Treaty of 1213 - The Beginning of the Lie

Once upon a time before the year 1066 the people of England held Allodial title to their
land. Not even the king could take the land for not paying a tithe. William the Conquer
came in 1066 and stole the Kings Title and took the land of the people. From William I,
1066, to King John, 1199, England was in dire straits. It was bankrupt.

The King invoked the Law of Mortmain, the dead man's hand, so people couldn't pass
their land on to the church or anyone else without the King's permission, (modern day
probate?). Without Mortmain the King would lose the land he controlled. The Vatican
didn't like that because the King owed a lot of pounds to the Vatican.(WHY?)(1). King
John refused to accept The Vatican's representative, Stephen Langton, whom Pope
Innocent III installed to rule England(religious or in fact?)(2) In 1208 England was
placed under Papal interdict(?). Interdict means a prohibition.)

King John was excommunicated and in trying to regain his stature he groveled before
the Pope and returned the title to his kingdoms of England and Ireland to the Pope as
vassals, and swore submission and loyalty to him. King John accepted Langton as
Archbishop of Canterbury, and offered the Pope a vassal's bond of fealty and homage.
Two months later, in July of 1213, King John was absolved of excommunication, at
Winchester, by the returned Archbishop of Canterbury, Langton. On October 3, 1213,
by treaty, King John ratified his surrender of his kingdoms to the Pope, as Vicar of
Christ who claimed ownership of everything and everyone on earth as tradition.

Question 1. Where in the Bible did Jesus give any man this kind of power over all men
and land? He didn't. He did not create a religion nor did he create the office of Pope.

Question 2. Can you have a third party break a contract between you and another
person under duress..? Don't those of you who are forced into a contract reserve all
your rights under modern UCC 1-207 and claim UCC 1-103?
The contract (treaty of 1213) was between two parties. Now the Barons of England
would not put up with being slaves anymore so they took to the sword and made King
John sign the Magna Charta. So doesn't this act of the Barons violate the principle of
natural law, when they created the Magna Charta, as having no force and effect upon a
contract between two parties? Well Pope Innocent III, the other contracting party
thought so, for he declared the Magna Charta to be: ". . .unlawful and unjust as it is
base and shameful. . . whereby the Apostolic See is brought into contempt, the Royal
Prerogative diminished, the English outraged, and the whole enterprise of the Crusade
greatly imperiled." Quoted from G.R.C. Davis: Magna Charta. Trustee of the British
Museum. London. 1965.
The Pope, in order to introduce strife in England and Ireland that would help him, used
Jesus teachings to his advantage that is verified in the Gospels by two of His Apostles.
So St. Levy (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27), alias Matthew, cites Jesus at Matthew 10::34-36

Page 1 of 7
and Luke 12:49, 51-3. Nothing reveals the antithesis of government and religion more
clearly than these facts.

Question 3. What did the contract of 1213 A.D. create? A TRUST or CONTRACT. Only
the two parties, the King's heirs and the Pope, can break the contract. For the Trust
/Contract cannot be broken as long as there are heirs to both sides of the contract.
At this time in history we now know who controlled the Kings of England and the land of
the world. For Now we have the Pope claiming the whole Western Hemisphere besides
Europe. The Holy See of Antioch ruled all the easterly side and the Holy See of
Alexandria ruled the western side, so there was a conflict. (3)

So, on with the story. The King's explorers had come to America to claim dominion over
land by deceiving and murdering the natives, the American Indians. The King operated
under the treaty of 1213 and everything was going along okay until the 1770's when the
bunch of rogues called the "Founding Fathers" decided they wanted the benefits but not
pay the taxes to the King. They, being lawyers, and professional educated men, didn't
know they were still under the Pope's control? Their lies and fraud now would affect the
American colonies and the people who lived on the land.

Those common people who fought in the American Revolution were unaware that the
1213 treaty still ruled despite the fact they THOUGHT the Magna Charta was a viable
piece of work.(4) The Declaration of Rights in 1689 declared the Rights of the British
subjects in England. At the end of the English Declaration it stated at Section III " ...that
should any of the Rights just mentioned be in violation of the HOLY ALLIANCE (1213
Treaty), ...it is as if this Declaration was never written".

