The Top Ten Articles for Rapid Assistance

06/30/2017

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/06/the-top-ten-articles-for-rapid.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+http%2Fpaulstramerfeedburnercom+%28http%3A%2F%2Fwww.paulstramer.net++++Paul+Stramer+personal+blog%29

 By Anna Von Reitz

Today, I went to my own website and have extracted a Top Ten List for people frantic for practical information they need to know to protect themselves and their assets and to grasp what is going on in the world at large.  I do this with some trepidation because people need to study the issues and keep up with the conversation, not just “grab and go”. 

However, I do understand the almost-panic response of many who wake up and realize that they are under attack, so I went through and identified the exact articles from my website that you need to read and also a couple of articles that are crucial to understanding how things actually stand in the world.

Article 560 — “How to Correct Your Political Status and Why”  — This one gives you the Big Picture overview and the three fundamental actions you need to take to overcome the legal presumptions attached to both Municipal and Territorial citizenship.
http://annavonreitz.com/correctyourpoliticalstatus.pdf

Article 573 — “Re-Flagging Your Vessels” (and, if you still have questions about this one, Article 584).  This explains that your Name/NAME have been misconstrued as the names of “US Vessels” engaged in international commerce and held subject to Maritime and Admiralty law, when in fact, you are operating as peaceful American state vessels engaged in private international trade.  Just as ships at sea have to carry the proper flag to be properly recognized, so do you— and that flag is the Peacetime  or “Civil” flag of the United States.  Read all about it.
http://annavonreitz.com/flagyourvessel.pdf

Article 607 — “Dear Lucretia — Mortgage Relief — and the Rest of the Story” — This is the heavy-hitter where the details of the correction outlined in Article 560 are fully fleshed-out.
http://annavonreitz.com/mortgagerelief.pdf

Article 620 — “Pay Attention!  If You Want to Save Your Butts!”  This covers how to correct your land titles and deeds and indemnify them under specially constructed Private Registered Indemnity Bonds for each one of the actual states.  This process takes your land assets out of the “collateral pile” and puts them back under the protection of the sovereign states.
http://annavonreitz.com/privateindemnitybond.pdf

Article 626 – “Improved Act of Expatriation” — This example shows how you can expatriate from the presumption of Territorial “citizenship” and declare your permanent domicile and domicile for all the “Vessels” operated under your name to the land and soil of your natural state.  One slight correction — it should say “Amendment X” or “Article Amendment X” not just “Article X”—- no big deal if you have already done the recording as it is not crucial, but nice to do if you haven’t yet recorded the document.
http://annavonreitz.com/improvedexpatriation.pdf

Article 630 — “Title, Lien and Bond” — This again gives the Big Picture from a slightly different viewpoint, showing you how to secure and indemnify your identity and property with a powerful claim that cannot be overcome by the thieves.
http://annavonreitz.com/titlelienbond.pdf

Article 631 — “Step One Complete.  Now What?  Dear Ernie…”  This is an overview to help people who have gotten part of the way through the process and need extra “oomph!” to get through the rest of it.
http://annavonreitz.com/steponecomplete.pdf 

These articles cover just about everything that anyone could ever need to know concerning the basics of extracting your Name/NAMES and recouping your birthright identity and reclaiming your assets and presenting yourselves properly.  They also give you the addresses you need and the bond numbers you need to protect yourselves.

Article 627 — “Retired Means Retired!”  is recommended for all the retirees out there who are worried about the loss of Social Security pay and medical care. It explains the actual obligation of the federal corporations.
http://annavonreitz.com/retired.pdf

In addition to these practical action articles that provide step-by-step explanations and directions, there are a couple other articles I wish everyone would read as a background so that people have a broader understanding of what is going on in the world and in our usurped courts.

Article 581 — “What Every American Needs to Know About Sir Lancelot” — This article explains in some detail what happened in Dark Ages Britain and France and how that precipitated the Norman Conquest, and how that in turn led to my husband’s forefathers becoming sovereigns in their own right in England.  This is a prelude to understanding how they later became sovereigns in the their own right in America — an international status you share with them today, which is unique in all the world — and how James Belcher serves today as the lawful Head of State for the United States of America.
http://annavonreitz.com/sirlancelot.pdf  

Article 588 — “Common Law, COMMON LAW, English Common Law, American Common Law”  This very important article explains the many different kinds of “common law” that exist and lays bare the deliberate confusion that some organizations like the “National Liberty Alliance” are promoting.  Always remember that Americans are owed American Common Law and no other kind of “common law” will suffice.
http://annavonreitz.com/commonlaw.pdf

Now, I’ve written it all once and Paul Stramer has faithfully published it all and made it available as a data base, and now, beyond that, we have gone the extra mile and organized and annotated the essentials for you.

Unless you have read all the articles listed and still not found the answers to your question—- please do not contact me for further individual help.  There are 350 million people in America, most of whom need to do this process.  I can’t possibly help each one and I have many, many other tasks to do: directing and supporting The Living Law Firm, organizing The American States and Nations Bank, raising hell in international jurisdiction to get this mess straightened out, bringing necessary complaints and court actions, and on and on and on…..

It’s important that I not be deluged with correspondence and not be inundated with calls, even though my email and postal address and telephone number are published and freely available.  Why?  Because I don’t have a battery of receptionists ready to take calls, and I don’t have an army of public relations specialists, paralegals, and “agency representatives” to answer questions for me; because it depresses me when I can’t answer every single one of your calls and your letters; because I have to keep my nose to the grindstone working on huge projects that will benefit everyone, not just one; because I am only one getting-on old lady.

I can’t even take the time to write “thank you” notes for donations and that really bugs me.

So, please, everyone, do your homework first and try your best to sort through things with all the information I have given you BEFORE you call or email questions.  It will help me and help all the others working with me and for me, too.  http://annavonreitz.com/

Olddogs Comments!

Why Anna publishes everything in PDF is beyond me, but you can highlight the title (not number) of her articles and copy paste them on Paul Stramer’s search bar and have then in plain text so you can send them by email to your friends. http://www.paulstramer.net


Governments Have Descended to the Level of Mere Private Corporations

06/29/2017

 http://www.rocklarochelle.org/documents/clearfield-doctrine.pdf

Supreme Court Building

 

 Clearfield Doctrine

Supreme Court Annotated Statute, Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371 1942

Whereas defined pursuant to Supreme Court Annotated Statute: Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371 1942: “Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation, and take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen . . . where private corporate commercial paper [Federal

Reserve Notes] and securities [checks] is concerned . . . For purposes of suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as entities entirely separate from government.”

What the Clearfield Doctrine is saying is that when private commercial paper is used by corporate government, then government loses its sovereignty status and becomes no different than a mere private corporation.

As such, government then becomes bound by the rules and laws that govern private corporations which means that if they intend to compel an individual to some specific performance based upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules, then the government, like any private corporation,

must be the holder-in-due-course of a contract or other commercial agreement between it and the one upon who demands for specific

performance are made.

And further, the government must be willing to enter the contract or commercial agreement into evidence before trying to get the court to enforce its demands, called statutes.

This case is very important because it is a 1942 case that was decided after the UNITED STATES CORPORATION COMPANY filed its “CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION” in the State of Florida (July 15, 1925). And it was decided AFTER the ‘corporate government’ agreed to use the

currency of the private corporation, the FEDERAL RESERVE. The private currency, the Federal Reserve Note, is still in use today.

References:

(i) Articles of Incorporation of UNITED STATES CORPORATION COMPANY

http://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/articles-of-incorporation-of-u-s-corp-company.pdf

(ii) From The Great American Adventure by Judge Dale, retired. (pages 93-94) http://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/the-great-american-adventure-complete-work-by-judge-dale.pdf

[4] Corporations are not and can never be SOVEREIGN. They are not real, they are a fiction and only exist on paper.

[5] Therefore, all laws created by these government corporations are private corporate regulations called public law, statutes, codes and ordinances to conceal their true nature. Do the Judge and your lawyer know about this? You bet they do!

[6] Since these government bodies are not SOVEREIGN, they cannot promulgate or enforce CRIMINAL LAWS; they can only create and enforce CIVIL LAWS, which are duty bound to comply with the LAW of CONTRACTS. The Law of Contracts requires signed written agreements and complete transparency! Did you ever agree to be arrested and tried under any of their corporate statutes? For that matter, did you ever agree to contract with them by agreeing to be sued for violating their corporate regulations?

[7] Enforcement of these corporate statutes by local, state and federal law enforcement officers are unlawful actions being committed against the

SOVEREIGN public and these officers can be held personally liable for their

actions. [Bond v. U.S., 529 US 334-2000]

(iii) Our Government is Just Another Corporation

http://anticorruptionsociety.com/is-our-government-just-another-corporation/

GOVERNMENTS HAVE DESCENDED TO THE LEVEL OF MERE PRIVATE CORPORATIONS

                                      CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE

Supreme Court Annotated Statute

Clearfield Trust Co. vs United States

318 US 363-371 –  1942

Says:

When private commercial paper is used by Corporate government, the Government loses it’s Sovereignty status and becomes no different then a mere private Corporation.

This case is very important because it is a 1942 case that was decided after the UNITED STATES CORP COMPANY FILED IT’S  ” CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION” IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA ( JULY 15, 1925),
And it was decided ‘ AFTER’ the ‘ Corporate Government’ agreed to use the currency of the private Corporation, the FEDERAL RESERVE.{ based in London}

THE PRIVATE CURRENCY THE ‘ FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE’, IS STILL IN USE TODAY.

  1. Do we ‘ technically’ have a Government, since the sovereignty status is lost, or a mere Corporation ?

By Ed Johnston

“People occasionally stumble on the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.” “People who shut their eyes to truth, simply invite their own destruction.” It’s the same the world over folks….. it’s all about status/ standing……..subject, or sovereign!

You are “presumed” to be a

subject……Subject=citizen=person=debtor=slave! So how does one go about “correcting” ones “presumed” subject status? By affidavit of truth wherein is included a revocation of all powers of Attorney, signed, notarized, (certified copies made) and entered into the public record, (county recorder and/or by publication =proper service of notice procedures) certified copies sent first class mail to any/all interested parties, ie; government officials, public servants, courts, judges, Prostitutors, ect.

Truth is sovereign in commerce, all law is commercial law, Unrebutted affidavit stands as fact in law! No one can or will ever be able to rebut your truth, (your sworn affidavit). any questions? PM me on fb! If you are in U.K. contact me, I’m sure we can adjust/apply this process to you as well! American Law and Procedure, Vol 13, page 137, 1910: ”This word `person’ and its scope and bearing in the law, involving, as it does, legal fictions and also apparently natural beings, it is difficult to understand; but it is absolutely necessary to grasp, at whatever cost, a true and proper understanding to the word in all the phases of its proper use … A person is here not a physical or individual person, but the status or condition with which he is invested… not an individual or physical person, but the status, condition or character borne by physical persons… The law of persons is the law of status or condition.”

People are not persons. Read the following legal definitions of the word `person’ As you will see, persons are defined as non-sovereigns. A sovereign is someone who is not subject to statutes. A person is someone who voluntarily submits himself to statutes. In the United States the people are sovereign over their civil servants: Romans 6:16 (NIV): “Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey…” Spooner v. McConnell, 22 F 939@ 943:

“The sovereignty of a state does not reside in the persons who fill the different departments of its government, but in the People, from whom the government emanated; and they may change it at their discretion. Sovereignty, then in this country, abides with the constituency, and not with the agent; and this remark is true, both in reference to the federal and state government.”
1794 US Supreme Court case Glass v. Sloop Betsey: “… Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people” 1829 US Supreme Court case Lansing v. Smith: “People of a state are entitled to all rights which formerly belong to the King, by his prerogative.”

US Supreme Court in 4 Wheat 402: “The United States, as a whole, emanates from the people… The people, in their capacity as sovereigns, made and adopted the Constitution…”

US Supreme Court in Luther v. Borden, 48 US 1, 12 Led 581: “… The governments are but trustees acting under derived authority and have no power to delegate what is not delegated to them. But the people, as the original fountain might take away what they have delegated and intrust to whom they please. …The sovereignty in every state resides in the people of the state and they may alter and change their form of government at their own pleasure.” US Supreme Court. in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, page 370: “While sovereign powers are delegated to the government, sovereignty itself remains with the people.” Yick Wo is a powerful anti-discrimination case. You might get the impression that the legislature can write perfectly legal laws, yet the laws cannot be enforced contrary to the intent of the people.

It’s as if servants do not make rules for their masters. It’s as if the Citizens who created government were their masters. It’s as if civil servants were to obey the higher authority. You are the higher authority of Romans 13:1. You as ruler are not a terror to good works per Romans 13:3. Imagine that! Isn’t it a shame that your government was surrendered to those who are a terror to good works? Isn’t it a shame that you enlisted to obey them? US Supreme Court in Julliard v. Greenman, 110 US 421: “There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States …. In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld.” US Supreme Court in Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 US 653, 667 (1979): “In common usage, the term ‘person’ does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are ordinarily construed to exclude it.” US Supreme Court in U.S. v. Cooper, 312 US 600,604, 61 S.Ct 742 (1941): ”Since in common usage the term `person’ does not include the sovereign, statutes employing that term are ordinarily construed to exclude it.” US Supreme Court in U.S. v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258 67 Sct677 (1947): ”In common usage, the term `person’ does not include the sovereign and statutes employing it will ordinarily not be construed to do so.” US Supreme Court in US v. Fox, 94 US 315:

”Since in common usage, the term `person’ does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it.”

U.S. v. General Motors Corporation, D.C. Ill, 2 F.R.D. 528, 530: In ”common usage the word `person’ does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are generally construed to exclude the sovereign.” Church of Scientology v. US Department of Justice, 612 F.2d 417 @425 (1979): “the word `person’ in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings., see e.g. 1, U.S.C. § para 1.” In the 1935 Supreme Court case of Perry v. US (294 US 330) the Supreme Court found that: “In United States, sovereignty resides in people… the Congress cannot invoke the sovereign power of the People to override their will as thus declared. ”Since in common usage, the term `person’ does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it.”

U.S. v. General Motors Corporation, D.C. Ill, 2 F.R.D. 528, 530: In ”common usage the word `person’ does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are generally construed to exclude the sovereign.” Church of Scientology v. US Department of Justice, 612 F.2d 417 @425 (1979): “the word `person’ in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings., see e.g. 1, U.S.C. § para 1.” In the 1935 Supreme Court case of Perry v. US (294 US 330) the Supreme Court found that: “In United States, sovereignty resides in people… the Congress cannot invoke the sovereign power of the People to override their will as thus declared.”


Timeline of the Great Fraud

06/28/2017

http://www.stage2omega.com/timeline-of-the-great-fraud-by-judge-anna-von-reitz/

by Judge Anna Von Reitz

People need to end the Two party Corporate fascist-politics fraud and the Congress ‘in Trust’ system

  1. 1754-1776: The “United Colonies” take shape as a loose political association, and the First and Second Continental Congresses result. 2. 1776: The Colonies declare independence. 3. 1781: The Articles of Confederation bind “States” — political subdivisions of the United Colonies – together in a “perpetual union”, creating a confederation of States to operate in the international Jurisdiction of the Sea. [Why a “confederation” instead of a “federation”? – Because the original States gave up some of their natural jurisdiction to the new political entity, the Union, they created.] 4. 1783: The Treaty of Paris and Treaty of Versailles cements this arrangement splitting the land and sea jurisdictions between the States and the Federal Union and places King George III as Trustee of American interests on the “High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways” —which means he kept control of American international commerce. The new “Union” entity operating in the international Jurisdiction of the sea was always controlled by the British and it has always been the British Monarch’s responsibility as International Trustee to manage it and guarantee its proper operation. It has instead run amok for 150 years. 5. 1787: The Supreme Perfected Republican Declaration of the United Colonies creates the National Trust owed the Continental United States. 6. 1789: Two years later, “The Constitution for the united States of America” splits off the sea jurisdiction and creates the new Federal United States. A year later (1790) the Federal United States forms a commercial company doing business as the United States (Commercial Company) to provide the nineteen enumerated services agreed to by the subscribing States. 7. 1812-1814: The British try to horn in again and are beaten back. This skirmish results in the Treaty of Ghent, where the British interests in American shipping and commerce are reaffirmed and lasting peace is promised in return. 8. 1845: The British Monarch and Pope secretly agree to undermine the American System of government via the Treaty of Verona. The British Monarch breaches the Treaty of Ghent and both the Pope and the King secretly breach their trust as International Trustees. They set out on a covert action and issued Letters of Marque and Reprisal to the members of the Bar Associations, allowing them to act as Foreign Agents on American soil and as privateers free to plunder American commerce. 9. 1860: Thanks to the efforts of the Bar Associations a member of the Bar, Abraham Lincoln, is elected to serve as President. Note that he is ineligible serve as President of the United States of America, by the Titles of Nobility Amendment to the actual Constitution— but is eligible to serve as President of the United States (Commercial Company). This is the same situation we have with Barack Obama who is ineligible to serve as President of the United States of America, but is able to serve as President of the United States (Incorporated). 10. 1861: The Civil War begins. ‘Congress’ adjourns for lack of quorum and without a date to reconvene. Lincoln organizes a Delaware Corporation and the remaining members of Congress begin functioning as a Board of Directors. 11. 1862: The “Corporate Congress”—a body of men no different than the Board of Directors of IBM, change the meaning of a single word —only and explicitly for use within their corporation. That word is “person”. From then on the word “person” is deemed to mean “corporation” for federal government purposes. (37th “Congress”– Second Session, Chapter 49, Section 68.) 12. 1863: Lincoln signs the Lieber Code as Commander in Chief and puts the Union Army, the Grand Army of the Republic, in charge of the nation’s future and money supply. A day later, he bankrupts the original United States (Commercial Company). 13. 1865: Lee’s Army surrenders to Grant and a general armistice is declared. The Southern States are in ruins and under military occupation by the Union. The original Northern States are bankrupt. Foreign banks are in control of the new “United States of America, Inc.” and the Union Army reigns supreme. Over the next two years President Andrew Johnson will three times publicly declare peace on the land jurisdiction of the Continental United States, but peace is never declared in the international Jurisdiction of the Sea controlled by the Federal United States under the trusteeship of the British Monarch. 14. 1868: The Corporate Congress writes itself a new Corporate Constitution, called “the Constitution of the United States of America” and palms off this look-alike, sound-alike private corporate document “as if” it were the actual Constitution. This is fraud on many levels. The Constitution of the United States of America purposefully sought to confuse and delude people into thinking it was the actual Equity Contract obligating the States to receive services and subrogate their international jurisdiction to the federal government. 15. 1871: The Corporate Congress begins to set up shop for itself by creating a separate government for the District of Columbia. The initial effort fails but seven years later the Washing ton DC Municipality is created as an independent international city state run as a plenary oligarchy by the members of “Congress”. Also in 1871, the Corporate Congress claimed to own all United States corporations – 41st “Congress”- Third Session, Chapters 62, 63, 64, and 65. 16. 1874-1885: All the actual States on the land are reorganized and at the same time completely new “Federal States” are created and new “State Constitutions” are written for them. The original States on the land are renamed in this process. The original State of Ohio operating the land jurisdiction became the Ohio State, while the usurping “Federal State”— merely a corporate franchise of the United States of America, Inc. operating in the international Jurisdiction of the Sea—took over the name “State of Ohio”. 17. 1900-1904: Still lusting after more power for itself, the Corporate Congress set up a second shop for itself and obtained permission to do it from the Supreme Court in a series of cases known as The Insular Tariff Cases. As with setting up the Washington DC Municipality as a foreign city-state on our shores and running it as their own little oligarchy, the “Congress” now took the “federal territories and possessions” and made a new “union” of “American states” – Puerto Rico, Guam, et alia -and began calling it “the United States of America (Minor)”. They just forgot to add the (Minor) part of the name from then on, and let people assume that all the repugnant laws they passed governing this “Constitutional Democracy” also applied to the Continental United States. 18. 1912-1913: A private association of European and American banks calling themselves “The Federal Reserve” bought the governmental services corporation known as “The United States of America, Inc.” and its “State” franchises as a business venture, and began operating such familiar agencies as The United States Department of Agriculture and The United States Department of Transportation as private, for-profit businesses -without telling anyone. They exercised the “government powers” they didn’t really possess in a vast fraud scheme in collusion with members of “Congress” to institute a fiat monetary system and misused their position of trust to put competitors out of business, set up monopolies, rig commodity markets, and commit other acts of blatant self-interested criminality and fraud. 19. 1917: Engaging in a war for profit, Congress and their Banker Bosses passed the War Powers Act and the Trading With the Enemy Act, and numerous other illegal and repugnant “Acts” pertaining only to the Federal United States and the international Jurisdiction of the Sea, but presented them to the public as if this claptrap pertained to the actual States and People on the land of the Continental United States. Deceived by this venal and purposeful fraud, millions of Americans complied with what they believed to be the “Law” passed by a legitimate Congress acting as deputies of the States and the People. 20. 1918-1933: Once in control of the monetary system the “Federal Reserve” increased the monetary supply exponentially, causing the “Roaring Twenties”. They built the house of cards and on October 29, 1929, they collapsed it – deliberately. This enabled them to put thousands of competitors out of business, allowed them to buy commodities, land, and labor for dirt cheap, and to manipulate the value of the dollar to their benefit. 21. 1933-1940: The banks took full advantage of the “national emergency” they created and the Congress did everything the bankers required: The Sheppard-Towner Act, the Buck Act, the Alien Registration Act, the Social Security Act(s), the Emergency Banking Act, and more. The purpose of all this was to lay claim to the labor and the assets of the States and People of the Continental United States by securing “private contracts” with them, enabling the perpetrators to “represent them” and to set up corporations “in their names”. Hundreds of millions of Americans were told that they “had to” sign up for Social Security and have a Social Security Number in order to have a job, that it was “the Law” and that “Congress had passed it” and so, believing it to be a lawful government mandate – when in fact it was a corporate fraud scheme – they were subscribed en mass. Remembering now the actions of the Corporate Congress in 1862 redefining the word “person” to mean “corporation” for federal purposes, and their later claim made in 1871 to hold ownership interest in all United States corporations and seeing that their actions from 1933 to 1940 resulted in redefining the estates of living Americans as public trusts—that is, as a form of corporation— you can see that the “Corporate Congress” has claimed to own living Americans as assets belonging to their corporation and has also claimed to control and own their private assets — in flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention Protocols Volume II, Article 3, and in equally flagrant violation of the 1926 International Conventions on Slavery, and in violation of every lawful and moral duty, commercial contract, and trust indenture owed to the Continental United States and the American People. It is also apparent that all of this – every claim, every salvage lien, every title to land and property held under color of law – being held against the Continental United States and the living civilian inhabitants of the Continental United States, is pure, self-interested commercial fraud created and perpetuated under conditions of semantic deceit, constructive fraud, misrepresentation, and mischaracterization by the management of the Federal United States, the various governmental services corporations doing business as some form of “United States” and the British Government. 22. 1940-present: Among the first actions to be taken by the criminals was to “register” all live births. This established a claim of ownership on the baby and his or her estate, benefiting the “State of Ohio” or other “Federal State franchise”. This act of identity theft exercised via an undisclosed and forced contract with the Mother of the child, allowed each ”State” franchise to control the name and the property of the baby. The perpetrators promptly set up new “State franchises” benefiting themselves using names styled like this: “Joseph Quincy Public” and new “Municipal franchises” set up under the auspices of the Washington DC Municipality using NAMES styled like this: “JOHN QUINCY PUBLIC”. The only purpose for creating these franchises structured as various kinds of trusts – was to act as a means for the privately owned governmental services corporations to hypothecate debt against the labor of the living people and their private property assets and to exercise control over them amounting to slavery.


IRS Claims of “Frivolous Return”

06/27/2017
http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/06/irs-claims-of-frivolous-return.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+http%2Fpaulstramerfeedburnercom+%28http%3A%2F%2Fwww.paulstramer.net++++Paul+Stramer+personal+blog%29

 

By Anna Von Reitz

[This is a reply to a woman who revoked her election to pay federal income taxes and received back a snooty, threatening letter accusing her of having made a “frivolous return”— when in fact the IRS was admitting her right and ability to claim her exemption by sending her a Voucher in the same letter.  Read on.]

This [sending out “frivolous return” responses] is standard practice with the IRS, which is just a private bill collection agency.

Anything that you send back to them can be considered a “return” in a sense, and it is in that sense that they are using the word.  You have not sent them a “Tax Return” at all and cannot be accused of having done so.

Your right to revoke your election to pay is tightly bound to your citizenship or lack thereof.  It is also tied to your new found awareness of what a “Withholding Agent” is—- and that is, a Warrant Officer on a Merchant Marine vessel.

If this was the typical “IRS package”— the cover letter came with a Voucher printed at the bottom.  This little piece of paper is their “Cover Our Butts” token.  If you will note, it appears to be a payment slip—something you would send back with a check, etc., to pay their tax demand.   But look closer!  Look above where your name and address are printed and you will see a very strange thing: your Social Security Number enclosed by asterisks and without dashes like this: *123456789*.   This is the credit side of your account that these yahoos have to access if you properly instruct them to do so.

A Payment Voucher works like a Coupon or other similar instrument that allows you to claim or do something.  In this case, it allows you to claim your exemption from federal taxation.

If you were paying attention to the instructions given in “How to Change Your Political Status and Why” and in the article (number 607? 609?) titled “Dear Lucretia…..” you will have a good idea of what is going on and you will also have an exact description of the “ACCEPTED FOR VALUE. EXEMPT FROM LEVY.” red ink stamp.

Red ink is always used to cancel stamps at the post office— why?  Because it is private international land jurisdiction. Not sea jurisdiction.  That’s why you use red ink.  Land is red.  Sea is blue.

If you followed instructions and “surrendered” the federal PERSON on your Birth Certificate back to the Secretary of the Treasury there can be no further charges against you, and you will have all the information to complete your stamp and apply it to the back of the Voucher the IRS has so obligingly sent you.

Just write: “For payment and settlement of the ACCOUNT.” like you would on the memo line of a check, apply the red stamp with all the numbers and proper verbiage as described for Lucretia, sign it Last Name, First Middle in Upper and Lower Case, and return it to the same snooty wannabe and say this:

“Contrary to your desires and presumptions, I am claiming my exemption and revoking any election to pay federal income taxes.  Having done so, and having notified the Commissioner(s) of my decision, I am prohibited by law from ever filing again.

Also contrary to your suppositions, I am the paramount security interest holder in all assets registered and unregistered and held in this NAME and I am not a municipal CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES nor am I a territorial U.S. Citizen.  More importantly, I am not a “Withholding Agent” which is a Warrant Officer aboard a Merchant Marine vessel, volunteer or otherwise.

Any attempt to coerce me into making any such false admissions or assumptions of debt under penalty of perjury would be suborning a crime and you would be an accomplice to that crime and more, should you continue to suggest that I am not free to relinquish any “voluntary” job or status or to suggest that I am a “Taypayer” or that I have any such obligation or made any “frivolous return” to you, as you implied with your most recent correspondence.

I have returned and surrendered the federal “PERSON” to the Treasury and have named Mr. Steven T. Mnuchin the Fiduciary responsible. You will need to return the enclosed Voucher to the Treasury for payment/adjustment of the account. That said, I suggest that you put my NAME on a “Do Not Contact” list as technically, any further contact from your office is mail fraud.”

As always, when you receive mail from the IRS, you must reply to forestall any claim that you are “evading” anything.  And as always, send the mail certified, return receipt requested, so that you can prove that you did reply.

You may from time to time hear from them again.  Like all Bill Collectors they go on fishing expeditions and try to wedge in a claim anywhere they can.  Always reply and tell them in no uncertain terms who you are, who they are, and where the b.s. ends.  If you have any trouble with them at all, turn them into the Commissioner and/or to IRS CID, and watch the fur fly.

At least, for a change, it won’t be your fur…..

Judge Anna

See this article and over 600 others on Anna’s website here:

http://www.annavonreitz.com/


The Right to be Remembered

06/26/2017

http://theinternationalforecaster.com/topic/international_forecaster_weekly/the_right_to_be_remembered

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjCO_aFblHo

…the real solution here, as always, is in our own hands. Unless and until the internet is “shut down” (which is not going to happen, at least not for good), it is essentially impossible for The Party to actually scrub alternative news and information from the web.

James Corbett | June 24, 2017

Like many other people in the online era, Mario Costeja González found himself in an uncomfortable situation: When people Googled his name the top result was a piece of potentially embarrassing information from his now-distant past. But unlike many other people in the online era, he did something about it: He went to court.

The story goes like this: In 1998 González’ home was foreclosed as a result of debt which he subsequently paid off. But over a decade later he discovered that when people Googled his name the most prominent result was a link to a 1998 article from the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia detailing the foreclosure. He contacted the newspaper to ask them to remove his name from the article, but they refused to do so on the grounds that the announcement of the foreclosure had been mandated by the Spanish Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. So he took his complaint to the the Spanish Agency of data protection, which rejected his complaint against the newspaper but upheld his complaint against Google, calling on the search engine to remove the link to the article from its results. Google counter-sued in the National High Court of Spain and, in the end, the court ruled that search engines are “in certain circumstances obliged to remove links to web pages that are published by third parties and contain information relating to a person from the list of results displayed following a search made on the basis of that person’s name.”

The case contributed an important legal precedent to the so-called “Right to be Forgotten,” the idea that people should be free to live their lives without worry that they will be forever stigmatized by an event in the past that is no longer relevant. The great irony in González’ case, of course, is that now when people Google his name they’re greeted with tens of thousands of search results about his case, discussing in great detail the very foreclosure that he had worked to expunge from his Google trail. Such is life in the age of the internet, a medium which has introduced us to “The Streisand Effect.”

But as distressing as it must be to be attempting to separate yourself from your digitally preserved past, it has to be noted that the entire concept of the “Right to be Forgotten” comes with a corollary that is even more horrific: In order for the search engines and databases to grant your “Right to be Forgotten” they must have the ability to memory hole you.

The memory hole, as I’m sure I don’t need to remind you, is where Winston Smith and the other members of The Party deposited information that was problematic to Big Brother in the world of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Politically inconvenient documents, government records that contradict the newest Party-approved version of history, old newspaper records that contradict the pronouncements of Big Brother, even scraps of waste paper, were all “memory holed” by conscientious Party members at their earliest convenience. The “memory hole” in Winston’s office is a “large oblong slit protected by a wire grating” into which problematic papers are inserted to be “whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.”

