The Missing 13th Amendment

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 01-29-2005 02:13 PM

__Um, I don’t even know where to start with this, but, would you like to really take a look at where the conspiracy started against America? Think Banks, money, lawyers, monarchs, and politicians. If some of this hasn’t been adding up to you for any number of reasons, read these snippets of this article, and follow the link for the entire piece, WOW, absolutely enlightening beyond comprehension. You really want to know what is wrong with our system?? Read It!

The Missing 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.

(excerpt from text 2)

In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys but most held no "title of nobility" or "honor". There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen's "counsel of choice" was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state or national bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank "Esquire" -- a "title of nobility". "Esquire" was the principle title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States.

Why? Because the loyalty of "Esquire" lawyers was suspect. Bankers and lawyers with an "Esquire" behind their names were agents of the monarchy, members of an organization whose principle purposes were political, not economic, and regarded with the same wariness that some people today reserve for members of the KGB or the CIA.

Article 1, Sect. 9 of the Constitution sought to prohibit the International Bar Association (or any other agency that granted titles of nobility) from operating in America. But the Constitution neglected to specify a penalty, so the prohibition was ignored, and agents of the monarchy continued to infiltrate and influence the government (as in the Jay Treaty and the US Bank charter incidents). Therefore, a "title of nobility" amendment that specified a penalty (loss of citizenship) was proposed in 1789, and again in 1810. The meaning of the amendment is seen in its intent to prohibit persons having titles of nobility and loyalties to foreign governments and bankers from voting, holding public office, or using their skills to subvert the government.

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

For the complete piece with all links go here..

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/13th-amend.shtml

Long read, but may add a bit of a binder to all conspiracies that exist today.

fab

daboodaddy · Post by **daboodaddy** » 01-29-2005 04:59 PM

There are many Americans who have been knighted by the Queen of England. If I am not mistaken, some are still influential politically.

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 01-30-2005 07:09 AM

interesting is it not???

worth a bit more investigation

fab

drnewel · Post by **drnewel** » 01-31-2005 09:39 PM

This is interesting because of the hand of England on the American Civil War.

Also interesting because of the titles of other kings, from other lands - perhaps titles from middle eastern countries.

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 02-02-2005 01:09 PM

I've really been doing alot of reading on this, and so far, it is not a far fetched piece. There are a few others working on this as well, very interesting.

In a MAJOR way if you take a look at the visions of our forefather's and their defintion of "people" and "representatives" cmpared to this mockery of liars and thieves who hold these positions today.

Alot of foresight was given by these great men, if you read the 13th as stated here, they saw these guys and their lieges coming, and looked to prempt this whole cabal we have had since the early 20th century, by calling a "spade" a "spade"

And the spades have it now, leaving us conveniently "undefined" and stuck with ill representation that was never intended to attain power over the people.

this is very interesting.

fab

Mana Loa · Post by **Mana Loa** » 02-02-2005 11:28 PM

drnewel wrote: This is interesting because of the hand of England on the American Civil War.

Also interesting because of the titles of other kings, from other lands - perhaps titles from middle eastern countries.

Very well put. The fact is after failing twice to take the United States by military force, it is obvious that the leaders who possessed intelligence determined that a different means was necessary. If military wasn't working (read banging your head on the wall) then infiltration would have to be used.

The war of 1812 taught them this, thus after most all of the founders were dead, guessing by the early 1830's or so they started their plan in earnest. We all know what happened in 1861 and the decade leading up to it.

I suspect that the leadership realized how powerful the written word was after the loss of the 1812 war. Thomas Paine's Common Sense played a critical role in keeping our colonists cohesive in the face of our winning the war of independence and this was utilized heavily through newspapers and early magazines and books.

Divide and conquor is ages old, the fact our Civil War happened when it did should justify further examination.

As a refresher...1783 we win, 1803 Louisiana Purchase and the US is coast to coast, 1806 Lewis and Clark discover the abundance lying in the West...1812 British return and are thrown out...head banging in Europe deemed painful new long term strategy decided upon. 1836 Queen Victoria begins long reign.

