The Magic Show: Canada is a Corporation

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240
Subscribe to We the People Constitutional Conventions on Rumble https://rumble.com/c/c-1516344
Subscribe to Constitutional Conventions on Rumble https://rumble.com/user/ConstitutionalConventions
Subscribe to get important Information
https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail.
Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8
https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html
info@ConstitutionalConventions.ca

Show more

The Magic Show: Canada is a Corporation
Pierre-André Paré
"All is privilege conceded by the State: your car, your house, your profession, in short your life; and what the state gives (you), it can take back (from you) if you’re not a docile taxpayer."

Pierre-André Paré
former Deputy Minister at the Quebec 
Department of Revenue

before a commission of the National Assembly of Quebec. Published by Le Devoir, April 6, 1996.) [Council Order 863-96, July 10, 1996 - https://bit.ly/2FmRcif]

The discretion of a judge is said to be the 
law of tyrants.

It is always unknown.

It is differrent in different men. It is casual and depends upon constitution, temper-and passion.

In the best, it is sometimes caprice. In the worst, it is every vice, folly and

passion to which human nature is liable."

Justice Charles Pratt, Lord Camden (1714-1794) (Emphasis added)

Ladies and Gentlemen, Look! Look! Que the band.

Draw the curtains.
And let the Shadow Magic begin!

UK Royals Coat of Arms, motto: "God and my right" (dieu et mon droit)

ACT ONE
(THE ROYAL CHARTER)
Smoke and mirrors and Rupert's Land Act appears

In 1670, King Charles II of England formed a charter for a corporation, called" The Governor and Company of Adventurers of England Trading in the Hudson Bay". It would later be called the 
Hudson Bay Company or HBC. The  charter comprised 40% of what is now the Canadian landmass, and included much of what is currently the U.S. states of Minnesota and North Dakota.
https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2020/01/16/1670-hudsons-bay-company-chartered/

Charles II King of England, (Scotland, 
France, and Ireland and Defender of
the Faith)3,861,400 square kilometers (1,490,900 square miles)

Royal Charter 1670
The Royal Charter for incorporating The Hudson's Bay Company, A.D. 1670.

https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2020/01/16/1670-hudsons-bay-company-chartered/
https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2021/01/20/canadians-need-to-be-educated-about-canadas-history/

3,861,400 square kilometers (1,490,900 square miles)

King Charles II signed the Hudson Bay Charter over to his German cousin, Prince Rupert of the Rhine, and seventeen of Rupert's associates known collectively as "The Company of Adventurers".
The deed was in the name of the monarch, fully and forever, for all heirs in

perpetual succession. It can never be revoked.

Rupert held the rights to "sole trade and commerce" of this enormous land.

King Charles II called his cousin and the 17 associates the "true and

absolute Lords and Proprietors" of what would now be referred to as

Rupert's Land.

Prince Rupert of the Rhine
Hudson Bay Company Coat of Arms, motto: "a skin for a skin"

Hocus Pocus Fishbones Chokus!

Never mind the millions of people whose ancestor's, successors and heirs,

already inhabited the land, the Native People, plus the settlers,

all of whom would come: to despise and loathe the ruthless Hudson Bay Company. The charter's

partners ran into their forts and locked up with their cannons in order to stay protected from those on the outside, who hated this company.

Prince Rupert

Fort in background
The Rupert's Land Charter controlled 100% of all resources of the land, the furtrade, forestry, minerals, the waterways, and everything else. It was a full-on monopoly, plus, they could make their own laws and enforce them. And all members of the HBC had to take oaths back to the King and / or Queen,as they still do today.
Rupert's Land Map

Trading with the HBC
No one knows what the actual deal was between King Charles and Prince

Rupert, and we are only given a cryptic clue which sounds more like an inside joke.

We are told that in exchange for the deed, the Hudson Bay Company owed the British

Royals two beaver pelts and two elk heads yearly. One can imagine what one likes, but It might have meant that King Charles II was getting a cut of the profits.

Symbolically, the two beaver pelts, and two elk heads might have been a way of saying this business "fleeces them, decapitates them, and mounts their heads like trophies".

Beaver
The Hudson Bay Company ran like this for 200 years.

Building Forts

The company allowed courts and all the trappings of a regular country, but it was actually a forprofit corporation, called the Hudson Bay Company. Everything came down to paying fees and penalties, using the corporate court system to uphold

laws and make money.

