United States National: a Remedy That Cannot Be Stopped or Side-Stepped or Ignored

[Bigjon]

A Remedy, By Anna von Reitz (https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2017/02/04/by-anna-von-reitz/)Posted on February 4, 2017 (https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2017/02/04/by-anna-von-reitz/)by David Robinson (https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/author/drobin88/)

Finally, Thank God and Thanks to Many People, a Remedy That Cannot Be Stopped or Side-Stepped or Ignored —- Judge Anna

First, please be patient with yourself as you read through these facts. It took years of hard labor by dozens of good people to ferret out each little piece of this. It’s going to take you at least an hour or two to take it in and follow the logic to its inexorable conclusion.
When you get to the end, you will find a template that lays out the very simple one-page Fraud Killer. This does not mean that you should abandon your efforts to document your own identity and proper standing and that of your relatives—but you now have in your hands a very powerful means to break the shackles of the Great Fraud.

________________________________________________
Definition(s) of “United States” and “UNITED STATES” and “United States of America” and “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”…..
_________________________________________________

Note the date and by what entity— an “acting” Congress during the Civil War—this was done:
1864– the “acting Congress” passed an Act changing the meaning of “state, States and United States” to mean “the territories and District of Columbia”. (13 Stat. 223, 306, ch. 173, sec. 182, June 30, 1864.)

[“US Territories”—- portions of the United States that are not within the limits of any state and have not been admitted as states. Includes all federal installations—military bases, docks, courthouses, etc.]

This was never changed, amended or appealed, so, all references to “state, States, and United States” in Federal Code that are not otherwise specifically defined, must be construed as “the territories and District of Columbia”.

You must also make a distinction between the meaning of the words used prior to and then after the passage of this 1864 corporate law.
Prior to this, “state, States, and United States” meant what we commonly still believe them to mean— after 1864 in “Federal Code”—they generally meant something entirely different and opposed to the popular meaning.

Three Crucial Definitions, Plus a Fourth in Commerce:
“ The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses.

(1) It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations.

(2) It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States (that is, the territories and District of Columbia) extends, or

(3) it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution.” — Hooven and Allison Company v. Evatt, 324 US 652 (1945) (This is also the verbatim definition of “United States” given in Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition.)
Additionally…. we have definition

(4) thanks to: The Legislative Act of February 21, 1871, Forty-first Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, page 419, Congress chartered a Federal Company entitled “United States,” a/k/a “US Inc.,” a “Commercial Agency” originally designated as “Washington, D.C.,”
in accordance with the 14th Amendment

[which the record indicates was never ratified— see Utah Supreme Court Cases, Dyett v Turner, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267; State v Phillips, (1975) 540 P 2d 936; as well as Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 448, 59 S. Ct. 972; 28Tulane Law Review, 22; 11 South Carolina Law Quarterly 484.]

Please note: that The Act of 1871 —“An Act to provide a Government for the District of Columbia,” ch. 62, 16 Stat. 419, February 21, 1871 — was repealed in 1874 and then passed piecemeal via these actions

—- “An Act Providing a Permanent Form of Government for the District of Columbia,” ch. 180, sec. 1, 20 Stat. 102, June 11, 1878, to remain and continue as a municipal corporation (brought forward from the Act of 1871, as provided in the Act of March 2, 1877, amended and approved March 9, 1878, Revised Statutes of the United States Relating to the District of Columbia . . . 1873–’74 (in force as of December 1, 1873), sec. 2, p. 2); as amended by the Act of June 28, 1935, 49 Stat. 430, ch. 332, sec. 1 (Title 1, Section 102, District of Columbia Code (1940)) .

When looking at the intent of all this, given that the actual District of Columbia was set up in 1790 and fully chartered by 1801, the aim of the Act of 1871 is, as it must be, merely to set up

“U.S. Corp”—
“That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the “District of Columbia”, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes … and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation.” – Act of 1871 verbiage—

So the Act of 1871 was to create a private corporation owned by the actual government of the District of Columbia— thus the birth of the infamous District of Columbia Municipal Corporation:

The only “government” created by the Act of 1871 was that of any private corporation which determines its own administrative rules and structures…….that is, the US Corp dba “UNITED STATES” is not merely the name of an incorporated municipality (District of Columbia)— it is the name of a private corporation (District of Columbia Municipal Corporation) that was created by the “acting Congress” via the Act of 1877 and as amended ever since.

