Fighting the NWO: over 60 years too late.

To fully comprehend where we are now, we need to take a trip back in to the 19 c., to a time where most of today’s legislation was at its moment of conception – the time at which the bastard seed of today’s political monster was spilt by the land-grabbing Landlords, Law Lords and political elite, who, having deprived the commoners of their heritage, were hellbent on also denying them of their dignity.

One of the most striking areas of early 19 c. legislation was those dealing, either directly or indirectly, with The Poor Laws, which despite having existed for nigh on 300 years, peaked around this time.

However, to simply look at the Poor Laws in isolation would be to deny the context into which they were transplanted, but it would also elevate them above their station. The Poor Laws were not so much a cause as an effect; they were the symptom of the sickness, not the cause of the disease itself.

The elements of the Poor Laws that I wish to focus on are Settlements and Settlement Certificates; concepts which today would be recognised as veritable smorgasbord of political treats, such as Birth Certificates, citizenship, residency and passports.

As should be obvious by this ‘esteemed’ bevy of benefits and privileges associated with Settlements and the associated certificates, it would pay not to simply brush over this topic without giving the care and attention it deserves!

What do we know about Settlements and Settlement Certificates?

Legal Settlement   [link]

Legal settlement was the overlying principle of poor relief, the qualifications for which were as follows :-

  1. To be born in a parish of legally settled parent(s)
  2. Up to 1662 by living there for 3 years . After 1662 you could be thrown out within 40 days and after 1691 you had to give 40 days notice before moving in.
  3. Renting property worth more than £10 per annum in the parish or paying taxes on such a property.
  4. Holding a Parish Office.
  5. Being hired by a legally settled inhabitant for a continuous period of 365 days. (most single labourers were hired from the end of Michaelmas week till the beginning of the next Michaelmas so avoiding the grant of legal settlement). By the time you were married, had proved your worth and gained experience, longer hirings were possible therefore changing legal settlement.
  6. Having served a full apprenticeship to a legally settled man for the full 7 years.
  7. Having previously been granted poor relief. This condition implied that you had previously been accepted as being legally settled and was usually only referred to in settlement examinations.
  8. Females changed their legal settlement on marriage, adopting their husbands legal place of settlement. ( If a girl married a certificate man in her own parish and he died, she would automatically be removed to his place of legal settlement along with any issue from the marriage).

If  you could not satisfy these requirements you could move into a new parish using a settlement certificate providing your home parish would issue oneThis was virtually a form of indemnity issued by your home parish stating that you and your family and future issue belonged to them and they would take you all back at their expense if you became chargeable to the parish. Because of the expense of  removal it would be unlikely your home parish would issue a certificate for a parish a large distance away. A settlement certificate was only valid if it bore the seals of the overseers of both parishes and that of the local Justices and was not transferable

In other words, having a ‘settlement’ placed one under the guardianship of the local Parish, the paupers required a ‘Settlement Certificate‘ to reside in an area, movement between settlements for the Poor was restricted, paupers could be evicted from settlements with the issuing of ‘removal orders’, and the ‘settlement certificates’ created a form of indemnity insurance, with the pauper being ‘underwritten’ by the Parish to whom he/she had a valid settlement claim.

Some other points of interest; initially, paupers were forced to wear a ‘P’ badge on their right shoulder, or a blue ‘badge of shame’. Their hair was often shaved too, so they could be easily ‘recognised’.

The political mood in the 19 c. was markedly different to the atmosphere of earlier times. Following on from the English Civil War, the cancerous spread of Enclosures, the claiming of Parliament by a “committee of Landlords”, and the self-serving policy that followed, the mood went from one of ‘common wealth’ to that of ‘public good’, and a deep-rooted focus on commerce and capital accumulation at all costs.

As is explained here;

Everyone would have a parish of legal settlement and if relief was required it would be the responsibility of that parish to provide it. The parish was required to elect each Easter two “Overseers of the Poor” who were responsible for setting the poor rate, its collection and the relief of those in need, these overseers should ideally be, “substantial householders” but in small villages the only practical qualification was to be a rate payer. In rural England where 90% of the population lived this was a fair and equitable system run by local people and administered by the local Justices of the Peace who were likely to be the Rector and local landowners. Following 1834 all this changed as parliament denigrated the system bit by bit in response to the growth of the large industrial towns and their very different problems.

It’s important and relevant to remember that with the Landlords/Law Lords now sitting in Parliament shaping legislation, whilst also holding title to the land they had [mis]appropriated, controlling the welfare of the paupers they had disenfranchised via an aggressive campaign of Enclosure, and with the ability to herd the dispossessed poor towards the Workhouses, where Landlords/Law Lords/Politicians could guarantee cheap labour to themselves for the factories they owned, as the Industrial Revolution they were promoting took hold … it’s not difficult to see the absurdity of the ‘unjust enrichment’ which was taking place at the time.

The Poor Law was radically following the great reform act of 1834. The main difference was that the relief of the poor was changed from a local responsibility into a group one. Groups of parishes were consolidated into Poor Law Unions so removing the local community responsibility. Out relief was discouraged and the workhouses, which had been in existence for the previous two centuries, became the primary source of relief.