Native Man
Everything was controlled by the HBC because they had the biggest guns and

an arsenal of bio weapons including diseases and liquour. Anything the common men and women wanted to do, they had to go through the company, such as

putting their canoes in the bay. You had to pay to travel the bay. Settlers could not trade with the Natives, and if they did, they were fined.
calendar-gallery-1926-governors-inspection

Let the curtains close to prepare for the next act and let us reflect on what we have seen. What it was then — it is now.
Canada actually operates under this perpetual charter but the royals, and the magicians who work for them,

make believe that elected officials are enacting laws. The same system is

still in place.

The key solution, or the way to contest this back then — as it is now — is to

refute any law that is repugnant to Common Law, or the Bible. The kings and

queens have sworn an oath on the 1611 King James Bible to be "defenders of the faith" so whatever contracts they have entered into they must not be repugnant.

But if they are, and everyone still agrees to uphold them, the royals are exonerated.

King-James-Bible-1611-credit-British-Library-Board

What was meant to be checks and balances on the laws, had been ignored. The Kings and Queens did whatever they wanted, so long as no one complained. If men and women don't object, they agree, and the Hudson Bay Company got

away with it for 250 years, i.e. from 1670 till 1920.

HBC Trading Token

Then one day, in the 1860’s, the monarchs back in England said to themselves, these HBC people have a country where they can do whatever they want

and make as much money as they want, and all they give us in return is a nebulous gift.

King Charles was never able to get out of it; it was a contract that he had signed, and he took an oath on the 1611 King James Bible to uphold his contracts.
This was no way for royals to do business . . . poof! The magicians were at work building a new illusion.
ACT TWO
(THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT)

A body is sawed in two and then put back together again with the BNA Act of1867. Izzy Wizzy- let's get busy!

Queen Victoria

In 1866 - 1867 the then ruling monarch, Queen Victoria, had a plan to get the charter back from the Hudson Bay Company. She joined the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick with Upper Canada and Lower Canada, added a railroad and formed: a dominion called British North America by passing an act. This act was

called the British North America Act (BNA Act).

The 1867 BNA Act formed a British dominion, called British North America.

https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2020/01/16/1867-bna-act-passed-by-british-parliament-cherry-picked-from-the-quebec-res/

BNA Act 1867

map 1867

BRITISH-NORTH-AMERICA-ACT

ACT THREE
(REPATRIATION OF THE RUPERT’S LAND ACT)

And now, ladies and gentlemen, the two parts of the body will be rejoined
into one! Sim Sala Bim!
Recapitulation: there were two corporate entities running side by side, the dominion, British North America (Canada) and the Hudson Bay Company.
Next,

Queen Victoria demanded the Hudson Bay Charter back. By making a

"country" called British North America, the queen forced the HBC to be

admitted into the newly formed country.

Now the HBC Charter was given back to Her Majesty, for the price of 12 million pounds. Victoria got her piece of paper but the people of the land had to pay for it, as usual.
Some things never change.
31 July 1868, HBC had to surrender their charter to the queen, and her

majesty's successors and heirs in perpetuity.

Rupert's Land Act, 1868, 31-32 Vict., c. 105 (U.K.)
https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2020/01/16/1868-ruperts-land-act/

So, the people of Canada who paid for the charter did not get it. The queen and her heirs got it.

Canadian Coat of Arms

ACT FOUR
(STATUTE LAW REVISION ACT)

On June 9th 1893, queen Victoria pulls a rabbit out of her hat and un-enacts the BNA Act, 26 years after she had formed it.
Uju Buju Suck Another Juju!

Beaver skin top hat courtesy the HBC
Screen Shot above

The rabbit (or the country now called Canada) which Queen Victoria pulled out of her hat 26 years ago hopped away! The BNA Act disappeared!

The dominion of British North America was removed by the queen with her

Statute Law Revision Act of 1893, but no one knew what she had done.

Even today, no one knows, except insiders.

Statute Law Revision Act, 1893 - Enactment No. 3

https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2020/01/17/1893-statute-law-revisions-act-uk-removal-of-sec-2-of-the-bna-act-legally-removing-the-monarchy-from-canada/

Queen Victoria

Let the curtains fall so we can have an intermission and reflect on what it means
that there is No Act, No Parliament, No Constitution, No de jure laws.

