150
Years of British Criminality -- The Very Short Version
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment