Sunday, August 6, 2023
4337-4340: Dear Jack -- About Confederate States, states, States, and STATES from Lincoln County Watch
By Anna Von Reitz
How many times do I have to tell you that I don't accept any foreign titles, like "Mrs." or "Mrs. Riezinger" etc.? My only Proper Person is a Lawful Person, not a Legal Person, and I want no further confusion about that fact.
A
"Confederate State" by definition is a "State of State" and always has
been. A State of State is a business organization that is either (1)
owned and operated by a State, or, (2) contracted to provide the
services of a State-of-State organization.
At no time is a "Confederate State" defined as a true State with physical borders and a living population.
All
"Confederate States" are "inchoate" or "incomplete" States due to their
nature as business organizations set apart from the physical State.
This
is why they follow the nomenclature as "State of North Carolina" for
example, which literally means "State belonging to or set apart from
North Carolina".
Even
those Insular States like Puerto Rico that have land and soil, have not
entered Statehood via the Northwest Ordinance, so their "Confederate
States" -- for example, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico -- exist only on
paper remain a "Possession of the United States".
If
you don't believe me, you are welcome to check the "Definitions"
section of the Uniform Commercial Code, older Legal Dictionaries,
Banking Dictionaries that cover Commercial jargon, American
Jurisprudence (Second Edition), Benedict's Admiralty Law, and even the
autobiography of Jefferson Davis and the numerous quotes of Abraham
Lincoln concerning the Confederation, all of which serve to clarify
exactly what "a" Confederation and a "Confederate State" is, and what
the Confederation created by The Articles of Confederation ---- was.
Your
assertion that States of States precede States, and that States derive
from states is, as usual, provably and logically wrong.
The use of the styles: "states", "States", and "STATES" is a Latin style convention.
Again,
I remind you that our official language is English. But for the sake
of the discussion, in Latin, the use of all small letters denotes the
superior party, Upper Lower case denotes indentured servitude or public
office, and the use of all capitals indicates a slave, a corporation, or
a dead man's estate.
With that generalized explanation in place, you are prepared to learn why a "state" in Latin is superior to a "State" and a "State" is superior to a "STATE".
In
the Latin system, the "state" refers to the national soil jurisdiction
formed by the contiguous counties in each physically-defined State
all joined together, while "State" refers to the international
jurisdiction defined by the land underlying the soil and is defined by
the physical borders of each State land mass.
Please note that because it underlies the soil, the land must be present and must be claimed prior to the soil, or the soil has nothing to rest upon.
So
the national jurisdiction of the soil depends on the international
jurisdiction of the land, and both are inseparably joined.
The
realm of the States-of-States lies outside physicality in the
jurisdiction of the air. In the Latin system, the STATE is a
Confederate State.
Using English conventions, we just call it the State of North Carolina, Incorporated.
Even
in the days before the so-called Civil War, the unincorporated
Confederate State-of-State was called, "The State of North Carolina".
So when you say, "Confederation" you are talking about a consortium of businesses that are allied together.
And
when you refer to each Confederate State, you are referring to an
inchoate, non-physical business that may simply be "corporate" or which
may be "incorporated" --- but in any case, is a separate business entity
quite apart from any State of the Union.
So
now that we finally know what we are talking about and know that
"Confederate States" are not the same as "States" in nature or
jurisdiction, we are ready to consider -- who or what was responsible
for organizing, running, and overseeing these "Confederate States", that
is, businesses providing government services for the States of the
Union?
The Federal Constitution issued in 1787 to the States of America answers that question.
The
original Union States (or in the Latin system, Union states) had been
using the business name "States of America" since the 1770's. The 1787
Federal Constitution refers to this "States of America" as the
Subcontractor receiving the service contract.
So,
the original Union (not the Northern faction in the Civil War)
operating as the States of America was the recipient of "The
Constitution for the united States of America" and was the operator of
the Federal Republic and the Union states (Latin nomenclature system)
were the owners of the individual Confederate States (State of State
businesses).
Contrary
to the idea most people have been given, the "more perfect union"
referred to in The Articles of Confederation was obviously the States of
America and the original Union of the Union states (Latin nomenclature
system).
The
Articles of Confederation were the Articles of Incorporation for the
State-of-State (Confederate) businesses belonging to the Union States,
so that they, similar to the State Members of the Federation of States,
could act together in their mutual self-interest: that is, their "more
perfect union".
When the Confederation broke down for lack of quorum, that entire system broke down. It's been defunct for160 years.
It can be restored via the Reconstruction but that can only be accomplished by the actual States, not the States of States.
----------------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
My "Blood Oath" --- and Yours
By Anna Von Reitz
I
am so tired of hearing this clap-trap that I am a "Vatican Agent" when I
have never worked for or with the Vatican in my life, and am not even a
Catholic.
This
stems from the seven (7) years I spent giving Due Process to the
Municipal United States Corporation Employees at the behest of their
Employer, Pope Benedict XVI -- telling them what they were doing wrong
and giving them the chance to correct before their Corporation was
liquidated in 2015.
This
false allegation that I am a "Vatican Agent" comes from people who are
so ignorant that they equate the Pope with the Vatican and the Vatican
with the Church.
Such
people will never get it through their thick skulls that the Roman
Catholic Church has a secular side to it, which impacts our daily lives
in profound ways --it rules the Jurisdiction of the Air, including all
the patents, copyrights, trademarks and corporations in the world.
That's why I have recently sued for the liquidation of hundreds of criminal corporations under Ecclesiastical Law.
Of
course, back in 2006, we went to the Pope, because it was his
CORPORATION and the crimes were occurring in his jurisdiction.
So, I say, "Uh-duh."
No,
I am not like all the Patriot Geniuses out there who are calling me a
"Vatican Agent" and criticizing me for taking the problem to those
responsible for it, instead of helplessly chasing my tail and howling at
the moon. Like they do.
Our freedom was being infringed by a CORPORATION owned and operated by the Pope.
Our whole country was being mis-administered and run into the ground by a CORPORATION owned and operated by the Pope.
So who else would you talk to or work with to solve the problem?
The Pope.
All
roads still lead to Rome for a reason. That reason is that the
Jurisdiction of the Air is ruled by the Pope and it includes all the
corporations on Earth.
I
am similarly sick of hearing purported Christians talking about my
Blood Oath and mistaking it for a blood oath taken to a Secret
Society.
My
Blood Oath was the same Blood Oath all these hideously ignorant
Christians have taken and continue to take every time they have
Communion.
Uh-duh, again.
In the name of the True God, what does that Communion wine represent? Blood.
What do you think you are doing when you take Communion? Taking a Blood Oath.
In
90% of Christian Churches, the Congregation recites the Apostles' Creed
-- reading the contract aloud -- before taking communion.
The
existence of a verbal contract places the action in the Jurisdiction of
the Sea -- Satan's realm, and makes your affirmation of it a binding
Oath.
So what happens at Communion?
You
enter into a contract in which you consume the "Blood" and take the
Blood Oath to the effect that you believe and affirm every word of The
Apostles' Creed.
You
then receive the "consideration" on the contract, the Communion wine,
and that consideration guarantees your what? Your salvation.
And what does "salvation" imply? Again, it's a sea-term, salvage, that the Church applies.
Your
wrecked boat is going to be hauled to safe harbor in the grave and the
Church is going to be paid handsomely for the labor and materials needed
to do this work.
And if you aren't rolling your eyes toward the ceiling by now, you certainly should be.
It's
the same language and rationale they use when they claim that your
Mother's "birth canal" is part of the "Navigable Inland Waterways" where
the British Monarch is your Trustee on "the High Seas and Navigable
Inland Waterways".
Why
do you think they insist on calling physicians Medical Doc(k)tors? So
that you are "delivered to the Doc(k)". And there is even a
double-play on that.
What
does it mean in British legal terminology to be "delivered to the
dock(et)?" Ah, your cargo (body) is being delivered to the dock, where
the Customs Clerk, aka, Bar Attorneys, are waiting to assess fees and
determine your destination, most likely jail.
Ultimately,
they take the joke even further, because all that can be further
stretched to mean that you are delivered to the Dock-ette, the Temple
Prostitute representing the Great Whore in the Babylonian religion.
Do you get the joke now? Are you laughing, or just going, "Ouch!"
Even the very Elect will be fooled.
But
don't think that my "Blood Oath" was ever anything different than
yours, if you consider yourself a "Christian" ----and thank the True God
who sees the heart and intention and doesn't judge us because we are
fools.
----------------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
United States History Versus American History
By Anna Von Reitz
Dear Adam and Many Others,Too:
My heart goes out to you and everyone else struggling their way forward and looking for the truth.
