best distractions they discovered are “fear, debt and war.” These traitors don’t do anything in a hurry because time is always on their side. Some of their plans have taken more than one hundred years to fulfill. Some will never be fulfilled. But even that has never deterred them.

The “Slave Question” And “Lincoln’s Election”

In 1860 the “slave question” and “Lincoln’s election” divided a nation. This division set the stage for conspirators to create a new private foreign corporation designed to

convert the federal government into a business
pirate America’s labor and industry.
The plan was to divert the public’s attention via a distraction consisting of fear, debt and war.

What happened

the South seceded
the federal government imploded
martial law was imposed and Lincoln suddenly enjoyed dictatorial power by and through “Executive Privilege.” [Sounds a lot like today, doesn’t it.]
Fort Sumter was attacked
War was declared. Patriotism and prejudice was force fed the American public.
Fear, debt and war created hardship for the Republic while commerce flourished and filled the pockets of politicians and the European royal and elite owners of the Virginia Colony Corporation.

During all this distraction the private foreign corporation called United States of America was created and filed. The organic Constitution was copied as a corporate “mission statement,” absent Article XIII. Both replace the Municipal Charter for the District of Columbia. All that remained was to destroy all copies and references to the organic 13th Amendment and then convince the American public that this fraudulent rewrite was the one and only Constitution of the United States of America.

Checkmate.

This devious example became a paradigm for all future historic events.

The New Hampshire Legislature was coy and subtle in their recent effort at transparency. It suggested the removal of Article XIII [the missing 13th Amendment] was merely an “omission” and that the fraudulent Constitutional rewrite in 1871 was intended to be used only as a corporate “mission statement” for the District of Columbia. Obviously some habits are hard to break.

What they haven’t said is we Americans are really sovereign and that all American governments, courts and agencies are unconstitutional private for profit foreign corporations. These corporations have absolutely no authority or jurisdictional power over the sovereign American republic. The Supreme Court admitted this in the year 2000, in Bond v. United States, 529 US 334, 2000. The government-controlled media swept it neatly under the carpet.

In an attempt to avoid repercussions the government presented a false case and decision titled US v. Bond before the federal appeals court. This reversed the US Supreme Court. There is, of course, no body of law that can reverse the US Supreme Court. It’s the highest court in America even under their corporate regulations.

I choose to believe that these New Hampshire legislators are subtly circumventing a nefarious history in which they and their brotherhood continue to play an integral part. I also believe that the members of that state legislature now foresee their future arrest, loss of liberty and political demise and that this recent attempt at transparency is actually an intelligent attempt to solicit some degree of leniency and forgiveness from the American public.

You be the judge.

Blessings, Judge Dale, retired

[donnay]

Below is an article written by one of the original finders of the missing 13th Amendment. In the body of the Constitution it speaks of "Titles of Nobility", but this amendment made it abundantly clear who could and could not hold public office for a reason-- so there were no conflicts of interest in passing laws to benefit any others except for the American people. Can it be just that simple to reclaim what our founders envisioned for this country? I think so if more people knew about it.

Here is HB 638.

The Missing 13th Amendment

David M. Dodge, Researcher, Date 08/01/91


In the winter of 1983, archival research expert David Dodge, and former Baltimore police investigator Tom Dunn, were searching for evidence of government corruption in public records stored in the Belfast Library on the coast of Maine.

By chance, they discovered the library's oldest authentic copy of the Constitution of the United States (printed in 1825). Both men were stunned to see this document included a 13th Amendment that no longer appears on current copies of the Constitution. Moreover, after studying the Amendment's language and historical context, they realized the principle intent of this "missing" 13th Amendment was to prohibit lawyers from serving in government. So began a seven year, nationwide search for the truth surrounding the most bizarre Constitutional puzzle in American history -- the unlawful removal of a ratified Amendment from the Constitution of the United States.

Since 1983, Dodge and Dunn have uncovered additional copies of the Constitution with the "missing" 13th Amendment printed in at least eighteen separate publications by ten different states and territories over four decades from 1822 to 1860. In June of this year (1991), Dodge uncovered the evidence that this missing 13th Amendment had indeed been lawfully ratified by the state of Virginia and was therefore an authentic Amendment to the American Constitution. If the evidence is correct and no logical errors have been made, a 13th Amendment restricting lawyers from serving in government was ratified in 1819 and removed from the U.S. Constitution during the tumult of the Civil War. Since the Amendment was never lawfully repealed, it is still the Law today. The implications are enormous.

The story of this "missing" Amendment is complex and at times confusing because the political issues and vocabulary of the American Revolution were different from our own. However, there are essentially two issues:

What does the Amendment mean? and,
Was the Amendment ratified?