Few Americans realize that there are all these definitions for the “United States.” Most have been misled to believe that the term “United States” has a single meaning and is a generic term referring to the country as a whole–However, in Title 28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C), it stated unequivocally that the UNITED STATES is also the name of a corporation, as just demonstrated from the public records.
__________________________________________________ ___

Does the UNITED STATES – the private corporation operating the government of “the Territories and District of Columbia” have “citizens”?

1873: U.S. v. Anthony 24 Fed. 829 (1873) “The term resident and citizen of the United States (”United States” meaning “territories and District of Columbia”) is distinguished from a Citizen of one of the several states, in that the former is a special class of citizen created by Congress.” (That is a “citizen of the United States” is a “statutory citizen”—created by legislative action.)

1875 – This definition of “United States” as a Corporation has its own citizens (see United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542) who are generally referred to as United States citizens.

1953 – Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383 “A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government…”

1967 – Also Congressional Record, June 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646): A “citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT, the private constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4.

[This neatly explains once and for all what a “citizen of the United States” is in federal parlance, as opposed to popular speech, and underlines the need for Americans to forthrightly expatriate from any such “citizenship” and instead declare their allegiance to the land of their nativity, for example, California or Nevada or Ohio.]
__________________________________________________ ____

Can a corporation be a citizen?
Diversity of citizenship exists when opposing parties in a lawsuit are citizens of different states or a citizen of a foreign country. If the party is a corporation, it is a citizen of the state where it is incorporated or is doing business. If diversity of citizenship exists, it places the case under federal court jurisdiction pursuant to Article III, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution.
____________________________________

The same duplicitous wordsmithing was done with the words “United States of America”—

From A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier, published 1856:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (First meaning given):

(1) The name of this country. [That is, the actual land mass.] The United States, now thirty-one in number, are Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and California.”

(Fifth meaning): (5)—The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property, 1 Marsh, Dec. 177, 181, but it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law.
______________________________________

So what does all this tell us? So far as the federal government is concerned the phrase “United States” has meant “the territories and District of Columbia” since 1864, and the “United States Corporation” has been the “government” of the “territories and District of Columbia” since 1877.

A similar thing was done with the phrase “United States of America” in which it was used as the name of this country, but then is also used to name a corporation— the “United States of America, Inc.”

These two privately owned and operated corporations have been bankrupted consecutively— “the United States of America, Inc.” in 1933 and the UNITED STATES entered into insolvency as of March 2015.

When it is announced that the “UNITED STATES” is insolvent, what does that mean? It means that the corporation operating “as” the government of the “territories and District of Columbia” is insolvent and subject to liquidation of its assets.

And who — or what — is on the hook to pay for all this?
All the “citizens of the UNITED STATES” which this corporation created out of thin air to benefit itself and which it has operated under your names—- JOHN MARK DOE and MABEL HELEN RHODES and JEAN MARIE FITZPATRICK…. as “a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT, the private constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4.”

Here you can clearly see that both the USA, Inc. and the US, Inc. are acting in collusion to bilk and indebt the unsuspecting American People by mischaracterizing them and their political status.
What has been done here is nothing less than “slavery by proxy”.
A corporate franchise has been named after you, and then, you have been coerced and deceived into accepting the debts of that franchise via a “similar names” deceit.

Prior to 1933, a Foreign Situs Trust created by the USA, Inc. was named after a living man called “John Frederick Doe” and this Foreign Situs Trust was then also gratuitously named as a Surety for the bankrupt USA, Inc’s debts. The actual man named John Frederick Doe was then pursued and forced to pay the debts owed in fact by this corporation. In 1999 that bankruptcy settled and the American People paid off every penny of it.

In approximately 1944 the US. Inc., named a Cestui Que Vie Trust after the living man called “JOHN FREDERICK DOE” and this estate trust was named as the Surety for the US Inc.’s debts. The actual man named John Frederick Doe was then pursued and forced to pay the debts owed by this corporate franchise, too.

This past year, 2015, President Obama acting as the CEO in charge of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. (the USA, Inc’s latest rendition organized under the laws of the United Nations City-State) announced the creation of a new franchise named after “John Frederick Doe”— a franchise of a bankrupt Puerto Rican Electric Utility named “JOHN F. DOE” operated under the laws of Puerto Rico.

Meanwhile the living American who is the Holder in Due Course of the given name “John Frederick Doe” and who is in fact the owner and executor of his name and all derivatives thereof associated with him, is being subjected to false charges and racketeering on a scale unique in world history.
________________________________________

So…… What to DO about it?
_________________________________________

In order to answer that, you need a few more definitions and research….
What is NATIONALITY? –“That quality or character which arises from the fact of a person’s belonging to a nation or state. Nationality determines the political status of the individual, especially with reference to allegiance; while domicile determines his civil status.