So we know that the English Declaration didn't fly, so what makes you think the 1774
Declaration of Rights in this British Colony would work. Weren't these people doing the
same thing as the Barons did in 1215 A.D. to King John? A contract is a contract. Look
at Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Can anyone obligate a
contract? Were the "founding fathers" trying to obligate a contract between two parties
that still have heirs living today?
Question 4. How important is the "ultimate benefactor", the Pope, The HOLY SEE, in
the scheme of things? Move through history till modern times and pull Public Law 88-
244, which follows Public Law 88-243 - the institution of the law- merchants Uniform
Commercial Code. Are you shocked that the Pope is listed in this Public Law?

Doesn't the United States have an ambassador in the Vatican? Why? Is it a government
like all other nations such as France, Japan, Spain or Brazil? The Vatican runs the
world, it controls the British Crown. Is it any wonder they separate man's Church and
government? They don't talk about the Lord Almighty's Church (government) do they.(5)
"Organized churches" are given special tax privileges because the Vatican dictates to
the sixty United States trustees through the trust document, the U.S. Constitution

Page 2 of 7
created by the 1783 treaty between the King, frontman for the Vatican, and Adams,
Hartly, Laurens, & Franklin who were operating for the King and not the people of
America. Look at Article VI of the Constitution for the United States for your answer as
stated in the "New History of America".(6)

You see we are still under the Pope who rules over all nations as he declared he did
back in 1213. The 1783 Treaty did say in the opening statement quoted exactly as it
appears in olde English; "It having pleafed the Divine Providence to difpofe the hearts of
the Moft Serene and Moft Porent Prince, George the Third, by the grace of God, King of
the Great Britain, France and Ireland, Defender, of the Faith , Duke of Brunfwick and
Laurenberg, Arch-Treafurer and PRINCE ELECTOR OF THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE,
& C. AND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, . . .."
(Emphasis added in caps).

Did you catch the last few words? This is from a King (man) who can supposedly make
no claim over the United States of America because he was defeated? The King claims
God gave him the almighty power to say that no man can ever own property because it,
"goes against the tenets of his church, the Vatican/Holy Roman Empire, because the
King is the "Elector of the Holy Roman Empire’"

What about the secret Treaty of Verona, made the 22nd of November, 1822, which
shows the power of the Pope and the Vatican's interest in the US Republic.

Here is part of The Secret Treaty of Verona. "The undersigned specially authorized to
make some additions to the treaty of the Holy Alliance, after having exchanged their
respective credentials, have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE I. The high contracting powers being convinced that the system of
representative government is equally as incompatible with the monarchial principles as
the maxim of the sovereignty of the people with the divine right, engage mutually, in the
most solemn manner to use all their efforts to put an end to the system of representative
governments, in what ever country it may exist in Europe, and to prevent its being
introduced in those countries where it is not yet known.
ARTICLE II. As it cannot be doubted that the liberty of the press is the most powerful
means used by the pretended supporters of the rights of nations to the detriment of
those of princes, the high contracting parties promise reciprocally to adopt all proper
measures to suppress it, not only in their own state but also in the rest of Europe.
ARTICLE III. Convinced that the principles of religion contribute most powerfully to keep
nations in the state of passive obedience which they owe to their princes, the high
contracting parties declare it to be their intention to sustain in their respective states,
those measures which the clergy may adopt with the aim of ameliorating their own
interests, so intimately connected with the preservation of the authority of the princes;
and the contracting powers join in offering their thanks to the Pope for what he has
already done for them, and solicit his constant cooperation in their views of submitting
the nations."

Page 3 of 7
Do we have a false God before us and worship him and his church instead of the real
Lord, Jesus and his government. The divine right of kings exists in Clinton and every
Governor of the states in corporate Union. Well let me go on record and say that the
Lord gave me the same right as the Pope claims was given to him. Am I not a Steward
upon the land of the Lord as a mere sojourner, the same as the Pope? Are not you also
a Steward?

Did the Lord make a covenant with Adam and Eve to subdue the earth and reign over
the animals and to populate the earth? Doesn't that contract still exist? And doesn't it
exist with you also? And we, the true believers in that contract, can we take all the
nations (mans) laws in the world and dump them in the ocean to regain our rightful
place on this earth under the Lord's Natural Law to thwart the contract between King
John and the Pope that appears to defeat the original contract the Lord made with man?