The
quickest and easiest way to get acquainted with the functions and
traditions of the State Assemblies is to look for an old (more than 100
years old) High School or College level "American History" or "American
Government" book that covers structure of State government.
When
I was a girl, we had separate history classes, one for US History and
one for American History. People knew that these were two separate
subjects, and there were two separate books.
In
the years since then, the American History books have been quietly
removed from the shelves and from the curriculum of the public schools,
which results in our pervasive ignorance about our actual American
Government.
The old people have forgotten and the young people never knew.
Even
as I was going through public school, circa 1965, the books were being
changed. My graduating class in 1974 was the last graduating class to
have both American History and United States History classes.
Jimmy
Carter's illegal meddling in local schools via the Federal Department
of Education and coercive use of Federal Grants to reward compliant
School Districts (that word again -- any time you see "district" as in
District of Columbia, pay attention) resulted in American History books
either disappearing or being rewritten in a deceptive way.
For
example, in US History books the "three branches of government" were
described exclusively in terms of the Federal Government and we were
told that the branches of the Federal Government were the Executive
Branch, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch.
Fair enough? Everyone heard that?
But in the American History books the "three branches of government" were described as Federal, State, and Local Government.
If
you never read American History, you wouldn't have a clue that there is
a different meaning attached to "three branches of government".
Another
example-- in the United States History books, we read that military
districts were set up as the organizational units of the earliest
Federal Government administered by the Second Continental Congress.
In
the American History books, we read that British Land Law provided the
template for the administration of the Colonies and later guided the
adoption of the County and State Government System in which the soil
jurisdiction was controlled by the Local County Government, and the
international land jurisdiction was controlled by the State Government.
Both
bits of information are highly informative, whether viewed from the
standpoint of United States History or from the standpoint of American
History, but as you can begin to appreciate, the loss of half our
history has crippled our understanding of how things are supposed to
work.
In United States History, the "assemblies" referenced are all (military) District Assemblies.
In American History, the Assemblies are State Assemblies.
In
United States History, the Confederate States (States of States) are
spoken of in the same breath as the actual States of the Union, and "the
Confederate States of America" means the government headed by Jefferson
Davis during the Civil War.
In
American History, the Confederate States (States of States) are called
States of America whether from the North or the South, and there is a
clear difference between States and Confederate States-of-States. The
phrase "the Confederate States of America" means the various
States-of-States organizations operating as a group, not the government
headed up by Jefferson Davis in the Civil War.
You can begin to see how our failure to study American History in public schools has truncated our view.
It
makes total sense that the Confederation formed in 1781 under The
Articles of Confederation was called the States of America, and so, each
member of the States of America Confederation was called "The State of
New York", "The State of Florida" and so on. When the Southern members
split off and called themselves "The Confederate States of America" ---
it isn't just a name picked out of a hat.
There
is an entire context to the name "The Confederate States of America"
that you miss, if you don't read American History and are limited to the
United States History version.
It's
the same way throughout, talking about the same or similar things, like
looking at the same object using two different lenses.
In
United States History, the words "State National" refer to the people
of each State of the Union and it's clear we, Americans, acquire our
nationality from our States. We are Wisconsinites and Californians and
New Yorkers...
In
American History, the similar words "state national" means any American
from any of the States of the Union who doesn't work for the government
or hold a government office, that is, "state national" means a member
of the General Public.
You see? Very similar vocabularies, similar words, but different context.
In
United States History, the word "Assembly" refers to the (military)
District Assembly and the Districts send representatives to their
State-of -State Legislature, like the State of California Legislature.
In
American History, the word "Assembly" refers to the State Assembly
composed of the General Assembly of the people living within the borders
of the State. In the American system, each State Assembly is the
Legislature for the physically defined State of the Union.
The
best way to learn all this stuff is the way we learned it -- two
separate text books, one United States History and one American
History.
Of
course, there are Primary Source documents underlying all of this and
it's easy to get confused once you dive into the archives, but if you
stick to the old textbooks they have it pretty well separated out and by
reading both, you will be able to observe the differences.
In
United States History, one State-of-State is pretty much a cookie
cutter of any other State-of-State (because they are all franchises of
the same Parent Corporation, like Dairy Queen franchises) and the laws
of one such State-of-State are adopted in all the others.
In
American History, each State is enclosed by its borders and its laws
are uniquely its own and do not extend to any other State of the
Union.
