150 Years of British Criminality -- The Very Short
By Anna Von Reitz
We are Third Party Beneficiaries with respect to the National Trust created in the Preamble and are indemnified in the British system under two Royal Sovereign Seals--- the seal of King George the III with respect to the delegated powers, and the seal of William Belcher with respect to the undelegated powers, otherwise known
as the Great Seal of the United States. William Belcher inherited his sovereignty as a result of the Norman Conquest of Britain and Wales. Thus, the Definitive Treaty of Peace, Paris, 1783, calls George III the "prince of the United States" and does not mention who the actual Head of State---the "king" of the United States--- was.
Later generations simply presumed it was the British Monarch, with results disastrous to them and to us. This split of delegated and undelegated powers held by two sovereigns in international jurisdiction ultimately resulted in the situation we have today, where the delegated powers are held by the British-backed United States and the undelegated powers are held by the "states and people" under the Belcher Seal and operated by the United States of America by default.
The misunderstanding about our states (and also, therefore, our state offices) comes about because people don't grasp the difference between the international
jurisdiction of the sea and the national jurisdiction of the land.
Everything discussed above, including the National Trust established by the Preamble, exists only in the
international jurisdiction of the sea and has nothing to do with our sovereignty on the land.
We have all been taught to focus on the Constitution but that is substantially a red herring in that it discusses only our position with respect to the foreign international
jurisdiction and says nothing about our own sovereign domain. This can be excused in that our land jurisdiction was never the subject of The Constitution, so why would
the Founders talk about that? We were expected to know the basis of our own sovereignty on the land, just as we were expected to know the history and protect our own Common Law Courts from British meddling.
Two centuries later, the situation speaks for itself.
As to our sovereignty on the land which vests itself in our nations called "states" for international purposes, that sovereighty derives from entirely different authorities and specifically begins with a land grant and settlement made by the King of Spain in 1778 via (yet another) Treaty of Paris. The situation was that the British King was financing both sides of the Revolution to hedge his bets--- he emerged the victor to a greater or lesser extent, either way.
The King of France was intermediary funneling funds to the Americans. The King of Spain, however, had grudges against both the King of Britain and the King of France
---- and he was in charge of the land jurisdiction worldwide, thanks to the claims of the Holy See and its "dispensations" under the Unam Sanctum Trust.
So while the Americans were concluding their treaty with France to secure what most of them believed was French support for the American Revolution, the King of Spain
quietly granted the entire continent (absent Spain's holdings of course) to the rebels via the "other" Treaty of Paris, 1778. If they could win the war, the land was already
vouchsafed to them--- and as of 1778, it was available to them to use as collateral to borrow against internationally.
This is how the Americans financed their loans from the French King who was actually acting as a pass-through agent for King George III. They wagered their
claim to the land given to them by the Spanish King and used it as collateral. If George III had won the ground war, he would have won the whole shooting match; as it was, he emerged with a tidy debt owed by the Americans and a great deal of leverage, which he used to secure the delegated powers granted to him and his proxy government in DC. The land claim passed from the Spanish King to the colonies, which in the years
immediately following the end of open hostilities with Britain (1783-1789) undertook a number of inter-colony initiatives to settle the land jurisdiction claims. This all
focused on settling the national borders of the separate nation-states, establishing trade relationships, currencies, treaties with respect to international commercial
issues, taxation, interstate travel, security of the international Post Roads and Post Offices, and similar concerns.
As for the basic grant of land jurisdiction, they issued
another trust known as The Supreme Republican Declaration of the United Colonies, grandfathering in the original thirteen colonies as a union of land jurisdiction states, and claiming all the rest of the land jurisdiction for themselves and their progeny subject to later arrangements and acquisitions.
The later arrangements were solidified by the Northwest Ordinance which provided for the orderly creation and inclusion of territories and from the territories the
creation of new nation-states which would be enabled to enter the union under the Equal Footing Doctrine. The inclusion of "other acquisitions" such as the Louisiana
Purchase and the Republic of Texas and the Spanish Settlement followed the same basic pattern of establishing a form of territorial government and later, upon
enrollment in the original union, a separate state government.
Throughout this discussion we are talking about geographically defined nations and their body politics simply called, "California" or "Wisconsin" or "Ohio". References in law books to these states always use the style "states"----- no capitalization whatsoever. These are the sovereign states from which our sovereignty on the land of this continent derives. These states are nations in the fullest sense of the word, just like Britain or France.
They are completely different and separate from any "State of __________", and in fact, the word "of" means "separate from, apart from, or belonging to", so "State of Delaware" is talking about what? The international corporation used by the actual state known as Delaware and its people to operate in international commerce.
In trade, Delaware needs no "State of _________" to conduct business within its own borders or with other unincorporated sovereign states and nations. It is only
when it wishes to engage in incorporated business transactions with the other nation-states, like the State of California, or with other countries like France, that it
needs to use an incorporated "State of ___________".
And therein lies the rub. Each state retains its right to conduct trade within its borders and also retains the
right to trade with other sovereign nations; it uses a "State of _________" corporation to operate in international commerce outside its borders--- and the
proxy "Federal Government" run by the British Monarch has delegated control of international commerce. This control is exercised by operating all incorporated
businesses in all states as franchises of the United States, Inc.
So now you know the difference between the actual land jurisdiction sovereign state and the fact that each one is in fact a separate nation, an entire country unto itself,
plus you know what the "State of _________" entity is and what it is used for and who controls it and why.
None of the states operated in international commerce until after the Civil War. At that time, The United States of America, Inc. was formed, and the original states
were forced to write new "state constitutions". Under these new constitutions (all constitutions are debt agreements) the corporation used by the actual sovereign
state was obliged to operate under names styled like this: California State, Wyoming State, Florida State. Meanwhile, the name "State of California" and "State of Wyoming", etc. was "adopted" by totally different entities under new ownership.This switch and the use of the same old names applied to different corporate entities led up to the greatest fraud in human history. The "State of Illinois" prior to the Civil War was an entirely different beastie and under completely different ownership that the "State of Illinois" after the Civil War and the same pattern applies across the
whole country. There is a state constitution prior to the Civil War and a new state constitution after the Civil War.
Fast forward again to the 1930's. FDR is working as liaison for the United States, Inc. at the Geneva Conventions, May, 1930. As a business ploy, the G-5 nations
agree by private treaty to bankrupt their "international corporations" and discharge all debts left over from the First World War. Three years later, Roosevelt, now elected President of the United States, carries through by sleigh of hand and deceptive wordsmithing, sets up a constructive
fraud by which the California State, Illinois State and other land jurisdiction corporations are "assumed" to be sureties standing good for the debts of the United States, Inc. even though they are owned and operated by the United States of America, Inc. This isn't a corporate take-over. It's just plain old commercial fraud in which false claims are made against the assets of a Third Party and false assumptions then lead to that innocent victim being charged for the debt via a process of commercial liens and titles and hypothecation of debt.
The American states and people were raped, pillaged, and plundered by the United States, Inc. and the British Crown from 1930 to 1999, when all debts of the
bankruptcy of the United States of America were discharged and settled and our "States" doing business as "California State" and "Wisconsin State" were left derelict
and adrift, mere shells ---- and in exactly the same condition as a man recovering from bankruptcy.
All this was accomplished in Breach of Trust and Commercial Contract by the British Monarch and the British Government operating under color of law on our land, pretending to be our friends, allies, and protectors.
As a result of their vicious fraud our State corporations were left in financial ruin, butlike a man recovering from bankruptcy, not dead. The vermin responsible for palming off their odious debts on us have tried by every
means to "finish us off" in the intervening years, without success.
All this history is necessary for you to know before I can answer your "simple" question about the oaths of office owed to our actual States.The "vacated offices" that we are occupying belong to the land jurisdiction state and
are operated as offices of the formerly bankrupted "Alaska State", "California State" and so on. These offices were "vacated" during the long bankruptcy and so far as
the vermin responsible for this circumstance are concerned, it was never anticipated that they would be re-occupied by the states and the people they belong to.
During the bankruptcy these States were operated by "State of State Legislatures" functioning as Bankruptcy Trustees---- corporate con artists overseeing the rape and
the pillaging, but nonetheless "representing" the state in the position of Trustees. These legislatures operating in that capacity continued to pass "Session Laws" to
administer the affairs of the victims. Thus, for example we have Session Laws that establish the "California State" under a new "state constitution" in 1879, and we
have Session Laws established for the bankrupt entity throughout the bankruptcy. It is via the circa 1870's "constitutions" creating the Wisconsin State, Louisiana Stateand so on, that we maintain a chain of title and succession of contract back to the original Constitution and are enabled to enforce it. It is via the Session Laws related
to the "second" state constitutions that we obtain the offices and the oaths.All land jurisdiction offices are exercised under red ink. Business signatures are in
script in Upper and Lower Case. All land jurisdiction transactions are understood to be in trade, not commerce, and are not under the control of the United States. Our
business as State officials and State Citizens is all conducted under unincorporated business structures locally (hence the need for all state and county assemblies to operate as unincorporated businesses) and under undelegated powers internationally ---note the red Post Marks. All commerce is exercised in blue ink. Commercial signatures of "Account Holders" are in script in Upper and Lower Case. All sea jurisdiction transactions entered into
by US PERSONS are understood to be in commerce. You are considered to be actingas a US PERSON if you retain such a PERSON. You surrender these PERSONS via
surrendering the BC to the Secretary of the Treasury and appoint him your Fiduciary and credit the United States of America, U.S. Treasury, without recourse.That settles the issue of whether you are operating as a State Citizen or a US Citizen.
This entire history from the Civil War to date is nothing but a nasty scam designed by the British to bilk their Creditors and palm off their debts on innocent Third
Parties, but once you have the history and the names nailed down, it gets easier to comprehend.
See this article and over 400 others on Anna's website here:www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.