In the real-world version of Nineteen Eighty-Four that we are living through today, of course, we do not need a complex series of pneumatic tubes leading to a central furnace in order for documents to be erased and all traces of the past destroyed. Today we just require that a few Big Tech companies be in bed with Big Brother enough to dutifully oblige requests to memory hole a person, place or event that poses a problem to The Party. And luckily for Big Brother, The Party seeded, funded and controls Silicon Valley, so there’s no question that Google and its cohorts will cooperate.

To be fair, this is a different version of “censorship” than Orwell or any of his contemporaries could have imagined, but it is probably more insidious for that. When a major search engine de-lists your site, or even just adjusts its algorithm so your site appears lower in the search results, it isn’t that your information is destroyed. The data doesn’t disappear. But for almost everyone who uses the internet, it might as well be gone; they’ll never see it in their normal, day-to-day, Google-searching, Facebook-posting, Tweet-reading, YouTube-watching routine.

Think this is an overblown, paranoid conspiracy fantasy? It’s already happened numerous times. The most incredible of all these stories is what happened when Amazon discovered that a user had started selling an electronic version of Nineteen Eighty-Four on its Kindle store without owning the rights to the book. Upon learning of the situation, Amazon simply deleted the book from the Kindle of every user who had purchased it and refunded them the money. That’s right, with the flip of a switch Amazon memory holed Nineteen Eighty-Four. Even Orwell couldn’t have made that one up.

I’ve discussed this type of censorship before, most recently in my video on 21st century censorship and perhaps most intriguingly in my podcast analyzing Borges’ masterful short story, “The Library of Babel.” But wouldn’t you know it, the very day that I created my “Censorship in the 21st Century” video detailing how Google and YouTube are starting to memory hole alternative media channels and sites that counter the establishment propaganda, YouTube announced the new steps they’re taking “to fight terrorism online.”

Now keep in mind that if you think these tools are only ever going to be used on some crazed suicide bomber to keep his final crazed manifesto from going viral, then this may sound reasonable. Specifically, the four steps being taken by YouTube are:

  • “increasing our use of technology to help identify extremist and terrorism-related videos”
  • increasing “the number of independent experts in YouTube’s Trusted Flagger programme.”
  • “taking a tougher stance on videos that do not clearly violate our policies,” meaning “will appear behind an interstitial warning and they will not be monetised, recommended or eligible for comments or user endorsements.”
  • increasing its role in “counter-radicalisation efforts,” including redirecting would-be terrorist recruits to “anti-terrorist videos that can change their minds about joining.”

But one would have to be an imbecile or a child not to understand that any and all “problematic” political content will eventually fall under this category of “extremist” material. We have already seen how Google’s demonetization efforts have impacted alternative news sources like AntiWar.com and We Are Change, and even producers of bland, non-political entertainment are increasingly calling out the bizarre and nonsensical way their videos are being demonetized seemingly at random. The point of YouTube’s latest announcement is that demonetization is just the beginning. Soon legions of Party members are going to be scouring the web looking for content to flag, demonetize, render un-sharable and shut down comments on. And on top of that, they’ll attempt to redirect would-be viewers of these thoughtcrime videos to Party-approved content.

Do we really have to stretch our imagination to see how this will soon be applied to videos, articles and social media posts on 9/11 truth, anti-war topics, exposes of government wrongdoing, etc.?

Well, in case you needed it spelled out any more clearly, it should be stressed that YouTube chose to originally make this announcement not via its own blog, but on the editorial pages of the Financial Times. Yes, that Financial Times. Let there be no doubt that The Party has nothing to fear from GooTube or its social media confreres.

But hey, Google has finally announced that they’ll be scrubbing private medical records from their search results so I guess we can all breathe easy knowing our data is in good hands, right?

Of course not. No, the real solution here, as always, is in our own hands. Unless and until the internet is “shut down” (which, barring nuclear annihilation of the planet, is not going to happen, at least not for good), it is essentially impossible for The Party to actually scrub alternative news and information from the web. They can and will (and are) scrubbing the links to this information from their controlled search engines and social media platforms, but who says we have to use them?

As with virtually every other thing in life, we are voting with our actions every single day with every single decision we make. We are watching videos on YouTube instead of a peer-to-peer alternative like BitChute. We are posting to Facebook instead of a blockchain alternative like Steemit. We are searching on Google instead of a privacy protecting search engine like DuckDuckGo or StartPage. I’m as guilty as anyone else of falling into bad habits. No one is perfect and we can’t change all of our practices overnight. But unless and until we begin the process of disentangling ourselves from the bought and controlled, Party-approved, Big Tech-dominated web, we are setting ourselves up to be disappeared. Forget the “Right to be Forgotten.” How about a “Right to be Remembered?”


The U.S. Constitution First Amendment And Radicalism

06/22/2017

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/06/u-s-constitution-first-amendment-radicalism.html

TOPICS: ConstitutionFree Speech

By Catherine J. Frompovich

“The United States Constitution legally protects your fundamental human rights. Every citizen should feel free from an immediate threat, so limited speech restrictions make sense. However, valuing free speech means that our collective tolerance for new ideas needs to increase. Redefining every negative interaction as hate speech hurts everyone, creating a climate of political correctness that ultimately muzzles every American. There is a reason that free speech is legally defined. No one person or group can impose their ideas or priorities on another, nor should they. Ultimately, these values promote mutual respect, which creates the safest public climate for all citizens across every political stripe and social issue.”

Sujit Choudhry is the founding director of the Center for Constitutional Transitions and the I. Michael Heyman Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley – School of Law.

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/06/hate-speech-vs-free-speech-critical-analysis-constitutional-law-expert-sujit-choudhry.html

Personally, I could not agree more whole-heartily about the U.S. Constitutional human rights agenda against suppression and controls than what Professor Choudhry stated above.  However, not everyone sees the U.S. founding documents in that light or interpretation.

In my opinion, the First Amendment expresses support for, plus also guarantees, free speech and the practice of certain rights associated with freedom of belief, speech and religion, which in today’s political climate are denigrated by the very persons who claim to be “free speech rights advocates and enforcers.”  Hello!  What am I missing?  Their rabidness is indicative of their disdain for freedoms, in my opinion.  They seem to align with corporate dictates that mandate “their way or the highway” when it comes to healthcare, vaccines, GMO ‘phood’, weather geoengineering, microwave technology and AMI Smart Meters, public utility commissions, the U.S. CDC/FDA and a host of other actors which I would label a “Corporatocracy” form of socialist-fascist governance.

However, as I view the First Amendment, it also should include and enforce precluding the denials of suppression of free speech, beliefs, and religious tenets EXCEPT when radicals overstep their zeal and enthusiasm to promote fascist-like tactics as witnessed on today’s supposedly ‘free-thinking’ college and university campuses.  That preclusion also ought to extend to financial support extended to radical ‘free thinkers’ like George Soros and his many-faceted agendas, e.g., the color revolutions in various countries, Bill Gates and his foundation, the Rockefeller clan, the Rothschilds  AND the one percent elites who want to control humankind.

Apparently, the “more narrow interpretation” Professor Choudhry talks about in his article comes from the “political correctness” meme which, ostensibly, gave birth to what ought to be labeled “Democrat radicalism.”

Another sphere of First Amendment restraint  factors, in my opinion, which ought to be impacted with harnessing their rabid controls of the First Amendment regarding free speech are the six media corporations that own 90 percent of free thought and free speech media-output in the USA:  GE, News Corp., Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, CBS.  Ninety percent outputs boil down either to collusion or control!  Which is it?  And why have citizens fallen for it?

Source

As I assess the status of the First Amendment, it looks like it’s up on the checkout counter traveling down the belt to a final demise.  Apathy on the part of those who believe in the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments, plus our country’s founding documents, are responsible for allowing the socialist Democrat radicals, who are changing the Democratic Party, to get their pernicious and communist-like-thinking socialized “mad world” into what some radicals think the USA ought to become.

As a Nation, do we want the total loss of our freedoms that were paid for in blood, sweat, tears, honor and devotion to be lost?

 


NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL REAL AMERICANS TO DO THEIR DUTY.

06/21/2017

Notice of public fraud by the Corporate United States

It is every living human being in America’s responsibility to read this Notice until you fully comprehend it, and to teach every family member that claims to love their country and freedom how you/they have been beguiled by force of arms and threat’s of incarceration until the overwhelming population becomes informed and equipped to respond in kind until we as a Nation of free human beings can live in prosperity, freedom from tyranny, and control our own lives. Your choice to remain ignorant of this information will result in catastrophic world war and the death of billions of people. This education may require more effort than anything you have ever attempted to do, and the willful refusal to make the effort is nothing less than cowardice and total disregard of human lives’.

James P. Harvey


FINAL NOTICE OF COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEFAULT

By Anna Maria Wilhelmina Hanna Sophia Riezinger-von Reitzenstein von Lettow-Vorbeck,

Previously published at

https://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com/2014/08/27/final-notice-of-commercial-and-administrative-default/

February 3, 2014

Alaska Supreme Court via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3821

Alaska Judicial Council via US Certified Mail #7012 2210 0000 2447 3753

Alaska Attorney General via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3760

Governor Sean Parnell via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3777

Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3784

US marshal Robert Huen via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3791

Colonel Keith Mallard via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3807

Ms. Betsy Lawer, CEO, First National Bank of Alaska via US Certified Mail #7012 2210 0000 2447 3814

Joseph Everheart, Regional President, 301 West Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99501 via US Certified Mail #  7012 2210 0000 2447 3883

Abstract:  Since 1944 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) an agency of the UNITED NATIONS doing business as the UNITED STATES, INC.  dba STATE OF ALASKA   has functioned as a secondary Trust Management Organization (TMO) charged with the fiduciary obligation of fulfilling all service contracts of the bankrupted United States of America, Incorporated, during its Chapter 11 reorganization.   In accepting the assets of the United States of America, Inc. the IMF also accepted its liabilities, which include the claims of the Priority Creditors,  living Americans  who are owed (1) reparations for the seizure of privately owned gold assets by the United States of America, Inc. acting in Breach of Trust during the 1930’s, (2) all interest in their private property, material rights, land, homes, businesses, persons and names that have been improperly entangled in the bankruptcy of the privately owned “United States of America, Incorporated” and (3) the natural resources possessed by the organic, geographically defined states of the Union.

The IMF has claimed to represent the interests of all the Creditors of the United States of America, Inc., but has instead alleged that the living American People— to whom the IMF and its many subsidiaries owe good faith service — are “unknown creditors”.  Chronic abuse by the IMF leadership and politicians acting in conflict of interest as corporate officers and employees of this privately owned and operated for-profit corporation dba the UNITED STATES, INC.— at the same time that they claim to “represent” the American People,  has led to unrestrained and unauthorized hypothecation of public debt against private assets, identity theft, fiduciary malfeasance, fraud, extortion under armed force, and Breach of Trust usurpation.

You are receiving this FINAL NOTICE OF COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEFAULT because you work for the UNITED NATIONS/IMF dba the UNITED STATES, INC. or one of its STATE franchises or agencies, or a banking institution impacted by these facts.  You are responsible in some capacity for meeting the contractual and fiduciary obligations owed to the American People.  You are being made explicitly, individually, personally, and undeniably aware of criminal acts of mis-administration and malfeasance being committed and directed by IMF corporate officers functioning in blatant Breach of Trust and Conflict of Interest while occupying vacated and long-inactive Public Offices.

Absent a specific, fully disclosed, voluntary appointment to act in behalf of specific individual Americans, there is no basis for any claim that any elected or appointed official employed by the UNITED STATES or its STATE franchises, agencies, or subsidiaries, represents anyone but themselves. Election to a corporate office does not imply Power of Attorney.  Election to a private corporate office does not imply election to public office.  The same is true of any elected or appointed official employed by the United States of America, Inc. and its State franchises.

Sean Parnell has been elected to serve as the GOVERNOR of the STATE OF ALASKA, a corporate municipal franchise of the UNITED STATES, INC.   This is not the same office as the Alaska State Governor, a civil office of the organic Alaska State.

The claims of the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. against the private property and Estates of the American People have been denied and successfully rebutted at the highest levels of world governance.  

The “United States of America, Inc.” has been released from bankruptcy as of July 1, 2013, and all debts related to it and its franchises have been discharged, so that the UNITED STATES, INC. can not bill the United States of America, Inc. for services. 

You are being afforded the opportunity to self-correct and correct the operations of your Office/OFFICE.  Failure to timely do so and provide remedy to those who have been harmed may result in you being prosecuted for impersonating American officials, double indemnity fines, up to ten (10) years in prison for per offense, commercial compensatory damage claims, and dissolution of the IMF, franchise, agency, bank or other corporate charter of the legal fiction entity you work for.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS IS NOTICE TO AGENTS, NOTICE TO AGENTS IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS.

______________________________________________________________________________

This letter is your COMPLETE AND FINAL NOTICE informing you of crimes being committed under the auspices of your Office/OFFICE, making you individually and personally liable, and serving to make everyone associated with your Office/OFFICE an accomplice to these continuing acts of criminal fraud and malfeasance if immediate action to correct operations is not taken.

______________________________________________________________________________

America was founded under the administration of commercial Trust Management Organizations, the most famous of which was the Virginia Company. As a result of the Revolutionary War, the American People formed an unincorporated domestic civil government.  The Several states later contracted with an incorporated Trust Management Organization dba “United States” to provide international representation and stipulated public services in common.

The American civil government based on individual and organic state sovereignty is known as The Republic. A more recent Trust Management Organization dba the United States of America, Inc. clearly admitted its status as a mere representative of the Republic when it popularized the Pledge of Allegiance:  “…..and to the Republic for which it stands.”

The Republic originally functioned in international commerce through the agency of an incorporated commercial Trust Management Organization known simply as the “United States”.  George Washington was the Eleventh President of this Trust Management Organization, which predated the Revolutionary War. 

Thus there are two governments in America and there always have been.  The Republic, which is the civil government of the American People, and a Trust Management Organization that is charged with providing nineteen enumerated services for the Sovereign States, most of which deal with international commerce.

The Republic States that entered into the original equity contract known as The Constitution for the united States of America were represented by the original Trust Management Company dba “United States” from 1789 to 1863 when it was entered into bankruptcy caused by the expense of the Civil War.  A second Trust Management Organization called  the “United States of America, Incorporated” functioned from 1871 to 1933.  Thereafter, the United States of America, Inc. was entered into bankruptcy by Executive Order issued by its President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.  The United States of America, Incorporated, entered into the receivership of International Bankruptcy Trustees, specifically, the Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico, selected by the Creditors —-the IBRD, World Bank, and Federal Reserve.

Since 1944,  the United States of America, Incorporated’s business affairs have been managed by these same international bankruptcy trustees under the direction of these same creditors organized as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) acting  under various corporate names including the UNITED STATES, the UNTED STATES OF AMERICA, the USA, and E PLURIBUS UNUM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

The State of Alaska is a corporate municipal franchise of the bankrupted United States of America, Incorporated. The STATE OF ALASKA is a corporate municipal franchise of the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED.  These entities are not the same as the geographically defined Alaska State.

These Trust Management Organizations don’t have a contract to operate the civil government, though they have been conniving and contriving to do so for several decades with disastrous results.

All bank officials operating businesses in the geographically defined Alaska State have knowingly or unknowingly set up checking, savings, and other depository accounts, including mortgage and escrow accounts, which result in unlawful conversion of private property into corporate assets. By creating these accounts in the NAMES of individual ESTATE trusts owned and operated by the UNITED STATES, INC. instead of the names of the living people,  private bank accounts belonging to john-quincy:adams have been unlawfully converted to the ownership of Puerto Rican trusts owned and operated by the UNITED STATES, INC. under the NAME of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.

This semantic deceit dependent upon the use of “similar names” and the constructive fraud of non-disclosure practiced by the banks has resulted in claims by the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. that the funds and contracts under deposit as negotiable instruments are the property of UNITED STATES, INC. “individual franchises” and are subject to seizure by the UNITED STATES, INC. and available to serve as collateral backing the debts of the UNITED STATES, INC.

All banks and bank officials operating in the Alaska State are under NOTICE and DEMAND to correct their records to reflect the fact that all assets contained in or claimed by “individual franchise ESTATE trusts” operated “in the name of” American Nationals and their private unincorporated business enterprises have been redeemed by the American Nationals having the same or similar given names and living at the geographic addresses of record on file.

All bank and bank officials operating in the Alaska State are under NOTICE that any claim presented by any officer of the UNITED STATES or the STATE OF ALASKA pretending an interest in the private property assets of American Nationals or seeking to withdraw deposits under the authority of the Dodd-Frank Act are prohibited from any such action by Public Law of the Republic, and that any bank complying with such demand will be liquidated. Any banker aiding or abetting unlawful conversion of private assets for the benefit of the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable under American Common Law.

Any corporate Officer/OFFICER receiving this NOTICE who is unaware of the facts presented is invited to contact Interpol, the nearest Vatican Legate, or the International Services Agent for Alaska.  

Any corporate Officer/OFFICER receiving this NOTICE who believes that we are misunderstanding any of the historical facts or any aspect of the material circumstance, is invited to produce the single document which they believe grants their agency or Office/OFFICE jurisdiction and/or controlling ownership interest in living Americans, their private property assets, their credit, their labor, their organic states or any other material assets.

In “representing” the Republic, the United States of America, Incorporated, was bound to honor all the contracts and Public Laws established by the Republic.  In receivership, the United States of America, Incorporated, had to be operated according to the same Trust Indenture that was established by the Preamble and Bill of Rights, because it is not possible to receive the assets in bankruptcy without also receiving the liabilities.  The UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED, acting as a secondary Trust Management Organizaton since 1933 has in turn undertaken to “represent” the United States of America, Incorporated, and is bound by the same obligations.

We will address, briefly, the common claim made by Officers/OFFICERS representing either the “United States of America, Inc.” or the UNITED STATES, INC. to the effect that living American Nationals are “US citizens” subject to domination by any incorporated entity under contract to serve them.

According to the Act of the Republic enacted as Public Law by the Members of Congress Assembled as an unincorporated Body Politic of the Domestic States on April 14, 1802, (2 Stat. 153, c. 28, ss.1, Revised Statute 2165)—“an alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, and not otherwise.”

This is Public Law fully enacted as substantive law by the unincorporated Body Politic operating under full commercial liability as the domestic civil government of the Several States. It cannot be amended or repealed by any “Act” of any incorporated Trust Management Organization claiming to represent the Republic, and it sets forth a lengthy process that is required to redefine any American National as a “US citizen” subject to the corporate jurisdiction of the United States of America, Inc. and/or its Bankruptcy Trustees and successors, such as the UNITED STATES, STATE OF ALASKA, etc.

Any claim that any private contract entered into by individuals can magically overcome this prerequisite of Public Law stands mute and disproven by the entirety of the Federal Register and Code, which unfailingly describes American Nationals domiciled in the geographically defined organic states as “non-resident aliens” with respect to the United States of America, Inc. and its municipal jurisdiction.

Virtually no American Nationals have ever deliberately undertaken to become “US citizens” as required by US Statute at Large 2.  They have not  by any knowing and voluntary act agreed to stand as sureties for a bankrupt Trust Management Organization calling itself the “United States of America” in 1930, 1933, 1959, or at any other time.  They have not agreed under conditions of full disclosure to contract at all with the UNITED STATES, INC. to provide any services, much less have they granted any authorization to this foreign, privately-owned banking cartel to “represent” them or their interests as Priority Creditors of the United States of America, Inc.

They did not grant authorization to any Governor/GOVERNOR or other elected or appointed official, corporate officer, employee, or hired contractor of the United States of America, Incorporated or the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED, to represent them or their interests in these matters at any time from the founding of the Republic to date.

They did not under conditions of full disclosure voluntarily grant authorization allowing any Trust Management Company to operate public trusts under their individual names, to lay claim to their private assets by presumption under color of law, to hypothecate debt based upon the value of their labor, their homes, land, or other resources, or to otherwise impose the debts, statutes, codes, or regulations of any corporation upon them.  

In 1995 a group of American Nationals moved to redeem and reclaim the individually named ESTATES created by the Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico, the Bankruptcy Trustee appointed by the IMF.   These Americans provided proof to the Internal Revenue Service/IRS and the Custodian of Alien Property/CUSTODIAN OF ALIEN PROPERTY and the US Bankruptcy Trustees/US BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES that they were alive and competent to administer their own affairs, and that they were Priority Creditors of the United States of America, Incorporated.  At that time and ever since, they have objected to any presumption that they are or ever were “wards of any State or STATE”—-  ever incorporated, incompetent, or disabled.

They have uniformly declared and testified before the world that they have been defrauded, lied to, lied about, victimized by deliberate semantic deceit, suffered extortion, armed robbery, gross fiduciary malfeasance, inland piracy, conspiracy against their rights and material interests, have suffered from self-interested non-disclosure, breach of trust, despotism, and default of commercial contract—all at the hands of Trust Management Organizations that are obligated to function in good faith and with full fiduciary liability.

They have repudiated the claims of the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC. which are merely privately owned for-profit commercial corporations no different than Microsoft, Incorporated, which have sought to attach the private property assets of individual American Nationals and the assets of the Republic via fraudulent deceit and misrepresentation.  These Americans reclaimed their full sovereign authority among the nations of the world, and they redeemed all assets held in “public trusts” created by the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC.

All debt accrued against any public trusts operated under the given names or variations thereof of American Nationals by the United States of America, Incorporated or the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED and any and all incorporated franchises of these Trust Management Organizations—-including the State of Alaska,  STATE OF ALASKA,  WELLS FARGO, INC., ABC MORTGAGE, INC, and so on—- is to be discharged, dollar for dollar, without exception.  Clear fee simple title to the assets is to be returned to the individual American Nationals and the organic states of the Republic.

The American Nationals have issued no valid proxy authorizing any agency, elected official, corporate officer, foreign agent or public employee of the United States of America, Inc. or the UNITED STATES, INC. to “represent” them in an abusive manner contrary to their material interests, nor did they grant any such authority to the Trust Management Organizations to represent them regarding these specific matters. They recognize no claims brought against them, their private property assets, or their organic states which are based on representations made “in their behalf” by third parties acting in Breach of Trust and contract default.

The leadership of the UNITED STATES, INC. known as the US CONGRESS has recently passed the Dodd/Frank Bill, gratuitously granting themselves the right to pillage the bank accounts of Americans which have been purposely and self-interested constructed by the IMF dba UNITED STATES as accounts belonging to federal franchise “ESTATE trusts” without the knowledge or consent of the victims.

The criminal intent of these actions is self-evident—first to unlawfully convert private bank accounts to the ownership of “public trusts” owned and operated by for-profit corporations merely pretending to “represent” the victims, second to claim that these private assets have been voluntarily “donated” to the public trust franchises, or “abandoned” by the legitimate beneficiaries of the assets.

This NOTICE is your individual passport to a real “federal” prison if you do not immediately cease and desist all participation in support of these claims, actions, and intents.  

The living man, whose given name is properly written in this form: john-quincy:adams has been induced by undeclared foreign agents of the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. and the FEDERAL RESERVE dba United States of America, Inc. to believe that he is depositing his private property into his own private bank account, but in fact, he is always depositing his private property into a bank account owned by “John Quincy Adams” which is a foreign situs trust owned and operated by the United States of America, Inc. or  “JOHN QUINCY ADAMS” which is an ESTATE trust owned by the banks operating the  UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED.

Any Officer/OFFICER receiving this NOTICE who doubts that this is true is invited to pull out their “personal check book” and look at what appears to be the signature line under high magnification.  You will see under high magnification that the line is not a line.  It is a row of microprint endlessly repeating “authorizing signature” over and over.  This verbiage has to be there, because the “owner” of the account, YOUR NAME, is a Puerto Rican Trust, and can’t function without human agents.

The IMF, dba UNITED STATES, INC., has deceived millions of Americans into depositing  their private assets into “public franchise accounts” without their knowledge or consent. Most likely many of the Officers/OFFICERS reading this NOTICE have been similarly victimized by this foreign interloper’s deceit, fraud, and self-interest.  To lead you along in this deception they have allowed you to write checks on “their” account and claimed that you are an employee of their corporation—and as such, required to obey all their “laws”, rules, codes, statutes, and regulations that they may deem appropriate to establish and enforce.

This is all a form of bunko that has only been made possible because the banks operating as creditors gained a position of trust via the bankrupting of the Trust Management Organization dba the United States of America, Inc. 

The IMF gained control of the apparatus of government services by creating the Secondary Trust Management Organization dba UNITED STATES, INC. which has been “filling in” while the United States of America, Inc. was in receivership.  The FEDERAL RESERVE, another privately owned banking cartel, gained a similar position of trust as the primary creditor of the United States of America, Inc. throughout its bankruptcy reorganization.

The IMF dba UNITED STATES and its corporate OFFICERS and their appointed Bankruptcy Trustees commandeered the apparatus of what Americans mistakenly thought of as their government, claimed to “represent” the American People, and have gone on an eighty-year rampage of white collar fraud the likes of which has never been seen in the history of the world.

The IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. has claimed that the American People have had a free choice in the midst of all this misrepresentation and unlawful conversion of assets.  They could “redeem” their property held in the franchise ESTATE trusts set up in their NAMES by the banks at any time, simply by notifying the proper officials — the Internal Revenue Service.

The American Nationals were never told any of this, so this remedy was never actually made available in any practical sense to the millions of rank and file Priority Creditors of the United States of America, Inc.

The two Trust Management Organizations dba the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC., were and are, both obligated to defend the National Trust, including the material interests and rights of individual Americans who are beneficiaries of the National Trust Indenture.

Breach of Trust results in severance of contract, including the service contracts that go along with the fiduciary obligations owed as liabilities of the IMF and its agencies and franchises to the living beneficiaries—the American Nationals.

Any concerted attempt by Trustees—whether individuals or entire vast incorporated Trust Management Organizations—-to impose upon the beneficiaries of a trust or to usurp the assets and collateral held in trust for the Trustees or the Trust Manager’s own benefit, is a High Crime of Felony Fraud and Criminal Malfeasance.

The Supreme Court for the State of Alaska/THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA and The Superior Court for the State of Alaska / THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA have been informed of these facts and have failed to correct their operations. 

These Undeclared Foreign Agents and Agencies employed jointly by the FEDERAL RESERVE, a privately owned and operated Central Bank employed by the bankrupted “United States of America, Inc.” and the IMF operating the UNITED STATES, INC.,  have continued to presume a controlling interest in the assets of individual American Nationals and in already-redeemed individual ESTATES and to also presume that the private property assets of individual Americans were offered as surety and collateral for debts owed by the “United States of America, Inc.”  –all based on insupportable and undocumented representations made by unauthorized third parties acting in Breach of Trust eighty years ago.

They have continued on this course knowingly and despite having their offers to contract refused and all these false presumptions thoroughly rebutted in individual court actions entered as demonstration cases:  3AN-12-6858CI and 3PA-12-1447CI.

This NOTICE includes presentation of charges against the Clerks and Judges operating The Superior District Court for the State of Alaska and the CLERKS and JUDGES operating THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA.

If these Officers of the British Crown do not immediately cease and desist in their activities in support of the fraudulent misrepresentations and claims being made by their employers they will be subject to deportation and seizure of their individual property assets in Alaska.

This is your individual and personal NOTICE that not only are “Governors” of the “United States of America, Inc.” and “GOVERNORS” of the “UNITED STATES” not authorized or empowered to pledge private property of any American National,  they were never empowered to pledge any assets of the organic states, either.

All “Acts”, pledges, agreements, and policies of the “US Congress” and “State Governors” operating the “United States of America, Inc.” —-a privately owned commercial corporation under contract to serve the Americans—- and pretending to have affect upon living American Nationals, their private property assets, or their organic states is fraudulent, null and void as if these Acts never existed.

All “ACTS” of the “US CONGRESS” and “STATE GOVERNORS” operating the UNITED STATES, INC—-a privately owned commercial corporation under contract to serve the Americans— and pretending to have affect upon living American Nationals, their private property assets, or their organic states is fraudulent, null and void as if these ACTS never were.

Similarly, all “legislative acts” of the State of Alaska and the STATE OF ALASKA operating as corporate municipal franchises of the “United States of America, Inc.” or the “UNITED STATES, INC.” which pretend to have affect upon Alaskans, their private property assets, or their organic states, are fraudulent, null and void as if they never were.

All rules, statutes, codes, regulations, taxes, tithes, fees, penalties, and “laws” established by these corporations apply only to their employees and their corporate officers, similar to the internal policies set by any other commercial corporation on earth.  Any pretension that any individual American National is obligated to obey these instruments of corporate policy as an “employee” must be backed up with proof of fully disclosed employment contracts and agreements.

This NOTICE informs you individually and personally that the individual living American Nationals, their private property, and their organic states, are NOT subject to any law, statute, rule, code, regulation, order, or internal policy promulgated by any incorporated entity.

THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA and the STATE OF ALASKA have been fully informed of these facts and have received and are right now receiving direct instruction from the actual Entitlement Holders regarding the status and proper administration of the individual Estates/ESTATES of Alaskans.

All corporate Officers/OFFICERS receiving this NOTICE now have cause to know that they cannot rely upon second-hand direction received from third parties merely claiming to “represent” individual Alaskans, nor claiming to have controlling interest in private assets held in public trusts that have been established “in the name of” individual Alaskans by the United States of America, Inc.  and the UNITED STATES, INC.

All the individually named public trusts generated by the two Trust Management Organizations dba the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC. are legal fictions which have been created under the auspices of the Holy See and the Roman Curia and misused as a means to plunder the private property assets of Americans and their organic states under color of law. 

The persons promulgating, preserving, and supporting this abuse and fraud are criminals—outlaws on the land, and pirates on the sea.  Anyone receiving this NOTICE who does not immediately cease and desist and correct their behavior, presumptions, and operations in whatever office they hold, is fully liable

In “the name of” public trusts, the Trust Management Organizations pretending to represent the American states and individual living Americans have gone on compiling debts, creating bankruptcies, making false commercial claims, and otherwise seeking to ensnare and obligate assets of the US Trust for the benefit of their private shareholders for eighty years.

This is your FINAL NOTICE of these facts.  You will be held individually and personally liable and accountable for any support of or continuing participation in these acts of fraud and breach of trust.

Members of the Bar Association who are by definition citizens of the Inner City of London City State and foreigners on American soil will be subject to deportation and seizure of all their private assets if they continue to presume against and impose upon the American Nationals who are their ultimate employers.

Corporate officers of the United States of America, Inc.  or the UNITED STATES, INC. who continue to impersonate state judges or pretend to act as state civil officials, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the American Common Law if they do not voluntarily come into compliance and live within the limitations of their actual Office/OFFICE.