Nationality arises either by birth or by naturalization. According to Savigny, “nationality” is also used as opposed to “territoriality,” for the purpose of distinguishing the case of a nation having no national territory.” –The Law Dictionary.

Please note that nationality can be applied according to the country—the land— where you are born, whereas citizenship is a legal status adopted when you are registered with the government in some country.

Nationality can also be an inheritance from one’s parents as when a child is born to Americans living overseas, but one only becomes a citizen of a country via the adoption of a political status.

You can’t change your nationality, but you can change your citizenship, i.e., political status.

Every American–except first generation immigrants– was born on the land of one of the American states or born to parents or grandparents who were, and so by (1) birthright or by (2) inheritance, every American is naturally an American State National, and not a “citizen of the United States”.

You are a native of Florida or Wisconsin or Texas….and your proper nationality is as a Floridian, Wisconsinite or Texan….. and so on, and during your lifetime you do not “belong to” the organic state being referenced, instead, the state—the land— belongs to you.

But then, a dirty trick was played on your Mother at the hospital. People she trusted came to her and told her that it was the “law” that she has to sign certain papers. Unknown to her, those papers register her baby as a “citizen of the United States”—- and we already know what that means. The baby is “seized upon” as a surety backing the debts of the USA, Inc. and the US, Inc. and via the illicit copyrighting of his given name, the baby is identified as chattel property belonging to these private mostly foreign owned corporations.

However, fraud vitiates everything. It destroys all contracts and presumptions. It taints everything it touches. All Americans subjected to this undisclosed process have been defrauded and mischaracterized and deprived of their lawful status. There is no statute of limitations on the crime of fraud and it is recognized as a crime in all venues and jurisdictions of law, national and international, and global.

Okay, so….
Sorting the Poop from the Shinola….
Section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) states that “the term ‘national of the United States’ means

(A) a citizen of the United States (read that, “territories and the District of Columbia”), or

(B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States (again, “territories and the District of Columbia”).”

Therefore, U.S. citizens are also U.S. nationals. Non-citizen nationality status refers only to individuals who were born either in American Samoa or on Swains Island to parents who are not citizens of the United States.

This is all talking about “citizens of the United States” that is, “citizens of the federal government corporation”.

INA § 349 states that a citizen, whether a U.S. citizen by birth or naturalization [JOHN FREDERICK DOE is a U.S. citizen by process of “naturalization”] shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing certain acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality. The fact of intention is critical; it is not the mere performance of the actions mentioned in § 349.

Seven types of conduct are currently listed in the INA as expatriative. The potentially expatriating acts are:

(1) applying for and obtaining naturalization in a foreign country, provided the person is at least 18 years old;

(2) making an oath of allegiance to a foreign country, provided the person is at least 18 years old;

(3) serving in the military of a foreign country as a commissioned or noncommissioned officer or when the foreign state is engaged in hostilities against the United States;

(4) serving in a foreign government position that requires an oath of allegiance to or the nationality of that foreign country, provided the person is at least 18 years old;

(5) making a formal renunciation of U.S. citizenship to a consular officer outside of the United States;

(6) making a formal renunciation of citizenship while in the United States and during time that the United States is involved in a war; and

(7) conviction for treason or attempting by force to overthrow the U.S. government [that is, corporation], including conspiracy convictions.
——————————————————–

Now, finally, consider this supremely important information regarding the separate and “foreign” status of the United States defined as “territories and District of Columbia” (1864) with regard to the actual several states forming the United States (definition (3) from the Hooven case) —-nailed down by “The Informer”:

A key authority on this question (is the federal “United States” a foreign entity with respect to the states of the United States?) in the case of Hanley v. Donoghue, in which the U.S. Supreme Court defined separate bodies of State law as being legally “foreign” with respect to each other:
“No court is to be charged with the knowledge of foreign laws; but they are well understood to be facts which must, like other facts, be proved before they can be received in a court of justice. [cites omitted] It is equally well settled that the several states of the Union are to be considered as in this respect foreign to each other, and that the courts of one state are not presumed to know, and therefore not bound to take judicial notice of, the laws of another state.”
[Hanley v. Donoghue, 116 U.S. 1, 29 L. Ed. 535]
[6 S.Ct. 242, 244 (1885)]

Another key U.S. Supreme Court authority on this question is the case of In re Merriam’s Estate, 36 N.E. 505 (1894). The authors of Corpus Juris Secundum (“CJS”), a legal encyclopedia, relied in part upon this case to arrive at the following conclusion about the “foreign” corporate status of the federal government:

“The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.” [citing In re Merriam’s Estate, 36 N.E. 505, 141 N.Y. 479, affirmed U.S. v. Perkins, 16 S.Ct. 1073, 163 U.S. 625, 41 L.Ed 287]
[19 C.J.S. 883]

Before you get the idea that this meaning of “foreign” is now totally antiquated, consider the current edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, which defines “foreign state” very clearly, as follows:

“The several United States*** are considered “foreign” to each other except as regards their relations as common members of the Union.

… The term “foreign nations,” as used in a statement of the rule that the laws of foreign nations should be proved in a certain manner, should be construed to mean all nations and states other than that in which the action is brought; and hence one state of the Union is foreign to another, in the sense of that rule.”

And a recent federal statute proves that Congress still refers to the 50 States as “countries”. When a State court in Alaska needed a federal judge to handle a case overload, Congress amended Title 28 to make that possible. In its reference to the 50 States, the statute is titled the “Assignment of Judges to courts of the freely associated compact states”. Then, Congress refers to these freely associated compact states as “countries”:

(b) The Congress consents to the acceptance and retention by any judge so authorized of reimbursement from the countries referred to in subsection (a) …. [!!!]
[28 U.S.C. 297, 11/19/88]” — End quote.

So here is the Big Picture……
The government of the “United States” (read that as: “the territories and District of Columbia” per the 1864 redefinition) is a corporation also called the “UNITED STATES” or “U.S. Corp” or “US, Inc.” set up by the Act of 1877.

That corporation doing business as the US, Inc., and a similar corporation operating as the USA, Inc., have been creating “citizens” for themselves out of thin air, defined as corporate “persons” of various kinds, named after living Americans.

All of these foreign corporate franchises named after you are “citizens of the United States” — meaning

(4), “citizens of the United States” or as Kitchens v. Steele put it, “citizens of the federal government” [i.e., corporation].

Currently, the US, Inc. version is doing business as a Cestui Que Vie Estate Trust under the name “JOHN FREDERICK DOE” or whatever your “FIRST MIDDLE LAST” name may be, operated out of Puerto Rico.

The USA, Inc. version is doing business as a franchise of a bankrupt Puerto Rican Electric Utility under the name “JOHN F. DOE” or whatever your “FIRST MIDDLE-INITIAL LAST” name may be.

Again, Puerto Rico, a Commonwealth Protectorate of the United States is operating as a semi-autonomous Home Base for all this crime against Americans.

Take all this information into a nice, big, sticky Ball of Wax and what do you get?
(1) Since “JOHN FREDERICK DOE” is a naturalized “citizen of the United States”, “HE” can be expatriated by INA 349 (2) “making an oath of allegiance to a foreign country, provided the person is at least 18 years old” and

(2) since the actual states of the Union are all foreign countries with respect to the “United States” referenced, you can repatriate “JOHN FREDERICK DOE” to Wisconsin or Illinois or wherever else he rightfully came from by issuing an Oath of Allegiance to the land he was born on—Wisconsin, Texas, etc., and

(3) Sending a certified copy of the new Oath of Allegiance signed by John Frederick Doe (your name substituted appropriately) to John Forbes Kerry, the US (Corporation) Secretary of State, telling him that “JOHN” is expatriating and going home and by the way— all his assets are due and owing as a Priority Creditor of the UNITED STATES.

Please send a copy to the United Nations Secretary General and ask him to notify the UN Bankruptcy Trustees presently trying to liquidate the assets of the UNITED STATES, so they can exclude JOHN FREDERICK DOE from the asset roster.
Same thing with “JOHN F. DOE”.
And there isn’t a thing these con artists in suits can say, do, or complain about, because their other option is to admit to their crimes in front of the whole world.
“John Frederick Doe” —is still standing on terra firma, still have your wits about you, and are still able to say that you are a “Citizen of these United States”.