Before we consider the issue of ratification, we should first understand the Amendment's meaning and consequent current relevance.
MEANING of the 13th Amendment

The "missing" 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."

At the first reading, the meaning of this 13th Amendment (also called the "title of nobility" Amendment) seems obscure; unimportant. The references to "nobility," "honour," "emperor," "king," and "prince," lead us to dismiss this Amendment as a petty post-revolution act of spite directed against the British monarchy. The U.S. modern world of Lady Di and Prince Charles, make anti-royalist sentiments seem so archaic and quaint, that the Amendment can be ignored.

Not so. Consider some evidence of its historical significance:

First, "titles of nobility" were prohibited in both Article VI of the Articles of Confederation (1777) and in Article I, Sections 9 and 10 of the Constitution of the United States (1787);
Second, although already prohibited by the Constitution, an additional "title of nobility" amendment was proposed in 1789, again in 1810, and according to Dodge, finally ratified in 1819. Clearly, the founding fathers saw such a serious threat in "titles of nobility" and "honors" that anyone receiving them would forfeit their citizenship. Since the government prohibited "titles of nobility" several times over four decades, and went through the amending process (even though "titles of nobility" were already prohibited by the Constitution), it's obvious that the Amendment carried much more significance for our founding fathers than is readily apparent today.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

To understand the meaning of this "missing" 13th Amendment, we must understand its historical context -- the era surrounding the American Revolution. We tend to regard the notion of "Democracy" as benign, harmless, and politically unremarkable. But at the time of the American Revolution, King George III and the other monarchies of Europe saw Democracy as an unnatural, ungodly ideological threat, every bit as dangerously radical as Communism was once regarded by modern Western nations. Just as the 1917 Communist Revolution in Russia spawned other revolutions around the world, the American Revolution provided an example and incentive for people all over the world to overthrow their European monarchies.

Even though the Treaty of Paris ended the Revolutionary War in 1783, the simple fact of our existence threatened the monarchies. The United States stood as a heroic role model for other nations, that inspired them to also struggle against oppressive monarchies. The French Revolution (1789-1799) and the Polish national uprising (1794) were in part encouraged by the American Revolution. Though we stood like a beacon of hope for most of the world, the monarchies regarded the United States as a political typhoid Mary, the principle source of radical democracy that was destroying monarchies around the world. The monarchies must have realized that if the principle source of that infection could be destroyed, the rest of the world might avoid the contagion and the monarchies would be saved.

Their survival at stake, the monarchies sought to destroy or subvert the American system of government. Knowing they couldn't destroy us militarily, they resorted to more covert methods of political subversion, employing spies and secret agents skilled in bribery and legal deception -- it was, perhaps, the first "cold war". Since governments run on money, politicians run for money, and money is the usual enticement to commit treason, much of the monarchy's counter- revolutionary efforts emanated from English banks.
DON'T BANK ON IT (Modern Banking System)

The essence of banking was once explained by Sir Josiah Stamp, a former president of the Bank of England:

"The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin... Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again... Take this great power away from them, or if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit."

The last great abuse of the U.S. banking system caused the depression of the 1930's. Today's abuses may cause another. Current S&L and bank scandals illustrate the on-going relationships between banks, lawyers, politicians, and government agencies (look at the current BCCI bank scandal, involving lawyer Clark Clifford, politician Jimmy Carter, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and even the CIA). These scandals are the direct result of years of law-breaking by an alliance of bankers and lawyers using their influence and money to corrupt the political process and rob the public. (Think you're not being robbed? Guess who's going to pay the bill for the excesses of the S&L's, U.S.-taxpayer? You are.)

The systematic robbery of productive individuals by parasitic bankers and lawyers is not a recent phenomenon. This abuse is a human tradition that predates the Bible and spread from Europe to America despite early colonial prohibitions.

When the first United States Bank was chartered by Congress in 1790, there were only three state banks in existence. At one time, banks were prohibited by law in most states because many of the early settlers were all too familiar with the practices of the European goldsmith banks.

Goldsmith banks were safe-houses used to store client's gold. In exchange for the deposited gold, customers were issued notes (paper money) which were redeemable in gold. The goldsmith bankers quickly succumbed to the temptation to issue "extra" notes, (unbacked by gold). Why? Because the "extra" notes enriched the bankers by allowing them to buy property with notes for gold that they did not own, gold that did not even exist.