None of these Trust Management Organization schemes and actions— bankruptcies, debts, service contracts, etc. — have anything to do with any living American nor with any geographically defined state of the Union nor with any private assets belonging to these peaceful unincorporated entities, but through purposeful semantic deceit and fraud, false claims arising among these incorporated entities have been allowed to bleed over and impact the beneficiaries of the US Trust.

All of this uproar, all these claims and counter-claims, all these legal fiction entities battling it out with each other in corporate administrative tribunals,  have nothing whatsoever to do with the living people, their private assets or their organic states—and they never have had. 

The only business any living American National has with any corporate administrative tribunal functioning as a Court/COURT is (1) to inform the personnel operating the Court/COURT of facts pertaining to some issue being considered, or (2) to present a claim against the United States of America, Inc. or the UNITED STATES, INC. or one of their franchises, such as the STATE OF ALASKA.  See the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 for statutory admission.

Beginning in 2009, American Nationals took their claims against the United States of America, Incorporated and the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED —both— to the Holy See.

This is your individual and personal NOTICE that all authority to create legal fictions—trusts, public utilities, corporations, foundations, and cooperatives—derives directly and explicitly from the Holy See and from the law forms established and copyrighted by the Roman Curia.

Along with the power to create comes the power to destroy.

The Holy See has the power and the right to dissolve the UNITED NATIONS Charter, the IMF Charter, the UNITED STATES Charter, and so on, ad infinitum, to order the distribution of the assets of these legal fiction entities to their creditors, and the Pope has the additional unlimited ability to rewrite or void any “law” created by any incorporated entity worldwide.

In 2010 Pope Benedict XVI agreed with the American Nationals that gross Breach of Trust and fiduciary malfeasance related to the administration of the US National Trust and the individually named public trusts has occurred.

Remedy begun in 2010 has been continued by Pope Francis dba FRANCISCUS, acting as CEO of the Global Estate Trust.

This correction is coming directly from the Highest Contracting Powers, from the very top of the interlocking trust directorate that has incorporated virtually all the Trust Management Organizations responsible for administering government services worldwide—including both the United States of America, Incorporated, and the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED.

Private attorneys and civil postmasters and international diplomatic agents in every organic state of the Union have been appointed either directly by the Holy See or under the Holy See’s direction to communicate these facts to all those responsible for the administration of the Trust Management Organizations and their franchises and agencies responsible for the deplorable conditions of abuse, fraud, and criminality engulfing America.

This is your FINAL NOTICE: The legal fiction organizations you work for will be liquidated if they do not come into compliance and function lawfully.

Demonstration court cases have been prosecuted in Alaska seeking to re-educate those who are individually responsible for administration of the respective Trust Management Organizations, their franchises, and agencies. Every good faith effort has been made to provide discussion and bring the recipients of this NOTICE to their senses, to avoid the necessity of dissolving corporate charters and forcing arrests, but clearly, correction must be made and it must be done with alacrity to avoid further damage to the American Nationals and their organic states.

Case Number 3AN-12-6858CI was prosecuted entirely via Special Appearance—by definition, merely to inform THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA.

The COURT pretended to have jurisdiction it didn’t have, grossly misrepresented its authority,  willfully concealed its actual nature, function, and role, failed to require validated proof of an international commercial claim, failed to require identification of the true parties of interest, failed to require proof of ownership and provenance of an unregistered Promissory Note, pretended to misunderstand clearly enunciated statements denying consent and claims of identity, and pretended to have authority to seize private property assets under Federal Debt Collection Procedures though no viable public trusts, federal or State,  were even in evidence.  Officers of the COURT dba JERMAIN, DUNNAGAN, and OWENS in the person of MICHELE BOUTIN, ESQ. hired the ALASKA STATE TROOPERS to trespass on private property and to extort over $100,000.00 USD under armed force.

Confronted with the facts, THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA failed to take appropriate corrective action and instead acted as an accomplice to the errors and crimes committed.

Another case 3PA-12-1447CI was similarly prosecuted.   After voluminous correspondence with the COURT, the MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH, and the respective political officials, someone, somewhere, bowed to the simple truth—that the MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH is a franchise of the STATE OF ALASKA which is a franchise of the UNITED STATES, INC. which is providing services based on fraudulent misrepresentation and without a valid contract, and then demanding payment and alleging a security interest in private property that isn’t theirs.   The MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH  foreclosure action was dropped and the supposed “tax debt” erased from the books, but the next year they attempted to repeat the same errors and commit the same acts of mis-administration and malfeasance.

The “United States of America, Inc.” and the UNITED STATES, INC. are both commercial corporations—-privately and mostly foreign-owned commercial corporations.  They have no special standing at all.  With respect to American Nationals they have precisely the same standing as any other multi-national corporate conglomerate.

This is your NOTICE of the facts.  These incorporated entities can’t force individual American Nationals to accept services, buy insurance, pay taxes, or do anything else based on the representations of third parties merely claiming to represent them. They have no authority to arrest, imprison, or detain any American National for any “crime” lacking a corpus delecti demonstrating actual harm to other living people or their property.  If they persist in providing services without a valid contract, they have no recourse to complain if they don’t get paid and no enforceable security interest in private property. 

The American People are accommodating these Trust Management Organizations and paying them to provide stipulated government services, not the other way around. It should not be necessary for individual Americans to prosecute law suits simply to secure the proper administration of long-standing fiduciary obligations from their employees and service vendors.

Consider carefully the consequences of continuing to mis-administer the public trusts and using these deceptively named commercial vessels as an excuse to plunder the private property assets of the American People.  Piracy, including inland piracy, is a crime. As of September 1, 2013, each corporate officer, each hired administrator, is individually liable, from the “President of the UNITED STATES” on down to the lowliest clerk.

The United States, Canada, Australia, England, Ireland, Scotland, New Zealand, South Africa—-have all been similarly victimized by international bankers and the self-serving and/or ignorant politicians who have betrayed the interests of the people they claim to represent.

These countries all stand to be devastated by a struggle to force the politicians, administrators, bankers and jurists responsible for this mess to (1) get their hands out of other people’s pockets, (2) do their actual jobs, (3) stop making insupportable claims against private property assets that don’t belong to the corporations they work for, and (4) refuse to execute “orders” received from the “President” of a corporation that has exactly the same relationship with respect to American Nationals as the President of J.C. PENNY or the President of SOUTHWEST AIR, INC.

In one capacity or another, you are all responsible for oversight and administration of the Trust Management Organizations involved in this national-scale debacle. You all have cause to know what the truth is and to act accordingly.  There should be no doubt in your minds that the fiduciary obligations described herein exist and that the contracts creating and protecting the National Trust Indenture will be honored— even if it requires armed intervention, arrests, and liquidation of the world’s largest financial institutions.

Undeclared Foreign Agents have operated the Alaska Court System / ALASKA COURT SYSTEM and The Superior District Court for the State of Alaska / THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA in an stubbornly criminal and fraudulent manner in violation of their corporate charter, resulting in false claims of jurisdiction, grand felony acts of armed extortion and inland piracy, fiduciary malfeasance, constructive fraud, unlawful conversion, and numerous other crimes including assaults against unarmed American civilians.

In 3AN-12- 6858CI THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA employed all the fraud gambits described herein, including grossly over-stepping its jurisdiction.  THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA, INC. owes the private estate trust pillaged in that matter over $400,000.00 USD times (4) four as compensatory damages.  Until that debt is paid and restitution to the individual American Nationals made, the STATE OF ALASKA is in Breach of Trust and Contract Default increasing the Public Debt, in violation of its Corporate Charter, and is subject to dissolution.  A complete bounty collection of $50,000,000.00 USD may additionally be applied against the State of Alaska, Inc. for violation of XIV Section 4 of its Charter.

This is your individual and personal NOTICE that failure to stop crime, like failure to make every reasonable effort to prevent crime, makes you an accomplice to the crime. You are liable. You have been fully informed.  This NOTICE has been recorded worldwide. Failure to render assistance and provide remedy to the victims of crime also makes you an accomplice to the crime.

Criminality of the kind described herein and failure to honor contractual and fiduciary duties owed is due cause for severance of your contract for services, criminal prosecution, and dissolution of the corporations you work for.  Cease and desist all improper actions.

This NOTICE is by my hand and upon my civil authority set this ______day of February, 2014:

______________________________________________________________________________

Anna Maria Wilhelmina Hanna Sophia Riezinger-von Reitzenstein von Lettow-Vorbeck, Private Attorney in Service to His Holiness, Pope Francis

In Care Of: Box 520994

Big Lake, Alaska

Under Seal:

 

 


Step One Complete. Now What…. Dear Ernie.

06/20/2017

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/06/step-one-complete-now-what-dear-ernie.html

By Anna Von Reitz

I keep getting questions from people who have sent back their endorsed Birth Certificates to the Secretary of the Treasury and their Form 56 and instructions, etc., and they are asking me—- now what?

Step Two:  You have to do the expatriation and the revocation of Voter Registration, too.

This is a double-whammy trap they have created—- both Municipal “citizenship” and Territorial “Citizenship” have to be renounced.

Returning the BC to the Secretary of the Treasury “surrenders” the “criminal” PERSON back whence “he” came and cashiers the MUNICIPAL “citizen”—- now you still have to deal with the Territorial Citizen—- the presumed Foreign Situs Trust operating under your Upper and Lower Case name.

Your name in the form “John Michael Doe” is a Trade Name when domiciled on the land, and a Foreign Situs Trust when domiciled on the sea.  You have assumed all your life that you are acting on the land and are a landsman, but thanks to the surreptitious corruption and falsification of the public records which your Mother unknowingly signed at the hospital, you have been mis-identified as a orphaned, fatherless child donated to the “State of………” organization, which is a foreign corporation operating in the international jurisdiction of the sea.

It is that fundamental “misunderstanding” that you now need to address.

I posted a good example of an Act of Expatriation on my website yesterday.  It’s better than most of the examples you can find because it is simple, direct, and takes care of the issues of both domicile and political allegiance.  Most Acts of Expatriation simply declare what you are not and leave the rest hanging.  This one declares both the permanent domicile of your names (that is, your “vessels” in trade) and your allegiance to the land and soil of your actual birth state.  You will find it at the bottom of the list.  Look for “Improved Act of Expatriation”.

You also have to get rid of any “Voter Registration”.  You do this by notifying the State of State Voter Registration Office and having your name removed.  Once you realize that what they are doing is operating a foreign corporation on your soil and are offering you “enfranchisement” —- as in Dairy Queen franchise — and voting rights in exchange for your natural right to elect your own public officials and conduct your own government and live under your own law, you should have absolutely no regret about no longer being a “voter” and no longer participating in their private, foreign corporate elections.

That completes the rebuttal of both forms of federal citizenship— both MUNICIPAL and Territorial.  If you use my Act of Expatriation, it also clears up the matter of your actual permanent domicile being on the land of your native state of the Union and makes your allegiance to that state clear.

Having completed Step One and Step Two (which has two parts– the recorded Act of Expatriation and the revocation of Voter Registration) you are back on the land of the state where you were born, a free American.

Step Three is to “retire” from any presumption of federal employment.  Notify the private “Social Security Administration” that you have retired from all federal employment and have returned to your native birthright political status.  If they have any objections or claims give them five (5) business days to reply and tell them that if you do not hear from them in that time you will accept their agreement that all insurances, services, and benefits of the Social Security program are due and owing to you regardless of political affiliation or lack thereof and that you are free to receive your pension and other program services without prejudice, presumption or claim otherwise.

As part of Step Three you are free to revoke your election to pay federal income taxes, so long as you are not actually a federal civilian or military employee or dependent, political asylum seeker or otherwise prohibited from relinquishing this particular duty.  If you work for the corporation, you have to do what the corporation says.  The corporation has the right to dock your pay, if you agree to it, as a condition of employment—- if they call this a “tax” it is in the euphemistic sense, because they are not actually a government, but a governmental services corporation.  They can also “tax” that part of your retirement pension that comes from actual federal employment.

Most Americans have (a) never worked in any capacity for the federal government in their lives or (b) have spent a couple years in the military, which upon retirement accounts for such a tiny part of their pension that it is far, far below the amount of the standard deduction and can be totally discounted as taxable pension “income”.

You have instead been misidentified as an unpaid “volunteer” warrant officer in the Merchant Marine Service, known as a “Withholding Agent” and you have contributed to the confusion by agreeing — under penalty of perjury no less — that you are a “Withholding Agent”.

Now that you know that you are not a voluntary warrant officer in the Merchant Marines, you can admit the “mistake” and revoke your election to pay federal income taxes.

Driver Licenses?  We all know that if you don’t have a DL you are subjected to endless harassment and there is also a possible presumption that you are not a “safe” driver, etc., so, what to do?   Place a label stating “Retired. Not for Hire.” on the back of the license or write the same in permanent marker on the back of the license.  This gives any arresting officer proper notice of your status.

If he gives you a ticket anyway, sign it with your Trade Name, using the word “by” to create a “by-line” for your version of “John Henry Doe”, and add the words “Without Prejudice” or “All rights reserved” as part of your signature.  He will give you a copy of the ticket, not the wet-ink original.  Return the copy to the Clerk indicated on the ticket within 3 days, and simply ask them to send you the original ticket— there must have been a mistake, because you were only given a copy and you can’t pay based on a copy.

The problem for them is that they have already cashed in the original wet-ink copy of the ticket and been paid.  Their additional effort to charge you a second time is just plain old double-dipping.  So do your public duty and help put an end to corruption of the police forces.

You can buy “forever” tags for your car.  These “Z tags” are a one time charge and they place your car in a private category amounting to a recording of foreign property.  This is not ideal, but it beats being harassed by ignorant hyped-up patrolmen.

Passports?  Same thing.  It doesn’t really matter what they say, it matters what you say and do.  Every Passport has a signature line confirming your identity, etc., so, again, write “Retired” and “by:” and add your disclaimers— without prejudice, all rights reserved, UCC 1-308 to your signature.  You aren’t a federal citizen and aren’t a federal employee. You are traveling under one of their passports because of their incompetence, so make it clear that you have “retired” from any such presumption  and let the public record you have established and the Treasury Department take over from there.

We have discovered that all court cases—- all court cases—– are decided based purely and simply on the public records.  Nothing else.  If you are a Municipal citizen operating under an account name like JOHN MICHAEL DOE, you are guilty by definition and all that goes on from there is a discussion about how much you owe and how long you will be in jail.

If you are a Territorial Citizen operating under the name of a Foreign Situs Trust, the situation is a little different, but not much. If you haven’t taken steps to correct the false public record, your name will show up in the same status as a Puerto Rican visiting America and you will still be under the federal classification, obligated to pay federal income taxes, presumed to be operating in commerce not trade, etc.

You have been “subjected” without your knowing consent and it is up to you to object to this and the enslavement and false presumptions that go with it.  You must place the corrected records and deeds and other information into the public record to rebut all these falsified claims.

This includes Steps 1, 2, and 3.

You also need to waive all “benefit” of limited liability provided by the governmental services corporation to its employees and either post a private registered indemnity bond with the Treasury Department or place your “vessels”—that is, all your names and accounts and deeds— under the protection of the indemnity bond established for the actual state where you were born:  AMRI00001  RA393427640US – Missouri for example.

When that happens, those responsible for operating this “System” against you don’t have the means to oppose you or claim any jurisdiction over you or your property.  You come “home” to the actual states of the Union and assume your lawful standing as an American state national—- and also inherit the responsibility of operating your own local and state government.

Work on Steps One, Two, and Three.  Read the information contained here until it begins to make sense and then read it again.  And again.  And again.  It will slowly begin to take shape in your mind and you will grasp the monstrous nature of the fraud that has been committed against you by people who were supposed to be here providing you and your states with “essential governmental services”.

Get yourselves free and then get to work restoring your fifty nation states, one county at a time.

See this article and over 600 others on Anna’s website here:

www.annavonreitz.com


Democracy Is A Front For Central Bank Rule

06/19/2017

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/06/19/democracy-front-central-bank-rule/

Paul Craig Roberts

Several years ago when the Federal Reserve had its Fed funds rate at zero to 25 basis points (one-quarter of one percent—0.25%), there was a great deal of talk, somehow presented as urgent, whether the Federal Reserve would raise interest rates.

RT asked me if the Fed was going to raise interest rates. I answered that the purpose of low interest rates was to restore the solvency of the balance sheets of the “banks too big to fail” by raising debt prices. The lower the interest rate, the higher the prices of debt instruments. The Fed drives bond prices up by purchasing bonds, and the Fed raises interest rates by selling bonds, or by purchasing fewer of them than previously.

I told RT that a real increase in interest rates would undercut the Fed’s policy of rescuing the balance sheets of the big banks whose balance sheets were loaded up with bad debt that desperately needed a rise in debt prices for the banks to remain solvent.

When shortly thereafter the Fed raised the overnight funds rate, it blew my credibility with RT. RT did not understand that real interest rates had not increased. Indeed, two days after the “rate increase” the nominal interest rate had not changed. It was still 18 basis points. The announced rate had gone from the old range of zero to 25 basis points to a new range of 25 basis points to 50 basis points. The former max was the current minimum.

Moreover, over the long time period in which there was such well marketed concern over whether such an inconsequential interest rate rise would occur, inflation had risen, making the real interest rate negative well below the 18 basis points official interest rate. By the time the Fed raised the nominal rate, the real rate was already more negative. Thus, there was no rise in real interest rates.

The financial press did not explain this, either from incompetence or collusion. RT accepted the fake news as reality and wrote off my credibility. I am often interviewed by RT, but no longer on economic matters, about which I know the most.

A couple of days ago, after a long period of waiting for another interest rate rise, an announcement from the Fed, amidst further indication of US economic decline, announced another 25 basis point increase in the target range for the Fed funds rate.

Inflation aside, in fact interest rates declined, as my sometime co-author Dave Kranzler reports. http://investmentresearchdynamics.com/has-the-fed-actually-raised-rates-this-year/
Despite this publicized “rise” of the Fed funds rate, the 10-year interest rate on Treasuries “has declined 30 basis points this year. Thus for certain borrowers, the Fed has effectively lowered the cost of borowing.”

Kranzler goes on to point out that “the spread between the 30-day Treasury Bill and the 10-yr Treasury has declined this year from 193 basis points to 125 basis points – a 68 basis point drop in the cost of funding for borrowers who have access to the highly engineered derivative products that enable these borrowers to take advantage of the shape of the yield curve in order to lower their cost of borrowing.”

Kranzler provides a chart that shows that the spread between the 30-day Treasury bill and the 10-year Treasury bond is narrowing. As the short-term rate rises, the long term rate is falling, and the spread between the long and short rate has declined 68 basis points from almost two percentage points to one and one quarter percentage point.

Clearly, this is not a rise in interest rates.

Clearly also, a rise in the Fed funds rate no longer signals a rise in all interest rates.

Why is the Fed raising short rates when the long rates are falling?

Why do “democratic Western democracies” have central banks that do nothing except protect big banks at the expense of the people?

How long will the insouciant peoples of the West continue to conspire in their own demise?

Olddogs Comments!

Now, will someone please tell me; why are Americans so stupid they participate in their own demise? A Democracy does not empower the people to use their influence in government! A democracy is the government’s biggest tool to totally control the people. It is the corporate structure of the government that allows them to operate like a for profit company. And THAT! is why they are getting richer and we are getting poorer. All this, because the people are too stupid to govern themselves.


General Lee Speaks: Had it Figured Out

06/17/2017

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/06/fred-reed/general-lee-right/

 

By Fred Reed

“The consolidation of the states into one vast empire, is sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home and the certain precursor of ruin which has overwhelmed all that preceded it.” Robert E. Lee

The man was perceptive. Amalgamation of the states under a central government has led to exactly the effects foreseen by General Lee.

In, say, 1950, to an appreciable, though imperfect extent America resembled a confederacy. Different regions of the America had little contact with each other, and almost no influence over one another. The federal government was small and remote. Interstates did not exist, nor of course the internet, nor even direct long-distance telephone dialing. West Virginia, Alabama, Massachusetts, New York City, Texas, and California had little in common, but a little conflict arose since for practical purposes they were almost different countries. They chiefly governed themselves. The proportion of federal to state law was small.

It is important to note that regional differences were great. In 1964 in rural Virginia, the boys brought shotguns to school during deer season. Nobody shot anybody because it wasn’t in the culture. The culture was uniform, so no one was upset. It is when cultures are mixed, or one rules another, that antagonism comes.  Such shotgun freedom would not have worked in New York City with its variegated and often mutually hostile ethnicities.

Regions differed importantly in the degree of freedom, not just in the freedom of local populations to govern themselves but also in individual freedom. It made a large difference in the tenor of life. If in Texas, rural Virginia, or West Virginia you wanted to build an addition to your house, you did. You didn’t need licenses, permits, inspections, union-certified electricians. Speed limits? Largely ignored. Federal requirements for Coast Guard-approved flotation devices on your canoe? What the hell kind of crazy idea was that?

Democracy works better the smaller the group practicing it. In a town, people can actually understand the questions of the day. They know what matters to them. Do we build a new school, or expand the existing one? Do we want our children to recite the pledge of allegiance, or don’t we? Re-enact the Battle of Antietam? Sing Christmas carols in the town square? We can decide these things. Leave us alone.

States similarly knew what their people wanted and, within the limits of human frailty, governed accordingly. Then came the vast empire, the phenomenal increase in the power and reach of the federal government, which really means the Northeast Corridor. The Supreme Court expanded and expanded and expanded the authority of Washington, New York’s storefront operation. The Federals now decided what could be taught in the schools, what religious practices could be permitted, what standards employers could use in hiring, who they had to hire. The media coalesced into a small number of corporations, controlled from New York but with national reach. More recently we have added surveillance of everything by Washington’s intelligence agencies.

Tyranny at home said General Lee. Just so. This could happen only with the consolidation of the states into one vast empire.

Tyranny comes easily when those seeking it need only corrupt a single Congress, appoint a single Supreme Court, or control the departments of one executive branch. In a confederation of largely self-governing states, those hungry to domineer would have to suborn fifty congresses. It could not be done. State governments are accessible to the governed. They can be ejected. They are much more likely to be sympathetic to the desires of their constituents since they are of the same culture.

Aggressive abroad, said General Lee. Is this not exactly what we see? At this moment Washington has the better part of a thousand military bases around the world, unnecessary except for the maintenance of empire. America exists in a state of constant war, bombing Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Somalia, recently having destroyed Iraq and Libya. Washington threatens Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China. Its military moves deeper into Africa. Washington sanctions Cuba, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, to no effect. It constantly tries to dominate other nations, for example adding to NATO.

None of these wars and little if any of the imperial aggression interests more than a tiny fraction of the country’s people. To whom can the war against Afghanistan matter? Libya? Few people have heard of Montenegro. Does its membership in NATO or lack of it affect Idaho?

In a confederacy, states would have to approve a war. Few would unless the United States itself were threatened. They might well refuse to pay for wars, not for their benefit or to allow their sons, daughters, and trans-genders to be conscripted.

But with a central government, those benefiting from war can concentrate money and influence only on that government. For example, military industry, Israel, big oil, Wall Street. Wars might carry the votes of states with arms factories. Other states would decline.

.In principle, the Constitution should have prevented the hijacking of the military that we now suffer. As we all should know, and some do, America cannot under the Constitution go to war without a declaration by Congress, the last one of which occurred in 1941. But a single central government can be corrupted more easily than fifty state governments. A few billionaires, well-funded lobbies, and the remoteness of Washington from the common consciousness make controlling the legislature as easy as buying a pair of shoes.

And thus, just as Marse Bob expected, the Federals are out of control and make war without the least reference to the nation. If America attacks North Korea, or Russia, or China, we will read of it the day after. The central government and only the central government decides. A few days ago I read that the Pentagon contemplates sending thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan. This combines tyranny at home and aggression abroad. Who wants to send them? A few neocons in New York, the arms industry, a few generals, and several senators. It could not happen in a confederacy.

Will this, as General Lee predicted, prove “the certain precursor of ruin which has overwhelmed all that preceded it.”? Wait.

The Best of Fred Reed


The Economic Collapse

06/16/2017

Not even during the worst parts of the last recession did things ever get this bad for the U.S. retail industry. As you will see in this article, more than 300 retailers have already filed for bankruptcy in 2017, and it is being projected that a staggering 8,640 stores will close in America by the end of this calendar year. That would shatter the old record by more than 20 percent. Sadly, our ongoing retail apocalypse appears to only be in the early chapters. One report recently estimated that up to 25 percent of all shopping malls in the country could shut down by 2022 due to the current woes of the retail industry. And if the new financial crisis that is already hitting Europe starts spreading over here, the numbers that I just shared with you could ultimately turn out to be a whole lot worse.

I knew that a lot of retailers were filing for bankruptcy, but I had no idea that the grand total for this year was already in the hundreds. According to CNN, the number of retail bankruptcies is now up 31 percent compared to the same time period last year…

Bankruptcies continue to pile up in the retail industry.

More than 300 retailers have filed for bankruptcy so far this year, according to data from BankruptcyData.com. That’s up 31% from the same time last year. Most of those filings were for small companies — the proverbial Mom & Pop store with a single location. But there are also plenty of household names on the list.

Yes, the growth of online retailers such as Amazon is fueling some of this, but the Internet has been around for several decades now.

So why are retail store closings and retail bankruptcies surging so dramatically all of a sudden?
Just a few days ago, another major victim of the retail apocalypse made headlines all over the nation when it filed for bankruptcy. At one time Gymboree was absolutely thriving, but now it is in a desperate fight to survive…

Children’s clothing chain Gymboree has filed for bankruptcy protection, aiming to slash its debts and close hundreds of stores amid crushing pressure on retailers.

Gymboree said it plans to remain in business but will close 375 to 450 of its 1,281 stores in filing for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. Gymboree employs more than 11,000 people, including 10,500 hourly workers.
And in recent weeks other major retailers that were once very prosperous have also been forced to close stores and lay off staff…

This hemorrhaging of retail jobs comes on the heels of last week’s mass layoffs at Hudson Bay Company, where employees from Saks Fifth Avenue and Lord & Taylor were among the 2,000 people laid off. The news of HBC layoffs came on the same day that Ascena, the parent company of brands like Ann Taylor, Lane Bryant, and Dress Barn, told investors it will be closing up to 650 stores (although it did not specify which brands will be affected just yet). Only two weeks ago, affordable luxury brand Michael Kors announced it too would close 125 stores to combat brand overexposure and plummeting sales.
In a lot of ways this reminds me of 2007. The stock market was still performing very well, but the real economy was starting to come apart at the seams.

And without a doubt, the real economy is really hurting right now. According to Business Insider, Moody’s is warning that 22 more major retailers may be forced to declare bankruptcy in the very near future…

Twenty-two retailers in Moody’s portfolio are in serious financial trouble that could lead to bankruptcy, according to a Moody’s note published on Wednesday. That’s 16% of the 148 companies in the financial firm’s retail group — eclipsing the level of seriously distressed retail companies that Moody’s reported during the Great Recession.
You can find the full list right here. If this many major retailers are “distressed” now, what are things going to look like once the financial markets start crashing?

As thousands of stores close down all across the United States, this is going to put an incredible amount of stress on shopping mall owners. In order to meet their financial obligations, those mall owners need tenants, but now the number of potential tenants is shrinking rapidly.

I have talked about dead malls before, but apparently what we have seen so far is nothing compared to what is coming. The following comes from CNN…

Store closings and even dead malls are nothing new, but things might be about to get a whole lot worse.

Between 20% and 25% of American malls will close within five years, according to a new report out this week from Credit Suisse. That kind of plunge would be unprecedented in the nation’s history.

I can’t even imagine what this country is going to look like if a quarter of our shopping malls shut down within the next five years. Already, there are some parts of the U.S. that look like a third world nation.

And what is this going to do to employment? Today, the retail industry employs millions upon millions of Americans, and those jobs could start disappearing very rapidly…

The retail sales associate is one of the most popular jobs in the country, with roughly 4.5 million Americans filling the occupation. In May, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics released data that found that 7.5 million retail jobs might be replaced by technology. The World Economic Forum predicts 30 to 50 percent of retail jobs will be gone once struggling companies like Gymboree fully hop on the digital train. MarketWatch found that over the last year, the department store space bled 29,900 jobs, while general merchandising stores cut 15,700 positions. At this rate, one Florida columnist put it soberingly, “Half of all US retail jobs could vanish. Just as ATMs replaced many bank tellers, automated check-out stations are supplanting retail clerks.”
At this moment, the number of working age Americans that do not have a job is hovering near a record high. So being able to at least get a job in the retail industry has been a real lifeline for many Americans, and now that lifeline may be in grave danger.

For those running our big corporations, losing these kinds of jobs is not a big deal. In fact, many corporate executives would be quite happy to replace all of their U.S. employees with technology or with foreign workers.

But if the middle class is going to survive, we need an economy that produces good paying jobs. Unfortunately, even poor paying retail jobs are starting to disappear now, and the future of the middle class is looking bleaker than it ever has before.


The “UN” Swamp Draining, and Today’s Situation Report

06/15/2017

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/06/the-un-swamp-draining-and-todays.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+http%2Fpaulstramerfeedburnercom+%28http%3A%2F%2Fwww.paulstramer.net++++Paul+Stramer+personal+blog%29

By Anna Von Reitz

The UN is not the United Nations, in the same way that the UNITED STATES is not the United States.

By the fall of 1943 the Vichy French government knew the jig was up.  Herr Hitler’s plan to borrow all he could from the Jews of Europe and then murder his priority creditors wasn’t working out so well.  So the Vichy began quietly moving their own ill-gotten gains to Switzerland and not a small number of the vermin paid off Swiss officials to become Swiss citizens.  Some of these characters and their friends even took over de facto ownership of certain Swiss banks where they deposited the wealth they pillaged from their neighbors and from the dead.

Against this general backdrop two corporations were formed in France, one was called the UN Corporation, and the other was the IMF. Both the UN Corp and the IMF were spooled up by the same group of Rothschild-Rockefeller-Railroad Baron and Big Oil interests.  This version of “UN” was and is a privately held commercial corporation created some years before the actual United Nations charter was signed.

This then allows the same kinds of deceptively similar names deceits and frauds that arise when we mistake the UNITED STATES for the United States; by that point in history, this misuse of similar names to promote constructive fraud schemes had become completely routine.  Rumor has it that Dag Hammarskjold, the second Secretary-General of the United Nations, decried this cozy deceit and was going to expose it for what it was, but was killed before he could do so.

