A well-known Dutch saying goes: When one sheep crosses the dam more will follow. In the new mindset we can change that to: If one sheep is over the dam it suddenly turns out not to be a sheep. We can do everything differently when we begin to discover that we can leave the safety of the flock and discover that sheep behavior is a program. Be the loner who dares to step out of the flock!
The "We Willem Alexander, by the grace of God, King of the Netherlands" is part of that programming and implies that we have a stable owner and assumes that the stable is the best place for the flock. Apart from the fact that herd animals should originally roam freely through the endless green pastures, because this is their natural nature, the discovery that you are not a sheep is even more liberating.
That "We" refers to "the crown" the institution that claims all power purely on the basis of that grace of God. Just look at the fancy monkey suits they have to put on to create and maintain the illusion of power. You have shiny bits of metal on all those suits and you have hats with feathers and carriages with horses; trumpet blasts to make the whole thing even more bombastic. The show in the United Kingdom did show how much show it takes to win over the masses. Take a listen to one of the Lords Spirituals (and read on below):
The Lords Spiritual are five clergy of the Church of England, once split off from Rome, like a kind of D66 that was once rebellious but now just back to mainstream. It is the church that is the de facto boss and proclaims the king as king. Oh yes and the king is again at the head of that church, by the grace of God. So what we see here is that one of the lackeys of "the crown," declares Elizabeth II dead and simultaneously proclaims Charles king. In effect, the members of the royal house thereby declare themselves monarchs.
That Church of England is an institution that falls under the crown. The Lords Spirituals are not democratically elected and the king declares himself king through the Lord Spirituals. And now we are all thinking, "Yes, but that is just ceremonial, the real power lies with the democratically elected prime minister and his or her ministers." And you still believe that?
In the Netherlands, we have the same model of a monarchy. The Netherlands is a kingdom. That means that a king is the head of state or also called: the "inviolable part" of the government. According to the official reading, that king has no power, but that is a pertinent lie found on all official websites. That lie is masked by the story that the king can never sign laws alone, but also needs the signature of a minister. Bullshit.
Yes, the ministers (who have sworn allegiance to the king) sign for approval by the "King's Cabinet" (again, from the king, after all), but the final and all-important signature comes from We William Alexander.
What is one of the main tasks of the media is to downplay the role of the royal house. The petty people must obviously not find out that the entire democracy is a farce and that all (repeat: all) politicians swear allegiance to the king. "Yes, they may swear allegiance, but that's just a ceremonial event hear. That's for form. They are allowed to have their own opinions". It is time to take off your blinders. To swear allegiance to, means that the one to whom you swear allegiance is your boss and you must listen to the will of the one to whom you swear allegiance.
Even the alternative media perpetuate the concept of the Monarchy's existence. Robert Jensen' s "Oh I'd long since forgotten it was Prince's Day (it's that unimportant)" and the showing of the, via Café Weltschmertz (see this call) hired protest audience, were allowed to briefly show some discontent within the fences of the system. This way we still seem a bit rebellious, but don't get to question the system itself.
None of the alternative media point out that your programming is so deep that you believe in a sham democracy and the idea that the existence of the monarchy is merely ceremonial. It is not! It is absolute. So absolute, in fact, that someone from the same royal bloodline is at the helm of Europe: Ursula von der Leyen.
The House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) is a dynasty of German origin whose members ruled over several European countries. The dynasty arose from the ducal house of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld (from the house of Wettin), which gained possession of the dual duchy of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in 1826. Descendants of this lineage gained several other lands in the 19th century. In 1917, King George V changed the name of the British royal family (actually German, namely Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) to Windsor. This made the British forget that they were secretly ruled by a German bloodline (just like the Netherlands).
Ursula is the daughter of Ernst Carl Julius Albrecht. Through the Albrecht lineage, we then arrive at the name Saxe-Coburg and Gotha; the same family as the British royal family. Europe is ruled by the same "royal bloodline" as that of Elizabeth II (see this extensive evidence). And you may think that Europe is a democracy. No, democracy is the illusion of participation to keep the masses sweet; nothing more and nothing less.
