The Ultimate Delusion By: Stephen Kimbol Ames, circa 1999

This treatise is not the complete answer, but it is a good jumping off place. NEVER accept what you read until you've been diligent in getting to the real story as closely as possible. I've read and researched quite a bit of Ames' writings, along with many others like Dan Meador, James Montgomery, The Informer, George Mercier, etc., etc., and am pretty confident that some of what they purport has some validity. But, as I said, always question and search for corroborating evidence for yourself !

Harvey W.


The Ultimate Delusion
By: Stephen Kimbol Ames, circa 1999

"You see, we are cows. The IRS is the company, who milks the cows, and the United States Inc. is the veterinarian, who begrudgingly takes care of the herd. Great Britain (actually the 700 acre enclave known as The City of London or "the Crown," but, NOT particularly, the figurehead King or Queen) is the Owner of the farm in fee simple. HOWEVER, the farm is controlled and held in allodium by the Pope." Sad, ain't it ?
You'll see why after reading this...

[The above quote and the following document modified and corrected slightly by HW.]

We begin...

Queen Elizabeth controls and has amended U.S. Social Security, as follows:
S.I. 1997 NO. 1778 The Social Security (United States of America) Order 1997 Made 22nd of July1997 coming into force 1st September 1997. At the Court at Buckingham Palace the 22nd day of July 1997. Now, therefore Her Majesty in pursuance of section 179 (1) (a) and (2) of the Social Security Administration Act of 1992 and all other powers enabling Her in that behalf, is pleased, by and with advice of Her privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered as follows:

"This Order may be cited as the Social Security (United States of America) Order 1997 and shall come into force on 1st September 1997."
Does this give a new meaning to Federal Judge William Wayne Justice stating in court that he takes his orders from England? This order (1997) goes on to redefine words in the Social Security Act and makes some changes in United States Law.

Remember, King George III was the "Arch-Treasurer and Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire and of the United States of America." See: Treaty of Peace (1783) (date corrected from original document) 8 U.S. Statutes at Large (the following site shows George III's title and conforms to the above reference: [link to avalon.law.yale.edu] Great Britain, which is merely an agent for the Pope, is in charge of the USA 'plantation.'

What people do not know is that some of the so called Founding Fathers and King George were working hand-in-hand to bring the people of America to their knees, to install a Central Government over them and to bind them to a debt that could not be paid. First off you have to understand that the UNITED STATES is a "corporation" and that it existed before the Revolutionary war. See Respublica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43. 28 U.S.C. 3002 (15)

Now, you also have to realize that King George was not just the King of England. He was also the King of France. "Treaty of Peace" (1783) U.S. 8 Statutes at Large 80.

On January 22, 1783 Congress ratified a contract for the repayment of 21 loans that the UNITED STATES had already received dating from February 28, 1778 to July 5, 1782. Now the UNITED STATES Inc. owes the King money which is due January 1, 1788 to King George via France. Is this not incredible? The King funded both sides of the War. There was more work that needed to be done. Now the Articles of Confederation which was declared in force March 1, 1781 states in Article 12 "All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed and considered a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged."

Now, after losing the Revolutionary War, even though the War was nothing more than a move to turn the people into debtors for the King, they were not done yet.

Now, the loans were coming due and so a meeting was convened in Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss the economic instability of the country under the Articles of Confederation. Only five States came to the meeting, but there was a call for another meeting to take place in Philadelphia the following year with the express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation
On February 21, 1787 Congress gave approval of the meeting to take place in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of confederation. Something had to be done about the mounting debt. Little did the people know that the so called founding fathers were acutely going to reorganize the United States, because it was Bankrupt.

On September 17, 1787 twelve State delegates approve the Constitution (NOTE: Rhode Island did NOT attend. They apparently smelled something bad.) The States became Constitutors. Definition of Constitutor: In the civil law, one who, by simple agreement, becomes responsible for the payment of another's debt. Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.

The States were now liable for the debt owed to the King, but the people of America were not, because they were not a party to the Constitution, because it was never put to them for a vote. On August 4th, 1790 an Act was passed which was titled: An Act Making Provision for the Payment of the Debt of the United States. This can be found at 1 U.S. Statutes at Large pages 138-178.
This Act for all intents and purposes abolished the States and Created the Districts. If you don't believe it, look it up. The Act set up Federal Districts. Here in Pennsylvania, we've got two Federal Districts. In this Act each District was assigned a portion of the debt. The next step was for the states to reorganize their governments, which most did in 1790. This had to be done, because the States needed to legally bind the people to the debt. The original State Constitutions were never submitted to the people for a vote. So, the governments wrote new constitutions and submitted them to people for a vote, thereby binding the people to the debts owed to Great Britain. The people became citizens of the State where they resided, and ipso facto a citizen of the United States. A citizen is a member of a fictional entity, and it is synonymous with "subject."

What you think is a state is, in reality, a corporation, in other words, a Person.

"Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is Person." 9 F.. Supp 272

Word "person" does not include state. 12 Op Atty Gen 176.

There are no states, just corporations. Every body politic on this planet is a corporation. A corporation is an artificial entity, a fiction at law. They only exist in your mind. They are images in your mind, that speak to you. We labor, pledge our property and give our children to a fiction.

Now, before we go any further let us examine a few things in the Constitution.