Queen Elizabeth II

The current queen, Elizabeth II, does NOT sign the laws into being in British Columbia, Canada.The Lieutenant Governor, who represents

the queen, also does NOT sign the laws into being.
Zip! Nothing! Its all a grand illusion.

The Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia is the viceregal representative of the Canadian monarch, Queen Elizabeth II.

This office was created in 1871, and has 
served the crown ever since.

Iona Campagnolo

The Lieutenant Governor from 2001 - 2007, was Iona Campagnolo. She was very wise and she made a statement in one of her speeches, where she removed herself from liability.

She admitted that she did not sign any laws, and neither did the queen whom she represented. Why? Because thelaws are repugnant to Common Law and 
the Bible.

Voila!

Iona Campagnolo's Coat of Arms

Here is what Iona Campagnolo, Lieutenant Governor said:
“As Head of State, I have the same 
mandate as Her Majesty,

Queen Elizabeth, the Queen of Canada;
that is to say, apart from a single reserve power to sustain democratic governance . . . NONE!
. . .Thus Her Majesty is our head of State, while the Governor General is the
defacto Head of State,
and neither is in command of Provincial or Territoria jurisdiction!

…. A Head of State however is the CEO of the Province and is required to sign all state documents in the name of the People to render them into law.”
But neither Iona Campagnolo, nor the queen sign them! Abracadabra!

There are NO de jure laws in B.C. Canada.

Iona Campagnolo Speech
coin

Now the curtains suddenly malfunction and come crashing down on the Shadow Magic Show, sending the magicians scurrying and the stage hands
scrambling to get things righted.

When many educated men and woman were in court, challenging the legal "name game"

(the strawman/legal fictitious name,
manifested by the issuance of the state’s birth certificate after the child’s physical birth), the judges roll their eyes!! When reading the words by Iona 
Campagnolo, that related to the fact that
she did not sign the laws and neither
did the queen.
Suddenly, many of the judge put his hands up and cried:
"Stop! We have to take a break!"

The prosecuting lawyer said: "I don't even understand what this is all about!"

The judge's reply: "I think they are challenging the jurisdiction of the court."

The words of Iona Campagnolo and pondered, "How can someone admit they have no power and then sign the documents into law?"

They assume she was signing them. They may know or NOT but soon learn later that she was not; a clerk of the court was signing them.

Iona Campagnolo was a very smart, no nonsense lady, who was exonerating herself from the whole scam and any liability. What she said in her speech was,

"I am supposed to be signing these 
documents into law, but I am not,
and therefore there is no law."

Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II

Why is the queen not signing the laws? Because, they are repugnant to

Common Law and the Bible. The queen’s representative, Iona Campagnolo was not signing them either. So, tax laws are not tax laws, they only exist inside the Hudson Bay Charter jurisdiction. The minute you step into Common Law jurisdiction, or a higher jurisdiction, they don’t apply.

The full liability would land on the Queen and Lieutenant Governor in 
Commerce Law jurisdiction.
The curtains have been secured and the Shadow Magic Show has been restored so on to the next act!
ACT FIVE
(REPATRIATION OF THE CONSTITUTION)
Hahchah Mahchah! Watch this, kiddo!

Pierre Trudeau

A NEW MAGICIAN CALLED PIERRE TRUDEAU WAS ON THE STAGE
with the current queen, Elizabeth II of England.
Trudeau, the 15th CEO of the Corporation of Canada - know as a character called the Prime Minister of Canada.
The problem was, he had to call the act by a different name, because the BNA Act had been repealed by Queen Victoria and that made it impossible to revivify.
So the magic show begins

There was no mechanism to restore the BNA Act, because the BNA Act created the

parliament and the parliament had been virtually dissolved, so they couldn’t even pass an act to create themselves! The Queen’s magicians had the

more powerful magic words.

Trudeau decided to name his trick the Constitution Act of 1982, adding in a Charter and Bill of Rights and freedoms. Which resulted in more crimes against Sovereign Men and Women.

Charter of Rights and Freedoms: A charter for the Coporation to Protect the Corporation and to ensure Sovereign Men and Women would be enslaved.

https://constitutionalconventions.ca/2020/01/22/1982-constitution-act-includes-charter-of-rights-and-freedoms-an-act-created-by-the-uk-parliament-on-behalf-of-the-queen-of-england/

Pierre Trudeau

Trudeau's "honorary" Coat of Arms, a house with no roof! These logos tell a lot more than you think. . .