Most interesting indeed.

Mana Loa · Post by **Mana Loa** » 02-02-2005 11:41 PM

fabzilla wrote: I've really been doing alot of reading on this, and so far, it is not a far fetched piece. There are a few others working on this as well, very interesting.

In a MAJOR way if you take a look at the visions of our forefather's and their defintion of "people" and "representatives" cmpared to this mockery of liars and thieves who hold these positions today.

Alot of foresight was given by these great men, if you read the 13th as stated here, they saw these guys and their lieges coming, and looked to prempt this whole cabal we have had since the early 20th century, by calling a "spade" a "spade"

And the spades have it now, leaving us conveniently "undefined" and stuck with ill representation that was never intended to attain power over the people.

this is very interesting.

fab

A spade is a spade, unless of course you have been "taught" a spade is a spoon and you use the spoon to feed you, and this is passed down generation to generation..say 4 to 6 gen deep by now.

The great men who created this country are not dead. That is the thorn in the foot of the plan. May the pain be great. Death be to Tyrants was not an idle rant. The pen is mightier than the sword, and the mind is mightier than the pen.

A spade is a spade. Freedom is freedom. We may be "undefined" fabzilla, but then that is also a reflection of the "school" itself. You can't spread fire without feeling heat.

A spade is a spade. If you are in the rabbit hole you are in the rabbit hole. It works both ways in my opinion.

They who control have forfeited their freedom as they would like to take yours. Ones' actions bind them. Control is very expensive I think and why eventually it fails everytime. There has been much head banging in the history of man. I think the people should feel the hope because there is great evidence to have it.

Slavery is ALWAYS defeated, no matter which slavery we consider.

Just my thoughts on this matter.

Waverider · Post by **Waverider** » 02-03-2005 01:40 AM

History reveals all!

This is very interesting, very.. Is there more..?
Google' is the answer, hey' ..

This should be out in the open for sure...
Make it a mandate', hey..

Oh yes the Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of N.Y. after 911' was knighted.

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 02-03-2005 03:55 AM

The interesting thing with this, is that if you look at the long last of combatants against Dodge's "research" and the list of the so called "extremists' who have forwarded this conspircy theory, you really need to kck back and make a choice.

Is there an Illuminati, NWO, the PTB's, ET's, Secret Societies, and all other possibilities of a shadow existance,

OR

Is it just as simple as waking up and doing the daily grog and believing every thing that is spewed on the airwaves and from the mouths of lawyers and politicians.

It is, as simple as that.

22 websites I've hit on this, and it appears to me, that it is a "battle" of some sort, and not just about a research paper and it's outlandish theories, which I do not believe they are, but then again, I'm still open to the idea that God is an astronaut.

So take from it what you will.

I'll stay with it. Here's a few links I've read on the material, some pro and of course some anti, it strikes me interesting the foundations and members that have taken an "anti" stance on this, and whom they are.

http://w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-02.html

http://www.pushhamburger.com/13th_ame.htm

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

http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/E/thirteen/thirt01.htm

http://www.freedomdomain.com/orig13th02.html

http://www.halexandria.org/dward258.htm

http://www.uhuh.com/constitution/am13talk.htm

http://usa-the-republic.com/amendment_13/

fab

Iris · Post by **Iris** » 05-22-2005 05:06 AM

So the clause we were talking about in the other thread DOES tie in here. The founders' idea was to have common, everyday people serving as our representatives. Wouldn't they be surprised (and sickened) to see what we have today? A government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich, owned by England, with Americans born as slaves without even knowing it, and with our so-called representatives not representing us at all, but representing the international bankers, the Carlysle group, the Rothschilds, etc. It has a lot to do with our debts, doesn't it, with our reps holding allegiance to other than We the People?

This one was interesting:
http://www.pushhamburger.com/13th_ame.htm

But this sentence was confusing to me, in the context where it was written, "One who reads the law or acquires a degree in law by competition and examination is not banned." That seems contradictory to the rest of the article. Can you explain, please?