Article Six, Section One, keeps the loans from the King valid. It states: "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation (Articles of Confederation)."
Another interesting tidbit can be found at Article One, Section Eight, clause Two, which states that Congress has the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. This was needed so the United States (Which went into Bankruptcy on January 1, 1788) could borrow money and then, because the States were a party to the Constitution, they would also be liable for it.
The next underhanded move was the creation of The United States Bank in 1791. This was a private Bank which issued 25,000 shares of which 18,000 were held by those in England. The Bank loaned the United States money in exchange for Securities of the United States.

The creditors of the United States, which included King George, wanted to be paid the interest on the loans that were given to the United States. So, Alexander Hamilton came up with the great idea of taxing alcohol. The people resisted, so, George Washington sent out the militia to collect the tax, which they did. This has become known as the Whiskey rebellion. It is the Militia's duty to collect taxes. How did the United States collect taxes from the people, if the people were not a party to the Constitution? I'll tell you how. The people are slaves! The United States belongs to the founding fathers and their posterity and Great Britain. America is nothing more than a Plantation. It always has been. How many times have you seen someone in court attempt to use the Constitution, and then the Judge tells him he can't. It is because you are not a party to it. We are SLAVES! If you don't believe this, read Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520 which states, "But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution, the Constitution, it is true, is a compact but he is not a party to it."

Now, back to the Militia. Read Article One, Section Eight, Clause 15, which states that it is the militia's job to execute the laws of the Union. Read Clause 16 which states that Congress has the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such part of them, as may be employed in the service of the United States. The Militia is not there to protect you and me. It is their duty to collect our substance.

As you can plainly see, all that the Constitution did [in reality] was to set up a Military Government to guard the King's commerce and make us slaves.
If one goes to 8 U.S. Statutes at Large 116-132, you will find "The Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation. This Treaty was signed on November 19th, 1794, which was twelve years after the Revolutionary War. Article 2 of the Treaty states that the King's Troops were still occupying the United States. Being the nice King that he was, he decided that the troops would return to England by June 1st, 1796. The troops were still on American soil because, quite frankly, the King wanted them here.
Here is the key to where this started:

Many people tend to blame the Jews for our problems. Jewish Law governs the entire world, as found in Jewish Law by MENACHEM ELON, DEPUTY PRESIDENT SUPREME COURT OF ISRAEL, to wit:

"Everything in the Babylonian Talmud is binding on all Israel. Every town and country must follow all customs, give effect to the decrees, and carry out the enactment's of the Talmudic sages, because the entire Jewish people accepted everything contained in Talmud. The sages who adopted the enactment's and decrees, instituted the practices, rendered the decisions, and derived the laws, constituted all or most of the Sages of Israel. It is they who received the tradition of the fundamentals of the entire Torah in unbroken succession going back to Moses, our teacher."

We are living under what the Bible calls Mammon. As written in the subject Index, Mammon is defined as ("Civil law and procedure").

Now turn to the "The Shetars Effect on English Law" -- A Law of the Jews becomes the Law of the Land, found in "The George Town Law Journal, Vol 71: pages 1179-1200." It is clearly stated in the Law Review that the Jews are the property of the Norman and Anglo-Saxon Kings. It also explains that the Talmud is the law of the land. It explains how the Babylonian Talmud became the law of the land, which is now known as the Uniform Commercial Code. The written credit agreement, the Jewish shetar, is a lien on all property (realty), and today it's called the mortgage! The treatise also explains that the Jews are owned by Great Britain, and the Jews are in charge of the Baking system.

We are living under the Babylonian Talmud. It is from which all of our problems come. It was brought into England in 1066, and has been enforced by the Pope, Kings and the Christian churches ever since. It is total and relentless mind control. People are taught to believe in things that do not exist.

Before you scream that the UCC is unconstitutional, I'm sorry people, you are not a party to any constitution. Read the case cite below.

"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it." Padelford, Fay & Co., vs. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah 14 Ga. 438, 520.

You have to understand that Great Britain (Article Six, Section One), the United States and the States are the parties to the Constitution, not you. Let me try to explain.

If I buy an automobile from a man, and that automobile has a warranty, and the engine blows up the first day I have it, then I tell the man just forget about it. Then you come along and tell the man to pay me, and he says "no". So you take him to court for not holding up the contract. The court then says "case dismissed." Why, because you are not a party to the contract. You cannot sue a government official for not adhering to a contract (Constitution) that you are not a party to. You had better accept the fact that you are a slave. When you try to use the Constitution, you are committing a CRIME known as CRIMINAL TRESPASS. Why? It is because you are attempting to infringe on a private contract that you are not a party to. Then to make matters worse, you are a debt slave, who owns no property or has any rights. You are a mere "user" of your Master's property! Here are just a couple of examples:

"The primary control and custody of an infant is with the government" Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62

"Marriage is a civil contract to which there are three parties - the husband, the wife and the state." Van Koten v. Van Koten. 154 N.E. 146.

"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State: individual so-called "ownership" is only by virtue of Government, i.e. law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State." Senate Document No. 43 73rd Congress 1st Session. (Brown v. Welch supra) You own no property, because you are a slave. Really, you are worse off than a slave, because you are also a debtor.

"The right of traffic or the transmission of property, as an absolute inalienable right, is one which has never existed since governments were instituted, and never can exist under government." Wynehamer v. The People. 13 N.Y. Rep.378, 481.