From here, Parish Unions morphed into Boards of Guardians and eventually Local Councils and Local Government.

So this evolution over a period of decades took it from a very local Parish level to a nationalised system of Unions of Settlements, and a relatively sophisticated model of local government, greatly influenced in this evolutionary process by the manipulation of the Landlords, as either Lords of the Manor or as Politicians, but at all times with an eye on profit, capital accumulation and land holdings. Rather than being an evolution of welfare reforms, it was more a commercial evolution, with ‘welfare’ being its cloak of disguise and also its main source of labour supply.

However, to refocus specifically on the issue of Settlements again, briefly;

  • The SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE; was essentially a right of abode or proof of entitlement to benefits.
  • A pauper could live in their SETTLEMENT and they could move to another settlement.
  • The settlement certificate was like a domestic visa, residency card, insurance policy and birth certificate, all rolled in to one.
  • When the Unions were established, they could move between SETTLEMENTS within the same union.

A fairly basic structure and one we can comprehend and recognise.

Keep in mind that around the same time as the ‘reforms’ of the Poor Laws and the elevation of the Workhouses as the main source of Poor Relief, also being introduced were the statutes removing the registering of births, deaths and marriages from the local Parish and also the introduction of Area Health Boards and vaccinations. It was an incredibly significant period of legislative history, placing a never before seen level of control in the hands of the newly established Local Government bodies, which were agencies of Parliament, being the legal apparatus of the Landlords, Law Lords, Industrial magnates and political elite. The 19 c. was a massive PIG trough, with all swine up to their eyes in commercial swill.

Now … let’s turn our attention to some big events in the early 20th century

  • 1918 … WWI ends.
  • 1920 … League of Nations … topic for discussion? Passports, whereupon a prototype was wheeled out.
  • 1921 … League of Nations … Passports became hot topic due to a ‘refugee crisis’ following WWI.
  • 1926 … League of Nations … standardise passports.

Primary excuse for all of this focus on Passports was the re-SETTLEMENT of refugees after WWI, the rationale being that the refugees needed visas/passports to validate them being ‘resettled’ in new ‘settlements’.

  • 1930 … Bank for International SETTLEMENTS formed and opens its doors for business the following year.
  • 1941 … Lend-Lease Act – during WWII, this Act was passed by the Allies, to technically remove borders. What this meant was that the U.S could transport planes to Russia, and because of the Lend-Lease Act which took the borders away, no money needed to change hands because it was a ‘domestic’ transfer of assets. But of course there was quid pro quo … planes to Russia, trains to the US, or ships, or whatever was required. So the Allies passed the Lend-lease Act to circumvent international trade and established a way in which they could just exchange goods without international trade protocol … or so we were led to believe.
  • 1943 … Stalin proclaimed publicly … “the war could not be fought without the cooperation of the UNITED NATIONS – the first time that the phrase ‘United Nations’ had been given as public notice.

Stop and think about this for a moment; we have gone from domestic settlements in sovereign nations … to a global United Nation without borders, which even has a centralised bank for the central banks, which is called the Bank for International SETTLEMENTS. Do you see the Fabianesque gradualism in play here? It’s an organic creeping, similar to that which took hold in the early 19 c., but on a much grander, global scale.

What happened after WWII? For one thing, passports were kept in place permanently. This was not the issue prior to WWII. Think back to Settlement Certificates and the multiple role they played and you’ll identify the need for passports to stay in the game.

Quick recap;
in the 19th century … there were SETTLEMENTS.
A group of settlements was called a UNION.

QUESTION: By applying that knowledge mixed in with a little logic, what would you call a group of European Settlements?

ANSWER: European Union?

[Wow … fancy that! Who could have imagined …]

QUESTION: Applying the same logic, what would one call a proposed group of North American settlements?

ANSWER: North American Union?

[Wow … fancy that! Who could have imagined ..]

Now … going back to the 19th century; you could not move from your settlement without a settlement certificate. When the union of settlements was introduced, you could move freely within the union. Sound familiar?
It should – it describes, to a ‘T’, the travel arrangement between members of the EU.

The Settlement Certificate is also synonymous with the Passport we carry today.

Now … go get your passport and turn to the data page.
The Passport should have a data field for ‘TYPE’.
Is it a ‘P’ ?

Some other points of interest; initially, paupers were forced to wear a ‘P’ badge

Do you have your badge of shame in your modern-day, biometric Settlement Certificate?

What does this then lead to as a logical and natural extension of logic?
The UK [insert your country here] is simply a settlement of the United Nations [Union]

The Area Health Boards report to the NHS, which is simply a single settlement within the WHO Union, which is how and why every health authority in the world takes orders from WHO. It is the Central Administration Department.

It’s also why Birth Certificate registration policy and administration is controlled, regulated and centralised by the UN Union.

So there is zero need to worry about Global Governance … we already have it.
No point wasting time and energy stopping something that has already happened.

Relax – we’re only about 65 years too late.

One Response to “Fighting the NWO: over 60 years too late.”
Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] Fighting the NWO: over 60 years too late. ( Share this:EmailPrintFacebookTwitterMoreStumbleUponRedditLinkedInDiggLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: