24 May 2026 III

Tuesday 28 April 2026, A king called Charles III gave a speech to Congress in the United States, included in that speech was the following:

“You recently commented Mr President, that if it was not for the United States European countries would be speaking German. Dare I say that if it wasn’t for us, you would be speaking French.”

The King of England, assumed, is unelected, it is hereditary, and constitutionally decorative. He was flown to Washington to tell the US Congress that power should face checks and balances. What Charles actually said was:

“The US Supreme Court Historical Society has calculated that the Magna Carta is cited in at least 160 Supreme Court cases since 1789, not least as the foundation of the principle that executive power is subject to checks and balances. Distinguished members of the 119th Congress, it is here in these very halls, that the ‘spirit of liberty’ is present in every session and every vote cast not by the will of one, but by the deliberation of many.”

This is this point, the Democrats stand and offer a cheering ovation, the attendant media claimed the room erupted, and if you watched the speech you could hear it yourself. Why was it the Democrats?

Charles cited the Magna Carta as the tradition ‘he’ embodies.

In the US they had what they call; ‘No Kings Protests’ and they also cite the Magna Carta which is of course the same tradition that Charles claims to embody.

In essence what we had is a King citing the checks on his own power to an audience who’s ancestors and therefore by tradition had revolted against his Crown, and yet the Congress erupted in great cheer.

Are we missing something very subtle here?

The nation that broke from the Crown 250 years ago required the assumed King of England to remind them of their founding principles which of course on America they call democracy, but in fact America true is a Constitutional Republic in the same way England is a Constitutional Monarchy.

King Charles III is not the King of England he is the King of the UK Corporation. So what is playing out here?

The US media cited his speech as a subtle warning to America and while the Democrats cheered, Trumps face said it all….

Before his visit the Council on Foreign Relations, a branch off the RIIA, posed an open question:

“Would a Royal visit salvage the unraveling of the UK-US special relationship?”

In Charles’s speech he was making it very clear what it would take to salvage the relationship, this is why the Democrats stood, cheered and clapped, but this is when we saw the face of a usury puppet.

Subtle is not the word when it comes to comprehending the speech and so we must look at history for the context and positioning of King Charles III’s speech, not from the perspective of Robert Maxwells’ education literature that the American’s have been subject too for decades but the real history of usury, King, Parliament and the Inner City of London.

The first King Charles was born in 1600 and was the second son of James I. He inherited the throne in 1603. This is the king who lost his head due to the civil unrest that would conclude in the English Civil War, the shift in what Parliament was and the rise of the power of an independent entity and creditor to a New Model Army and New Parliament.

The civil unrest was a direct consequence of enclosure, a system whereby the landed gentry consistently encroached upon the common land, dug trench and erected fences to prevent the common folk from using the centuries old tradition of land in common for the common use.

Let us not forget that with the installation of the Tudors, the Holy See families through the House Pallavacini, via its puppet house the House Stanley, the Earls of Derby, had removed the Plantagenets and installed a strange house with no real factual evidence of lineage, tied to the House of York by marriage, Henry Tudor who would become Henry VII 1485 until his death in 1509. His first born was Arthur which referenced Henry’s fixation on all things Arthurian legend, the very hero awaited by the natives to unravel all that had been carried out since the 1066 invasion and mass murder. Arthur died, not without mystery and next inline was a dark skinned upstart who would be installed as Henry VIII. Big changes would take place under this monarch, big bureaucracy, more taxation and the acceptance of the murder of a wife not befitting the kings will. Monasteries removed and all power shifted to finance and government.

We then get queens and finally a Scottish bloodline that would secure the Scottish and therefore a subverted Roman creed over the land of England, the installation of the Whigs in London and a clear subversion of the English Constitutional Monarchy was begun.

This is when England has the first Charles on the throne and the main thrust of our exploration of the true history of the 1600s on England.

The first record of protests against enclosures is found in 1480, just 5 years before the installation of the Holy See Venetian banking families puppet, Henry VII. After 1530 such protests become more and more frequent. During the 16th Century, (1500s) the century under the Tudors, most of England was fenced off, common law had been stifled through the subversion of the monastic system that enshrined the common law and all its freedoms. In essence that was the original theology afforded to Rome but as we now know, Rome itself was suffering a real subversion by the money masters from Venice, made so in the fact, Rome had allowed the Venetian Black Nobility in to its halls to fight the Germanic Hohenstaufen’s, or, the Holy Roman Empire. The Venetian’s conquered Rome by having the Church divide itself from the military branch, a split in theology we call the Reformation together allowing for a carve up of its dominions.

Under enclosure, common land was converted to private property not unlike the current method of pulling swathes of land into trust, as example, the National Trust. The peoples rights and freedoms were stripped as the land was enclosed, the monasteries dissolved and therefore no power structure left to secure those rights and freedoms for the people.

In July of 1549, Robert Ketts led the men of Norfolk to rebellion against the policies of Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector. This came two years after the death of Henry VIII who reigned from 1509 until 1557.

Ketts led a move in which his men filled the ditches and tore down the enclosure fences, they defeated the Royal Army sent to suppress them and the Crown sent a larger force that included German mercenaries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kett

Some 58 years later in the summer of 1607, England is in complete revolt.
The Midland revolts began in Haselbech:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midland_Revolt

The revolt spread to Northamptonshire, Warwickshire, Leicestershire and on from there. They ripped down the fences, pulled the hedges and filled the ditches. This is where the term ‘Leveller’ was born, the people who levelled the enclosure ditches. The people who where dispossessed did not disappear, many of them were sent onto Colonial ships. During there 17th Century (1600s) around 210,000 Englishmen went to the Caribbean and some 130,000 Englishmen were sent to Virginia. Many of them arrived as indentured servants. The peak of this forced emigration period is 1630 to 1660. We are speaking in terms of the English Civil War generation.

Can we now better understand why the well documented Pirates of the Caribbean history became a reality, it was those forced into exile continuing their revolt against the East India Companies that had gained a stranglehold on the English Crown. It must also be recognised that the executive of the East India Companies was made up of Scottish Whigs, or Presbyterians/Puritans.

Some of the emigres did go voluntarily but the the vast majority did not. The gangs of kidnappers were known as ‘spirits’ who supplied the merchants with servants by luring or in most cases forcing people aboard the ships. The term ‘spirited away’ comes from the English accounts of these middle men who would spirit away captives for the Atlantic trade.

Maurice Thompson was a major tobacco trader and slaver who had emigrated to Virginia. He was a Puritan or Presbyterian but of course as they do, he is presented as an Englishman. The clue is in his mothers line…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Thomson

Thompson was the pioneer of the slave plantations in the Caribbean and obtained a monopoly of the Virginian trade on behalf of the East India Company operating out of the City of London Liveries. His business interests include, West African slave trading, New England provisioning, silver prospecting in Panama and raids into Venezuela. He and his associates were the people in charge of the New Parliaments War financing from 1642 onwards.

In September of 1640 he delivered a mass London petition to Charles I demanding Parliaments recall. Three of the four MPs elected to London constituencies in the Long Parliament of 1640 had direct links to Thompson’s merchant networks. December 1640 these city radicals ran a campaign to abolish Bishops, the remaining block to enclosure. By the spring of 1641 they were controlling the flow of loans to the NewParliament. In April 1641 they pushed through a law, with the clause that banned Charles I from dissolving the New Parliament without its consent.

By the winter of 1642, Ireland is in rebellion and the political situation on England is reaching a flashpoint. On the 4th January 1642, the following city traders set up the City of Londons Committee on Public Safety:

John Fowke – Merchant, organised petition campaigns, militia networks, crowd mobilisation. (Tommy Robinson)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fowke

Isaac Pennington – MP for London; Coleman Street radical becoming Lord Mayor 1642. Member of Cromwell’s government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Penington_(Lord_Mayor)

Maurice Thompson – Colonial merchant, slaver, tobacco and sugar monopolies.

Thomas Andrewes – City financier, later first Common Council Lord Mayor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrewes

Samuel Moyer – Colonial trader Thompson associate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Moyer

George Thompson – Maurice’s brother
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Thomson_(MP_for_Southwark)

Together set up the City of Londons Committee on Public Safety, (not the Parliamentary Committee of July 1642), what they set up was a City body created by the Common Council on the same day that King Charles I had walked into the commons to arrest five members:

The Five Members were:
* John Hampden (c. 1594–1643), member for Buckinghamshire
* Arthur Haselrig (1601–1661), member for Leicestershire
* Denzil Holles (1599–1680), member for Dorchester
* John Pym (1584–1643), member for Tavistock
* William Strode (1598–1645), member for Bere Alston

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Members

This was the very reason that the English Civil War broke out.
The Oligarchic constitution of the City was thus created. The Mayor of London was replaced and the cry that London had saved Parliament was sounded. They forgot to explain that they had destroyed the original Parliament and formed a New Parliament.

War officially breaks out in August 1642, but before the first battle, Thompson and his associates had already launched a plunder expedition into Ireland and a Naval rampage through the Spanish Caribbean.

Once the fighting began on England, Thompson’s network took full control of the New Parliaments finances and the Naval machinery.

The levellers were getting organised and demanding universal suffrage. They wanted equality before the law, freedom of religion (except for Catholics) and an end to conscription.
An Agreement of the People was a series of manifestos, published between 1647 and 1649, for constitutional changes to the English State. Said to be the first fully written English Constitution and is said to be the works upon which the American Constitution was based.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Agreement_of_the_People

It was subsequently overturned by the New Model Army acting for the private City of London with its Heads of Proposals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heads_of_Proposals

The New Parliaments creditors wanted order, not a constitution written by the people. Cromwell’s armies were paid with City loans, he owed the creditors. And one of the first things he did was shut down the assemblies in Putney that had produced the Constitution known as the Agreement of the People with full military force. He then purged the New Model Army of all radicals and reassured London financiers that his New Model would fight for the New Parliaments credit, not Democracy and especially not any form of monarchy.

Charles I was executed on the 30th January 1649.

The High Court of Justice that tried him said that he tried to uphold an unlimited and tyrannical power, to rule according to his will, and to overthrow the rights and liberties of the people, and for that, he is guilty of treason, which means a breech of trust.

Rights and Liberty, this is political rhetoric straight from the New Parliament and it’s creditors. What they wanted was no taxation without Parliamentary consent, or in reality, their own consent, and that no King could ever smash their securities to interrupt their trading. Of course there are more reasons as to why he lost his head but that is the core financial deal.

After ten years of Cromwell, the man who cancelled Christmas, banned the pub, banned dancing and all things called fun, a move was birthing to restore the King.

The Restoration of 1660 did not reverse what had been done, the office of monarch had been abolished, all power was in the hands of the City who had its puppet New Parliament, Scotland was the only nation left, England had no Parliament and no common rights, everything became a privilege under license from the New Parliament, in fact nothing relating to the power flip would change in the so called Restoration.

Cromwell’s Republic was a Military tax state that was running huge deficits to the City to keep itself alive and in motion, Cromwell paid for this with yet more land confiscation. Of course that could not sustain itself under normal politics because people do not like high taxation. This is why a growing public hunger for a Restoration of what was too supplant what at that time is.

Upon the Restoration people were delighted at the fact, street parties were had and great celebration, Christmas was back the pubs reopened and laughter was a welcome method of convalescing from the trauma, but as is the same today, people only understand the outer paradigm of how things work, they fail to ever see the inner workings of the financial elites and always fall into line behind the shills and parrots offered up by the same elites. This is how they control the opposition, crumbs set loose for the public to follow, those who do speak the truth are marginalised and contained through insidious labels, the hapless mob only to eager to lay siege against the very minds who do have their interests to heart.

Under Charles I, the King could override Parliament, he could tax by Royal Prerogative, he had control over the courts and command of the Army and Navy.

Charles II had been castrated, he can do nothing about tax or Parliament and has no power over the Army and Navy. He can do nothing without the explicit command of the New Parliament. And to cap it off and to show the truth of the matter, he is no longer allowed to step a foot in the City of London without explicit permission from the kings of finance, the Venetian Black nobility bankers.

Since that time the monarch has played a role, King Charles III plays his role as did all the monarchs before him back to the death of King Charles I. They play the rational voice of reason, they get to keep the titles, the ceremony, the palaces and the Duchies. In return the City or empire gets a public face, a relatable face, one that presents the face of sanity, you can do Christmas you can go to the pub, you can have justice. It has Royal weddings and princes and princesses, but the truth of the matter is very different, like his mother before him, who told you how it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AX5ejaBjbg

The King has no clothes, Parliament controls justice, the tax and your privileges, and the City controls the Parliament’s credit. Parliament has a national debt and you are the unsecured creditors, made so through the 1933 bankruptcy declarations and the removal of gold backed currency. Your twin is the liable entity, it is the younger twin at that, your birth certificate is the evidence on the record and it is that from which you require a license to act in commerce under the light of the City.

Charles II in the rare breaks taken from shagging every female that would sire his offspring, forming the New Model Aristocracy, he would bargain with the House of Commons because the City of Londons credit markets have become indispensable. By 1694, the Bank of England has been established to fund the national debt. The monarch now the rational arbitrator, his authority is re cast to an ability to provide rational judgement as opposed to holding raw power.

In the character of Elizabeth II, the City had its perfected front, she played the role to perfection, always presented as the font of civility, the ever patient Queen watching over the nation, but it takes only a peak at the contracts made and the agreements signed during her reign to see the only constitution being upheld was that of the City.

So in Charles III, we have a quandary to consider, in his speech to the US Congress, he began with the statement:

“We meet in times of great uncertainty, in times of conflict from Europe to the Middle East, which pose immense challenges for the international community.”

He was subtly presenting the fact that this instability in part was caused by US policy especially so through Trumps first term in which Trump consistently threatened to leave NATO. This has the affect of bolstering the enemies of Europe into rash decisions, I would cite Russia attacking the Ukraine and the empowering of the terrorist groups backed by Iran.

He continued:

“We meet too in the aftermath of the incident not far from this great building that sought to harm the leadership of your nation. Let me say that such acts of violence will never succeed.”

A clear reference to the January 6th event. So we are dealing here with huge symbolism albeit very subtle, that to use violence to make change domestically will not succeed..

He continued:

“It is extraordinary to think that I am the 19th of our line of sovereigns to study with daily attention the affairs of America.”

Using the term study translates to keeping an eye on what you are doing, more in line with how you study a threat. He continued:

“The very principle on which your Congress was founded, no taxation without representation, was once a fundamental disagreement between us and at the same time a shared democratic value which you inherited from us.”

A direct hint at the fact, we mothered you well and you completed what we did not, but keep your pit-bull in check if the alliance is to continue. He continued:

“Today, thousands of US personnel, defence officials and their families are stationed in the United Kingdom as British personnel serve with equal pride across 30 American States. We are building F-35s together.”

A subtle hint at how they are working together on a project going against British popular opinion, due to the fact, Britain gets a share of the technology so long as US Air Force standards are applied to the Royal Air Force. He continues use:

“And we have agreed the most ambitious submarine program in history, AUKUS.”

Translating, Australia – United Kingdom – United States. This is a clear admission that all things UK and Australia are becoming a subdivision of the United States, fully dependant upon the US for all military needs. This began with the rental of the submarine nuclear capacities which the UK rents from the US. In essence our infrastructure is being completely privatised by the City who by the way, fully control the United States of America INC. This can also be seen in the fact, the entire Federal Reserve system is but an administrative level for the Bank for International Settlements, headed in Basil Switzerland.
He continued:

“Our governments are concluding new economic and technology agreements to write the next chapter of our joint prosperity and ensure that British and American ingenuity continues to lead the world. Our nations are combining talent and resources in the technologies of tomorrow, in AI and drug discovery.”

This is the point at which his use of the Magna Carta flips into the right to build the digital database system because we share the same system of law.

So far we have discussed the military side of this privatisation integration, but we can also see how this is playing out on the domestic front through such as Palantir. Our Place and medical data is being signed away as we speak, even under the biggest deception, Nigel Farage. Palantir is a surveillance company seeded with CIA money that in 2025 signed a strategic partnership with the UK Ministry of Defence.

Charles on behalf of the City was reminding the US Congress that their strong man was breaking the alliance…

Further Study
Salvation Lives on Rothschild Island
Scotland Controlling the British Isles Since James I
City of London Moving to Kazakhstan