ACT SIX
(QUEEN ELIZABETH'S PROCLAMATION)

Trudeau’s Constitution Act, the queen pulled, and is still pulling, now it is the magic show of the so called (King Charles III) a string of scarves from her sleeve. Scarves and more scarves many miles

long as the queen smiles confidently. This is perhaps the most clever trick of all . . . .

Doo-Dee Doo-dee Doo-dee!

PROCLAMATION of April 17, 1982, proclaiming in force the

CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982

SI/82-97, May 12, 1982.

ELIZABETH R

JEAN CHRÉTIEN
Attorney General of Canada

ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories QUEEN, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

To All to Whom these Presents shall come or whom the same may in anyway concern,
Greeting:
A Proclamation

Whereas in the past certain amendments to the Constitution of Canada have been made by the Parliament of the United Kingdom at the request and with the consent of Canada;
And Whereas it is in accord with the status of Canada as an independent state that Canadians be able to amend their Constitution in Canada in all respects;

And Whereas it is desirable to provide in the Constitution of Canada for the recognition of certain fundamental rights and freedoms and to make other amendments to the Constitution;

And Whereas the Parliament of the United Kingdom has, at the request and with the consent of Canada, enacted the Canada Act, which provides for the patriation and amendment of the Constitution of Canada;
And Whereas section 58 of the Constitution Act, 1982, set out in Schedule B to the Canada Act, provides that the Constitution Act, 1982 shall, subject to section 59 thereof, come into force on a day to be fixed by proclamation issued under the Great Seal of Canada.
Now Know You that We, by and with the advice Our Privy Council for Canada, do by this Our Proclamation, declare that the Constitution Act, 1982 shall, subject to section 59 thereof, come into force on the seventeenth day of April in the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-two.

Of All Which Our Loving Subjects and all other whom these Presents may concern are hereby required to take notice and to govern themselves accordingly.

In Testimony Whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Canada to be hereunto affixed.

At Our City of Ottawa, this seventeenth day of April in the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-two and in the Thirty-first Year of Our Reign.

By Her Majesty's Command

ANDRÉ OULLET

Registrar General of Canada

PIERRE TRUDEAU

Prime Minister of Canada

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN
Queen Elizabeth II
Queen's Proclamation 1982
Of particular interest is this sentence from the queen's proclamation:
"Now Know You that We, by and with the advice Our Privy Council for Canada, do by this Our Proclamation, declare that the Constitution Act, 1982 shall,

subject to

section 59 thereof, come into force on the seventeenth day of April in the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-two."

Section 59 of the Constitution of 1882
Section 23 "Minority Education Rights"

The operative words here are “subject to section 59” (of the Constitution Act). Now section 59 defers to section 23 (of the Constitution Act), and what is 23? It is the language issue. So, the people of Quebec would have to agree that in their province, children may be educated in any language that their parents desire. In Quebec, this is never going to fly. They will not sign off on a language issue and the Queen knew it.

So section 59 / 23 is the condition for which the Constitution of 1982 will come into force and effect!

NEVER HAPPENED IT WAS NEVER FULFILLED or satisfied (and So many are still deeived all across the land mass known as canada)
proclamation-of-patriation

And that did not happen. The Queen’s magic words are the strongest of all. So, there the Constitution sat. And is still sitting as of March 19,2024 in no where land!
MeechLake Accord of 1987 and the Charlottetown Accord of 1992.
Both failed.

No matter what man think they know about Canada’s Constitution,it is LOST as Sea!!
it is sitting in limbo subject to section 59. Section 59 says,
when 23 is satisfied,
there has to be another Proclamation and this section has to be not only repealed, but disappeared.
Ta-daa!

Canadian 2 dollar bill
All that Trudeau did, does not come into effect, until section 59 has been satisfied, so that takes us back to the Hudson Bay Charter.
And the one who owns the Hudson Bay Charter is Queen Elizabeth II, or soher family. When she mentions the word "Canada" in her proclamation, she is not talking about a country, she is talking about the Hudson Bay

Corporation. Whoever owns the Royal Charter corporation, owns all of the resources, licensing fees, fines, and taxes extorted from the men and women across a land mass known as Canada.