Yes, let us go back to the original contract and destroy the Vatican's control over
everybody. Before 1066 the Pope did not claim all the land as the people claimed the
land and didn't pay taxes on it to anybody. Didn't the Lord say to the people after
coming out of Egypt, "why do you want a king when you have me and my contract?"
Which Lord do you want to live under, a Pope, a King, President, Governors, Senators,
Representatives, or a real Lord called Jesus Christ. "Christians," are ridiculed and put
down because they read the Word of the Lord correctly and could defeat even the best
the Pope has to throw at them.

The King James version of the Bible is just that. A version concocted by the King under
the guidance of the Pope so as to hide the real truth. I was taught by the church I went
to, which is government controlled as it has to be by the treaty of 1213 and reiterated in
the 1783 Treaty between The Pope's Elector, King John and the First President of the
United States, Sam Huntington and Charles Thompson, Secretary. I read the passage,
when Jesus was on the cross, from a very old manuscript that said, "Forgive them NOT,
for they know what they do." This is different than what most people believe he said,
"Forgive them for they know not what they do." Bottom line is that when men write,
transcribe, translate, update, and copy over thousands of years they always alter the
interpretation, words and insert their own meanings. You can see this in just the 200
years that our country became separated from England, but still remains a colony under
different compact and use of clever wording. But that is another whole subject that you
do not know about.

Eminent domain and Allodial title:

Why and where did "eminent domain" rear its ugly head? Right after the King's
government was formed here in America. Eminent domain replaced the Law of
Mortmain of England and when government wanted your land they claimed eminent
domain thereby destroying that to what people think they have allodial title. Allodial title
only existed in America when the King granted the use of the land to the likes of William
Penn, .........

But it could be taken at any time. Are you or were your great, great, great grandfathers

Page 4 of 7
ever free to hold land that could never be taken away? Ask some of today's farmers and
see how many lost their farms to the government that belonged to their past family and
I'll bet none of the land goes back to the 1789 era. Well it's a wonderful world to live in
the end times, isn't it. Read Revelations to see where the false preachers come from.
Who is the "Harlot" in Revelations?

Does the Vatican come close with a mortal calling himself the "vicar" of Christ?

Here is the definition of vicar in Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English
Language.

Vicar: "In a general sense, a person deputed or authorized to perform the functions of
another; a substitute in office."

The Pope PRETENDS to be vicar of Jesus Christ on earth.

Pretend; To hold out as a false appearance; to offer something feigned instead of that
which is real; To exhibit as a cover for something hidden."

You bet your life the Pope has something to hide. He is no more powerful than You. The
King is no more powerful than You. The American President and Governor's are no
more powerful than You. You allow THEM run your lives ...WHY.?

Thinkers, you cannot fight the Pope or the King on their contract even though you are
affected by the contract. You must go elsewhere for relief. Remember the first contract
in history, God with Adam and Eve? You had better because you were a part of it as an
heir and it is your saving grace. Why do you think the "courts of common law" are
despised and Government and States are taking action to stop them? See where the
power lies when this happens? Clinton, the Governors, and Congress of the United
States and the Legislatures of the several states are only following orders and delegate
to the 60 U.S. Trustees, who always show up in bankruptcy generated mostly by IRS
actions. Isn't that a starting point?

What do Trustees administer? A trust? The Constitution is a trust, correct? It was

created by the 1783 Treaty, correct? It is not the private man's trust contract, correct?
Only those entering into the contract are UNDER the constitution and are bound by it,
correct? Look up the definition of "under" in words and phrases and a good dictionary
such as Webster's 1828 at Vol. II, 101. I, my dear readers, am not "under" some damn
corporate trust (constitution) drafted in secrecy by the King and corporate lawyer
esquires (you call them the "Founding Fathers") whom were controlled by the Treaty of
1213, wherein the Vatican still ruled over all. It was never "my constitution" and never
will be. The Constitution does not apply to me nor will it ever.