In this one, http://www.amendment-13.org/, it says, "In terms familiar to the common man, this might quite properly be called the use of bribes and graft by individuals and powers foreign, i.e. external, to the Congress of the United States to subvert the constitutional process and suborn our political system and the interests of WE THE PEOPLE." -- foreign to the Congress? Would this cover lobbyists? Or only from outside the country?

Hmm... it would also preclude any allegiance to the NWO, I assume. I wonder if it would also keep us out of the UN? Would it mean that lawyers couldn't work in the government? Or would that not apply any more because they no longer get their titles from England? Could it render some of our laws or presidential orders null and void? Would it have an effect on our national debt in any way? I'm still foggy about how this could tie in to the bankers thing and our paper money. Or does it? What other applications would this have today?

I did read that one LOOOONG article, but was tired when I read it and so tired when I got to the end that it just sounded like it was advising civil disobedience that would get you tossed in jail. The article was a bit confusing to me, and daunting in its length.

Is there a serious movement afoot today to have this Amendment restored to public view and acceptance? I'm sure there would be heavy opposition.

mudwoman · Post by **mudwoman** » 05-22-2005 05:43 AM

Not sure why this is of great historical importance Fab, since it was passed. A lot of amendments have been proposed.

Twelve states ratified the amendment, not enough to make it part of the Constitution under Article V of the Constitution, which requires ratification of "the legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress."

According to President James Monroe's Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams, in reports dated February 3, 1818 and February 27, 1818, the following actions transpired:

Ratifications:
Maryland December 25, 1810
Kentucky January 31, 1811
Ohio January 31, 1811
Delaware February 2, 1811
Pennsylvania February 6, 1811
New Jersey February 13, 1811
Vermont October 24, 1811
Tennessee November 21, 1811
Georgia December 31, 1811
North Carolina December 23, 1811
Massachusetts February 27, 1812
New Hampshire December 9, 1812

Rejections:
Connecticut May 13, 1813
New York March 12, 1812
Rhode Island September 15, 1814

No Action:
South Carolina

No Reply:
Virginia

The publication of an amendment as part of the Constitution could just mean that the publishers thought that it was, or would be (by publication time), part of the Constitution.

http://www.thirdamendment.com/nobility.html
http://www.thirdamendment.com/missing.html

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 05-22-2005 11:46 AM

Iris, I think the bar association and becoming an "ordained" member of such is the difference in the phrasing.

You need not pass the bar to maintain a good education in the legal field.

We are in a system of enslavement by contractual obligations known and unknown.

Legally speaking, your SS number could be interpretted as a binding form of release to enter into a contract with other entities. And if they do not have it, you can skirt your way out of it and consider most nullified.

Another scary aspect of the national ID measures put into play.

fab

mudwoman · Post by **mudwoman** » 05-22-2005 01:14 PM

Oops, I am correcting the wording of my statement. So sorry about the typo, Fab.

My post should have read:

Originally posted by mudwoman
Not sure why this is of great historical importance Fab, since it not was passed. A lot of amendments have been proposed.

Sandy

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 05-22-2005 01:21 PM

I caught your intention

That is part of the premise of this theory, the votes actually do not match and may have been different.

Either way it is not on the books as stated, BUT it does bring issue to a very interesting scenarion that has developed that an act such as ths would have eliminated if not controlled from occuring in such an enormous way.

Either way, we as commoners have been ruled out of the ruling class which is of its own a crime against every last one of us.

here's a good essay...

Tragedy and the Common Man

An Essay

by Arthur Miller 1949

http://vccslitonline.cc.va.us/tragedy/milleressay.htm

Enjoy

fab

Fantastic Forum the Original Art Bell's Midnight in the Desert and Coast to Coast AM Forum

The Missing 13th Amendment

The Missing 13th Amendment

Interesting

Re: Interesting

Fabzilla!