Colonists knew that bankers occasionally printed too much paper money, found themselves over-leveraged, and caused a "run on the bank". If the bankers lacked sufficient gold to meet the demand, the paper money became worthless and common citizens left holding the paper were ruined. Although over-leveraged bankers were sometime hung, the bankers continued printing extra money to increase their fortunes at the expense of the productive members of society. (The practice continues to this day, and offers "sweetheart" loans to bank insiders, and even provides the foundation for deficit spending and the U.S. Federal government's unbridled growth.)
PAPER MONEY

If the colonists forgot the lessons of goldsmith bankers, the American Revolution refreshed their memories. To finance the war, Congress authorized the printing of continental bills of credit in an amount not to exceed $200,000,000. The States issued another $200,000,000 in paper notes. Ultimately, the value of the paper money fell so low that they were soon traded on speculation from 5000 to 1000 paper bills for one coin.

It's often suggested that the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against a paper economy -- "No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a tender in Payment of Debts" -- was a tool of the wealthy to be worked to the disadvantage of all others. But only in a "paper" economy can money reproduce itself and increase the claims of the wealthy at the expense of the productive.

"Paper money," said Pelatiah Webster, "polluted the equity of our laws, turned them into engines of oppression, corrupted the justice of our public administration, destroyed the fortunes of thousands who had confidence in it, enervated the trade, husbandry, and manufactures of U.S. country, and went far to destroy the morality of U.S. people."

CONSPIRACIES

A few examples of the attempts by the monarchies and banks that almost succeeded in destroying the United States:

According to the Tennessee Laws (1715-1820, vol. II, p. 774), in the 1794 Jay Treaty, the United States agreed to pay 600,000 pounds sterling to King George III, as reparations for the American revolution. The Senate ratified the treaty in secret session and ordered that it not be published. When Benjamin Franklin's grandson published it anyway, the exposure and resulting public uproar so angered the Congress that it passed the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) so federal judges could prosecute editors and publishers for reporting the truth about the government. Since we had won the Revolutionary War, why would U.S. Senators agree to pay reparations to the loser? And why would they agree to pay 600,000 pounds sterling, eleven years after the war ended? It doesn't make sense, especially in light of Senate's secrecy and later fury over being exposed, unless we assume U.S. Senators had been bribed to serve the British monarchy and betray the American people. That's subversion.

The United States Bank had been opposed by the Jeffersonians from the beginning, but the Federalists (the pro-monarchy party) won out in its establishment. The initial capitalization was $10,000,000 -- 80% of which would be owned by foreign bankers. Since the bank was authorized to lend up to $20,000,000 (double its paid in capital), it was a profitable deal for both the government and the bankers since they could lend, and collect interest on, $10,000,000 that didn't exist.

However, the European bankers outfoxed the government and by 1796, the government owed the bank $6,200,000 and was forced to sell its shares. (By 1802, the U.S. government owned no stock in the United States Bank.)

The sheer power of the banks and their ability to influence representative government by economic manipulation and outright bribery was exposed in 1811, when the people discovered that European banking interests owned 80% of the bank. Congress therefore refused to renew the bank's charter. This led to the withdrawal of $7,000,000 in specie by European investors, which in turn, precipitated an economic recession, and the War of 1812. That's destruction.

There are undoubtedly other examples of the monarchy's efforts to subvert or destroy the United States; some are common knowledge, others remain to be disclosed to the public. For example, David Dodge discovered a book called "2 VA LAW" in the Library of Congress Law Library. According to Dodge, "This is an un-catalogued book in the rare book section that reveals a plan to overthrow the constitutional government by secret agreements engineered by the lawyers. That is one of the reasons why this Amendment was ratified by Virginia and the notification was lost in the mail. There is no public record that this book exists." That may sound surprising, but according to The Gazette (5/10/91), "the Library of Congress has 349,402 un-catalogued rare books and 13.9 million un-catalogued rare manuscripts." There may be secrets buried in that mass of documents even more astonishing than a missing Constitutional Amendment.

TITLES OF NOBILITY

In seeking to rule the world and destroy the United States, bankers committed many crimes. Foremost among these crimes were fraud, conversion, and plain old theft. To escape prosecution for their crimes, the bankers did the same thing any career criminal does. They hired and formed alliances with the best lawyers and judges money could buy. These alliances, originally forged in Europe (particularly in Great Britain), spread to the colonies, and later into the newly formed United States of America.

Despite their criminal foundation, these alliances generated wealth, and ultimately, respectability. Like any modern member of organized crime, English bankers and lawyers wanted to be admired as "legitimate businessmen". As their criminal fortunes grew so did their usefulness, so the British monarchy legitimized these thieves by granting them "titles of nobility".

Historically, the British peerage system referred to knights as "Squires" and to those who bore the knight's shields as "Esquires". As lances, shields, and physical violence gave way to the more civilized means of theft, the pen grew mightier (and more profitable) than the sword, and the clever wielders of those pens (bankers and lawyers) came to hold titles of nobility. The most common title was "Esquire" (used, even today, by some lawyers).