Thus, when the news media today is talking about “UN Peacekeeping Forces” you never know– except by context– whether they  are talking about commercial mercenaries hired by the UN Corp to protect its business interests or if you are talking about combined actual military forces contributed by member governments of the United Nations.  Both are called “UN Peacekeeping Forces” though obviously the nature, intent, standards, motivations, and behavior of the two so-called “Peacekeeping Forces” are dramatically different and often at odds.

One final fact needs to be added to the mix before we can wrap up the explanation you want.  There are in this world approximately a hundred stunningly large Historic Trusts.  Many of these Historic Trusts stem from the days of the Spanish Conquistadors, when vast fortunes were made and for the most part, kept, in family trusts.  These so-called Spanish Trusts have moved with their owners all over the world, so that there are heirs of Spanish gold in China, the Philippines, Indonesia, the Middle East, Turkey, England, the United States and Canada that I know of.  Other Historic Trusts started out as Royal Grants of land or gold or as similar Public Grants.  The SwissIndo Trust is only one of these many huge Historic Trusts.

So, what you are referencing as “UN-SWISSINDO” is a Joint Venture between the privately owned Vichy French Commercial Corporation calling itself the “UN Corporation” and the SWISSINDO Corporation spun off the Historic Trust of the same name.  As such UN-SWISSINDO is a commercial mercenary organization wedded to a corporation funded by a Historic Trust, both of which are basically under the control of FRANCE and the Bank of France, that is, Jacob Rothschild, and his Vichy French turned Swiss friends, and the same group of bloodline families that sponsored the IMF.  The “UN-SWISSINDO Initiative” is also being supported behind the scenes by the British Crown Corporation.

Same old crap, different day.  The UN “Peacekeeping” Mercenaries are being paid by the SWISSINDO Historic Trust and together they promote the Nazified vision of the New World Order which is also largely supported by the Roman Catholic Church under the domination of the Jesuit Order founded by yet another Spanish Soldier and Heir of the Spanish Conquest, Ignatius Loyola, whose mad dream was create a worldwide Christian government by force of arms.

So when you read that the Canadians have taken over the Vatican Bank and are cleaning it up, interpret that as: British Crown affiliates working in tandem with the Roman Catholic Church, the Vichy French UN Corporation and Swissindo Trust, and Jacob Rothschild’s Bank of France interests, are helping Mom do the laundry. Or, put another way, the foxes are cleaning the hen house and building new nesting boxes for the hens.

Isn’t that heart-warming?   They are all gathered round to bankrupt “Mom” — the Vatican — and Cousin Beth (Puerto Rico), too, to save their assets unscathed in the coming economic blood bath, and they are using old Nazi plunder to pay their private army as muscle to open up the USB Swiss Bank and plunder it of the SwissIndo Trust assets and at the same time are keeping the other Historic Trust deposits held hostage in the banks they directly control so that other Historic Trusts can’t compete or do anything with their assets unless they all fund a private mercenary army themselves and start World War III against the fake “UN” and its “Peacekeeping Forces”.

La, la, la, how the world does spin.  Compare this seamy underbelly with the public image of New Age light, love, and power to the people coming to save them from oppression and I think you can see why I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

Privately, I call this development “Neu Republique 2.0”.   We started out with “Neu Republique 1.0” with the French Rothschild interests paying the ticket for General Dunford et alia and sponsoring the “New Republic” as Successor to Contract replacing the bankrupt UNITED STATES, INC.   We said, thanks, but no thanks; we accept a month by month quid pro quo to pay for services rendered, nothing more. So now they have turned around and upped the ante, brought more of the old bloodline families and industrial upstarts together to front “Neu Republique 2.0” — with all the rotten European interests represented and using the SwissIndo Historic Trust to fund their rampages.

We say, “Thanks, but no thanks.” to this development, too.  We don’t want to cheat anyone.  We agree to pay for services rendered month to month, but no assumption of contract and only conditional acceptance of the New Republic 2.0.

And where is Donald Trump?  He thumbed his nose at Rothschild’s offer of the first New Republic sales pitch, but then, turned right around and fell for New Republic 2.0.   This is not unlike a man divorcing his wife, and then getting back into bed with her and her three ugly step-sisters, too.  Why would he do such a thing?  Maybe they sweetened the pot.  Maybe he doesn’t know much world history.  Maybe his advisors suck wind.  What The Donald needs to do, if he wants to be free and if he wants America to be Great Again, is to talk to the other Historic Trusts and order the Department of Defense to open their accounts so that there is détente and a counter-balance and more funding sources to choose from.

I have heard the “five million dollars to everyone and a lifetime stipend” being promoted by UN-SWISSINDO, but don’t believe for a moment that this offer is coming without awful strings attached.  I haven’t seen any contracts– also known as “applications” and “enrollment forms”, etc.,— so far, so I don’t know the particulars of the deception, but I can guarantee you that some kind of gross deception and false counterclaim will be involved, of the sort that whoever signs on the dotted line loses everything including their soul.  Just like the Mothers of newborns have been coerced and their children have been “enrolled” as wards of the state without anyone providing full disclosure, you can bet that UN-SWISSINDO’s offer and your receipt of it, will result in you and your property being owned by unsavory interests.

All the while, these shameless frauds will be singing “Yankee Doodle Dandy” and accusing everyone and everything else of doing what they are doing themselves, either because they really do suspect everyone else of thinking and doing the same things they do, or because they hope to keep scrutiny focused on anything and anyone other than on who they actually are and what they are actually doing.  They will continue to encourage, exploit, and promote the confusion of the “UN” corporation with the United Nations organization.  They will continue to misrepresent who and what they are.  They will continue to try to two-block efforts of the other Historic Trusts to bring their assets to bear on the world’s problems.  They will continue to try to cast themselves as angels of light.

As Will Rogers said, “It’s hard to cheat an honest man.”  — but even honest men need to keep grounded and focused and be suspicious that something shady is going on when somebody offers to hand out five million dollars and a lifetime living stipend for free— especially when the persons making the offer have a bad history and have made deliberate efforts to obscure who and what they are.

As for your last question — how can the government still be operating if it is being liquidated — the answer is simple.  They just booted up new corporations, gave them new deceptively similar names, and skated right on with an empty balance sheet and “YOUR NAME” and estate left holding the bag for it all.

Someone should ask Mr. Trump what he thinks he is doing and why he is allowing all this to go on, when he has all the other Historic Trusts supporting his efforts?  Why get into bed with Rothschild, Rockefeller and the whole Vichy Company again?

This is even more senseless when you realize that we already have the assets to pay for our own expenses and the expenses of the federal government, too. It’s high time for Mr. Trump to put DOD to good use and open up our accounts.  What excuse can there be, for not letting the American people have access to their own Historic Trust accounts?  Hmm?  Are all 390 million of us supposed to be “terrorists”?   Are Donald Trump’s actual employers– the people who ultimately pay his salary — his “enemies”?  And by what logic is our money being “blocked” by the U.S. Treasury/IMF and the American people are instead being kept purposefully poor and desperate and fed offers from “UN-SWISSINDO”?

No doubt it has a lot to do with the fact that the IMF has been functioning as the U.S. Treasury for many years now and both the “IMF” and the “UN” were spun off by the same bad actors.  Their object is to feed upon us under the guise of serving us. Donald Trump is following a long string of “US Presidents” by sitting on his hands and doing nothing about it.

Someone should ask Mr. Putin— who has been around the barn longer and accordingly knows more than Mr. Trump — why he hasn’t tired of this game and put an end to these banker “wars” when his own country has been hurt by them, and everyone can see that just a handful of evil old men have caused and are continuing to cause the unnecessary suffering of millions?   The whole world is like it is constipated and can’t manage to dump the load.

Same thing for the Chinese government.  You want to deal in gold and silver?  Why aren’t you expediting that process for us via an honest means, instead of standing by and letting these same old parasites have their way?  Certainly, the Chinese know that the Americans have always traded in silver?  Surely, they know that our national trust does not belong to the Territorial or Municipal United States?  We have opened an International Trade Bank allowing free trade between the United States of America and the rest of the world.  Why aren’t the Chinese beating a path to our door, complaining about the US Trade Deficit, swapping U.S. Treasury Bonds for asset-backed bonds—- and demanding that we have full access to our Historic Trusts?

Again, it’s still just the same old group of the same old nasty men playing the same old nasty games.  Nothing new.

They have been caught red-handed in bankruptcy and probate fraud, trying to steal your assets, so now they are going to keep you poor—keep you from accessing your own Historic Trusts, your lawful inheritance— and offer you fairytales and “money of account” instead, and then claim that they gave you “equitable consideration” for everything you are and all that you naturally own, when in fact five million and a lifetime stipend is nothing compared to what they are trying to take from you.

So, now, I will a few question back to you—- how long before people wake up?   How much longer before the American people stand up and get moving instead of waiting for someone or something else to come save them?  How long before they speak with one voice and say “Enough!”  to all this international piracy and coercion on our shores?  How long before we all put enough pressure on the members of Congress to crack them open like so many Brazil Nuts and force them to do what is right by the American people they are supposed to be serving in Good Faith?  How long before our own trust accounts get opened up?  How long before we come by the millions to throw the so-called “UN” and everything and everyone associated with it back into the sea where it belongs?

How long before somebody, somewhere, wises up enough to recognize the alligators even when they wear cute costumes and whisper sweet nothings?

The whole purpose in draining the swamp is getting rid of the snakes and crocodiles.  The “UN” in any guise is a snake operation and the DOD is not doing its job to protect our ESTATES and the Treasury is balking from what it needs to do— which is to stop babbling about “terrorists” like a confused old ninny and unblock our Historic Trust accounts so that we can pay our own bills — at home and worldwide — with no help from the “UN” nor “SWISSINDO” nor the “IMF” nor the Neu Republique in any form whatsoever.

The Marshal Plan is done and over.  No more excuses for picking our pockets or keeping the American people in a state of perpetual “war” and charging us “Victory Taxes” 72 years after the war ended and continuing to hold title to our land as any “Victory” program, either.  Time for the Europeans to get to off our soil, off our backs, thank us for rebuilding their entire universe, and get smart enough to drain their own swamp.

 

And that is what I have to say about the “UN” and “UN-SWISSINDO” and the current situation.  The only message that Pope Francis and Donald Trump and the “DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE” need to hear and hear it loud and clear is— get off the pot and open up our Historic Trust Accounts.  I have nine of them and together they make “SWISSINDO” look like a small hill of beans.  It’s past time to get beyond this, stop the fraud, and move on.

See this article and over 600 others on Anna’s website here:

http://www.annavonreitz.com/


Lynching Free Speech: The Intolerant State of America

06/14/2017

http://mailchi.mp/rutherford/commentary-lynching-free-speech-the-intolerant-state-of-america?e=84f74f6a6a

By John W. Whitehead

June 13, 2017

“What are the defenders of free speech to do? The sad fact is that this fundamental freedom is on its heels across America. Politicians of both parties want to use the power of government to silence their foes. Some in the university community seek to drive it from their campuses. And an entire generation of Americans is being taught that free speech should be curtailed as soon as it makes someone else feel uncomfortable. On the current trajectory, our nation’s dynamic marketplace of ideas will soon be replaced by either disengaged intellectual silos or even a stagnant ideological conformity. Few things would be so disastrous for our nation and the well-being of our citizenry.”—William Ruger, “Free Speech Is Central to Our Dignity as Humans”

My hometown of Charlottesville, Va., has become the latest poster child in a heated war of words—and actions—over racism, “sanitizing history,” extremism (both right and left), political correctness, hate speech, partisan politics, and a growing fear that violent words will end in violent actions.

In Charlottesville, as in so many parts of the country right now, the conflict is over how to reconcile the nation’s checkered past, particularly as it relates to slavery, with the present need to sanitize the environment of anything—words and images—that might cause offense, especially if it’s a Confederate flag or monument.

In Charlottesville, that fear of offense prompted the City Council to get rid of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee that has graced one of its public parks for 82 years. In doing so, they have attracted the unwanted attention of the Ku Klux Klan.

Yale University actually went so far as to change the name of one of its residential colleges, which was named after John C. Calhoun, the nation’s seventh vice president, a secretary of state, secretary of war, senator and Yale alum who supported slavery.

New Orleans ran up a $2 million tab in its efforts to remove its four Confederate monuments, with the majority of the funds being used for security to police the ensuing protests and demonstrations.

With more than 1,000 Confederate monuments in 31 states (in public parks, courthouse squares and state capitols), not to mention Confederate battle flags on display in military cemeteries, and countless more buildings and parks named after historic figures who were slaveholders, this isn’t an issue that is going away anytime soon, no matter how much we ignore it, shout over it, criminalize it, legislate it, adjudicate or police it.

The temperature is rising all across the nation, and not just over this Confederate issue.

The “winter of our discontent” has given way to an overheated, sweltering summer in which shouting matches are skating dangerously close to becoming physical altercations.

As journalist Dahlia Lithwick writes for Slate, “These days, people who used to feel free to shout and threaten are emboldened to punch, body-slam, and stab. It is a short hop, we are learning, from ‘words can never hurt us’ to actual sticks and stones and the attendant breaking of bones. That is what has become of free speech in this country.”

Here’s the thing: if Americans don’t learn how to get along—at the very least, agreeing to disagree and respecting each other’s right to subscribe to beliefs and opinions that may be offensive, hateful, intolerant or merely different—then we’re going to soon find that we have no rights whatsoever (to speak, assemble, agree, disagree, protest, opt in, opt out, or forge our own paths as individuals).

The government will lock down the nation at the slightest provocation.

It is ready, willing and able to impose martial law within 24 hours.

Indeed, the government has been anticipating and preparing for civil unrest for years now, as evidenced by the build-up of guns and tanks and militarized police and military training drills and threat assessments and extremism reports and surveillance systems and private prisons.

Connect the dots, people!

The government doesn’t care about who you voted for in the presidential election or whether you think the Civil War was fought over states’ rights versus slavery. It doesn’t care about your race or gender or religion or sexual orientation.

When the police state cracks down, it will not discriminate.

We’ll all be muzzled together.

We’ll all be jailed together.

We’ll all be viewed as a collective enemy to be catalogued, conquered and caged.

Thus, the last thing we need to do is play into the government’s hands by turning on one another, turning in one another, and giving the government’s standing army an excuse to take over.

The police state could not ask for a better citizenry than one that carries out its own censorship, spying and policing.

This is how you turn a nation of free people into extensions of the omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent police state, and in the process turn a citizenry against each other. It’s a brilliant ploy, with the added bonus that while the citizenry remains focused on and distrustful of each other, they’re incapable of presenting a united front against the threats posed by the government and its cabal of Constitution-destroying agencies and corporate partners.

Unfortunately, we have already become a nation of snowflakes, snitches and book burners: a legalistic, intolerant, elitist, squealing bystander nation eager to report fellow citizens to the police for the slightest offense.

Mind you, once the police are called in, with their ramped-up protocols, battlefield mindset, militarized weapons, uniforms and equipment, and war zone tactics, it’s a process that is near impossible to turn back and one that too often ends in tragedy for all those involved.

So how do we stop this train from barreling down the tracks past the police state and straight into martial law?

Let’s start with a little more patience, a lot more tolerance and a civics lesson on the First Amendment.

As my good friend Nat Hentoff, that inveterate champion of the First Amendment, once observed, “The quintessential difference between a free nation, as we profess to be, and a totalitarian state, is that here everyone, including a foe of democracy, has the right to speak his mind.”

What this means is opening the door to more speech not less, even if that speech is offensive to some.

Understanding that freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society, James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

We haven’t done ourselves—or the nation—any favors by becoming so fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful or closed-minded that we’ve eliminated words, phrases and symbols from public discourse.

The result is a nation where no one really says what they really think anymore, at least if it runs counter to the prevailing views. Intolerance is the new scarlet letter of our day, a badge to be worn in shame and humiliation, deserving of society’s fear, loathing and utter banishment from society.

For those who dare to voice an opinion that runs counter to the accepted norms, retribution is swift: they are shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes.”

We have entered a new age where, as commentator Mark Steyn notes, “we have to tiptoe around on ever thinner eggshells” and “the forces of ‘tolerance’ are intolerant of anything less than full-blown celebratory approval.”

In such a climate of intolerance, there can be no freedom speech, expression or thought.

We have become a nation of snowflakes.

We have allowed our fears—fear for our safety, fear of each other, fear of being labeled racist or hateful or prejudiced, etc.—to trump our freedom of speech and muzzle us far more effectively than any government edict could. Ultimately the war on free speech—and that’s exactly what it is: a war being waged by Americans against other Americans—is a war that is driven by fear.

By bottling up dissent, we have created a pressure cooker of stifled misery and discontent that is now bubbling over and fomenting even more hate, distrust and paranoia among portions of the populace.

The First Amendment is a steam valve. It allows people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world.

When there is no steam valve to release the pressure, frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

The problem as I see it is that we’ve allowed ourselves to be persuaded that we need someone else to think and speak for us. The result is a society in which we’ve stopped debating among ourselves, stopped thinking for ourselves, and stopped believing that we can fix our own problems and resolve our own differences.

Not only has free speech become a “politically incorrect” four-letter word—profane, obscene, uncouth, not to be uttered in so-called public places—but in more and more cases, the government deems free speech to be downright dangerous and in some instances illegal.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the U.S. government has become particularly intolerant of speech that challenges the government’s power, reveals the government’s corruption, exposes the government’s lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices. Indeed, there is a long and growing list of the kinds of speech that the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation and prosecution: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, extremist speech, etc.

The powers-that-be understand that if the government can control speech, it controls thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry. In fact, some of this past century’s greatest dystopian authors warned of this very danger.

In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.

In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.

In George Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.”

And in almost every episode of Twilight Zone, Rod Serling urged viewers to unlock their minds and free themselves of prejudice, hate, violence and fear. “We’re developing a new citizenry,” Serling declared. “One that will be very selective about cereals and automobiles, but won’t be able to think.”

It’s time to start thinking for ourselves again.

It’s time to start talking to each other. It’s time to start listening more and shouting less.

Most of all, it’s time to start acting like people who will choose dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.

As Dahlia Lithwick concluded for Slate:

To guarantee an escape from conflict, from violence, requires censorship. To have free speech in this moment, when the stakes are so high, is to live with fear. This is not an easy thing to confront—or to accept… Conversation might still be our best chance of getting out of this mess. Free speech is just free speech. It takes actual humans making the effort to talk to each other to transform speech into something more vital and more valuable. Conversations don’t always work. They may sometimes go wrong—horribly, terribly wrong… The First Amendment will never be able to protect us from horrible words and horrific acts. It does guarantee that we’ll keep talking.

This commentary is also available at http://www.rutherford.org.

ABOUT JOHN WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at http://www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Click here to read more of John Whitehead’s commentaries.

PUBLICATION GUIDELINES AND REPRINT PERMISSION

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission. Click here to download a print quality image of John W. Whitehead.


Dear Leftist, Good-for-Nothing, so called journalists in “our” media:

06/13/2017
  1. You said nothing when Obama used drone strikes to execute people abroad.
  2. You said nothing about Russia for 50 years until Trump was inaugurated.
  3. You said nothing about Hillary’s campaign manager’s brother being paid $175,000 to lift U.S. sanctions on Russia.
  4. You said nothing when Obama engaged in military interventionism in Libyawithout Congressional approval.
  5. You said nothing when Obama greatly expanded presidential power through the use of Executive Orders.
  6. You said nothing when Obama filled his White House with lobbyists after he said he wouldn’t.
  7. You said nothing when Obama gave 47 of his fund raisers’ Administration jobs.
  8. You said nothing about the murders and rapes at the hands of illegal immigrants.
  9. You said nothing when Hillary’s net worth rose over $100 million as Secretary of State, in part, because her husband took money from foreign governments.
  10. You said nothing after Obama’s net worth rose over $10 million as President.
  11. You said nothing when Obama’s Justice Dept. wiretapped/surveilled reporters such as James Rosen and the AP.
  12. You said nothing when Obama restricted immigration 6 times with Executive Orders.
  13. You said nothing when Obama set a record for deportations.
  14. You said nothing when Bill Clinton met Loretta Lynch on the airport tarmac during the Clinton investigation.
  15. You said nothing when Hillary was fed debate questions.
  16. You said nothing when Obama and Hillary lied about a video and Benghazi
  17. You said nothing when Obama’s IRS abused the rights of taxpayers.
  18. You said nothing when Obama’s White House held meetings with lobbyists in coffee shops near White House to avoid disclosure requirements.
  19. You said nothing when Eric Holder sold the guns you hate to criminals and some were used to kill Americans.
  20. You said nothing when the Clinton’s took White House property.
  21. You said nothing when Hillary laughed off defending a child-rapist.
  22. You said nothing when Hillary lied about her private use of a private email server as Secretary of State.
  23. You said nothing when Janet Reno, under Bill Clinton, used a tank to kill the Branch Dividians.
  24. You said nothing when, on May 13, 1985, a bomb was dropped on a row house in Philadelphia to uproot the black liberation group known as Move, resulting in a fire that eventually burned down 61 houses, killed 11 people (including five children) and injured dozens.
  25. You said nothing when Elian Gonzales was forcibly deported using guns.
  26. You said nothing when George Soros paid protesters to burn parts of Ferguson.
  27. You said nothing about states’ rights until Trump’s Executive orders on immigration.
  28. You said nothing about Obama’s smoking.
  29. You said nothing about the record numbers of people on government assistance.
  30. You said nothing about the number of part time and low paying jobs under the Obama recovery.
  31. You said nothing when Obama had SWAT teams raid a Gibson guitar factory and seize property, on the purported basis that Gibson had broken India’s environmental laws-but no charges were filed.
  32. You said nothing when Obama claimed that the Fort Hood shooting was “workplace violence” rather than terrorism.
  33. You said nothing when Obama ended some terror asylum restrictions, by allowing asylum for people who provided only “insignificant” or “limited” material support of terrorists.
  34. You said nothing when the national debt doubled under Obama.
  35. You said nothing when 9 times the Supreme Court unanimously overturned Obama’s expansive use of Executive Power.
  36. You said nothing when Obama dismissed charges filed by the Bush Administration against New Black Panther Party members who were videotaped intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling station during the 2008 election.
  37. You said nothing when Obama released Guantanamo detainees who then went back to kill Americans.
  38. You said nothing when Obama unilaterally changed Congressional law by Executive Order.
  39. You said nothing when Obama fired an inspector general after investigating an $850,000 AmeriCorp’s grant received by a nonprofit run by former NBA star and Obama supporter Kevin Johnson.
  40. You said nothing about the 36 Obama’s executive office staffers that owed $833,970 in back taxes
  41. You said nothing when Obama Killed four Americans overseas in counter-terrorism operations without a judicial process.

So NOW, you are voicing your objections about three months of Trump, I’m sorry… we can’t hear you because you said NOTHING before!!! This was copied and shared . . . keep it going, not mine but I agree.

Olddogs Comments!

Don’t misunderstand because I have no use for anyone in this illegal government and if there are any who do not know they are crooks it can only be because they are too stupid to be in any kind of government. Demorats and republrats are all the same to me, but because there are so many of you still stuck in this charade, have a good laugh.

By the way, this is our real flag of peace.


What I Think. Really.

06/12/2017

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/06/what-i-think-really.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+http%2Fpaulstramerfeedburnercom+%28http%3A%2F%2Fwww.paulstramer.net++++Paul+Stramer+personal+blog%29

By Anna Von Reitz

What I said is that the Muslims have been misled and lied to about their own religious scriptures just as the Jews and the Christians have—- which is verifiable fact well-known to linguists competent to read the words of their Prophet in his original Aramaic language.

We have ALL been lied to and that has caused people to believe things and do things that are heinous.  Does everyone think that the Inquisition was “Christian”?   How about the Crusades?   How about the Pogroms?  Buchenwald?  — All done by Christians who were misled into committing horrifying crimes against helpless people and all strictly against the teachings of Jesus and against the Ten Commandments. It has all been papered over again and again with sophistry and excuses by people merely pretending to be Christians.

I tell you, I knew the truth, when I saw a priest look up at a life-sized crucifix and smile secretively.  You see, you can look at the Crucifixion two ways.  You can be appalled by the sacrifice and your own sins and be inspired to overcome them, or you can do what that priest did, and side with Lucifer and secretly mock the sacrifice of Jesus as a triumph for Satan.

In view of the widespread nature of this circumstance impacting all the major western religions what do you think?  That otherwise trustworthy scholars all developed insanity at the same time and in the same way, and just “happened” to misrepresent and prevaricate about their own holy scriptures in exactly the same way—to promote hatred and violence and warfare and bloodshed and grudge-keeping and misery?

Or is this incredible common lack of honesty and precision of translation and omission of crucial text evidence of Satanists at work in all three western religions— deliberately subverting them and their scriptures over time, so as to promote hatred and warfare in the name of God?  The same Satanists that profit themselves from selling arms to both sides of every war?  The same Satanists who put on yarmulkas and pretend to be Jews, and who buy prayer rugs and bow to Mecca and pretend to be Muslims, the same ones who put on clerical collars and pretend to be Christian priests while they diddle little children?

Who do all these pundits think that Jesus was talking to and about when he ranted against “those who call themselves Jews but are not” and labeled them a “synagogue of Satan”—– that was literal, people.  He was talking about Satanists pretending to be Jews.  If they would pretend to be Jews, why not Muslims and Christians, too?   Heaven knows, they couldn’t come right out and practice their own dreadful child murdering “religion” could they?

I think they are all stupid, is what I think.  I think the evidence of Satanic infiltration and manipulation of all three of the major western religions is beyond question, staring us all right in the face.  And we are too dumb to figure it out.  Just like we have been too stupid to realize that we are not “free” when we are taxed out of more than half our income and terrified of our own “government.

For the sake of sanity, everyone, globally—— wake up!  Wake up!   Remember Will Rogers— “Don’t believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see”?  Take that to heart.  Look with your own eyes.  Read with your own eyes.  Think with your own mind.  Seek for the Truth like a miner, mining for gold, so that you are not treated as dumb, driven cattle led to slaughter and sacrifice for the sake of some despot’s need to control and his greed for material things.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the writings of the Apocrypha and many other ancient fragments and parchments have shown that much of what we took to be the “whole story” about the Old Testament and the New Testament was not so cut and dried and neither were the origins of the Greek texts underlying the New Testament.  Current research more than suggests that the “Paul” of the Bible books was not the Apostle Paul of Tarsus, but Sa’ul also known as Paul, who was a contemporary of Saint Jerome merely writing “in the style” of the Apostle as commentaries and letters to his own congregants circa 330 A.D.

I have been told by linguists who are professional people I have no reason to distrust that the words of the Prophet are often distinctly different and sometimes completely opposite to what is taught in Mosques today, when you read the original text—- but modern Muslims don’t read the original text. Just like Catholics who went to Mass for centuries and mumbled Latin phrases without any real knowledge of what was being said.

Wake up!  Fire alarms are going off!  Remember all those burning libraries?  Alexandria, Rome, London, Istanbul, even in America during the War of 1812—– why do you think they always burn the libraries?   To keep you stupid!  To make sure you are ignorant and don’t know your own history, much less anyone else’s—- which makes you easily misled, so that you can be twisted into following their orders and believing whatever they want you to believe.

My reply to the nonsense — that I am a “Muslim Apologist”?  The men saying it are stupid and dishonest. They didn’t even bother to read what I wrote before they went off parroting this propaganda, so they are “tools”, too, for someone else’s agenda.  My further reply is on my website.  I think we all need to apologize to God for our asinine stupidity, cruelty, hypocrisy, and ingratitude.  So I do apologize to God, for myself and for my fellows on this planet.  We are all too dumb to appreciate or enjoy or value life or truth or anything worth having.

So in view of this idiocy and the hatred that it breeds, perhaps we do deserve to die.  Perhaps the “elite” are correct that 80% of us should be wiped out in some dreadful war concocted out of lies and superstitions and ignorance just like the last two World Wars.  Maybe they are right.  Maybe we are in fact “too stupid to live”, but while I breathe, I will stand like a lioness in the doorway and defend mankind and keep the faith that somehow, someday we will wake up out of our stupor, realize that we are all being conned and undermined by Satanists in our midst— and do something practical about it.  Like learning to recognize the problem for what it is.  Like blaming those responsible, instead of blaming the victims.

See this article and over 600 others on Anna’s website here:

http://www.annavonreitz.com/

Olddogs Comments!

I am afraid that my life experiences have made me much less optimistic than Anna. I personally believe that the education and media system has created a nation of educated idiots as preparation for total compliance. We are not a United Nation, as diversity has created chaos. Opinions are like elbow’s, everyone has at least two.


CHANGE A THREAT TO A NATIONS SOUL PART 1 and 2

06/10/2017

http://www.newswithviews.com/Kress/joe158.htm

By Joe Kress

March 22, 2014

NewsWithViews.com

Times change and today in the year 2014 our country experiences a lower standard of living due to rising prices, higher hidden taxes and inadequate education standards in grades 1 through 12 where the public schools, particularly in districts whose residents earn low wages caught in the grip of poverty. These districts are supported by federal and state taxes but never seem to improve teacher quality or better facilities. The primary reason is because alternatives to public education are blocked by mainly teacher unions within the public school systems. Their high paying jobs, retirement and health care benefits are threatened by competition. When charter schools and private schools offer better results in grade point averages and graduation rates in competition with the bloated, expensive public supported, conventional and mostly unimpressive public education system those who gain from the status quo lobby congress and the White House are those whose goal is a one fits all mentality.

SQUEEMISH MORALS

Another contributing factor in this changing world is confusion as to what is moral and what is not. Mostly what is not is in favor of lassie fare, a let Live society with the exception of the right to be born. Druggies, prostitution, abortion up to the day of delivery are the accepted norm. The socialist use the plans of redistribution welfare as the solution by transferring one group’s success to support another group’s failures.

On the other side of the coin there are powerful elements, including Democrat and Republican politicians that follow the dictates of their favorite lobbies whose interests aid and abet corporate and banking welfare. The bail out of GM and Goldman Sachs and other Central Banks and mortgage institutions interests are facts that can’t be denied. It demonstrates corruption within congress and lack of oversight in government and throughout the entire rancid political environment of Washington, DC. The Federal Reserve manages to maintain extremely low interest rates that offer investors opportunity to speculate in land and housing.