However, some of the states' representatives in 1776 realized that the Constitution was
a commercial contract among the Founding Fathers to protect their financial interests in

Page 5 of 7
the Americas and in Europe. The Articles of the Bill of Rights is designed to keep those
United States citizens whom are bound by the Constitution (contract) from encroaching
upon my natural Law Rights, (With this hint in mind you may discover where the IRS
gets its purported power that makes you liable, because you claim to be UNDER the
constitution, but they will never admit it because only a few know the real reason and
they are not about to tell their agents. The same goes for any license issued to you by
the corporate States). I hope you have read the Supreme Court cases of State and
United States cited in my previous books that prove beyond any shadow of a doubt I am
correct in my previous two sentences. Yet you always fall back into the trap by claiming
citizenship of the United States AND THE STATES.

No! You are not a citizen of the corporate or organic State if you want to be free. You
cannot claim it is your constitution and remain free. You cannot claim representatives in
the legislatures and remain free. How about your estate? State and Estate come from
the same contract.

Webster's 1828 Dictionary defines it;

"ESTA'TE, n. 1. In a general sense, fixedness; a condition; now generally written and

pronounced state. (6) The general interest of business or government; hence a political
body; a commonwealth; a republic.

But in this sense, we now use State." Get the picture? We are the ryots tenure holding
the "estate" of the King called your estate. Belong to a body politic and you are a slave.
In my previous books I told the people a "republic" is a fraud, for then you belong to the
estate of the King which makes you a law-merchant holding as a trustee the King's land
that he is holding in trust for the Vatican. The States are the "estate " of the
Vatican/King cabal with the money changers along for the ride are a full blown
consortium which includes the Congress/President/ Governors et al. I don't want to drive
you crazy, since you might not comprehend all that is here. Once you know the truth
and let go of all you were taught by the government and the preachers you don't
become the drowning man grasping at the lies to stay afloat. Have you ever wondered
why you were sinking while pleading case law and their constitution to protect you?

Bye till next time,

The Informer

(1) (WHY?). Because the Pope claimed all lands as the vicar of Christ and the king
owed money from the Vatican that was to be collected by the Church of England. The
church reduced their parishioners to mere serfdom. When they died the church got the
property and the King, in order to preserve what property he had instituted the law of
Mortmain. This prevented the people from willing the land to the Pope. When the pope
got wind of this he excommunicated the King. That's the explanation for the Why?

(2) This is a fact that is documented in the English documents of History at the Leeds
Library.

Page 6 of 7
(3) The conflict between each of the Holy Sees, one controlling the western front
(America) and the other controlling the China side with the dividing line somewhere in
Spain and France through Germany. The Pope is the figurehead, remember and the
best way to explain it is Congress is Alexandria and the Senate is Antioch.

(4) (Why doesn't the Magna Charta hold more force and effect than a later contract
between the king and the Pope? Because the Pope decreed it null and void as it would
break the contract he had initiated with the King. The Magna Charta was a contract
breaker by third parties and that was a no-no in any law. Besides the Pope owned
England and how could the Barons take the land that the King pledged let alone all the
surfs that the Pope still controlled through the church of England? He can't and so the
Magna Charta was declared Void. Now the Pope, through the front man, The King,
could create the other contracts called treaties and no one is the wiser. Remember, the
Pope was being controlled by the creditor, The Rothschilds to whom the Pope was
indebted.

(5) Why? It is clear as a bell. The "church" of GOD is 'Government of GOD' and man
created all these religions and made churches for them. They, man, cannot allow the
Government of the Lord "Church upon this rock" to get in the way of the government of
men, now can they?

(6) "New History of America", by The Informer

People you can read this for yourself in American Council of Christian Laymen: "How
Red Is The Federal Council of Churches", Madison, Wisconsin, 1949. Now you may
better understand James Montgomery's latest as to why all the declarations, Magna
Charta, etc. have no effect. Read on to see why.

See: James Montgomery's - "British Colony III" on the Internet. To further prove what I
say that the declared rights were also at the mercy of any previous charters or grants
from the king of England you must read section 25 of the 1776 North Carolina
Constitution, Declaration of Rights which states;09"And provided further, that nothing
herein contained shall affect the titles or possessions of individuals holding or claiming
under the laws heretofore in force, or grants heretofore made by the late King George II,
or his predecessors, or the late lords proprietors, or any of them."

www.truthcontrol.com/articles/treaty-1213-beginning-lie

Page 7 of 7