But now comes the most important part of all this: this so-called nobility does nothing but rule via the propaganda machine of all the billions they own (via Vanguard and Blackrock) in order to have the entire media and alternative media in their pocket, allowing them to continue to put on their costumed parade; that costumed parade that maintains the illusion of power. They declare themselves king. Nothing less than that! All that by the grace of God! And no one who dares to call out: the emperor has no clothes on!
All you have to discover is what that word literally means: you have to take off (un-cover) the covers. Those beautiful red-yellow cloaks stitched with golden thread, plush hats, layers of makeup, jewelry and medals; you can take off that ludicrous covering. It is a big propaganda show to maintain the self-proclaimed illusion of power. The grace of God is nothing more than a self-proclaimed grace. Or have you seen the signature of God? And why is the king the only sovereign human being? What nonsense! Wake up!
We of We Want Everything Else, by the grace of God, claim the reward of fellow countrymen. All who shall see or hear these, salute! do know: we claim our sovereignty and declare all your legislation invalid, because it is signed by someone from whom the grace of God, for assumed authority, is lacking. Thereby all legislation is invalid.
Don't resist the system; say goodbye to the system: start today.
Link entries: jensen.co.uk, cafeweltschmerz.co.uk
11 Comments
I tried to watch that video but had to vomit for a while.
How should I see it in other countries, e.g. Switzerland, we live/work
temporarily there, tax is a bit less but still .......
@Arigje
Just read this article and you'll find your answer:
https://www.degratiegods.com/ik-wil-weten-hoe/
Again well written and very enlightening. Especially pointing out deception (or wanting to catch it) by paid artists like Jensen and Weltschmertz, then you suddenly see it laid on thick.
The nauseating theater of the coronation was never my thing anyway, but then again you see the conditioning broken once you understand it.
Funny pun by the way, when I got the headline in I first thought it said Willemalexander.
Thnx again.
What we can find through Google is that Ursula is the daughter of Ernst Carl Julius Albrecht. Let's check out this entire family tree. I encourage you to click on the links yourself to check out the complete family tree.
source: geni.com
Ernst Carl was the son of Friedrich Carl Albrecht, born March 28, 1902. That in turn is a son of son of George Alexander Albrecht and Mary Ladson Albrecht (marrying within the same bloodline is normal in the world of royal, noble, pharaonic bloodlines). George Alexander Albrecht, in turn, is a son of George Alex Albrecht and Luise Albrecht (it remains Albrecht - incest). That Alex Albrecht is a son of Karl Franz Georg von Knoop and Kath Albrecht (Giffenig), a remarkable name of that father, because this Karl Franz Georg von Knoop is a great-grandson of an Albrecht (so presumably his grandfather changed the surname). In fact, his father was Karl Franz Georg von Knoop and his father is Franz August Heinrich von Knoop. His father was eventually another Albrecht after all, namely Johann Friedrich Albrecht.
Studying the bloodline on website Geni.com, we see that Von Knoop is actually the same surname for Albrecht over and over again. Sometimes it is Von Knoop and sometimes Albrecht. That family appears to be of "royal blood" and carries the Star of David and the lion in the family crest. The same lion we know from the Oranges.
Via the name Albrecht, we then indeed arrive at the name Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, found on the website 4crests.com. Here is a quote from that website:
This widespread English, German, French Catalan, Italian, Spanish and Hungarian name was originally derived from a Germanic personal name ALBRECHET, which was composed of the elements ADAL (noble) and BERHT (bright and famous). This was one of the most common Germanic given names, and was borne by various medieval princes, military leaders and great churchmen, notably St. Albert of Prague (Czech name Vojtech, Latin name Adalbertus), a Bohemian prince who died a martyr in 997 attempting to convert the Prussians to Christianity; St Albert the Great (?1193-1280) Aristotelian theologian and tutor of Thomas Aquinas; and Albert the Bear (1100-70) Margrave of Brandenburg. Most of the European surnames in countries such as England, Scotland and France were formed in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The process had started somewhat earlier and had continued in some places into the 19th century, but the norm is that in the tenth and eleventh centuries people did not have surnames, whereas by the fifteenth century most of the population had acquired a second name.
There are many notables of the name including Albert I (1255-1308) who was the king of Germany, the son of Rudolph I of Habsburg. He was elected king of Germany in opposition to the deposed Adolf of Nassau, whom he then defeated and killed in battle at Gollheim (1298). He proceeded energetically to restore the power of the monarchy and reduce that of the electoral princes, but was murdered while crossing the River Reuss by his disaffected nephew John. Albert, Prince Consort to Queen Victoria (1819-61) born at Schloss Rosenaux, near Coburg. He was the younger son of the Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. In 1840 he married his first cousin, Queen Victoria, a marriage that became a lifelong love-match. He was given the title of Prince Consort in 1857. Throughout their marriage he was, in effect the Queen's private secretary. Ministerial distrust and public misgivings because of his German connections, limited his political influence, although his counsel was usually judicious and far-sighted. He died of typhoid in 1861, occasioning a long period of seclusion by his widow. The Albert Memorial in Kensington Gardens was erected in his memory in 1871.
So Ursula von der Leyen is actually an Albrecht; her bloodline is Albrechet, which stands for ADAL (noble) and BERHT (bright and famous). Ursula's mother is set to 'private' by geni.com, but given the entire past history of the Albrecht (sometimes Von Knoop) family, we can actually assume that this was also an Albrecht or Von Knoop (one and the same bloodline). The entire past history testifies to "running in the family" (or insest). Besides, there is no reason to find any reason why Ursula should bear the surname Von der Leyen, since her father was a full-blooded Albrecht. But because she married a Von der Leyen, she adopted that surname.
Hi Martin, curious if you also cancelled your nationality?
After all, a nationality implies that you still have a social contract with this created entity presided over by Prince Pils.
Indeed it implies that, but I don't consider any contract valid anymore, because no one has authority over me. I did not enter into anything with the intention of a contract and with today's understanding it does not matter. It is a contract under the false pretense of "the grace of God" and therefore a fraudulent contract. Heartbreakingly invalid!
Willy thinks otherwise, coupled with your citizen slave nuMMertje you are considered a subject. So you must be submissive to the system and the laws/articles linked to it. So as long as that little number is linked to your name you are in violation of the contract....
How do we address that?
Then you haven't quite understood it yet. William and all his lackeys have no authority. They can only pretend. It is really very simple.
That faking, that's what they're good at. They have built a whole system around it that threatens and invites you to act on the threats. You can just say no.
@zalm, what you write makes sense. I am now also trying to figure out how to go through life as "stateless", just don't want to have anything to do with a criminal cartel nor be connected by registration (read contract)....
@Martin, it just doesn't feel good to belong to a nauseating club.
"Nationality is a kind of membership, which can be compared to membership in, say, a sports club or gaming club: if you have met the conditions to become a member, then after that you also enjoy the rights and obligations that come with membership."
https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/nl/onderwijs/bacheloropleidingen/studiekeuze/profielwerkstuk/onderwerpen/wat-betekent-het-voor-iemand-om-stateloos-te-zijn
@Zio
You can try to ignore my comments and thus give readers the feeling of "none of that goes without saying" (by referring to a programming institute called a university), but have you ever signed a contract? Membership requires a conscious decision. You did not consciously become a member of the Dutch state. That idea was forced upon you and it was forced upon you without explanation.
In addition, this is then also done under the false pretense that the law so requires, but that law is signed by the missing grace of God. So that is fraudulent without any doubt. So you are already stateless when you see that all legislation is based on the false premise that the king may sign all laws by the grace of God.