Think of the irony of it all when mortgages were lent to people regardless of their ability to pay the mortgage principle on purchases that reached abnormally high prices. The mortgages were approved for million dollar housing loans without even minimum down payments or minimum background investigations. Mostly, the buyer needed only to sign on the dotted line and the mortgage lenders would phony up the document to meet normal lending practices. The mortgages were bundled together and sold to foreign investors regardless of the fact that the mortgages were not secured by collateral or authentic owners. When the housing bubble began to collapse in 2008 the value of properties crashed to levels never before experienced during the 20th century. Hundreds of millions of dollars affected foreign investors, including domestic banking institutions who bundled mortgages and then resold them to buyers who thought they would collect on windfall profits.

As of today, within the United states, only a few top executives during the financial crisis, not those in the mortgage lending business, such as Enron, were prosecuted for falsely reported hyped up profits that never existed and caused their companies to collapse and the stocks in their companies became worthless. But that was not the case relative to the bankers and major mortgage companies who knowingly sold bundles of worthless mortgages. Corruption on a wholesale level was ignored to make sure those institutions could not fail.

Nearly as bad are those who would rather survive on government handouts by Big Brother than take jobs to get off of welfare and food stamp bandwagon. The fact is the jobs available are not acceptable by those on welfare who have available multiple government programs than hard labor. The fact is green card holders and illegal peasant immigrants will take those jobs instead. Their pay is low and menial in the eyes of those who are on perpetual retirement at government expense. Picking fruits and vegetables is arduous labor; working as motel maids too menial Still more ominous is the demographic influence to elect politicians that support their views for rejecting work to receive handouts, food stamps and cell phones. They use their ballot power for legislation to eliminate our nation’s borders and allow immigrants to perform unwanted tasks to benefit the political party that provides the most largess. Besides those on welfare, there are millions of citizens who have no bank accounts, work for cash only, pay no taxes and do lawns and other services such as selling of illegal drugs. They can vote without picture identification, thus enabling massive voter fraud.

LACK OF PERSERVERENCE IN A WORLD DEDICATED TO CHANGE

This is what is happening to the young as well as older generations who are not keeping up with the advancement of science and technology. The media, over the years, is inculcated with the mantra of liberalism and that of what the proponents of the New World Order desire for a society. Violence, racism, sexual depravity, pornography where there are no righteous objections, and only rarely open condemnations. The open door of thought changing cancers enter our living rooms through media and the internet that literally make these information outlets the tool of oligarchs, those who wish to level the United States to third world status in order to facilitate control. The New World Order affects on young and old alike. The goal of these power hungry mattoids is to bring down all resistance and create an obedient, compliant populace. Dictators of the past use similar methodologies by undermining the culture and ethics of their subjects.

THE GOOD AND THE BAD OF IT

Science has exceeded our wildest dreams, but the bad side of such development is to eliminate jobs of low repetitious labor such as in the auto industry or any manufacturing process that must meet foreign and internal competition. Competition demands innovation and that includes machinery to do the same jobs cheaper and better. The high costs of employing people to avoid people work on assembly lines is mechanization. It leaves little choice other than exporting labor requirements to the third world. Those of the third world competing against machines do so by being paid extremely low wages that amount to near slave labor.

It is a fact that the major portion of our population, those who are under-educated and those entrapped into long-term unemployed are doomed to be living in a failed socialized state. Those who have jobs and earn a decent living are small business owners who receive decent returns on their personal labor and investment are now vilified for earning too much, Legislation is now in progress to redistribute what they earn. Because of Big Brother, government has taken over the responsibility formally left to charities. Yet, charities in the past were the most effective way of helping those in need…not the government whose waste and corruption is monumental. Catholic Charities including their hospitals are filing law suits against the Government and if they do not win, they will be forced to close their doors or violate their religious belief that murder of the unborn and contraception practices are mortal sins.

This is our future and it can only end in a downward spiral, since no nation can survive the practices of socialism or communism. The only solution is through the creation of new business, new inventions that create new plants and hire people thus instilling what America had in the past… a drive to succeed, be educated and trust in God. What is now happening is that even the word God has been removed from our military academies pledge of allegiance and in our public school classrooms prayer is outlawed.

Those of us who haven’t kept up with high tech educational academic and technical requirements are relegated to the lowest paid jobs within service and agricultural industries, now mostly manned by foreign workers at lower wages. Those who admire the era of the flower children of the 60s with their music of hard rock, later hip hop, now heavy metal’s raw demeaning lyrics of rape and pornographic lyrics, contribute to a morphed society where whole swaths of the weakened populace become devoid of high values and aspirations.

Normalizing homosexual aberrant behavior, where a very small, powerfully financed homosexual minority supported by forces whose purpose is to lower society standards is a mindboggling diversion where abnormal is considered as normal. It is part of an overall plan to place a populace in an un-envious state of debasement and lack of ethics. Worse yet, there exists in the present government a political goal… the creation of a permanent welfare state composed of people who are wont to accept hard work, but rather depend on government largess.

 

This attitude of the creatures of the underworld, the likes of George Soros and select, enormously wealthy members associated with Hollywood and the entertainment industry are familiars of their evil masters who are implementing a New World Order devoid of nationalism, independence of citizen rights and those freedoms of which they are dedicated to destroy and then able to control. What is now happening was written as hypothetical literature in the prognostications of author George Orwell’s books 1984 and the Animal Farm. Both of which are actually now a reality.

The plan for implementation includes divisive envy between the sexes, between races and religions coupled with a much lower, weakened moral environment that corrupts the mind and destroys individual character and the joy of pride resulting from accomplishments. For part two click below.

2014 Joe Kress – All Rights Reserved

PART 2 of 2

 

A SUBTLE REVOLUTION

The sexual revolution is an enormous debilitating attack to include the creation of same sex marriage, not heterosexually mated and blessed.

The homosexuals/lesbians abjure the historical connotation of marriage and renounce civil contracts that would legally endow them to the same benefit as marriage between a man and a woman. They force on society their desire to equivocate normal heterosexual mating in marriage and homosexual acts as legal and acceptable.

Marriage was instituted by God for the preservation of mankind, not by same sex coupling. The gays real purpose is to equivocate social acceptance of abnormal being normal in all respects. The encompassing term ‘marriage’ is to accommodate those who are secular are for the most part altruistic in reason, ethics and behavior.

Other than twisting abnormal to normal, there is also women who wish to be married and have children but also wish to delay or avoided it until later, (unless it benefits those single women on welfare who are mothers and need more babies to receive increases in government payments to replace that what unwedded fathers should have provided).

There are the professional women who wait for reasons of career enhancement, but may eventually find that delay has a bad side. The longer older women wait the less probable is the chance of pregnancy and the higher chance of imperfect births.

PILLS THAT PILLAGE

In the modern age there is no need for permanent commitments ever since the development of over the counter pills to stop pregnancy – they are available to children and provided by parents out of fear of their daughters may become pregnant. The pills free up women to enjoy recreational sex before the act or the morning after.

There are pills that destroy the sperm cells in time before entering the uterus. The effect that pharmaceutical science created is the sexual revolution that proliferates throughout society. It allows women the freedom that never before existed in all of human history. What was the single contributor to balance demographics now no longer is constrained. The freedom is not simply wine and roses…. there is a price!

The effect of the pill is incredibly significant as to the ratio of birthing entirely at the option of the female who no longer exercises constraint because of worry of becoming pregnant. For every advancement there are prices to be paid, many of which are overwhelming. These are reasons enough to have second thoughts about being fed a chemical that potentially goes against the design of the Creator. The pharmaceutical companies warn that prolonged use of these pills is deadly.

FROM THE GOVERNMENT OFFICE OF DISEASE CONTROL

The consequences of promiscuity with multiple partners is “SDT,” better known as sexually transmitted diseases. These include Chlamydia, gonorrhea, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, herpes 1, herpes 2, HIV and syphilis. Chlamydia is an infection caused by bacteria commonly sexually transmitted. Most people that have it don’t know it since the disease often has no symptoms and is the most commonly reported SDT in the United States. Although easily treated, if not caught in time, it causes infertility. It can infect both men and women. Women who are pregnant and infected with the disease may realize serious effects and her developing baby. The infected newborn often have eye and lung infections.

Syphilis is primarily transmitted sexually. but may be passed to a baby by an infected mother during pregnancy. This causes serious health problems and the baby, if untreated, has a 90% chance of becoming chronically ill. HBV (affiliated hepatitis) is not uncommon.

Al Capone, the major crime boss during the nineteen thirties died from syphilis of the brain.

Gonorrhea is a common SDT. Untreated gonococcal infection in pregnancy has been linked to miscarriages, premature birth and low birth rate. The disease cause premature rupture of the membranes surrounding the baby in the uterus and infection of the fluid surrounding the baby, Eye infections are common in newborn infants with the disease.

The Herpes Simplex Virus, HSV-1 and HSV-2 infections of the new born can be of either type, but mostly are caused by HSV -2. Overall the symptoms of genital herpes are similar in pregnant and non-pregnant women, however, the major concern regarding HSV infection relates to complications linked to infection of the newborn. Although transmission may occur during pregnancy and after delivery, 80-90% of infections in newborns occur when the baby passes through the mother’s infected birth canal.

THE COST IS TOO HIGH AND THE SERVICES TOO LEAN

There is no need to go further in describing the reasons for so many medical problems arising from within a society that follows the wider road than the narrow path to achieve contentment, long life and mental stability. HIV infections treated using medicine like Prezista that prolongs and cures the life of the patient over time, costs hundreds of thousands of dollars.

There is no accounting for all those who forget to take the pills to prevent pregnancy, accidents happen, often result in pregnancy.

The question is who will pay the cost of treatment and who will be treated under the Affordable Care Act?

THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT IS NOT ADEQUATE AS THE SOULUTION BECAUSE, MOST OF THE NATION’S DOCTORS WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN MEDICARE OR MEDICADE. REIMBURSEMENT FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE PAYMENT PLAN BY GOVERNMENT. MEDICAID AND MEDICARE AS OF NOW IS INSUFFICENT TO SATISFY REIMBURSEMENT COSTS TO AMERICAN DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS.

The government’s solution is to employ less expensive doctors and nurses or nurse practitioners from Mexico, Guatemala, Cuba, India, Bangladesh, and other third world countries who will not have gone through the rigorous training and extended internships that American doctors and others receive to attain professional levels of expertise in nearly every field to include brain and heart surgery. THE GOVERNMENT SOLUTION FOR THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT IS TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL TAX ON ALL CITIZENS TO SUPPLEMENT THE INSURANCE COST FOR THOSE WHO CAN’T AFFORD COVERAGE.

THOSE WHO ENROLLED AND SUBSEQUENTLY LOSE THEIR INSURANCE CARRIERS BECAUSE THEY CAN’T AFFORD THE NEW FEES; THOSE WHO ARE DELIBERATING WHETHER TO PAY THE FINE BY NOT ENROLLING WHICH IS INITIALLY SIGNIFICENTLY LESS THAN THE HORRUNDOUS COST OF NEW INSURANCE COVERAGE WILL EVENTUALLY CAPITULATE AS THE FINES INCREASE.

 

THE OBAMA PLAN IS TO FORCE ALL WHO ARE NOT COVERED UNDER MENDICARE AND DO NOT QUALIFY FOR MEDICAIDE WILL EVENTUALLY BE COVERED BY A SINGLE PAYER PLAN WHERE BIG BROTHER CONTROLS ALL MEDICAL RECORDS AND DECIDES WHO SHALL RECEIVE CARE AND WHO WON’T.

THE PLAN IS THE LYNCH PIN FOR THE SOCIAL CONTROL OF AMERICA. IT HAS NOT WORKED SATISFACTORLY IN EUROPE OR CANADA BECAUSE OF INORDINATE DELAYS FOR TREAMENT AND DENIAL OF SPECIALIZED DRUGS.

When the time arrives where no one can exist without even inadequate treatment, they’ll obediently march to the hymn ONWARD WAYWORD SOLDIERS AND NEARER TO MARX ARE WE.

Joe Kress – All Rights Reserved

The “Curmudgeon,” Joseph H. Kress, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret) obtain a B.S. in Business Administration, with a major in economics and minor in accounting.

He served in England and Viet Nam where he received the Bronze Star during the TET Offensive, then he was appointed Chief of Supply for two state-side assignments; the DOD’s Defense Disposal Agency where he was chief of disposal operations for all of Southeast Asia, based at CINCPAC Headquarters in Hawaii. He retired from Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio as chief of supply with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel at the age of 52, and now he and his wife reside in Summerville, S.C.

Since leaving the military, he was involved in political campaigns, writing articles for the local papers, and as a realtor.

jkress@sc.rr.com


In Pursuit of Freedom

06/09/2017

In Pursuit of Freedom

 Good morning fellow prisoners

Olddog is taking a few days off as I complete the construction of my new pistol – rifle range located just 1 mile from home on seventy acres of pasture and woods. As some of you already know, I have been trying to comprehend how Americans have become so unaware of their imprisonment for over ten years and still it amazes’ me that so few give a damn as long as they have their sources of entertainment.

In the beginning of my presence on the internet I started two different sites named In Pursuit of Freedom and OLDDOGS LETTERS , but never attempted to create a following as my lack of credentials have always intimidated me into accepting lesser methods of accomplishing my goals. The one thing that has always confused me is, how is it possible that so many millions of intelligent people cannot see what the Government is doing to them? Confounded by that seemingly impossible tragedy I started A Nation Beguiled.Com and proceeded to distribute the works of some of the best authors who had the credentials and skills I do not have. So, I am republishing the info on those two sites to have yet another source of exposure to information that may help someone understand what happened to their freedom. May you all become enraged at what was done to you, and pass this info to everyone you know.


In Pursuit of Freedom

http://inpursuitoffreedom.blogspot.com/

From A Totalitarian Government

“Let me issue and control a nation’s currency and I care not who makes its laws.” Nathan Rothschild

My objective is to expose the truth that America never was the free country we were told, locate the relevant starting point, and present a sequential list of study material, so you can arrive at your own logical conclusions with much less time consuming research and personal study. Not realizing the leviathan of information I would encounter, and having invested in years of research that authenticate my own conclusions, I promise, you will appreciate the time this blog will save you.

LESSON ONE:

The shortest and most concise lesson on the surreptitious theft of our nation’s sovereignty, and our freedom from oppressive governance, begins with the document we were subliminally taught to worship from the day we entered public education, The Constitution for the United States of America.

Hologram of Liberty; The Constitution’s Shocking Alliance with Big Government, by Kenneth W. Royce, and available at Amazon for less than $15.00 is without doubt the best read to begin your education.

The following reviews are for your consideration.

By Karen A. Decoster

The Constitution that we live under was originally intended to be a document that would provide the cracks from which the waters of tyranny would ooze. The Hamiltonian Centralizers purposely provided us with a document that would destroy true Federalism (decentralization) and exalt the notion of a highly centralized form of Republican tyranny. The “Anti-Federalists” were the TRUE Federalists, and the “Federalists” were actually anti-federalists when the meaning of such is taken in its proper context. Mr. Royce deflates the wet dreams of the Parchment Worshippers. The Constitution actually went through numerous re-writings so as to pave the way for later interpretations that would grant ultimate power to a Central Machine. The Articles of Confederation should have been left to stand.

By G. F Gori

Kenneth Royce does a brilliant job of exposing the US Constitution for what it really is: a government that centralizes all power in the Federal government. Royce takes you from the Revolution to the ratification of the Constitution showing how the Articles of Confederation were totally destroyed. As pointed out by Royce this should be called a national, not federal government. The Constitution provides the framework for an unlimited government instead of a confederate republic. Royce correctly shows Hamilton’s designs for an all powerful, monarchial central government with which to submerge the states. Hamilton is shown in his true light as a tool for the merchant class, banks, corporations, and the ruling elite of the new republic. Along with other Federalists he is shown manipulating public opinion through scare tactics and propaganda. Standing against him were the anti-federalists, and Thomas Jefferson, a true votary of human liberty. Although this book can be depressing it is a must read for a patriot.

LESSON TWO:

Since most people surfing the net expect to find the information there, and not be referred to buying a book, the rest of this site is dedicated to the many people who have spent much of their time researching and writing for your benefit, and my only contribution is in organizing it into a comprehensible curriculum.

If any of you reading this have purchased and read Hologram of Liberty, you now know that during the period of the Constitution’s construction; more than surreptitious writing was going on.

In fact, the Bankers had already laid out a plan to replace the Articles of Confederation, and prepare the way for their ultimate control of our government, our resources, and our money.

In the links that I direct you to, you may find some apparent contradictions, but with perseverance you will eventually see the story unfold, and your good opinion of your old school teachers will never be the same again. But remember, they, like you, were taught by someone under the control of government controlled curriculum.

The following essay from Free America by Harry V. Martin will start filling in the gaps.

America’s first President – John Hanson

By Harry V. Martin

Copyright Free America and Harry V. Martin, 1995

So who was America’s first President?

John Hanson assumed the Presidency on November 3, 1781, the first man to be elected under the new Articles of Confederation. Hanson was elected by a unanimous vote and all potential candidates refused to run against him because of his work during the revolution and influence in Congress. He was a delegate from Maryland. His family was at the forefront of Maryland’s struggle for freedom and equality long before the American Revolution. In 1783, the Maryland Gazette eulogized Hanson on his death November 21, 1783, two years after being elected President. “Thus was ended the career of one of America’s greatest statesmen. While hitherto practically unknown to our people, and this is true as to nearly all the generations that have lived since his day, his great handiwork, the nation which he helped to establish, remains as a fitting tribute to his memory. It is doubtful if there has ever lived on this side of the Atlantic, a nobler character or shrewder statesman. One would search in vain to find a more powerful personage, or a more aggressive leader, in the annals of American history. and it is extremely doubtful if there has ever lived in an age since the advent of civilization, a man with a keener grasp of, or a deeper insight into, such democratic ideals as are essential to the promotion of personal liberty and the extension of human happiness. He was firm in his opinion that the people of America were capable of ruling themselves without the aid of a king.” It was only in the early part of this century that historians were able to locate Hanson’s grave in Prince George County, Maryland. In the dedication of Hanson’s statue in the Halls of Congress in 1903, Senator Jonathan P. Dolliver of Iowa described Hanson as “a man who in a peculiarly appropriate sense was the representative of the national ideal throughout the Revolutionary struggle.” Hanson’s statue does not reside with the other statues donated by the 50 states, his remains exclusive in the corridor between the House and the Senate. James Madison was an ardent admirer of John Hanson, as he saw in him not only exalted virtues, but also ideas and ideals, and a poise and a sagacity as a statesman, which caused him to he held in esteem by the people. Abraham Lincoln stated that Hanson should share equal honors with George Washington.

Hanson is known as “the forgotten man”. His forefathers and his sons have had long distinguished careers in the service of their country, but because of the struggle between the nationalist and the federalists in the late 1780s, the work of men like Hanson, Elias Boudinot, Thomas Mifflin, Richard Henry Lee, Nathan Gorham, Arthur St. Clair and Cyrus Griffin, all presidents before Washington, have been eclipsed. The American education system has neglected this critical point in American history, an era in which the very nation, itself, was shaped from the sword to the plowshare. George Washington referred to the election of Hanson by stating, “I congratulate Your Excellency on Your appointment to fill the most important seat in the United States of America.

For the whole story click the Free America Link in the educational links column on the right.

LESSON THREE:

Lesson four is going to need this introduction, because the subject is so unexpected, and will require much more thought, than what has been presented so far. I believe that the average American is unprepared for the truth, due to many reasons; that include our presuppositions acquired from TV, public education, the news and entertainment industry, and last but surely not the least, our loved ones.

With that said, take some advice and open your mind to the fact, that you have been misinformed all of your life, and for many reasons.

One must accept the fact that, not all people are trustworthy, and some are so vicious and greedy, they are not quite sane, and this type is quite often exceptionally intelligent.

So, with an open mind, try and understand that what you are going to read next is a masterpiece of premeditated, surreptitious, sin against humanity, that enabled a handful of men to build a legal weapon of mass destruction. I strongly advise the reader to go to the web site of this article and make a copy of it for more comfortable reading, and study it extensively.

Please proceed to lesson four, and then go to Against the Grain Press in the links column to make your copy.

While you’re there, bookmark the page and go back often for more education in other articles.

LESSON FOUR:

The United States is still a British Colony:

By James Franklin Montgomery

Published at (Against the Grain Press.com) and (Civil-Liberties.com)

The trouble with history is, we weren’t there when it took place and it can be changed to fit someone’s belief and/or traditions, or it can be taught in the public schools to favor a political agenda, and withhold many facts. I know you have been taught that we won the Revolutionary War and defeated the British, but I can prove to the contrary. I want you to read this paper with an open mind, and allow yourself to be instructed with the following verifiable facts. You be the judge and don’t let prior conclusions on your part or incorrect teaching, keep you from the truth.

I too was always taught in school and in studying our history books that our freedom came from the Declaration of Independence and was secured by our winning the Revolutionary War. I’m going to discuss a few documents that are included at the end of this paper, in the footnotes. The first document is the first Charter of Virginia in 1606 (footnote #1). In the first paragraph, the king of England granted our fore fathers license to settle and colonize America. The definition for license is as follows.

“In Government Regulation. Authority to do some act or carry on some trade or business, in its nature lawful but prohibited by statute, except with the permission of the civil authority or which would otherwise be unlawful.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914.

Keep in mind those that came to America from England were British subjects. So you can better understand what I’m going to tell you, here are the definitions for subject and citizen.

“In monarchical governments, by subject is meant one who owes permanent allegiance to the monarch.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914.

“Constitutional Law. One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws. The natives of Great Britain are subjects of the British government. Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.” Swiss Nat. Ins. Co. v. Miller, 267 U.S. 42, 45 S. Ct. 213, 214, 69 L.Ed. 504. Blacks fifth Ed.

I chose to give the definition for subject first, so you could better understand what definition of citizen is really being used in American law. Below is the definition of citizen from Roman law.

“The term citizen was used in Rome to indicate the possession of private civil rights, including those accruing under the Roman family and inheritance law and the Roman contract and property law. All other subjects were peregrines. But in the beginning of the 3d century the distinction was abolished and all subjects were citizens; 1 sel. Essays in Anglo-Amer. L. H. 578.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914.

The king was making a commercial venture when he sent his subjects to America, and used his money and resources to do so. I think you would admit the king had a lawful right to receive gain and prosper from his venture. In the Virginia Charter he declares his sovereignty over the land and his subjects and in paragraph 9 he declares the amount of gold, silver and copper he is to receive if any is found by his subjects. There could have just as easily been none, or his subjects could have been killed by the Indians. This is why this was a valid right of the king (Jure Coronae, “In right of the crown,” Black’s forth Ed.), the king expended his resources with the risk of total loss.

If you’ll notice in paragraph 9 the king declares that all his heirs and successors were to also receive the same amount of gold, silver and copper that he claimed with this Charter. The gold that remained in the colonies was also the kings. He provided the remainder as a benefit for his subjects, which amounted to further use of his capital. You will see in this paper that not only is this valid, but it is still in effect today. If you will read the rest of the Virginia Charter you will see that the king declared the right and exercised the power to regulate every aspect of commerce in his new colony. A license had to be granted for travel connected with transfer of goods (commerce) right down to the furniture they sat on. A great deal of the king’s declared property was ceded to America in the Treaty of 1783. I want you to stay focused on the money and the commerce which was not ceded to America.

This brings us to the Declaration of Independence. Our freedom was declared because the king did not fulfill his end of the covenant between king and subject. The main complaint was taxation without representation, which was reaffirmed in the early 1606 Charter granted by the king. It was not a revolt over being subject to the king of England, most wanted the protection and benefits provided by the king. Because of the kings refusal to hear their demands and grant relief, separation from England became the lesser of two evils. The cry of freedom and self determination became the rallying cry for the colonist. The slogan “Don’t Tread On Me” was the standard borne by the militias.

The Revolutionary War was fought and concluded when Cornwallis surrendered to Washington at Yorktown. As Americans we have been taught that we defeated the king and won our freedom. The next document I will use is the Treaty of 1783, which will totally contradict our having won the Revolutionary War. (footnote 2).

I want you to notice in the first paragraph that the king refers to himself as prince of the Holy Roman Empire and of the United States. You know from this that the United States did not negotiate this Treaty of peace in a position of strength and victory, but it is obvious that Benjamin Franklin, John Jay and John Adams negotiated a Treaty of further granted privileges from the king of England. Keep this in mind as you study these documents. You also need to understand the players of those that negotiated this Treaty. For the Americans it was Benjamin Franklin Esgr., a great patriot and standard bearer of freedom. Or was he? His title includes Esquire.

An Esquire in the above usage was a granted rank and Title of nobility by the king, which is below Knight and above a yeoman, common man. An Esquire is someone that does not do manual labor as signified by this status, see the below definitions.

“Esquires by virtue of their offices; as justices of the peace, and others who bear any office of trust under the crown….for whosever studieth the laws of the realm, who studieth in the universities, who professeth the liberal sciences, and who can live idly, and without manual labor, and will bear the port, charge, and countenance of a gentleman, he shall be called master, and shall be taken for a gentleman.” Blackstone Commentaries p. 561-562

“Esquire – In English Law. A title of dignity next above gentleman, and below knight. Also a title of office given to sheriffs, serjeants, and barristers at law, justices of the peace, and others.” Blacks Law Dictionary fourth ed. p. 641

Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and John Jay as you can read in the Treaty were all Esquires and were the signers of this Treaty and the only negotiators of the Treaty. The representative of the king was David Hartley Esqr..

Benjamin Franklin was the main negotiator for the terms of the Treaty, he spent most of the War traveling between England and France. The use of Esquire declared his and the others British subjection and loyalty to the crown.

In the first article of the Treaty most of the kings claims to America are relinquished, except for his claim to continue receiving gold, silver and copper as gain for his business venture. Article 3 gives Americans the right to fish the waters around the United States and its rivers. In article 4 the United States agreed to pay all bona fide debts. If you will read my other papers on money you will understand that the financiers were working with the king. Why else would he protect their interest with this Treaty?

I wonder if you have seen the main and obvious point? This Treaty was signed in 1783, the war was over in 1781. If the United States defeated England, how is the king granting rights to America, when we were now his equal in status? We supposedly defeated him in the Revolutionary War! So why would these supposed patriot Americans sign such a Treaty, when they knew that this would void any sovereignty gained by the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War? If we had won the Revolutionary War, the king granting us our land would not be necessary, it would have been ours by his loss of the Revolutionary War. To not dictate the terms of a peace treaty in a position of strength after winning a war; means the war was never won. Think of other wars we have won, such as when we defeated Japan. Did McArther allow Japan to dictate to him the terms for surrender? No way! All these men did is gain status and privilege granted by the king and insure the subjection of future unaware generations. Worst of all, they sold out those that gave their lives and property for the chance to be free.

When Cornwallis surrendered to Washington he surrendered the battle, not the war. Read the Article of Capitulation signed by Cornwallis at Yorktown (footnote 3)

Jonathan Williams recorded in his book, Legions of Satan, 1781, that Cornwallis revealed to Washington during his surrender that “a holy war will now begin on America, and when it is ended America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown.”….”in less than two hundred years the whole nation will be working for divine world government. That government that they believe to be divine will be the British Empire.”

All the Treaty did was remove the United States as a liability and obligation of the king. He no longer had to ship material and money to support his subjects and colonies. At the same time he retained financial subjection through debt owed after the Treaty, which is still being created today; millions of dollars a day. And his heirs and successors are still reaping the benefit of the kings original venture. If you will read the following quote from Title 26, you will see just one situation where the king is still collecting a tax from those that receive a benefit from him, on property which is purchased with the money the king supplies, at almost the same percentage:

-CITE-

26 USC Sec. 1491

HEAD-

Sec. 1491. Imposition of tax

-STATUTE-

There is hereby imposed on the transfer of property by a citizen or resident of the United States, or by a domestic corporation or partnership, or by an estate or trust which is not a foreign estate or trust, to a foreign corporation as paid-in surplus or as a contribution to capital, or to a foreign estate or trust, or to a foreign partnership, an excise tax equal to 35 percent of the excess of –

(1) the fair market value of the property so transferred, over

(2) the sum of –

(A) the adjusted basis (for determining gain) of such property in the hands of the transferor, plus

(B) the amount of the gain recognized to the transferor at the time of the transfer.

-SOURCE-

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 365; Oct. 4, 1976,

Pub. L. 94-455, title X, Sec. 1015(a), 90 Stat. 1617; Nov. 6, 1978,

Pub. L. 95-600, title VII, Sec. 701(u)(14)(A), 92 Stat. 2919.)

-MISC1-

AMENDMENTS

1978 – Pub. L. 95-600 substituted ‘estate or trust’ for ‘trust’ wherever appearing.

1976 – Pub. L. 94-455 substituted in provisions preceding par.

(1) ‘property’ for ‘stocks and securities’ and ’35 percent’ for ’27 1/2 percent’ and in par.

(1) ‘fair market value’ for ‘value’ and ‘property’ for ‘stocks and securities’ and in par.

(2) designated existing provisions as subpar. (A) and added subpar. (B).

EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1978 AMENDMENT

Section 701(u)(14)(C) of Pub. L. 95-600 provided that: ‘The amendments made by this paragraph (amending this section and section 1492 of this title) shall apply to transfers after October 2, 1975.’

EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1976 AMENDMENT

Section 1015(d) of Pub. L. 94-455 provided that: ‘The amendments made by this section (enacting section 1057 of this title, amending this section and section 1492 of this title, and renumbering former section 1057 as 1058 of this title) shall apply to transfers of property after October 2, 1975.’

A new war was declared when the Treaty was signed. The king wanted his land back and he knew he would be able to regain his property for his heirs with the help of his world financiers. Here is a quote from the king speaking to Parliament after the Revolutionary War had concluded.

(Six weeks after) the capitulation of Yorktown, the king of Great Britain, in his speech to Parliament (Nov. 27, 1781), declared “That he should not answer the trust committed to the sovereign of a free people, if he consented to sacrifice either to his own desire of peace, or to their temporary ease and relief, those essential rights and permanent interests, upon the maintenance and preservation of which the future strength and security of the country must forever depend.” The determined language of this speech, pointing to the continuance of the American war, was echoed back by a majority of both Lords and Commons.

In a few days after (Dec. 12), it was moved in the House of Commons that a resolution should be adopted declaring it to be their opinion “That all farther attempts to reduce the Americans to obedience by force would be ineffectual, and injurious to the true interests of Great Britain.” The rest of the debate can be found in (footnote 4). What were the true interests of the king? The gold, silver and copper.

The new war was to be fought without Americans being aware that a war was even being waged, it was to be fought by subterfuge and key personnel being placed in key positions. The first two parts of “A Country Defeated In Victory,” go into detail about how this was done and exposes some of the main players.