HBC IOU
“Now Know You . . . Constitution Act, 1982 shall, subject to section 59 thereof, come into force on the seventeenth day of April in the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-two.”
The 1982 Constitution with its Bill of Rights never came into force.
That is why, when you go into court and try to assert your freedom rights by way of the Constitution, they love it. They know that the constitution does not exist and you just gave them jurisdiction.
The monarchs perceived that if this magic trick were exposed, it might prove too inflammatory.

So, the royal magicians have been trying to change the name and connotations of the BNA / Constitution Act going all the way back to

1867.
They want to pretend like the 1867 BNA Act was never there!
And this new Constitution Act in 1982 has always been here, but it has not.
The Queen signs the Constitution Act; note the 2 pins on her left shoulder.
Another interesting part of the Queen’s Proclamation is this:

“Of All Which Our Loving Subjects and all other whom these Presents may
concern are hereby required to take notice and to govern themselves accordingly.”

She is talking to two sets of people here, “my subjects” and “all others” who are not my subjects. You are free to not be my subject. You, who are outside my subjects, and still want to interact with this document,
“whom these Presents may concern”, you must govern yourselves accordingly.

This document tells where Canada actually is.
Until section 59 is satisfied, there are NO laws, NO government, NO acts, No 
parliament, and No legislature. All
there is, is whatever they can get with 
their Hudson Bay Charter.

Happis Crapis! This SHIT SHOW is complete!
THE ILLUSION vs  JURISDICTIONS

Where's the After-Party?
Now it is time for the the Solution

Constitutional Conventions (https://constitutionalconventions.ca/, will explain how the illusions in this shadow show work. First of all, he understood the court’sboundaries concerning the Queen’s Proclamation of 1982.

The fact that this proclamation made all the laws nonexistent], these judges just stare at any man or woman,not knowing what to say!
They just want to get out of there, because at the end of the day, if there are no laws, how can the judge fine you or send you to jail?

In the states, you would say, "What is your jurisdiction over me?"

It is a writ in Common Law, where the judge has to prove it. Quo Warranto is a writ that says by what authority are you doing this?"

This writ goes way back, it is ancient, instituted long before people could travel quickly. As the Commonwealth realm spread, anyone
could go into a new area and say, "I am the new Lord, and you have to pay me taxes." How would you know if it were true? And the King would not want this to happen either because he wouldn't get his cut.
Enter "Quo Warranto", where the King would actually be a nominal plaintiff on this, making sure that the Lord had the seal of the King and was the real deal.

Prince Rupert of the Rhine
So, you can do a writ: "By what authority are you operating?" First, explain in that writ that the Queen has
un-enacted the BNA Act, and the Constitution Act of 1982 is subject to section 59 and still has not been satisfied. Then say, "By what authority are you operating?" and this requires the person to whom it is directed to show what authority they have for exercising some right or power they claim to hold.
Quo Warranto. The Hudson bay Charter is the only thing they can come up with, and most of the judges don't know about it.

No matter what you are trying to do, go with the higher truth, and ask them
to just leave you alone.
classroom
As far as pension plans and benefits, if you do not recognize Canada as a
country, you must waive your benefits and give them up.

When you go for the benefits, you waive your rights.

They don’t tell you that, but that’s how it works. It’s an agreement.

Each person has to decide.

tool

Internationally, all corporations are registered under the Uniform

Commercial Code, UCC. The UCC is a modern version of Law Merchant.

Law Merchant are ancient customs that are still operating today.

Contract Law has to give full disclosure, but you have to demand disclosure, they are not going to do it for you.

The agents of the Queen are ignorant of most of this information, by design, to protect the Queen.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse even for the agents, but this is the way it is. If you

are on the phone trying to have a discussion with them, they won't know what you are talking about.

You can try to educate them, but if they do not stop whatever they are doing that is bugging you, tell them you will go above them to the queen. If you do go to the queen and use
the wrong historical examples, she will just ignore you.

Detail of Statute of Westminster

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1931/4/pdfs/ukpga_19310004_en.pdf

For instance, everyone sites the Statute of Westminster, but if you read it, it tries to reverse the idea that laws can be considered repugnant. It states that the laws no longer have to be,”not repugnant to Common Law”.
I would never site that Act because they are trying to get out of a very important clause in the

Hudson Bay Charter.
The key is to use the correct historical examples.

When in Canadian courts, do NOT site the wrong Acts, because that propels the fiction. The judge gleefully thinks, “Oh, they believe that!” and he will pull you into his fraudulent jurisdiction. The judges love so-called Constitutional arguments!
They get excited when they hear that word, because they can use the fraudulent Constitution to pull you into that FICTION!!
They are happy about it. Tricks!

When you recite their fraudulent Acts, you are now an agent of the country,

and you give the judge jurisdiction to find you guilty. There is a point of view of what reality is (the truth) and they keep you mired in a different reality (the fiction),
So they have control over you. When you go to a higher jurisdiction, this game does't matter. If you have the correct historical answers, you pull the
argument into a higher jurisdiction.

When you know what happened in the Shadow magic Show of 1670, 1867, 1893, and 1982, you have the knowledge to pull the judge into a higher

jurisdiction.
voyagers

A judge will ask the accused if they agree with a fine or penalty. The smart judges ask for your agreement in the "contract" because they don't want to be held liable. It’s consensual. The scrupulous judges know what is really going on and they don't know who this man or woman standing before them is,

and who might be sitting in the audience, so they are very careful to get consent on everything. This way they will never be held liable.

A judge that does not get consent can be held liable with an Notice of Liability: "By what authority have you penalized me?" In Canada, the authority does not exist and you can actually show it. Unless section 59 has disappeared from the Act, there is no Constitution in Canada. Fifty-nine has to be erased and a new proclamation made in order for the

Constitution Act 1982 to come into force and effect. It says it right there,

very clearly, there is no country! When you say to the judges,

"You will be held liable"
that is when they recuse themselves or quit.
Looking

People are so deep in their beliefs that this information throws them for a

loop and it takes a while to sink in. Once it does, a lot of the puzzle pieces that did not make sense before, start to make sense. When you realize they are operating under this charter, it makes sense.

It all becomes crystal clear. Hold your ground, and they stay away from you. It takes courage, conviction, and inner strength, to maintain your authority.

Courthouse
Even the architecture of the courthouse and courtrooms are built to impress power over people, and strip away their authority. The doors are heavy and the steps are awkward. The courthouse inside is constructed to get you out of your comfort zone.
The pews are hard and uncomfortable. The judge wears a large black cape, and behind him on the wall are plaques, all creating the illusion that the judge has authority over you but he does not.

Court

Court

True authority lies in higher jurisdictions. The monarchs know this and are

afraid of this. Kings and Queens have taken oaths on the 1611 King James Bible
and to Common Law
They fear renunciation of their oaths. All versions of our Notice of Liability

contain 1611 KJB verses. When I used verses from other bibles, they were

ignored.

Remember the UCC is a modern version of Law Merchant, ancient customs that are still operating today and there is nothing the kings and queens can do about it.

Its their stuff!
Especially in Canada, where you can undo all of their Acts.
"Queen Victoria un-enacted that Act in 1893". That is all I said and I stood there quietly and we just stared at each other.
Even bring up 1982 because another slap in the face!
Voyagers

Remember the UCC is a modern version of Law Merchant, ancient customs that are still operating today and there is nothing the kings and queens can do about it.

Its their stuff! Especially in Canada, where you can undo all of their Acts.
It is all about jurisdictions. It is my strong opinion that the only jurisdiction

the Queen has is under the Hudson Bay Charter. That is the only thing the royals have because it is perpetual and it belongs to the Queen.
Bamburgh_Castle
The Royals
Their offsprings deemed themselves the royal elite. These are the banking families and the European Royals and they have always interbred
within their circle.
These monarchs claim to have a peculiar DNA and they have all of the money and they are in all of the power positions,

BUT, they do NOT have any authority! When you realize they are all FRAUD!
arundel castle england.

In the end, it has to do with us and our souls and if we can change.
Ultimately we decide.
The royals are just using us as pawns to create a reality and many are following it, but if enough of us turn away, its over.
Once we hit a critical mass...
Its over!

TAKE BOLD ACTION NOW FOR YOUR FUTURE AND FOR THE FUTURE OF YOUR CHILDREN.

There is no other path.

It is our destiny, and if we don’t take action we will be diluted out from ever again being able to take this course of action that will make us the free

Organize a Local Meeting - We have so many men and women looking to connect! 

Show less