In
United States History, the Courts are extremely limited to Federal
topics and regulatory authorities and, of course, Military Tribunals;
the words "Common Law" refer to Military Common Law, which nowadays
means the Universal Code of Military Justice. All their courts operate
within Judicial Districts.
In
American History, the Courts are Courts of General Jurisdiction, and
though each Court only holds jurisdiction within specific physical areas
-- County Courts in each County, State Courts in each State, Federal
Courts within the borders of this country--- their powers are
wide-ranging, and unique. The words "Common Law" refer to American
Common Law.
I've
just given you an idea -- a taste -- of the differences between United
States History and American History, and what you are missing as a
result of not studying American History in public school.
You can thank the Great Traitor, Jimmy Carter.
So when you come to me and say, where are you getting all this? Prove it.... how do you know?
I
was lucky enough to be born in Wisconsin almost seventy years ago and I
was also lucky to have a Grandmother who was 75 when I was born, a very
bright woman who lived another ten years and who made it her business
to teach me about my country and American History.
I had the advantage of reading both United States and American History, in tandem, in school.
I "know" these things the same way I can add and subtract, and so should you --- all of you.
And
the best way I can think of for you to check out the information for
yourselves, is to go find an old American History textbook and start
reading.
After
all the obfuscation and impersonation and lies you've been told, I
don't blame you for wanting to check out the information I've given you
-- but at the same time, we can't all just stand around while everyone
else educates themselves and gets up to speed.
If
we did that, we'd have to stop the presses and all progress every time
another confused fellow-American walked through the door, and that would
cost the very precious time we have to accomplish the work of the
actual State Assemblies.
So
I will make an appeal to you -- I am a long way past needing a good
textbook of American History and Government, so when you find one that
you like and that makes everything clear for you, come back and
recommend it and let me try to work out a copyright agreement with the
publisher to reprint it or let us reprint it.
There
are millions of Americans who don't know their own history, and other
than word of mouth and Primary Source citations from people like me,
what we really need is a good textbook we can hand out.
----------------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
Public International Alert for State Assemblies
By Anna Von Reitz
The
unpleasant truth is that the Civil War was never ended by any peace
process, so the Northern Army simply settled in and occupied our
country.
You
can look all day for many days on end, and all you will find are the
documents surrendering Lee's Army, and three public proclamations
(establishing a contract) by President Andrew Johnson declaring "peace
on the land".
You can see that the Army of Occupation and later Presidents didn't honor that contract.
What
then transpired was a roll call of evils, most of which required the
Army of Occupation to impersonate us -- that is, to pretend to be us, in
order to control us.
They substituted British Territorial State-of-State organizations for our American State-of-State businesses.
They substituted their military districts for our counties and held "District Assemblies" from then until now.
They substituted their corporation elections for our public elections.
The British Government took full advantage of this situation and has worked under a Cloak of Secrecy about this ever since.
So how did the British Camel get its nose into our tent again?
They
were never far away. After the Revolution, as part of the peace
process, they obtained certain concessions. Brits were allowed to stay
in this country and keep their private property under the terms of The
Residence Act.
The British Territorial Government got juicy contracts to provide governmental services, especially military services.
The British King remained our Trustee on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways.
This
same British Territorial Government headquartered in the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico (look it up if you don't believe me) fought with the
Northern States-of-States in the Civil War, and took over owing to the
bankruptcy of those organizations in 1863.
So
now, instead of an American controlled Army of Occupation, we've had to
contend with a British Territorial Army of Occupation.
It has been this way ever since.
This
is how "President" George Herbert Walker Bush and Henry Kissinger and
General Colin Powell could all accept an office and titles and
emoluments from a foreign government and serve as Knights of Her Royal
Highness Elizabeth II.
We
do have the possibility of up-ending all this by restoring and
Reconstructing our American Government, but only if we hold tight, know
what is going on, and remember who we are and how things are supposed to
work.
As
the only lawful Civilian Government of this country, the U.S. Army is
supposed to answer to us, not to the British Monarch and not to their
own whim.
They
are supposed to protect us and not interfere in our government--- but
the fact is that they don't want to give up control and they are
interfering.
They
want to continue their illegal and immoral occupation of our country
and they want to continue to treat us, their Employers, as a "conquered
people".
If so, we are only conquered by our own ignorance.
Right
now, we have the British Territorial Army personnel known as
U.S. Citizens hard at work trying to commandeer our fledgling American
State Assemblies, coming through our doors, pretending to be us, with
the express object of taking control of our Assemblies.
All
of a sudden, we have these guys from their "National Assembly"
organization, horning in and spreading vicious rumors about me
personally and pretending to join our Assemblies in good faith.
It's another British Substitution Scheme.
The
same process they employed to substitute their States-of-States for
ours and to set up and run their District Assemblies as if they were our
State Assemblies is being employed to try to take over our State
Assemblies.
So
now, I am instructing all the State Assemblies to close their doors to
non-member participation and to watch their membership roles carefully.
Non-members can observe, but not take part in floor discussions or votes
of any kind.
There
is little doubt that these embedded enemies of our country have already
infiltrated our organizations to some extent, in order to observe our
operations.
In
addition to British Sleeper Cells trying to commandeer what we've
built, we have British Territorial organizations in open competition in a
few States.
In
Oregon, we have Ron Vrooman's group, calling itself the Oregon
Statewide Jural Assembly, and pretending to be an American Jural
Assembly.
We
know that isn't true, because American Jural Assemblies are drawn from
the General Assembly membership of our State Assemblies. They don't
exist as "independent" vigilante groups like Ron's.
In
Missouri, we've had an unfortunate incident in which the Coordinator
was seduced into this same idea that The Missouri Assembly was
functioning as a Jural Assembly and not a General Assembly. Only a
handful of The Missouri Assembly members were properly papered up, and
when the Recording Secretaries discovered this, they were castigated for
demanding correction.
What is absolutely crucial at this juncture is for Americans to have a firm sense of who they are and know the warning signs.
The Impersonators will seem very similar to us. They will use deceptively similar terms.
For example, they will talk about "the Common Law" by which they will mean Military Common Law, not American Common Law.
In
the same spirit, they will talk about "Grand Juries" but they will be
talking about Grand Juries of U.S. Citizens convened as Military
Tribunals of the District Government, not Grand Juries convened by the
people of this country.
They
will talk a great deal about "the Constitution" by which they will mean
The Constitution of the United States of America --- their own
Territorial Constitution which is their meal ticket.
They
will play upon the common indoctrination and embrace and express the
idea that Americans live under "the" Constitution, but in fact, only
Public Employees live under any Constitution.
It's
their job to obey the limits of the Federal Constitutions and it's our
job to enforce the limits of the Constitutions --- there's a difference
involved.
They
are acting as Employees and viewing their Constitution as their
employment contract; we are acting as Employers, and demanding that they
obey the terms of their service contract.
They
will also talk about "democracy" and promote democratic ideas, like
"majority rule", even to the point of allowing majorities to infringe on
the most basic rights of individuals.
They don't understand that our American Government is not and never has been a democracy.
These
interlopers can appear to be very patriotic and pro-American, but in
fact, they are confused about what American is. They were never
taught.
And they don't want to learn.
They just want to continue bulling their way through life with the assumptions they were given in Public School.
They have a mentality of willful ignorance.
Somehow,
somewhere, I must hope that I have gotten my message through to enough
thinking Americans so that you can sort things out for yourselves.
1. We are being occupied by a British Territorial-controlled U.S. Army staffed by U.S. Citizens.
2. These U.S. Citizens think that they are acting as Americans when they are not.
3.
So our country is under occupation by what merely appears to be our own
military and is in fact a British Territorial Expeditionary Force.
4. These U.S. Citizens are coming into our State Assemblies with malice aforethought to commandeer them.
5. This is part of a command and control strategy using substitution schemes that has been in place ever since the Civil War.
6.
They have substituted their States-of-States for ours, their
incorporated "Counties of" for our Counties, their District Assemblies
for our State Assemblies, and now they are trying to commandeer our
operations again by substituting their U.S. Citizens as members of our
State Assemblies.
7. All State Assemblies are hereby alerted and advised to close their doors to this kind of interference and infiltration.
U.S.
Citizens must be allowed to record their birthright political status,
but as long as they work for or identify with the Federal Government
(military or civil service) they cannot be allowed to disrupt our State
Assemblies.
This is because they have a built-in conflict of interest and allegiance to a foreign government.
Licensed professionals have a similar built-in conflict of interest and are subject to coercion from the King's Government.
A word to the wise should be sufficient.
----------------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
No comments:
Post a Comment