Every time you pay a tax you are transferring your labor to the king, and his heirs and successors are still receiving interest from the original American Charters.

The following is the definition of tribute (tax).

“A contribution which is raised by a prince or sovereign from his subjects to sustain the expenses of the state.

A sum of money paid by an inferior sovereign or state to a superior potentate, to secure the friendship or protection of the latter.” Blacks Law Dictionary forth ed. p. 1677.

As further evidence, not that any is needed, a percentage of taxes that are paid are to enrich the king/queen of England. For those that study Title 26 you will recognize IMF, which means Individual Master File, all tax payers have one. To read one you have to be able to break their codes using file 6209, which is about 467 pages. On your IMF you will find a blocking series, which tells you what type of tax you are paying. You will probably find a 300-399 blocking series, which 6209 says is reserved. You then look up the BMF 300-399, which is the Business Master File in 6209. You would have seen prior to 1991, this was U.S.-U.K. Tax Claims, non-refile DLN. Meaning everyone is considered a business and involved in commerce and you are being held liable for a tax via a treaty between the U.S. and the U.K., payable to the U.K.. The form that is supposed to be used for this is form 8288, FIRPTA – Foreign Investment Real Property Tax Account, you won’t find many people using this form, just the 1040 form. The 8288 form can be found in the Law Enforcement Manual of the IRS, chapter 3. If you will check the OMB’s paper – Office of Management and Budget, in the Department of Treasury, List of Active Information Collections, Approved Under Paperwork Reduction Act, you will find this form under OMB number 1545-0902, which says U.S. withholding tax-return for dispositions by foreign persons of U.S. real property interests-statement of withholding on dispositions, by foreign persons, of U.S. Form #8288 #8288a.

These codes have since been changed to read as follows; IMF 300-309, Barred Assessment, CP 55 generated valid for MFT-30, which is the code for 1040 form. IMF 310-399 reserved, the BMF 300-309 reads the same as IMF 300-309. BMF 390-399 reads U.S./U.K. Tax Treaty Claims. The long and short of it is nothing changed, the government just made it plainer, the 1040 is the payment of a foreign tax to the king/queen of England. We have been in financial servitude since the Treaty of 1783.

Another Treaty between England and the United States was Jay’s Treaty of 1794 (footnote 5). If you will remember from the Paris Treaty of 1783, John Jay Esqr. was one of the negotiators of the Treaty. In 1794 he negotiated another Treaty with Britain. There was great controversy among the American people about this Treaty.

In Article 2 you will see the king is still on land that was supposed to be ceded to the United States at the Paris Treaty. This is 13 years after America supposedly won the Revolutionary War. I guess someone forgot to tell the king of England. In Article 6, the king is still dictating terms to the United States concerning the collection of debt and damages, the British government and World Bankers claimed we owe. In Article 12 we find the king dictating terms again, this time concerning where and with who the United States could trade. In Article 18 the United States agrees to a wide variety of material that would be subject to confiscation if Britain found said material going to its enemies ports. Who won the Revolutionary War?

That’s right, we were conned by some of our early fore fathers into believing that we are free and sovereign people, when in fact we had the same status as before the Revolutionary War. I say had, because our status is far worse now than then. I’ll explain.

Early on in our history the king was satisfied with the interest made by the Bank of the United States. But when the Bank Charter was canceled in 1811 it was time to gain control of the government, in order to shape government policy and public policy. Have you never asked yourself why the British, after burning the White House and all our early records during the War of 1812, left and did not take over the government. The reason they did, was to remove the greatest barrier to their plans for this country. That barrier was the newly adopted 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The purpose for this Amendment was to stop anyone from serving in the government who was receiving a Title of nobility or honor. It was and is obvious that these government employees would be loyal to the granter of the Title of nobility or honor.

The War of 1812 served several purposes. It delayed the passage of the 13th Amendment by Virginia, allowed the British to destroy the evidence of the first 12 states ratification of this Amendment, and it increased the national debt, which would coerce the Congress to reestablish the Bank Charter in 1816 after the Treaty of Ghent was ratified by the Senate in 1815.

Forgotten Amendment

The Articles of Confederation, Article VI states: “nor shall the united States in Congress assembled, or any of them, grant any Title of nobility.” The Constitution for the united States, in Article, I Section 9, clause 8 states: “No Title of nobility shall be granted by the united States; and no Person holding any Office or Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

Also, Section 10, clause 1 states, “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque or Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but Gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto of Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of nobility.”

There was however, no measurable penalty for violation of the above Sections, Congress saw this as a great threat to the freedom of Americans, and our Republican form of government. In January 1810 Senator Reed proposed the Thirteenth Amendment, and on April 26, 1810 was passed by the Senate 26 to 1 (1st-2nd session, p. 670) and by the House 87 to 3 on May 1, 1810 (2nd session, p. 2050) and submitted to the seventeen states for ratification. The Amendment reads as follows:

“If any citizen of the United States shall Accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honor, 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.”

From An “American Dictionary of the English Language, 1st Edition,” Noah Webster, (1828) defines nobility as: “3. The qualities which constitute distinction of rank in civil society, according to the customs or laws of the country; that eminence or dignity which a man derives from birth or title conferred, and which places him in an order above common men.”; and, “4. The persons collectively who enjoy rank above commoners; the peerage.”

The fore-mentioned Sections in the Constitution for the united States, and the above proposed Thirteenth Amendment sought to prohibit the above definition, which would give any advantage or privilege to some citizens an unequal opportunity to achieve or exercise political power. Thirteen of the seventeen states listed below understood the importance of this Amendment.

Date Admitted to the Union

State

Date voted the Amendment

Date Voted Against the Amendment

1788

Maryland

Dec. 25, 1810

1792

Kentucky

Jan. 31, 1811

1803

Ohio

Jan. 31, 1811

1787

Delaware

Feb. 2, 1811

1787

Pennsylvania

Feb. 6, 1811

1787

New Jersey

Feb., 13, 1811

1791

Vermont

Oct. 24, 1811

1796

Tennessee

Nov. 21, 1811

1788

Georgia

Dec. 13, 1811

1789

North Carolina

Dec. 23, 1811

1788

Massachusetts

Feb. 27, 1812

1788

New Hampshire

Dec. 10, 1812

1788

Virginia

Mar. 12, 1819

1788

New York

Mar. 12, 1811

1788

Connecticut

May 1813

1788

South Carolina

Dec. 7, 1813

1790

Rhode Island

Setp. 15, 1814

On March 10, 1819, the Virginia legislature passed Act No. 280 (Virginia Archives of Richmond, “misc.” file, p. 299 for micro- film):

“Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that there shall be published an edition of the laws of this Commonwealth in which shall be contained the following matters, that is to say: the Constitution of the United States and the amendments thereto…”

The official day of ratification was March 12, 1819, this was the date of re-publication of the Virginia Civil Code. Virginia ordered 4,000 copies, almost triple their usual order. Word of Virginia’s 1819 ratification spread throughout the states and both Rhode Island and Kentucky published the new Amendment in 1822. Ohio published the new Amendment in 1824. Maine ordered 10,000 copies of the Constitution with the new Amendment to be printed for use in the public schools, and again in 1831 for their Census Edition. Indiana published the new Amendment in the Indiana Revised Laws, of 1831 on P. 20. The Northwest Territories published the new Amendment in 1833; Ohio published the new Amendment again in 1831 and in 1833. Connecticut, one of the states that voted against the new Amendment published the new Amendment in 1835. Wisconsin Territory published the new Amendment in 1839; Iowa Territory published the new Amendment in 1843; Ohio published the new Amendment again, in 1848; Kansas published the new Amendment in 1855; and Nebraska Territory published the new Amendment six years in a row from 1855 to 1860. Colorado Territory published the new Amendment in 1865 and again 1867, in the 1867 printing, the present Thirteenth Amendment (slavery Amendment) was listed as the Fourteenth Amendment. The repeated reprinting of the Amended united States Constitution is conclusive evidence of its passage.

Also, as evidence of the new Thirteenth Amendments impending passage; on December 2, 1817 John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State, wrote to Buck (an attorney) regarding the position Buck had been assigned. The letter reads:

“…if it should be the opinion of this Government that the acceptance on your part of the Commission under which it was granted did not interfere with your citizenship.

It is the opinion of the Executive that under the 13th amendment to the constitution by the acceptance of such an appointment from any foreign Government, a citizen of the United States ceases to enjoy that character, and becomes incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under the United States or either of them… J.Q.A.

By virtue of these titles and honors, and special privileges, lawyers have assumed political and economic advantages over the majority of citizens. A majority may vote, but only a minority (lawyers) may run for political office.

After the War of 1812 was concluded the Treaty of Ghent was signed and ratified (footnote 6). In Article 4 of the Treaty, the United States gained what was already given in the Treaty of Paris 1783, namely islands off the U.S. Coast. Also, two men were to be given the power to decide the borders and disagreements, if they could not, the power was to be given to an outside sovereign power and their decision was final and considered conclusive. In Article 9 it is admitted there are citizens and subjects in America. As you have seen, the two terms are interchangeable, synonymous. In Article 10 you will see where the idea for the overthrow of this country came from and on what issue. The issue raised by England was slavery and it was nurtured by the king’s emissaries behind the scenes. This would finally lead to the Civil War, even though the Supreme Court had declared the states and their citizens property rights could not be infringed on by the United States government or Congress. This was further declared by the following Presidential quotes, where they declared to violate the states rights would violate the U.S. Constitution. Also, history shows that slavery would not have existed much longer in the Southern states, public sentiment was changing and slavery was quickly disappearing. The Civil War was about destroying property rights and the U.S. Constitution which supported these rights. Read the following quotes of Presidents just before the Civil War:

“I believe that involuntary servitude, as it exists in different States of this Confederacy, is recognized by the Constitution. I believe that it stands like any other admitted right, and that the States were it exists are entitled to efficient remedies to enforce the constitutional provisions.” Franklin Pierce Inaugural Address, March 4, 1853 – Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. 5.

“The whole Territorial question being thus settled upon the principle of popular sovereignty-a principle as ancient as free government itself-everything of a practical nature has been decided. No other question remains for adjustment, because all agree that under the Constitution slavery in the States is beyond the reach of any human power except that of the respective States themselves wherein it exists.” James Buchanan Inaugural Address, March 4, 1857 – Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. 5.

“I cordially congratulate you upon the final settlement by the Supreme Court of the United States of the question of slavery in the Territories, which had presented an aspect so truly formidable at the commencement of my Administration. The right has been established of every citizen to take his property of any kind, including slaves, into the common Territories belonging equally to all the States of the Confederacy, and to have it protected there under the Federal Constitution. Neither Congress nor a Territorial legislature nor any human power has any authority to annul or impair this vested right. The supreme judicial tribunal of the country, which is a coordinate branch of the Government, has sanctioned and affirmed these principles of constitutional law, so manifestly just in themselves and so well calculated to promote peace and harmony among the States.” James Buchanan, Third Annual Message, December 19, 1859 – Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. 5.

So there is no misunderstanding I am not rearguing slavery. Slavery is morally wrong and contrary to God Almighty’s Law. In this divisive issue, the true attack was on our natural rights and on the Constitution. The core of the attack was on our right to possess allodial property. Our God given right to own property in allodial was taken away by conquest of the Civil War. If you are free this right cannot be taken away. The opposite of free is slave or subject, we were allowed to believe we were free for about 70 years. Then the king said enough, and had the slavery issue pushed to the front by the northern press, which so formed northern public opinion, that they were willing to send their sons to die in the Civil War.

The southern States were not fighting so much for the slave issue, but for the right to own property, any property. These property rights were granted by the king in the Treaty of 1783, knowing they would soon be forfeited by the American people through ignorance. Do you think you own your house? If you were to stop paying taxes, federal or state, you would soon find out that you were just being allowed to live and pay rent for this house. The rent being the taxes to the king, who supplied the benefit of commerce. A free man not under a monarch, democracy, dictatorship or socialist government, but is under a republican form of government would not and could not have his property taken. Why! The king’s tax would not and could not be levied. If the Americans had been paying attention the first 70 years to the subterfuge and corruption of the Constitution and government representatives, instead of chasing the money supplied by the king, the Conquest of this country during the Civil War could have been avoided. George Washington had vision during the Revolutionary War, concerning the Civil War. You need to read it. footnote 7

Civil War and The Conquest that followed

The government and press propaganda that the War was to free the black people from slavery is ridiculous, once you understand the Civil War Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments. The black people are just as much slaves today as before the Civil War just as the white people are, and also we find ourselves subjects of the king/queen of England. The only thing that changed for black people is they changed masters and were granted a few rights, which I might add can be taken away anytime the government chooses. Since the 1930’s the black people have been paid reparations to buy off their silence, in other words, keep the slaves on the plantation working. I do not say this to shock or come across as prejudiced, because I’m not. Here’s what Russell Means said, for those that don’t remember who he is, he was the father in the movie called, “Last Of The Mohicans”. Russell Means said ” until the white man is free we will never be free”, the we he is referring to are the Indians. There has never been a truer statement, however the problem is the white people are not aware of their enslavement.

At the risk of being redundant; to set the record straight, because Lord only knows what will be said about what I just said regarding black people, I believe that if you are born in this country you are equal, period. Forget the empty promises of civil rights, what about you unalienable natural rights under God Almighty. All Americans are feudal tenants on the land, allowed to rent the property they live on as long as the king gets his cut. What about self-determination, or being able to own allodial title to property, which means the king cannot take your property for failure to pay a tax. Which means you did not own it to begin with. The king allows you to use the material goods and land. Again this is financial servitude.

“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 a mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” Senate Document No. 43, “Contracts payable in Gold” written in 1933.

The king controlled the government by the time the North won the Civil War, through the use of lawyers that called the shots behind the scenes, just as they do now and well placed subjects in the United States government. This would not have been possible if not for England destroying our documents in 1812 and the covering up of state documents of the original 13th Amendment.

According to International law, what took place when the North conquered the South? First, you have to understand the word “conquest” in international law. When you conquer a state you acquire the land; and those that were subject to the conquered state, then become subject to the conquers. The laws of the conquered state remain in force until the conquering state wishes to change all or part of them. At the time of conquest the laws of the conquered state are subject to change or removal, which means the law no longer lies with the American people through the Constitution, but lies with the new sovereign. The Constitution no longer carries any power of its own, but drives its power from the new sovereign, the conqueror. The reason for this is the Constitution derived its power from the people, when they were defeated, so was the Constitution.

The following is the definition of Conquest:

“The acquisition of the sovereignty of a country by force of arms, exercised by an independent power which reduces the vanquished to submission to its empire.”

“The intention of the conqueror to retain the conquered territory is generally manifested by formal proclamation of annexation, and when this is combined with a recognized ability to retain the conquered territory, the transfer of sovereignty is complete. A treaty of peace based upon the principle of uti possidetis (q.v.) is formal recognition of conquest.”

“The effects of conquest are to confer upon the conquering state the public property of the conquered state, and to invest the former with the rights and obligations of the latter; treaties entered into by the conquered state with other states remain binding upon the annexing state, and the debts of the extinct state must be taken over by it. Conquest likewise invests the conquering state with sovereignty over the subjects of the conquered state. Among subjects of the conquered state are to be included persons domiciled in the conquered territory who remain there after the annexation. The people of the conquered state change their allegiance but not their relations to one another.” Leitensdorfer v. Webb, 20 How. (U.S.) 176, 15 L. Ed. 891.

“After the transfer of political jurisdiction to the conqueror the municipal laws of the territory continue in force until abrogated by the new sovereign.” American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Pet. (U.S.) 511, 7 L. Ed. 242. Conquest, In international Law. – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary.

What happened after the Civil War? Did not U.S. troops force the southern states to accept the Fourteenth Amendment? The laws of America, the Constitution were changed by the conquering government. Why? The main part I want you to see, as I said at the beginning of this paper, is watch the money and the commerce. The Fourteenth Amendment says the government debt can not be questioned. Why? Because now the king wants all the gold, silver and copper and the land. Which can easily be done by increasing the government debt and making the American people sureties for the debt. This has been done by the sleight of hand of lawyers and the bankers.

The conquering state is known as a Belligerent, read the following quotes.

Belligerency, is International Law

“The status of de facto statehood attributed to a body of insurgents, by which their hostilities are legalized. Before they can be recognized as belligerents they must have some sort of political organization and be carrying on what is international law is regarded as legal war. There must be an armed struggle between two political bodies, each of which exercises de facto authority over persons within a determined territory, and commands an army which is prepared to observe the ordinary laws of war. It is not enough that the insurgents have an army; they must have an organized civil authority directing the army.”

“The exact point at which revolt or insurrection becomes belligerency is often extremely difficult to determine; and belligerents are not usually recognized by nations unless they have some strong reason or necessity for doing so, either because the territory where the belligerency is supposed to exist is contiguous to their own, or because the conflict is in some way affecting their commerce or the rights of their citizens…One of the most serious results of recognizing belligerency is that it frees the parent country from all responsibility for what takes place within the insurgent lined; Dana’s Wheaton, note 15, page 35.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary

Belligerent, In International Law.

“As adj. and noun. Engaged in lawful war; a state so engaged. In plural. A body of insurgents who by reason of their temporary organized government are regarded as conducting lawful hostilities. Also, militia, corps of volunteers, and others, who although not part of the regular army of the state, are regarded as lawful combatants provided they observe the laws of war; 4 H. C. 1907, arts, 1, 2.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary.

According to the International law no law has been broken. Read the following about military occupation, notice the third paragraph. After the Civil War, title to the land had not been completed to the conquers, but after 1933 it was. I will address this in a moment. In the last paragraph, it says the Commander-in- Chief governs the conquered state. The proof that this is the case today, is the U.S. flies the United States flag with a yellow fringe on three sides. According to the United States Code, Title 4, Sec. 1, the U.S. flag does not have a fringe on it. The difference being one is a Constitutional flag, and the fringed flag is a military flag. The military flag means you are in a military occupation and are governed by the Commander-in-Chief in his executive capacity, not under any Constitutional authority. Read the following.

Military Occupation

“This at most gives the invader certain partial and limited rights of sovereignty. Until conquest, the sovereign rights of the original owner remain intact. Conquest gives the conqueror full rights of sovereignty and, retroactively, legalizes all acts done by him during military occupation. Its only essential is actual and exclusive possession, which must be effective.”

“A conqueror may exercise governmental authority, but only when in actual possession of the enemy’s country; and this will be exercised upon principles of international law; MacLeod v. U.S., 229 U.S. 416, 33 Sup. Ct 955, 57 L. Ed. 1260.”

“The occupant administers the government and may, strictly speaking, change the municipal law, but it is considered the duty of the occupant to make as few changes in the ordinary administration of the laws as possible, though he may proclaim martial law if necessary. He may occupy public land and buildings; he cannot alienate them so as to pass a good title, but a subsequent conquest would probably complete the title…”

“Private lands and houses are usually exempt. Private movable property is exempt, though subject to contributions and requisitions. The former are payments of money, to be levied only by the commander-in-chief…Military necessity may require the destruction of private property, and hostile acts of communities or individuals may be punished in the same way. Property may be liable to seizure as booty on the field of battle, or when a town refuses to capitulate and is carried by assault. When military occupation ceases, the state of things which existed previously is restored under the fiction of postliminium (q.v.)”

“Territory acquired by war must, necessarily, be governed, in the first instance, by military power under the direction of the president, as commander-in-chief. Civil government can only be put in operation by the action of the appropriate political department of the government, at such time and in such degree as it may determine. It must take effect either by the action of the treaty- making power, or by that of congress. So long as congress has not incorporated the territory into the United States, neither military occupation nor cession by treaty makes it domestic territory, in the sense of the revenue laws. Congress may establish a temporary government, which is not subject to all the restrictions of the constitution. Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 21 Sup Ct. 770, 45 L. Ed. 1088, per Gray, J., concurring in the opinion of the court.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary

Paragraph 1-3 of the definition of Military Occupation describes what took place during and after the Civil War. What took place during the Civil War and Post Civil War has been legal under international law. You should notice in paragraph 3, that at the end of the Civil War, title to the land was not complete, but the subsequent Conquest completed the title. When was the next Conquest? 1933, when the American people were alienated by our being declared enemies of the Conquer and by their declaring war against all Americans. Read the following quotes and also (footnote 8).

The following are excerpts from the Senate Report, 93rd Congress, November 19, 1973, Special Committee On The Termination Of The National Emergency United States Senate.

Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency….Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.

A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency….from, at least, the Civil War in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.

In Title 12, in section 95b you’ll find the following codification of the emergency war powers: The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by subsection (b) of section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended (12 USCS, 95a), are hereby approved and confirmed. (March 9, 1933, c. 1, Title 1, 1, 48 Stat. 1)

It is clear that the Bankrupt, defacto government of the united States, which is operating under the War Powers Act and Executive Orders; not the Constitution for the united States, has in effect issued under its Admiralty Law, Letters of Marque (piracy) to its private agencies IRS, ATF, FBI and DEA, with further enforcement by its officers in the Courts, local police and sheriffs, waged war against the American People and has classed Americans as enemy aliens.

The following definition is from BOUVIER’S LAW DICTIONARY (P. 1934) of Letters of Marque, it says: “A commission granted by the government to a private individual, to take the property of a foreign state, or of the citizens or subjects of such state, as a reparation for an injury committed by such state, its citizens or subjects. The prizes so captured are divided between the owners of the privateer, the captain, and the crew. A vessel to a friendly port, but armed for its own defense in case of attack by an enemy, is also called a letter of marque.”

Words and Phrases, Dictionary

By the law of nations, an enemy is defined to be “one with whom a nations at open war.” When the sovereign ruler of a state declares war against another sovereign, it is understood the whole nation declares war against that other nation. All the subjects of one are enemies to all the subjects of the other, and during the existence of the war they continue enemies, in whatever country they may happen to be, “and all persons residing within the territory occupied by the belligerents, although they are in fact foreigners, are liable to be treated as enemies.” Grinnan v. Edwards, 21 W.Va. 347, 357, quoting Vatt. Law.Nat.bk. 3, c. 69-71.

So we find ourselves enemies in our own country and subjects of a king that has conquered our land, with heavy taxation and no possibility of fair representation.

The government has, through the laws of forfeiture, taken prize and booty for the king; under the Admiralty Law and Executive powers as declared by the Law of the Flag. None of which could have been done with the built in protection contained in the true Thirteenth Amendment, which has been kept from the American People. The fraudulent Amendments and legislation that followed the Civil War, bankrupted the American People and put the privateers (banksters) in power, and enforced by the promise of prize and booty to their partners in crime (government).

The following is the definition of a tyrant.

Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines tyrant as follows: “1. An absolute ruler; one who seized sovereignty illegally; a usurper. 2. a cruel oppressive ruler; a despot. 3. one who exercises his authority in an oppressive manner, a cruel master.”

“When I see that the right and means of absolute command are conferred on a people or upon a king, upon an aristocracy or a democracy, a monarchy or republic, I recognize the germ of tyranny, and I journey onwards to a land of more helpful institutions.” Alexis de Tocqueville, 1 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA, at 250 [Arlington House (1965)].

So we pick up with paragraph 4, which describes the taxation under Military Occupation and that you are under Executive control and are bound under admiralty law by the contracts we enter, including silent contracts and by Military Occupation.

Notice the last sentence in paragraph 5, Congress may establish a temporary government, which is not subject to all the restrictions of the Constitution. See also Harvard Law Review – the Insular Cases. This means you do not have a Constitutional government, you have a military dictatorship, controlled by the President as Commander-in-Chief. What is another way you can check out what I am telling you? Read the following quotes.

“…[T]he United States may acquire territory by conquest or by treaty, and may govern it through the exercise of the power of Congress conferred by Section 3 of Article IV of the

Constitution.

In exercising this power, Congress is not subject to the same constitutional limitations, as when it is legislating for the United States. …And in general the guaranties of the Constitution, save as they are limitations upon the exercise of executive and legislative power when exerted for or over our insular possessions, extend to them only as Congress, in the exercise of its legislative power over territory belonging to the United States, has made those guarantees applicable.”

[Hooven & Allison & Co. vs Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)

“The idea prevails with some indeed, it found expression in arguments at the bar that we have in this country substantially or practically two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to exercise.

I take leave to say that if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will be the result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitu- tional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism.

It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the constitution.” [Downes vs Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)]

A Military Flag

And to further confirm and understand the significance of what I have told you, you need to understand the fringe on the United States flag. Read the following.

First the appearance of our flag is defined in Title 4 sec. 1. U.S.C..

“The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field.” (my note – of course when new states are admitted, new stars are added.)

A foot note was added on page 1113 of the same section which says: “Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy.” 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483.

The president, as military commander, can add a yellow fringe to our flag. When would this be done? During time of war. Why? A flag with a fringe is an ensign, a military flag. Read the following.

“Pursuant to U.S.C. Chapter 1, 2, and 3; Executive Order No. 10834, August 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE, bordered on three sides. The President of the United states designates this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the Armed forces.”

From the National Encyclopedia, Volume 4:

“Flag, an emblem of a nation; usually made of cloth and flown from a staff. From a military standpoint flags are of two general classes, those flown from stationary masts over army posts, and those carried by troops in formation. The former are referred to by the general name flags. The latter are called colors when carried by dismounted troops. Colors and Standards are more nearly square than flags and are made of silk with a knotted Fringe of Yellow on three sides…use of the flag. The most general and appropriate use of the flag is as a symbol of authority and power.”

“…The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag. The same law that confers his authority ascertains its limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners and freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power well defined under the national maritime law.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914.

Don’t be thrown by the fact they are talking about the sea, and that it doesn’t apply to land. Admiralty law came on land in 1845 with the Act of 1845 by Congress. Next a court case:

“Pursuant to the “Law of the Flag”, a military flag does result in jurisdictional implication when flown. The Plaintiff cites the following: “Under what is called international law, the law of the flag, a ship-owner who sends his vessel into a foreign port gives notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the shipmaster that he intends the law of the flag to regulate those contracts with the shipmaster that he either submit to its operation or not contract with him or his agent at all.” Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41, 45, 185 ILL. 133, 49 LRA 181, 76 AM.

I have had debates with folks that take great issue with what I have said, they dogmatically say the constitution is the law and the government is outside the law. I wish they were right, but they fail to see or understand that the American people have been conquered, unknowingly, but conquered all the same. That is why a judge will tell you not to bring the Constitution into his court, or a law dictionary, because he is the law, not the Constitution.

You have only to read the previous Senates report on National Emergency, to understand the Constitution and our Constitutional form of government no longer exists.

Further Evidence

Social Security

I fail to understand how the American people could have been so dumbed down as to not see that the Social Security system is fraudulent and that it is based on socialism, which is the redistribution of wealth, right out of the communist manifesto. The Social Security system first, is fraud, it is insolvent and was never intended to be. It is used for a national identification number, and a requirement to receive benefits from the conquers (king).

The Social Security system is made to look and act like insurance, all insurance is governed by admiralty law, which is the kings way of binding those involved with commerce with him. “The Social Security system may be accurately described as a form of Social Insurance, enacted pursuant to Congress’ power to “spend money in aid of the ‘general welfare’,” Helvering vs. Davis [301 U.S., at 640]

“My judgment accordingly is, that policies of insurance are within… the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States.” Federal Judge Story, in DELOVIO VS. BOIT, 7 Federal Cases, #3776, at page 444 (1815).

You need to know and understand what contribution means in F.I C. A., Federal Insurance Contribution Act. Read the following definition.

Contribution. Right of one who has discharged a common liability to recover of another also liable, the aliquot portion which he ought to pay or bear. Under principle of “contribution,” a tort-feasor against whom a judgment is rendered is entitled to recover proportional shares of judgment from other joint tort- feasor whose negligence contributed to the injury and who were also liable to the plaintiff. (cite omitted) The share of a loss payable by an insure when contracts with two or more insurers cover the same loss. The insurer’s share of a loss under a coinsurance or similar provision. The sharing of a loss or payment among several. The act of any one or several of a number of co-debtors, co-sureties, etc., in reimbursing one of their number who has paid the whole debt or suffered the whole liability, each to the extent of his proportionate share. (Blacks Law Dictionary 6th ed.)

Thereby making you obligated for the national debt. The Social Security system is one of the contractual nexus’ between you and the king. Because you are involved in the kings commerce and have asked voluntarily for his protection, you have accomplished the following. You have admitted that you are equally responsible for having caused the national debt and that you are a wrong doer, as defined by the above legal definition. You have admitted to being a Fourteenth Amendment citizen, who only has civil rights granted by the king. By being a Fourteenth Amendment citizen, you have agreed that you do not have standing in court to question the national debt. Keep in mind this is beyond the status of our country and people, which I covered earlier in this paper. We are in this system of law because of the conquest of our country.

Congress has transferred its Constitutional obligation of coining money to the federal reserve, the representatives of the king, this began after the Civil War and the overturning of the U.S. Constitution, as a result of CONGEST. You have used this fiat money without objection, which is a commercial benefit, supplied by the kings bankers. Fiat money has no real value, other than the faith in it, and you CANNOT pay a debt with fiat money, because it is a debt instrument. A federal reserve note is a promise to pay and is only evidence of debt. The benefit you have received is you are allowed to discharge your debt, which means you pass on financial servitude to someone else. The someone else is our children.

When you go to the grocery store and hand the clerk a fifty dollar federal reserve note you have stolen the groceries and passed fifty dollars of debt to the seller. Americans try to acquire as much of this fiat money as they can. If Americans were aware of this; it wouldn’t matter to them, because they don’t care if the merchandise is stolen as long as it is legal. But what happens if the system fails? Those with the most fiat money or real property, which was obtained with fiat money will be forfeited to the king, everything that was obtained with this fiat money reverts back to the king temporary, I will explain in the conclusion of this paper. Because use of his fiat money is a benefit, supplied by the king’s bankers; it all transfers back to the king. The king’s claim to the increase in this country comes from the original Charter of 1606. But, it is all hidden, black is white and white is black, wealth is actually debt and financial slavery.

For those that do not have a Social Security number or think they have rescinded it, you are no better off. As far as the king is concerned you are subject to him also. Why? Well, just to list a couple of reasons other than conquest. You use his money and as I said before, this is discharging debt, without prosecution. You use the goods and services that were obtained by this fiat money, to enrich your life style and sustain yourself. You drive or travel, which ever definition you want to use, on the king’s highways and roads for pleasure and to earn a living; meaning you are involved in the king’s commerce. On top of these reasons which are based on received benefits, this country HAS BEEN CONQUERED!

I know a lot of patriots won’t like this. Your (our) argument has been that the government has and is operating outside of the law (United States Constitution). Believe me I don’t like sounding like the devils advocate, but as far as international law goes; and the laws that govern War between countries, the king/queen of England rule this country, first by financial servitude and then by actual Conquest and Military Occupation. The Civil War was the beginning of the Conquest, as evidenced by the Fourteenth Amendment. This Amendment did several things, as already mentioned. It created the only citizenship available to the conquered and declared that these citizens had no standing in any court to challenge the monetary policies of the new government. Why? So the king would always receive his gain from his Commercial venture. The Amendment also eliminated your use of natural rights and gave the Conquered civil rights. The Conquered are governed by public policy, instead of Republic of self-government under God Almighty. Your argument that this can’t be, is frivolous and without merit, the evidence is conclusive.

Nothing has changed since before the Revolutionary War.

All persons whose activities in King’s Commerce are such that they fall under this marine-like environment, are into an invisible Admiralty Jurisdiction Contract. Admiralty Jurisdiction is the KING’S COMMERCE of the High Seas, and if the King is a party to the sea-based Commerce (such as by the King having financed your ship, or the ship is carrying the King’s guns), then that Commerce is properly governed by the special rules applicable to Admiralty Jurisdiction. But as for that slice of Commerce going on out on the High Seas without the King as a party, that Commerce is called Maritime Jurisdiction, and so Maritime is the private Commerce that transpires in a marine environment. At least, that distinction between Admiralty and Maritime is the way things once were, but no more. George Mercier, Invisible Contracts, 1984.

What Lincoln and Jefferson said about the true American danger was very prophetic.

“All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined could not, by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. Abraham Lincoln

“Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless… the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is [now] while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion. Thomas Jefferson

Below are the political platforms of the Democrats and the Republicans, as you can see there is no difference between the two, plain socialism. They are both leading America to a World government, just as Cornwallis said, and that government will be the British empire or promoted by the British.

“We have built foundations for the security of those who are faced with the hazards of unemployment and old age; for the orphaned, the crippled, and the blind. On the foundation of the Social Security Act we are determined to erect a structure of economic security for all our people, making sure that this benefit shall keep step with the ever increasing capacity of America to provide a high standard of living for all its citizens.” DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM OF 1936, at page 360, infra.

“Real security will be possible only when our productive capacity is sufficient to furnish a decent standard of living for all American families and to provide a surplus for future needs and contingencies. For the attainment of that ultimate objective, we look to the energy, self-reliance and character of our people, and to our system of free enterprise.

“Society has an obligation to promote the security of the people, by affording some measure of protection against involuntary unemployment and dependency in old age. The NEW DEAL policies, while purporting to provide social security, have, in fact, endangered it.

“We propose a system of old age security, based upon the following principles:

  1. We approve a PAY AS YOU GO policy, which requires of each generation the support of the aged and the determination of what is just and adequate.
  2. Every American citizen over 65 should receive a supplemental payment necessary to provide a minimum income sufficient to protect him or her from want.
  3. Each state and territory, upon complying with simple and general minimum standards, should receive from the Federal Government a graduated contribution in proportion to its own, up to a fixed maximum.
  4. To make this program consistent with sound fiscal policy the Federal revenues for this purpose must be provided from the proceeds of a direct tax widely distributed. All will be benefitted and all should contribute.

“We propose to encourage adoption by the states and territories of honest and practical measures for meeting the problems of employment insurance.

“The unemployment insurance and old age annuity of the present Social Security Act are unworkable and deny benefits to about two-thirds of our adult population, including professional men and women and all engaged in agriculture and domestic service, and the self-employed, while imposing heavy tax burdens upon all.”

– REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM OF 1936, at page 366.

Both PLATFORMS appear in NATIONAL PARTY PLATFORMS — 1840 TO 1972; compiled by Ronald Miller [University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois (1973)

CONCLUSION

Jesus gave us the most profound warning and advise of all time, Hosea 4:6 “My people are destroyed by a lack of knowledge.” This being our understanding and spiritual development in His Word. When applied to the many facets of life, His Word exposes all of life’s pit falls. Jesus Christ’s Word covers all aspects of life.

The working class during the 1700’s were far more educated than now, but this was still not enough to protect them from the secret subterfuge practiced by the lawyers and bankers. Only with understanding of Jesus Christ’s Word, can the evil application of man’s law be exposed and understood for what it is. This is why Jesus Christ also warned of the beguilement of the lawyers and the deceit and deception they practice.

Another reason, the working class have been unable to understand their enslavement, is because of the time spent working for a living. At wages supplied by the upper class, sufficient to live and even prosper, but never enough to attain upper class status. This is basic class warfare. This system is protected by the upper class controlling public education, to limit and focus the working class’s knowledge, to maintain class separation.

What does this have to do with this paper? Everything! This is the reason our upper class fore fathers submitted to the king in the Treaty of 1783. After this Treaty and up to the Civil War, the working class were busy making this the greatest Country in the history of the world. You see they believed they were free, a freeman will work much harder than a man that is subject or a slave. As a whole, the working class were not paying attention to what the government was doing, including its Treaties and laws. This allowed time for the banking procedures and laws to be put in place over time, while the nation slept, so the nation could be conquered during the Civil War. The only way to regain this county is with the re-education of the working class, so they can make informed decisions and vote the mis-managers of our government out of office. We could then reverse the post Civil War socialist laws and the one world government laws, that have been gradually put in place since the Civil War. Until the defeat of America is recognized, victory will never be attainable. Only through reliance by faith on Jesus Christ and the teaching of His Kingdom will we realize our freedom. As I said earlier, just as this Country has been conquered, when Jesus Christ returns he conquers all nations and takes possession of His Kingdom and rules them with a rod of iron (Rev. 11:15-18). His right of ownership is enforced by THE LAW, God Almighty.

The preceding 11214 words are not to be changed or altered in any way, except by permission of the author, James Montgomery. I can be reached through Knowledge is Freedom BBS. Or email me at monjamf@northstate.net

“…And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, and give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have not time to think, no means of calling the mis-manager’s to account; but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow sufferers…” (Thomas Jefferson) THE MAKING OF AMERICA, p. 395

NOTE: Don’t forget to go back and read the foot-notes at Against the Grain Press.

If you’ve come this far, you are exceptional, Thank you!

Posted by OldDog


Regarding the Take Over of BLM Facilities in the Western States

06/07/2017

http://www.paulstramer.net/2016/01/regarding-take-over-of-blm-facilities.html

NOTICE to All Members of the Press Corps, All Federal Employees, All Members of the American  Armed Forces, All Sheriffs, United States Marshals, and Others Responsible for Public Safety and Peacekeeping

Issued by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger

January 3, 2016

Although it may come as a surprise to many Americans we have been mischaracterized and misidentified as British Crown Subjects for the better part of a hundred years.  This travesty has never been corrected; instead, the British Crown, a commercial investment organization, has kidnapped and press-ganged American land assets into the international jurisdiction of the sea and has pillaged our labor and our resources without mercy in criminal conspiracy and contempt of our Constitution.   They have been aided and abetted in this activity by members of the American Bar Association and the Internal Revenue Service acting as licensed privateers.

These vipers nurtured in our bosom pretending to be our “Friends” and our “Allies” and even our “Trustees” have practiced identity theft against the American people, have involved us in their own private bankruptcies as sureties obligated to pay their debts; they have pretended that because of their fraud against us, we have “abandoned” our property including our land patents, our bank accounts, and our organic states. They have usurped against our lawful government, enslaved our people, and acted as criminals in our midst.

The corporations responsible for this behavior are no different and no better than Walmart or Sears or Burger King; they have used names like “Bureau of Land Management” or “United States Department of Agriculture” and so on under color of law.

The “Bureau of Land Management” is not an actual unit of the American government.  It is a foreign corporation whose only business here is to provide us with “essential governmental services”.
The land patents to the western states are owed to the States of America and the Indigenous Tribal Governments without exception.  The only ownership accruing to the Federal United States dba District of Columbia Municipal Corporation or in other corporate guises is vested entirely in the ten square miles of the District and limited to its Boundary Stones.  The only ownership vested in the Federal Government in the western states or anywhere else is a lease interest in facilities that have been provided to expedite their service missions.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) facilities being occupied by American Militiamen were bought and paid for by the people of this country for the use of the BLM with the understanding that the BLM is a unit of the American government and is working in good faith for the people of this nation.

However, according to the public and private records, the BLM is not in fact any part of our lawful government at all and has not been so for decades.  It is a privately owned foreign “governmental services corporation” operating under color of law; it has no business interfering in the activities of the ranchers and farmers, occupying government facilities under conditions of fraud, or otherwise presenting false claims of interest, ownership, or authority.

The Hammonds and the Bundy Family are Priority Creditors of all the governmental services corporations which are now or which have operated in this country in the past. They are tax exempt and their “vessels in commerce”— meaning the various trusts and public utilities operated under their NAMES without their knowledge or consent—  are all tax-prepaid.  They and their countrymen are owed the patent to all land within the geographically defined boundaries of their respective states, free and clear of liens, encumbrances, or other presumptions against their property rights by foreign corporations operating under conditions of self-interested fraud.

BLM employees are here to provide “essential governmental services”. Those services do not include acting as undeclared commercial mercenaries operating under color of law and against the best interests of their employers and benefactors. Any federal employee offering to harm or interfere in the normal occupations of their employers, that is, the people of this country, or to prohibit their employer’s customary use of the land and resources they are heir to is acting as an Outlaw in contempt of the Public Law and the actual Constitution and is subject to arrest under the Bounty Hunter provisions of the United States Statutes-at-Large.

Being employed by BLM like being employed by JC PENNY confers no special authority, grants no immunity, and is not a license to undertake any activity that would otherwise be unlawful—including trespassing on private property, making fraudulent claims, and racketeering under armed force.  The rule for federal employees and law enforcement officials including “Federal State” and “Federal County” officials is that if you can’t do it in your private capacity, you can’t do it at all.

Members of the Press Corps are similarly reminded of their responsibility to safeguard public safety and obey the Public Law, including their obligation not to incite, misrepresent, or engage in insurrection against the lawful government of the people, by the people, and for the people. This is not a country of the corporation, by the corporation or for the corporation.  Anyone needing to be reminded of that fact should question both their education and their sanity.

The highest Law Officer in this country is the County Sheriff who has accepted the public office, received his bond, and taken his Oath. He is enabled to deputize as many men as he needs to enforce the Public Law within the borders of his county and may require the use of any and all equipment and facilities paid for with public funds in pursuit of these ends. He works directly for the people of his county and is accountable only to them.

All federal employees are guests of the people of each county and state.  So long as they pursue their lawful duties and do not inappropriately presume upon, threaten, harass, or otherwise offer to harm their hosts, over-reach their lawful jurisdiction, or make false claims against land assets they are owed safe conduct and support.  The moment they breach the peace, break the Public Law, offer contempt against the Constitution, engage in operations under color of law—including trespass on private property, cattle rustling, armed racketeering and so on, they are subject to arrest like any common felon.

The people of this country are the employers, benefactors, and Priority Creditors of all federal corporations, all federal employees, all federal contractors, and all federal officials. The people did not grant their hirelings any power to harass them, indebt them, mischaracterize them, change their political status, seize upon their property, defraud them, trespass upon them, or engage in any other criminal activity whatsoever.

It must be squarely recognized that the burning of barns is arson.  The theft and removal of livestock is cattle rustling.  The bringing of false claims of indebtedness and obligation is fraud.  The presentation of weapons, especially tactical weapons, employed in any of these activities is assault and attempted racketeering under force by undeclared private mercenary forces.  It is now easy to recognize that these are crimes masquerading as “law enforcement”.

The private in-house laws of corporations must remain in accord with the Public Law or those corporations must be liquidated as crime syndicates and their assets distributed to those they have harmed and to their lawful creditors.  This includes the BLM, the UNITED STATES, the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, the STATE OF OREGON, or any other corporation found to be operating in violation of the Public Law and their own charter.

Any questions may be addressed to:

Judge Anna Maria Riezinger
(907) 250-5087
Judge Bruce Doucette
(720) 338-0394


Twilight of the Courts: The Elusive Search for Justice in the American Police State

06/06/2017

http://mailchi.mp/rutherford/commentary-twilight-of-the-courts-the-elusive-search-for-justice-in-the-american-police-state?e=84f74f6a6a

 

By John W. Whitehead

“As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air – however slight – lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.”—Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

We have entered a new regime and it’s called the American police state.

As the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in County of Los Angeles vs. Mendez makes clear, Americans can no longer rely on the courts to mete out justice.

Continuing its disturbing trend of siding with police in cases of excessive use of force, a unanimous Court declared that police should not be held liable for recklessly firing 15 times into a shack where a homeless couple—Angel and Jennifer Mendez—was sleeping.

Understandably, the Mendezes were startled by the intruders, so much so that Angel was holding his BB gun, which he used to shoot rats, in defense. Despite the fact that police barged into the Mendez’s backyard shack without a search warrant and without announcing their presence and fired 15 shots at the couple, who suffered significant injuries (Angel Mendez suffered numerous gunshot wounds, one of which required the amputation of his right leg below the knee, and his wife Jennifer was shot in the back), the Court once again gave the police a “get out of jail free” card.

Unfortunately, we’ve been traveling this dangerous road for a long time now.

In the police state being erected around us, the police and other government agents can probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts.

Whether it’s police officers breaking through people’s front doors and shooting them dead in their homes or strip searching motorists on the side of the road, these instances of abuse are continually validated by a judicial system that kowtows to virtually every police demand, no matter how unjust, no matter how in opposition to the Constitution.

These are the hallmarks of the emerging American police state: where police officers, no longer mere servants of the people entrusted with keeping the peace, are part of an elite ruling class dependent on keeping the masses corralled, under control, and treated like suspects and enemies rather than citizens.

While the First Amendment—which gives us a voice—is being muzzled, the Fourth Amendment—which protects us from being bullied, badgered, beaten, broken and spied on by government agents—is being disemboweled.

A review of critical court rulings over the past decade or so, including some ominous ones by the U.S. Supreme Court, reveals a startling and steady trend towards pro-police state rulings by an institution concerned more with establishing order and protecting the ruling class and government agents than with upholding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Police can stop, arrest and search citizens without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. In a 5-3 ruling in Utah v. Strieff, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively gave police a green light to embark on a fishing expedition of one’s person and property, rendering Americans completely vulnerable to the whims of any cop on the beat.

In a blistering dissent in Utah v. Strieff, Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasted the court for holding “that the discovery of a warrant for an unpaid parking ticket will forgive a police officer’s violation of your Fourth Amendment rights.” Sotomayor continued:

This Court has allowed an officer to stop you for whatever reason he wants—so long as he can point to a pretextual justification after the fact. That justification must provide specific reasons why the officer suspected you were breaking the law, but it may factor in your ethnicity, where you live, what you were wearing, and how you behaved. The officer does not even need to know which law you might have broken so long as he can later point to any possible infraction—even one that is minor, unrelated, or ambiguous.

The indignity of the stop is not limited to an officer telling you that you look like a criminal. The officer may next ask for your “consent” to inspect your bag or purse without telling you that you can decline. Regardless of your answer, he may order you to stand “helpless, perhaps facing a wall with [your] hands raised.” If the officer thinks you might be dangerous, he may then “frisk” you for weapons. This involves more than just a pat down. As onlookers pass by, the officer may “‘feel with sensitive fingers every portion of [your] body. A thorough search [may] be made of [your] arms and armpits, waistline and back, the groin and area about the testicles, and entire surface of the legs down to the feet.’”

If you still can’t read the writing on the wall, Sotomayor breaks it down further: “This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants—even if you are doing nothing wrong… So long as the target is one of the many millions of people in this country with an outstanding arrest warrant, anything the officer finds in a search is fair game for use in a criminal prosecution. The officer’s incentive to violate the Constitution thus increases…”

Police officers can stop cars based on “anonymous” tips or for “suspicious” behavior such as having a reclined car seat or driving too carefully. In a 5-4 ruling in Navarette v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that police officers can, under the guise of “reasonable suspicion,” stop cars and question drivers based solely on anonymous tips, no matter how dubious, and whether or not they themselves witnessed any troubling behavior. More recently, in State v. Howard, the Kansas Supreme Court declared that motorists who recline their car seats are guilty of suspicious behavior and can be subject to warrantless searches by police. That ruling, coupled with other court rulings upholding warrantless searches and seizures by police—for such “suspicious” behavior as having acne scars, driving with a stiff upright posture, having car windows that are too heavily tinted, driving too fast, driving too slow, failing to maintain speed, following too closely, improper lane changes, distracted driving, screeching a car’s tires, leaving a parked car door open for too long, avoiding a traffic light by driving through a parking lot, driving near a bar or on a road that has large amounts of drunk driving, driving a certain make of car (Mercedes, Grand Prix and Hummers are among the most ticketed vehicles), having anything dangling from the rearview mirror (air fresheners, handicap parking permits, toll transponders or rosaries), or displaying pro-police bumper stickers—renders one’s car a Constitution-free zone.

Police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits. In Plumhoff v. Rickard, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that police officers who used deadly force to terminate a car chase were immune from a lawsuit. The officers were accused of needlessly resorting to deadly force by shooting multiple times at a man and his passenger in a stopped car, killing both individuals.

Police can “steal” from Americans who are innocent of any wrongdoing. In refusing to hear a challenge to Texas’ asset forfeiture law, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed Texas police to keep $201,000 in ill-gotten cash primarily on the basis that the seized cash—the proceeds of a home sale—was being transported on a highway associated with illegal drug trade, despite any proof of illegal activity by the owner. Asset forfeiture laws, which have come under intense scrutiny and criticism in recent years, allow the police to seize property “suspected” of being connected to criminal activity without having to prove the owner of the property is guilty of a criminal offense.

Americans have no protection against mandatory breathalyzer tests at a police checkpoint, although mandatory blood draws violate the Fourth Amendment (Birchfield v. North Dakota). Police can also conduct sobriety and “information-seeking” checkpoints (Illinois v. Lidster and Mich. Dep’t of State Police v. Sitz).

Police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime. In Maryland v. King, a divided U.S. Supreme Court determined that a person arrested for a crime who is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty must submit to forcible extraction of their DNA. Once again the Court sided with the guardians of the police state over the defenders of individual liberty in determining that DNA samples may be extracted from people arrested for “serious” offenses. While the Court claims to have made its decision based upon concerns of properly identifying criminal suspects upon arrest, what they actually did is open the door for a nationwide dragnet of suspects targeted via DNA sampling.

Police can use the “fear for my life” rationale as an excuse for shooting unarmed individuals. Upon arriving on the scene of a nighttime traffic accident, an Alabama police officer shot a driver exiting his car, mistakenly believing the wallet in his hand to be a gun. From the time the driver stumbled out of his car, waving his wallet in the air, to the time he was shot in the abdomen, only six seconds had elapsed. Although the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals concluded “that a reasonable officer in Hancock’s position would have feared for his life,” the video footage makes clear that the courts continue to march in lockstep with the police, because no reasonable person would shoot first and ask questions later. A report by the Justice Department found that half of the unarmed people shot by one police department over a seven-year span were “shot because the officer saw something (like a cellphone) or some action (like a person pulling at the waist of their pants) and misidentified it as a threat.”

Police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes.” In Florida v. Harris, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court determined that police officers may use highly unreliable drug-sniffing dogs to conduct warrantless searches of cars during routine traffic stops. In doing so, the justices sided with police by claiming that all that the police need to do to prove probable cause for a search is simply assert that a drug detection dog has received “proper” training. The ruling turns man’s best friend into an extension of the police state, provided the use of a K-9 unit takes place within a reasonable amount of time (Rodriguez v. United States).

Not only are police largely protected by qualified immunity, but police dogs are also off the hook for wrongdoing. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a police officer who allowed a police dog to maul a homeless man innocent of any wrongdoing. The case arose in 2010 after a police dog attacked a homeless man near an abandoned house where police were tracking a robbery suspect. The cop refused to call off the dog immediately, despite the man’s pleading and the fact that he did not match the description of the robbery suspect. The homeless man suffered deep bites on his hand, arm and thigh—which required a nearly 16-inch skin graft—as well as causing severe bleeding, bruising, swelling and an arterial blood clot. Incredibly, not only did the court declare that the police officer was protected by qualified immunity, which incentivizes government officials to violate constitutional rights without fear of repercussion, but it had the nerve to suggest that being mauled by a police dog is the equivalent of a lawful Terry stop in which police may stop and hold a person for questioning on the basis of “reasonable suspicion.”

Police can subject Americans to strip searches, no matter the “offense.” A divided U.S. Supreme Court actually prioritized making life easier for overworked jail officials over the basic right of Americans to be free from debasing strip searches. In its 5-4 ruling in Florence v. Burlington, the Court declared that any person who is arrested and processed at a jail house, regardless of the severity of his or her offense (i.e., they can be guilty of nothing more than a minor traffic offense), can be subjected to a strip search by police or jail officials, which involves exposing the genitals and the buttocks. This “license to probe” is now being extended to roadside stops, as police officers throughout the country have begun performing roadside strip searches—some involving anal and vaginal probes—without any evidence of wrongdoing and without a warrant.

Police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home. In an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King, the U.S. Supreme Court placed their trust in the discretion of police officers, rather than in the dictates of the Constitution, when they gave police greater leeway to break into homes or apartments without a warrant. Despite the fact that the police in question ended up pursuing the wrong suspect, invaded the wrong apartment and violated just about every tenet that stands between us and a police state, the Court sanctioned the warrantless raid, leaving Americans with little real protection in the face of all manner of abuses by police.

Police can use knock-and-talk tactics as a means of sidestepping the Fourth Amendment. Aggressive “knock and talk” practices have become thinly veiled, warrantless exercises by which citizens are coerced and intimidated into “talking” with heavily armed police who “knock” on their doors in the middle of the night. Poor Andrew Scott didn’t even get a chance to say no to such a heavy-handed request before he was gunned down by police who pounded aggressively on the wrong door at 1:30 a.m., failed to identify themselves as police, and then repeatedly shot and killed the man when he answered the door while holding a gun in self-defense.

Police can interrogate minors without parents present. In a devastating ruling that could very well do away with what little Fourth Amendment protections remain to public school students and their families—the U.S. Supreme Court threw out a lower court ruling in Camreta v. Greene, which required government authorities to secure a warrant, a court order or parental consent before interrogating students at school. The ramifications are far-reaching, rendering public school students as wards of the state. Once again, the courts sided with law enforcement against the rights of the people.

It’s a crime to not identify yourself when a policeman asks your name. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, a majority of the high court agreed that refusing to answer when a policeman asks “What’s your name?” can rightfully be considered a crime under Nevada’s “stop and identify” statute. No longer will Americans, even those not suspected of or charged with any crime, have the right to remain silent when stopped and questioned by a police officer.

Police can carry out no-knock raids if they believe announcing themselves would be dangerous. Police can perform a “no-knock” raid as long as they have a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile or give occupants a chance to destroy evidence of a crime (Richards v. Wisconsin). Legal ownership of a firearm is also enough to justify a no-knock raid by police (Quinn v. Texas). For instance, a Texas man had his home subject to a no-knock, SWAT-team style forceful entry and raid based solely on the suspicion that there were legally-owned firearms in his household. The homeowner was actually shot by police through his closed bedroom door.

The military can arrest and detain American citizens. In refusing to hear Hedges v. Obama (2014), a legal challenge to the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the President and the U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals, including American citizens. In so doing, the high court also passed up an opportunity to overturn its 1944 Korematsu v. United States ruling allowing for the internment of Japanese-Americans in concentration camps.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we are dealing with a nationwide epidemic of court-sanctioned police violence carried out against individuals posing little or no real threat, who are nevertheless subjected to such excessive police force as to end up maimed or killed.

When all is said and done, what these assorted court rulings add up to is a disconcerting government mindset that interprets the Constitution one way for the elite—government entities, the police, corporations and the wealthy—and uses a second measure altogether for the under-classes—that is, you and me.

This commentary is also available at http://www.rutherford.org.

ABOUT JOHN WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (Select Books, 2015) is available online at http://www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Click here to read more of John Whitehead’s commentaries.

PUBLICATION GUIDELINES AND REPRINT PERMISSION

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission. Click here to download a print quality image of John W. Whitehead.


Comparing the Articles and the Constitution

06/05/2017

https://www.usconstitution.net/constconart.html

A PRIMER FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO AMERICA

The United States has operated under two constitutions. The first, The Articles of Confederation, was in effect from March 1, 1781, when Maryland ratified it. The second, The Constitution, replaced the Articles when it was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

The two documents have much in common – they were established by the same people (sometimes literally the same exact people, though mostly just in terms of contemporaries). But they differ more than they do resemble each other, when one looks at the details. Comparing them can give us insight into what the Framers found important in 1781, and what they changed their minds on by 1788.

The following is a comparison, detailing the similarities and differences between the Constitution and the Articles. The topic page for The Articles and the Constitution Explained Page may also be of some interest.

Formal name of the nation
Articles: The United States of America
Constitution: (not specified, but referred to in the Preamble as “the United States of America”)

Legislature
Articles: Unicameral, called Congress
Constitution: Bicameral, called Congress, divided into the House of Representatives and the Senate

Members of Congress
Articles: Between two and seven members per state
Constitution: Two Senators per state, Representatives apportioned according to population of each state

Voting in Congress
Articles: One vote per state
Constitution: One vote per Representative or Senator

Appointment of members
Articles: All appointed by state legislatures, in the manner each legislature directed
Constitution: Representatives elected by popular vote, Senators appointed by state legislatures

Term of legislative office
Articles: One year
Constitution: Two years for Representatives, six for Senators

Term limit for legislative office
Articles: No more than three out of every six years
Constitution: None

Congressional Pay
Articles: Paid by states
Constitution: Paid by the federal government

When Congress is not in session…
Articles: A Committee of States had the full powers of Congress
Constitution: The President can call for Congress to assemble

Chair of legislature
Articles: President of Congress
Constitution: Speaker of the House of Representatives, Vice President is President of the Senate

Executive
Articles: None
Constitution: President

National Judiciary
Articles: Maritime judiciary established
Constitution: Federal judiciary established, including Supreme Court

Adjudicator of disputes between states
Articles: Congress
Constitution: Supreme Court

New States
Articles: Admitted upon agreement of nine states (special exemption provided for Canada)
Constitution: Admitted upon agreement of Congress

Amendment
Articles: When agreed upon by all states
Constitution: When agreed upon by three-fourths of all states

Navy
Articles: Congress authorized to build a navy; states authorized to equip warships to counter piracy
Constitution: Congress authorized to build a navy; states not allowed to keep ships of war

Army
Articles: Congress to decide on size of force and to requisition troops from each state according to population
Constitution: Congress authorized to raise and support armies

Power to coin money
Articles: United States and the states
Constitution: United States only

Ex post facto laws
Articles: Not forbidden
Constitution: Forbidden of both the states and the Congress

Bills of attainder
Articles: Not forbidden
Constitution: Forbidden of both the states and the Congress

Taxes
Articles: Apportioned by Congress, collected by the states
Constitution: Laid and collected by Congress

Ratification
Articles: Unanimous consent required
Constitution: Consent of nine states required

 

Constitutional Topic: Federalism

https://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_fedr.html

The Constitutional Topics pages at the USConstitution.net site are presented to delve deeper into topics than can be provided on the Glossary Page or in the FAQ pages. This Topic Page concerns Federalism. Federalism is not mentioned explicitly in the Constitution, but federalism is one of the many concepts that the Constitution embodies.

There are three major types of government in the place in the world today. The most prevalent is the unitary system. In a unitary system, power is held at the national level, with very little power being held in political subdivisions, such as provinces, counties, parishes, or towns. The least common is the confederation. Confederations are unions of equal states, with some power being held at the national level. Generally, it has been found that conflicting interests lead to the break-down of confederations.

The third major system is the federal system. In a federal system, the national government holds significant power, but the smaller political subdivisions also hold significant power. The United States, Canada, Australia, and Brazil are examples of federal systems.

Is any one of these better than the other? That is a matter of opinion. Suffice it to say that each has its positives and negatives, and as such, the choice for which to use in any particular nation depends on the nation, its people, its existing political subdivisions. The United States was a series of colonies under the British unitary system; upon the execution of the Revolution, the United States became a confederation under the Articles of Confederation; and when that system proved unsuccessful, it was transformed into a federal system by the Constitution.

Federal systems are chosen for a number of reasons. The size of the nation might be one concern; the diversity of the political subdivisions might be another. The United States combines a bit of both: the size of the continental United States made a unitary system unwieldy, and the diverse interests of the states made confederation impossible. Nations like Switzerland have a population split by language, and despite its small size, found federalism to be a better choice than the others. China, being an extremely large and extremely diverse nation, finds the unitary system more suited to its political ideology. However, communism does not require a unitary system: the former USSR was a federation, at least in its internal structure.

Federalism in the United States has evolved quite a bit since it was first implemented in 1787. In that time, two major kinds of federalism have dominated political theory.

The first, dual federalism, holds that the federal government and the state governments are co-equals, each sovereign. In this theory, parts of the Constitution are interpreted very narrowly, such as the 10th Amendment, the Supremacy Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Commerce Clause. In this narrow interpretation, the federal government has jurisdiction only if the Constitution clearly grants such. In this case, there is a very large group of powers belonging to the states, and the federal government is limited to only those powers explicitly listed in the Constitution.

The second, cooperative federalism, asserts that the national government is supreme over the states, and the 10th Amendment, the Supremacy Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Commerce Clause have entirely different meaning. A good illustration of the wide interpretation of these parts of the Constitution is exemplified by the Necessary and Proper Clause’s other common name: the Elastic Clause.

Dual federalism is not completely dead, but for the most part, the United States’ branches of government operate under the presumption of a cooperative federalism. The shift from dual to cooperative was a slow one, but it was steady.

One of the earliest examples of a shift was in the Supreme Court’s Gibbons v. Ogden decision, which ruled in 1824 that Congress’s right to regulate commerce under the Commerce Clause could be “exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations, other than those prescribed in the constitution…” The Court did not expand the powers of the national government much over the next century. But in the 1930’s, a wave of feeling of social injustice began to sweep the nation as the Depression began. Federal laws concerning labor, civil rights, and civil liberties began to take on a new priority. National laws, and amendments to the Constitution, have taken away many powers from the states, such as the ability to significantly restrict voting rights or the ability to draw political districts at the whim of political party bosses.

Some advocate a return to an emphasis on dual federalism as a returning of power to a government closer to the people, and hence under better popular control. There are many problems with this, however, as many states found in the Reagan era. President Reagan was a strong advocate of states rights, and wanted to return many of the powers taken up by the federal government to the states. But in many cases, this created more bureaucracy, as each of the 50 states had to establish offices to administer programs the federal government handed over. Worse, the transition was often unfunded, meaning that the costs of the programs were shifted to the states, but federal taxes were not reduced accordingly, leading to a higher tax burden on the people as states raised taxes to fund the programs. Worse, when federal taxes were cut, federal aid to the states that did exist was cut as well.

But despite the appeal of cooperative federalism, there is an on-going appeal to a degree of dual federalism. The failure of President Bill Clinton’s national health care initiatives is a perfect example of an area of politics that the people feel is best held more closely, in spite of some of the benefits of a national system.

Regardless of the kind of federalism current the Constitution does provide some very specific powers to both the states and the federal government. These powers are traditionally divided into three categories.

Reserved powers are those that have been reserved specifically for the states or are of a traditionally state scope. These consist mostly of police powers, such as providing fire and police protection, establishment of health regulations, licensing, and education.

Granted powers, also known as express, enumerated, implied, delegated, and inherent powers, are those specifically listed in Article 1, Section 8, such as the power to coin money, to raise an army and navy, to provide for patent and copyright protections, to establish a post office, and to make treaties and war with other nations. An express, delegated, or enumerated power is one specifically listed; an implied or inherent power is one that exists to carry out an express or enumerated power. For example, Congress can raise an army; this implies the ability to specify regulations concerning who can join the army.

Concurrent powers are those held to some extent by both the federal and state governments. Both, for example, have taxation power, the ability to construct and maintain roads, and other spending for the general welfare.

Many things are denied of both or either levels of government. States, for example, have no authority to coin money or wage war. Neither may pass a bill of attainder or any ex post facto law. Much of the Bill of Rights applies restrictions to both states and the federal government, while all of the Bill of Rights applies restrictions to the federal government. Note that the Bill of Rights originally had no effect of restriction on the states, but judicial interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s due process clause has incorporated much of the upholding of civil rights to the states.

As usual, the Internet has a wealth of information about lots of topics, including federalism. Here are just a few:

The Constitution For The United States
Its Sources and Its Application

http://www.barefootsworld.net/constit1.html

 

Index

 

Preface

 

Preamble

 

Article I

 

Article II

 

Article III

 

Article IV

 

Article V

 

Article VI

 

Article VII

 

Letter of Transmittal

 

Ratification

 

1st 12 Amendment Proposals

 

“Bill of Rights” Amend. I – X

 

Amend. XI -XXVII

 

This HTML Edition of The Constitution for the United States of America is taken with changes from:
“The Constitution of the United States, Its Sources and Its Application”
by Thomas James Norton, published by the Committee for Constitutional Government,
First printed circa 1922, last known publishing date circa 1969
HTML Edition Copyright 1996 — Barefoot Bob
Mirroring is not Netiquette without the Express Permission of Barefoot Bob

Published before the beginning of the “Socializing of America” in 1933, it is the best and most edifying rendition of our Foundation Document that I have found to clarify the intent of the Founders and the understanding of “We the People”, the Sovereign Citizens of the United States of America.

In this HTML Edition the Text of the Constitution is presented one phrase at a time, immediately followed by the history and reasons for the inclusion of that particular phrase in the Constitution, with reference links to other pertinent data contained elsewhere in the text.

Presented to the Sovereign Citizens of the United States of America
and the Sovereign Citizens of the WEB as a Work of Love

My Appreciation to RHC and to RLG, Patriots and Sovereign Citizens, for their encouragement and assistance and to “Pop”, Dean Lewis Hardison, who taught me the importance of our Constitution.

Preface

We the People of the United States, menaced for the past 100 years by collectivist trends, must seek Revival of Our Strength by re-Educating Ourselves in the Spiritual Foundations, Principles and Ideals which are the bedrock of our Republic, the Principle and Conviction of the Sacredness of every Human Life, and in the understanding of Our Responsibilities in the care and maintenance of those Foundations. To that end is this HTML Edition presented.

“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” —-George Washington, speech of January 7, 1790 in the Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790

“The establishment of our institutions,” wrote President Monroe, “forms the most important epoch that history hath recorded. They extend unexampled felicity to the whole body of our fellow-citizens, and are the admiration of other nations. To preserve and hand them down in their utmost purity to the remotest ages will require the existence and practice of virtues and talents equal to those which were displayed in acquiring them. It is ardently hoped and confidently believed that these will not be wanting.”

In this era of world-wide social and political change, it behooves us, as never before, to know the fundamentals of our Constitution which, in times of stress as well as in peace, has provided the American people with a more enduring and practical government, and a greater degree of prosperity that any other people have ever had.

It is well to remember the words of James Madison as we search for Truth in Self-Government and in Our Understanding of this Great Document of Liberty, Freedom, Justice and Prosperity.

“A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” — James Madison letter to W. T. Barry, August 4, 1822

“In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion,” wrote Washington in his Farewell Address, “it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.”

Therefore, the purpose of this presentation is to make accessible to every citizen and his posterity such knowledge of the Constitution For The United States as will serve him well, in peace or war. But the means of acquiring the information essential to stalwart citizenship has never before been available to the mass of people in as practical and simple form as this presentation on the internet.

“Almost every provision in that instrument [The Constitution],” said a great jurist, ” has a history that must be understood before the brief and sententious language employed can be comprehended in the relations its authors intended.”

The simple plan of this presentation is to explain the Constitution by a note to every line or clause that has a story or drama from history back of it, or that has contributed during the -1672 years of our life under this document to the welfare of mankind. This method leaves the test of the Constitution and the Amendments in unbroken connection, so that the whole design is plainly seen as the explanation appears immediately under the part to be explained. In addition to showing the historic sources of particular provisions of the Constitution examples are also given to the application of the clauses in great matters which have arisen during our nation’s life. These decisions of the courts are brought down to the present day. They illustrate very clearly that the man in power has undergone no change and that without the prohibitions of the Constitution and the means of giving them immediate effect he would become as dangerous as he ever was to the safety of the government and to the rights and liberties of the people.

One who reads and studies closely the full explanation in the text will discover that each clause or word in the Constitution was carefully designed to protect the individual — his life, his liberty and his property. By a few, the erroneous belief has been spread that the Constitution is a barrier in the way of American progress. Actually the Constitution is a coat of mail which man himself has fashioned for his own protection, and which he has changed from time to time that the protection might be the more complete — protection against the abuse of power by his servants in the legislature or Congress, whom he may dismiss at election time or by impeachment, and against whose invasion of his rights he can appeal to the courts; against his executive officers, whom he may dismiss by impeachment or ballot; against his judges, whom he may remove for lack of “good behavior.” His government is not his master, as the king or dictator has always been, but his servant.”

“In questions of power then,” wrote Jefferson, “let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

The Founders of the Republic feared parties of the people as much as they did a royal government. “Whenever there is an interest and power to do wrong,” wrote Madison to Jefferson in 1788, “wrong will generally be done, and not less readily by a powerful and interested party than by a powerful and interested prince.”

The notes which are to follow will disclose the truth of that statement. See Also “Undermining the Constitution – A History of Lawless Government”

There is no more interesting fact to be learned about our Constitution than that of its influence upon the nations of the world. While Americcans know in a general way that under their Constitution thirteen scattered agricultural communities have developed into a nation of fifty states of the most varied resources, with the highest social and educational advantages, they are not aware that our Constitution has been copied in whole or in part throughout the earth. “The Republic of the United States,” states Lord Bryce, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary at Washington from Great Britain from 1907 to 1913, author of “The American Commonwealth” (1888) and professor of civil (Roman) law in the University of Oxford from 1870 to 1893, writing (“Studies in History and Jurisprudence”, Vol. 1, p.168) of what he called a “rigid” constitution — one like ours, which can be changed only by a method different from that whereby other laws are enacted or repealed — “has not only presented the most remarkable instance of this type in the modern world, but has by its success become a pattern which other republics have imitated. . . . The constitutions of all the forty-five [now 50] States of the Union are rigid, being not alterable by the legislatures of those States respectively. This is also true of the Constitution of the Dominion of Canada, which is alterable only by the Imperial Parliament. Mexico and the five republics of Central America, together with the nine republics of South America, have all adapted constitutions which their legislatures have not received power to change.”

The Commonwealth of Australia adopted a constitution (1900) following ours more closely even that that of Canada (1867) did; and in 1909, after the Boer War, the Union of South Africa adopted a similar constitution, but owing to the diversity of the races and interests which were united, it does not follow the American model so closely as do those of Canada and Australia. France, Belgium, and Switzerland have put in their constitutions many provisions first employed in ours; but to the extent that other countries have failed to follow the Constitution of the United States their governmental structures are weak, as the study of the notes will reveal.

It is to be seen, further, that the underlying principles of our Constitution were not formulated in a day. When our forefathers declared their independence some of the colonists had lived under written charters from the English Crown for one hundred sixty-nine years, or three-fourths as long as the -1672 years we have lived under the present Constitution. During that long term many of the Colonies were practically self-governed. The English historian Lecky (“England in the Eighteenth Century”) says that all of them enjoyed greater privileges in this respect than did the English people themselves. It will be seen from a study of the notes that many leading principles of the Constitution were adoptions or adaption’s of what the colonists had worked out in experience while they were subjects of the English government; and that after the Declaration of Independence the States framed constitutions of their own from which many important provisions were borrowed by the Constitutional Convention and made a part of our fundamental law. Many other provisions of our Constitution merely state principles of English law as the colonists thought that they should be applied in the new day.

Thus, in 1780, seven years before the Constitution was drafted, Massachusetts put in its Constitution what became the classic statement of the American theory of the division of governmental powers:

“In the government of this commonwealth the legislative department shall never exercise the executive and judicial powers, or either of them; the executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them; the judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them — to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men.”

Nearly a year before the Constitutional Convention sat James Madison began working out what was called “the Virginia plan” of a form of government. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina took with him to the Convention a carefully drafted plan. Alexander Hamilton of New York had drawn such an elaborate scheme of government “that,” says Taylor (“Origin and Growth of the American Constitution”), “it might have gone into effect the next day if it had been adopted.” Other plans and suggestions almost without number were presented to the Convention. Taylor says that the three plans mentioned were the real basis of the Convention’s work, that they were restatements of principles contained in a document published in Philadelphia by Pelatiah Webster in 1783.

In addition to this careful preparation after more than a century of self-government, there were in the Convention men of extraordinary natural ability and wide experience, like Washington, Franklin, Hamilton and Madison. There were men who had studied law at the Inner Temple in London, who had been educated in the University of Edinburgh, who had been graduated from American colleges, who had been governors of States, chief justices of supreme courts, and men who had achieved distinction at the bar and in business life. Edmund Burke stated in the House of Commons in March 1776, that more books of law were going to America than of any other kind. Of the fifty-five members of the Constitutional Convention, thirty-one were lawyers. Blackstone’s Commentaries were taught by Chancellor Wythe in William and Mary College before the Declaration of Independence. John Marshall, Thomas Jefferson, and James Monroe were among his pupils.

When our Constitution was written Harvard College (1636) had been sending out educated young men for just a century and a half, William and Mary College (1693) had been graduating learned youths for almost a century, Yale College (1701) had been contributing to the education of the people for more than three quarters of a century, and Princeton (1746) had been teaching for half a century. The people were well prepared for their great endeavor.

The task of the Constitutional Convention was not to construct a government from the foundation up. There had already been firmly set by experience thirteen base-stones in the form of State republican governments. Upon these, and for the benefit of their population as a whole, the National structure was placed. This super-government was to deal with foreign nations, and also to administer at home all matters of National (as distinguished from State or local) character. The National government was to be supreme in its domain, and the State governments were to be sovereign in all affairs not National or foreign. As will be seen, this duality, while conducing to a happy balancing of governmental powers, has at the same time been the strongest force in political and material advancement. For the Nation has learned from the States, as they have learned from one another and from the Nation. Many changes have been brought about by the action of States which might never have resulted were action by the whole people called for in the first place. Of the numerous illustrations which might be given of the effect of State action upon National opinion perhaps the best is found in the laws (local option or prohibitory) restricting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors. Without precedent action and demonstration by the States the Eighteenth Amendment would not been adopted. This observation may be repeated as womanhood suffrage, the trial of which in many States led to the Nineteenth Amendment. In many ways the competition of the States has been vitalizing and progressive. It is a question whether a vast republic not having such political subdivisions could long stand.

It is not generally mentioned that our present fundamental law is the second written form of government of the United States. The first was called the Articles of Confederation. The Articles went into effect as a government of “the United States of America” in 1781.. In 1777, less than a year after the Declaration of Independence, the Articles which had been drafted were adopted by the Convention chosen by the Continental Congress 1 to frame them. But owing mostly to disputes regarding western lands (the royal grants to the Colonies reaching westward indefinitely), the last State did not give its ratification until 1781. The Articles were so inadequate that within four years plans originated at Mount Vernon to remodel them. Washington and a company of statesmen recommended the calling of a convention the next year (1786) at Annapolis. Only five States sent representatives and, therefore, the Convention adjourned to the next year at Philadelphia. AII the States except Rhode Isand were then present by representatives. Washington, a delegate from Virginia, was chosen to preside. “Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair,” he said; “the event is in the hand of God.” The Convention, which was called to remodel the Articles of Confederation, cast them aside and drafted an entirely new instrument.

Pains have been taken in the notes to state everything simply and clearly, and as fully as the restricted space would permit.

It is recommended that the General Index, the Landmark Court Case Index and the Constitutional History of this presentation receive diligent study, and that as a matter of review, the Constitutional Quiz be taken.

For historical value the dates of the great decisions and of the leading acts of Congress have been given. Citations of volumes and pages have been omitted because they are not followed up by the run of readers and they are unpleasant to most eyes. But for the help of lawyers, and others who may wish to go beyond the text, a short table of the leading cases is presented.

Acknowledgment is due to Mr. Gardiner Lathrop of the Chicago Bar, to Mr. William DeForest Manice of the Bar of New York City, and to Mr. Blackburn Esterline of the Bar of the City of Washington for very helpful readings of the manuscript.

As stated at the outset, this explanation of the Constitution has been prepared under the conviction that the American never has had within reach the means of acquiring that knowledge which, as a citizen, he should first of all possess.

Note 1. The Continental Congress was the provisional or emergency government which was made up of delegates from the several States and which acted as their united authority from the time that the dispute with the English Government assumed its most serious aspect (1774) until the Articles of Confederation went into effect in 1781.

“In addition to the very important charge of managing the war,” said President Monroe, discussing the Continental Congress, “that Congress had under consideration at the same time the declaration of independence, the adoption of a confederation for the States, and the propriety of instituting State governments, with the nature of those governments, respecting which it had been consulted by conventions of several of the Colonies. So great a trust was never reposed before in a body thus constituted.”

Thomas James Norton.
Chicago, February, 1922

THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY

“The question whether an act repugnant to the constitution can become the law of the land is a question deeply interesting to the United States; but, happily, not of an intricacy proportioned to its interest. It seems only necessary to recognize certain principles, supposed to have been long and well established, to decide it.

“That the people have an original right to establish for their future government such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduce to their own happiness, is the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected….

“This original and supreme will organizes the government, and assigns to different departments their respective powers. It may either stop here, or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments.

“The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?

“If an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the courts, and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory; and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on.” — Chief Justice Marshall.

Whether the framers of the Constitution intended that the Supreme Court should in proper cases hold unconstitutional acts of Congress and acts of the legislatures of the States is answered Yes. (See p. 179) The subject was fully discussed not only in the Constitutional Convention, but also in the State ratifying conventions and in print. Oliver Ellsworth, in the Connecticut Convention, stated clearly the practice then intended precisely as it exists in the courts today:

“This Constitution defines the extent of the powers of the general government. If the general legislature [Congress should at any time overleap their limits the judicial department is a constitutional check. If the United States go beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void; and the judicial power, the National judges, who, to secure their impartiality, are to be made independent, will declare it to be void. On the other hand, if the States go beyond their limits, if they make a law which is a usurpation upon the Federal [National] government the law is void; and upright, independent judges will declare it to be so.”

So there has been no usurpation of this power.

“Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.” — James Madison, Primary Author of the Constitution, President of the United States, Mainstream Militant and Revolutionary

In so many instances, fueled by greed, avarice, and self-aggrandizement, Our Elected Servants have subverted the Principles of the Constitution and Its strictures on the limitation of Government.

“Time has proven the discernment of our ancestors; for even these provisions, expressed in such plain English words that it would seem the ingenuity of man could not evade them, are now after the lapse of more than seventy years, sought to be avoided. Those great and good men foresaw that troublous times would arise, when rulers and people would become restive under restraint, and seek by sharp and decisive measures to accomplish ends deemed just and proper, and that the principles of constitutional liberty would be in peril unless established by irrepealable law. The history of the world had taught them that what was done in the past might be attempted in the future.

The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” — The Supreme Court of the United States, 1866 c31

“They saw all the consequences in the principle and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle.” — James Madison

“Because if . . . [An Unalienable Natural Right of Free Men] . . . be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: It is limited with regard to the coordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free Government requires, not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained: but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the greater Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The people who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are Slaves — James Madison, June 1785.

“. . . that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.” — Thomas Jefferson’s Last Letter, June 24, 1826

“Legislators have their authority measured by the Constitution, they are chosen to do what it permits, and NOTHING MORE, and they take solemn oath to obey and support it. . . To pass an act when they are in doubt whether it does or does not violate the Constitution is to treat as of no force the most imperative obligations any person can assume.” — Judge Thomas M. Cooley

The Great Barrier to the Alienation of the Unalienable Natural Rights of All Free Men, and the Metes and Bounds of the Government of the United States, is the Constitution for the United States.

“We the People” and OUR Elected Representatives MUST adhere to Principle, ALWAYS Placing Principles Before Personalities, Educating Ourselves to the Truth.

To save our Republic, all Americans must unite!!

“The last hope of human liberty in this world rests on us. . . . If we move in mass, be it ever so circuitously, we shall attain our object; but if we break into squads, every one pursuing the path he thinks most direct, we become an easy conquest to those who can now barely hold us in check.

I repeat again, that we ought not to schismatize on either men or measures. Principles alone can justify that. If we find our government in all its branches rushing headlong, like our predecessors, into the arms of monarchy, if we find them violating our dearest rights, the trial by jury, the freedom of the press, the freedom of opinion, civil or religious, or opening on our peace of mind or personal safety the sluices of terrorism, if we see them raising standing armies, when the absence of all other danger points to these as the sole objects on which they are to be employed, then indeed let us withdraw and call the nation to its tents. But while our functionaries are wise, and honest, and vigilant, let us move compactly under their guidance, and we have nothing to fear. Things may here and there go a little wrong. It is not in their power to prevent it. But all will be right in the end, though not perhaps by the shortest means.” — Thomas Jefferson to Colonel Wm. Duane, 1811

For two centuries of unexampled social, civil, and material advancement, in which it has been the controlling force, the Constitution has applied itself, adapted itself, developed itself, amended itself, and, through the stress and shock of civil and foreign wars the like of which no other constitution ever felt, it has maintained its equilibrium. The American citizen has reason to believe that his fundamental law contains inherently what the Scriptures call “the power of an endless life.”

As the Nation enters the new Millennium the only danger seen is that which has always plagued nations, dishonest power hungry influence peddling politicians and bureaucrats whose influence is bought by the special interests,dishonest men who have, with impunity, forgotten they have taken a Sacred Oath to Defend the Constitution and the Nation against ALL enemies, Foreign and Domestic.

Against this danger, as ever, the Ultimate Defense of the Nation and the Constitution, as a Freedom Loving People and Sovereign Citizens, is entirely dependent on the resolve, the dedication and the faith of

We the People of the United States

Constitution for the United
States of America

Adopted July 2, 1788
In effect March 4, 1789

The Preamble

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States,

1 It is important to notice that this is a government of the people, not of the States. Under the Articles of Confederation, in effect as our first form of “national” government, agreed to by the Continental Congress on November 15,1777 and in force after ratification by Maryland on March 1, 1782 until the ratification of the Constitution for the United States in 1788 and George Washington’s inauguration as the nation’s first President under the Constitution on April 30, 1789, the States as political entities, and not the people, entered into “a firm league of friendship”, each State retaining “its sovereignty, freedom and independence.” The new Constitution for the United States brought in a new Nation, the United States of America, deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed.”

“The people, the highest authority known to our system,” said President Monroe, “from whom all our institutions spring and whom they depend, formed it.”

“Its language, ‘We the People,’ is the institution of one great consolidated National government of the people of all the States, instead of a government by compact with the States for its agents,” exclaimed Patrick Henry in the Virginia ratifying assembly while leading opposition to its adoption, “The people gave the [Constitutional] Convention no power to use their name.” Some States restricted the authority of their delegates to revising the Articles of Confederation. It was claimed that the casting aside of the Articles of Confederation (which could be altered or amended only by the concurrence of every State) for a constitution to become effective when adopted by nine of the thirteen States was revolutionary. It was, in fact, a coup d’Etat. Revision only was uppermost in the minds of many. On February 21, 1787, the Congress existing under the Articles called a convention “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures such alterations and provisions therein as shall, when agreed to in Congress and confirmed by the States, render the federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of government and the preservation of the Union.” But it was the belief of the Constitutional Convention that as the new instrument was to go to the people for ratification or rejection, the objections stated by Henry and others were really unimportant.

in Order to form a more perfect Union,2

2 Meaning “a more perfect union” than had been achieved by the Articles of Confederation.

“In the efficacy and permanency of your Union,” wrote Washington in his Farewell Address, “a government for the whole is indispensable. . . . Sensible of this momentous truth you have improved upon your first essay [the Articles of Confederation] by the adoption of a Constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate Union and for the efficacious management of your common concerns.”

The Union, made “more perfect” by the Constitution was nevertheless in later times said to be dissoluble at the pleasure of any State that might wish to secede. In his Farewell Address (1796) Washington had called upon the people “indignantly” to frown “upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.” To put the question beyond controversy it required a four year Civil War, after the secession of the southern States, beginning with that of South Carolina in December, 1860, following the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency in the preceding month.

In a great debate in the Senate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, the former contended that the National Government through its Supreme Court, is the ultimate expounder of its own powers, while the latter stood for what was known as States’ Rights and argued for the right of the individual State, under its reserved sovereignty 163, to determine such questions for itself, as South Carolina had done (1833) by an ordinance declaring null a tariff law of Congress. Secession, he said, was the States remedy of last resort. Of Calhoun’s theory, and of the historic facts with which it presumed to deal, President Lincoln said, in a message (July 4, 1861) to a special session of Congress called to prepare for the Civil War:

“The States have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this, they can only do so against law and by revolution. The Union [of the original thirteen independent states under the Articles of Confederation], and not they themselves procured their independence and their liberty. By conquest or purchase the Union gave each of them whatever of independence and liberty it has. The Union is older than any of the States, [other than the original thirteen independent states under the Articles of Confederation] and in fact, it created them as States.”

This is in opposition to the decision of the Supreme Court in Gordon v. United States (1864), 117 U S. 697 (703). 163

The citizen was not, under the theory of States’ Rights, in contact with the National Government. He owed allegiance to his State, and the State, in turn, dealt with the Nation. After the Civil War the Fourteenth Amendment set that theory aside by declaring: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Every citizen now owes allegiance to the Nation as well as to the State.

It is interesting to note with what singular clearness James Wilson of Pennsylvania, a scholar from Edinburgh, laid down in the Constitutional Convention the doctrine which was, eighty years later, removed from debate by the Fourteenth Amendment 171, the question under discussion being whether the State or the people should be represented in the Senate:

“A Citizen of America is a citizen of the general government, and is a Citizen of the particular State in which he may reside. . . . In Forming the general government we must forego our local habits and attachments, lay aside our State connections, and act for the general good of the whole. The general government is not an assemblage of the States, but of individuals.”

Profiting by the experience of our country, the United States of Brazil, which was established in 1890, after the overthrow of the monarchy, carefully provided, in a constitution closely copying the fundamentals of ours, for a “perpetual and indissoluble Union between former provinces into the United States of Brazil.” And in 1900, when the various provinces of Australia were united as the Commonwealth of Australia, the Constitution, also closely following ours and adopting our terms, “State”, “House of Representatives” and “Senate”, provided for an “indissoluble Federal Commonwealth”

establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, 3

3 Since the Ethical and Moral Purpose of our Constitution is to “establish Justice” to insure domestic Tranquility, guidance from moral principles such as equality before the law, the absolute right to petition for redress of grievance without resort to violence against human dignity and liberty, are constituents of “Justice”, and necessary to interpret it.

The governmental “judge” made doctrines of Sovereign Immunity and Judicial Supremacy inculcated over the last years of judicial incrementalism are untenable to the Constitution as written.

Sovereign Immunity changes the basic relationship between government and its people from one seeking moral justice under the law to one in which people have no enforceable rights and government has no enforceable limits. That concept of moral justice; of striving to establish Justice and domestic Tranquility is what distinguishes barbarian from civilized society. The Founders designed the Constitution to transform the barbarian rule we rejected as Colonies, into a civilization befitting the dignity of a free people.

The Constitution, by both its general design and its terms as written, limits government to the powers delegated. Immunity from accountability to these limited powers it injures in violation of the law is a power not delegated. The Tenth Amendment forbids it. Our Constitution is a closed legal and logical system that declares itself and the laws made pursuant to it, to be the supreme law of the land, and that is the only law that it allows. There is no room in it for “inherent sovereign immunity”.

With regard to Judicial Supremacy no clearer reason for the rejection of Judicial Supremacy can be given than the words of Thomas Jefferson in 1819:

“If this opinion [of judicial supremacy] be sound, then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de se [act of suicide]. For intending to establish three departments, coordinate and independent, that they might check and balance one another, it has given, according to this opinion, to one of them alone the right to prescribe rules for the government of the others, and to that one, too, which is unelected by and independent of the nation … The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.”

In 1820, he further clarified his rejection of the doctrine of judicial supremacy when he wrote:

“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps … And their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The constitution has erected no such single tribunal.

With respect to Supremacy, “The Supreme Law of the Land” is “The Constitution as it is written” and the laws made pursuant thereto. Its interpretations are not the supreme law of the land. They are mere interpretations that may or may not be correct, or may even be dishonest and treacherous to it.

The final arbiter therefore of the meanings of that Supreme Law can only be We The People through utilization of the amendatory processes contained therein, and through the absolute First Amendment Right of Petition for a Redress of Grievances.

Under the Articles of Confederation the expenses of the common defense were to be “defrayed out of a common treasury” supplied “by the authority and direction of the legislatures of the several states.” The Nation itself had no power of self-defense in the raising of money and in some other important respects. It turned out in practice that some of the States signally failed in emergencies to make their contributions to the “common treasury.” Indeed, only New York and Pennsylvania paid their full proportion of the costs of the Revolution. One State, which had suffered none from the ravages of war, contributed nothing. But (to illustrate the difference between a league of States and a Nation) when the United States entered World War 1 in 1917 the Congress promptly exerted its power under the Constitution and raised by the issue of Liberty Bonds, by income taxes, and by other means all the money that it needed for “the common defense.” The States as such were not concerned except in providing militia, a subject to be noticed later. So it had been in the War of 1812, in the Mexican War, in the Civil War, and in the War with Spain. The Articles of Confederation were wholly deficient in this most important of all respects, in the power of “common defense.”

promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 4

4 Comment has been made that God is not mentioned in our Constitution. In the Declaration of Independence “firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence” is expressed, and in the Articles of Confederation it is mentioned that “it has pleased the Great Governor of the world to incline the hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress to approve and to authorize us to ratify the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual union.”

The Commonwealth of Australia put in the preamble of the Constitution which it submitted to the English Parliament for approval (1900) that “Whereas, the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessings of Almighty God, have agreed to unite,” etc.

A very interesting discussion of the proposition that “this is a religious people” is contained in a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States (1892) holding that the Alien Contract Labor Law of 1885 (prohibiting the bringing in of “foreigners and aliens under contract or agreement to perform labor in the United States”), while applying to an alien brought in to perform “labor or service of any kind”, did not relate in purpose — although it did in language — to a minister of the Gospel who had been employed to come from England to accept service in a New York church. In applying the rule of statutory interpretation, that the intent of the legislature must be followed, the court said that “no purpose of action against religion could be imputed to any legislation” when the language did not clearly state it, for the reason that from the commission given by Ferdinand and Isabella to Columbus down through all the charters of the colonies, as well as in the Declaration of Independence and in the constitutions of all the States, there is to be found a “profound reverence for religion and an assumption that its influence in all human affairs is essential to the well-being of the United States.” c3

Footnote [A]: It is important to note that the words “Constitution for the United States”, “The Preamble” and the dates of adoption and effectivity do not appear on the Original Document. That document begins with the words “We The People” in much emboldened characters to emphasize that it is the People that are establishing this Constitution, followed by text in lesser case characters, “of the United States”, to further denote the Body of the Whole in Common Law. The aforementioned heading has been added to textual presentations as a document title for cataloging and reference purposes. It has no other purpose and neither carries nor implies any authority.

I have very deliberately titled this work “The Constitution for the United States” to re-iterate the wording of clause four of the “Preamble” ,i.e., “promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION for the United States of America” and to emphasize that this is a charter that “We the People” have given to the united States, and not that the States or the National Government has given to “We the People”. It is “We the People”, the Sovereign Citizens, who must, through our efforts and responsibilities, secure this Charter of Liberty, Freedom and for Responsible Government for All Future Generations.

The authority of government lies entirely and irrevocably within the Body of The Whole, “We The People”.

High Resolution Images of the Original Documents:
Sheet 1, Sheet 2, Sheet 3, Sheet 4, Sheet 5, Letter of Transmittal to the States,
Declaration of Independence, Text of Letter of Transmittal to the States, The First 12 Amendment Proposals – “The Bill of Rights”, “True Bill” of The Bill of Rights Proposals

Additional Study Links to the Constitution of the United States from Groliers Encyclopedia Americana and other sources:
Constitution of the United States, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers

An additional link to “The Flags of the Several united States” with links to State Homepages and images of each of the Flags of the Several united States and the Territories.

Olddogs Comments!

I have learned from personal experience that Governments of any kind are a source of surreptitious tyranny, and only because of the lack of an honest education system are the people kept ignorant of solutions to tyranny. There never has been and probably due to ignorance of the people, there probably never will be an honest – straight forward – comprehensible – system of co-operation between human beings. My last conclusion is, bend over and kiss your butt good-by, because greed for money and power has destroyed common sense. I personally believe that diversity has lowered humanity to some unknown new creature.