Continued...

[CPUd]

Thirteenthers.

[Ronin Truth]

The above posts might be pretty interesting, if true. But the wall o' text just causes my eyes to glaze over.

[donnay]

The above posts might be pretty interesting, if true. But the wall o' text just causes my eyes to glaze over.

Not everything can be explained away in a sound bite.

[Ronin Truth]

Not everything can be explained away in a sound bite.

Could it just be summarized in a screenfull or so?

[TheCount]

Could it just be summarized in a screenfull or so?

A summary would be unbelievable. Instead, you need multiple pages (or hours of youtube videos) for the author to make steadily more unbelievable claims so that when you reach the final claim it seems believable in comparison to all the rest of the nonsense that preceded the claim.

[donnay]

Could it just be summarized in a screenfull or so?

The Missing 13th Amendment would clear out most of the criminals in DC.

[CaptainAmerica]

I looked into this back in 2008 and remember reading about the destruction of the first Library of Congress and how important ratifications from the states were secured at the Library of Congress which the British army burned down. If states ratified the original 13th amendment near the end of the war of 1812 then it would possibly explain one reason the Library of Congress was a victory for the British in more ways than one. I do know that several libraries at the capitols of colonial states supposedly have documentation about the original 13th amendment which had to do with "titles of nobilities=treason" basically making lobbying illegal? I can see why the amendment was proposed during the war of 1812 considering the british were infiltrating the newly formed republic, some would accept gifts from foreign powers to carry out agendas...to protect against these actions in office the republic would have to come up with an amendment against "titles of nobilities" and "gifts"

[Ronin Truth]

The Missing 13th Amendment would clear out most of the criminals in DC.

That probably is the explanation of why it's missing.

[ClydeCoulter]

A summary would be unbelievable. Instead, you need multiple pages (or hours of youtube videos) for the author to make steadily more unbelievable claims so that when you reach the final claim it seems believable in comparison to all the rest of the nonsense that preceded the claim.

Yeah, Bastiat's The Law was way too long to explain something so simple as the purpose for law. /sarc

Really, some things take some background history and source examples.

edit: Not that I agree or disagree with the OP.

[ClydeCoulter]

2: Why didn’t Lincoln’s Martial Law policies abate and the government return back to normal following the Civil War?

The federal government for the American Republic had imploded when the southern states decided to secede from the Union and walk out while Congress was still in session. Absent the presence of those southern state delegates, Congress could not adjourn and could not move forward for lack of a quorum! President Lincoln became the federal law under martial law until a new federal government could be assembled.

Once some of the states seceded from the Union, that would change (lower) the number of members needed to establish a quorum.

[donnay]

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."

http://www.amendment-13.org/

[acptulsa]

I don't see how that would affect lawyers. I think that to be a major stretch. But it would be fun to see Georges H.W. and W. Bush lose their citizenship for having taken innumerable gifts from the Royal House of Saud.

[CPUd]

I don't see how that would affect lawyers. I think that to be a major stretch. But it would be fun to see Georges H.W. and W. Bush lose their citizenship for having taken innumerable gifts from the Royal House of Saud.

Thirteenthers say that because lawyers use the title "esquire", they are a knight's squire or something.

[donnay]

I don't see how that would affect lawyers. I think that to be a major stretch. But it would be fun to see Georges H.W. and W. Bush lose their citizenship for having taken innumerable gifts from the Royal House of Saud.

Lawyers placing the "Esquire" or "Esq." title to their name, have swore an allegiance to the BAR association. Not many people know that the BAR association is a private organization and not every lawyer is a member.

Whenever someone was appointed as a Crown Lawyer they were granted a Title of Nobility - Esquire - and swore strict allegiance to the King. Our Supreme Court was staffed by Crown Lawyers.

http://www.constitutionalconcepts.or...d-%20facts.htm

[mrsat_98]

Could it just be summarized in a screenfull or so?

Attorneys would be prohibited from holding public office.

I don't see how that would affect lawyers. I think that to be a major stretch. But it would be fun to see Georges H.W. and W. Bush lose their citizenship for having taken innumerable gifts from the Royal House of Saud.

Attorney original meaning was "one who twists words for the king". I was exposed to the missing 13th about twenty years ago donnay information by David Dodge was the bleeding edge back then.

[Ronin Truth]

Attorneys would be prohibited from holding public office.

Yeah, that's a major conflict of interest. What a great idea. Let's pass it again.

[mrsat_98]

Yeah, that's a major conflict of interest. What a great idea. Let's pass it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titles_...lity_Amendment

[Ronin Truth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titles_...lity_Amendment

Thanx!