Example:
Act of Expatriation and Oath of Allegiance
Whereas “FIRST MIDDLE LAST” is a naturalized “citizen of the United States” under the Diversity Clause of the Constitution(s) and is the age of majority and whereas such “citizenship” was never desired nor intended nor willingly nor voluntarily entered into, “FIRST MIDDLE LAST” willingly and purposefully renounces all citizenship or other assumed political status related to the United States defined as “the territories and District of Columbia” (13 Stat. 223, 306, ch. 173, sec. 182, June 30, 1864) and its government, a corporation doing business variously as the UNITED STATES, U.S. Corp, US, Inc., etc. formed under the Act of 1877, and does repatriate to the land of HIS birth known as Wisconsin (Texas, etc. as it applies) and does freely affirm HIS allegiance to the same actual and organic state of the Union and does accept HIS true Nationality as an American State National and an American State Vessel in all international commerce owned and operated by Doe, John Frederick of 1121 Petaluma Court, Felsburg, Florida, 10210.
This do I certify, Witness and confirm this _____day of _______, 2016.
______________________________ by John Frederick Doe, all rights reserved.
Notary Witness
Clark County
Florida State
Before me this _____day of ________ 2016 did appear one JOHN FREDERICK DOE and he did establish this Act of Expatriation and Oath of Allegiance freely and without coercion, in Witness whereof I set my sign and seal.
_________________________________Notary; my commission expires on________________________.

[Glass]

Did she ever come back with the real actual source of this claim?


1967 – Also Congressional Record, June 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646): A “citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT, the private constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4.

As it stands this specific claimed record as quoted does not exist.

[palani]

https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=015/llsl015.db&recNum=2 , enter 223 as a page number and go to that page. Scroll down to the bottom of this page and turn to the next page. There is information here that suggests a remedy to any excesses committed by the current government (or all past ones for that matter).

Once remedy has been found all these confusing and opposing definitions dissolve to 'don't care doesn't apply to me' . [I don't normally like to refer to the statutes of foreign governments unless they tend to be exculpatory ... as is the foreign sovereign immunities act and this act declaring expatriation to be a recognized right]

Exculpatory ... the adjective form of exculpate




exculpate (v.)
"to clear from suspicion of wrong or guilt," 1650s, from Medieval Latin exculpatus, past participle of exculpare, from Latin ex culpa, from ex "out of" (see ex-) + culpa ablative of culpa "blame, fault." Related: Exculpated; exculpating.

[monty]

Did she ever come back with the real actual source of this claim?


As it stands this specific claimed record as quoted does not exist.

Her answer to me was "there are more than one Congressional Record. Keep looking, you will find it." I didn't pursue it further.

[Bigjon]

https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=015/llsl015.db&recNum=2 , enter 223 as a page number and go to that page. Scroll down to the bottom of this page and turn to the next page. There is information here that suggests a remedy to any excesses committed by the current government (or all past ones for that matter).

Once remedy has been found all these confusing and opposing definitions dissolve to 'don't care doesn't apply to me' . [I don't normally like to refer to the statutes of foreign governments unless they tend to be exculpatory ... as is the foreign sovereign immunities act and this act declaring expatriation to be a recognized right]

Exculpatory ... the adjective form of exculpate

That is a great resource and I do appreciate it.

But it is a historical record, which begs the question is the remedy still there?

The rascals have been known to have rescinded laws, reworded laws to make them more obscure, like they are hiding something.

Listening to Ralph Winterrowd who claims the only way to get an accurate picture of "our" law is to have a subscription to Lexis Nexis or West Law in order to binary search the record for valid laws. I think Ralph said his West Law subscription costs 365 frn's a month. That is too much for me.


88458846

[Bigjon]

Her answer to me was "there are more than one Congressional Record. Keep looking, you will find it." I didn't pursue it further.

Thank you for finding this, it is worrysome to say the least. Her lack of references and then when you go and look and find nothing makes me really wonder if she is reading from Patriot sources instead of real sources. There is a lot of crap floating around the internet, that just aint so.

But in her defense, she has opened my eyes to a more clear picture of the deception called the USA inc.

[palani]

Is the remedy still there?

There is always a remedy. The problem with expatriation is to recognize what you are expatriating FROM and where you are expatriating TO. For you cannot expatriate from one entity or condition/status to another without having a clear definition of where you are going to. Expatriating is a condition akin to recognizing poor mistakes you made in the past (or the actions of those who claim to represent you) and proclaiming that those self-same actions don't bind you in the future.

Becoming a monk is a form of expatriation with a recognized status of 'civil death' that comes with it.

Perhaps expatriating the status of NEUTER to one of MALE or FEMALE is similar? Perhaps expatriating commerce (the owning of something specific) for the concept of claiming everything is similar?

Whether those who want your voluntary servitude recognize your freedom or not is really beyond your control. You can only control your own actions and words and who will represent you and the deeds of aliens is not worthy of the ulcer that develops when you worry about them.

[$365 a month for a bunch of lies is a bit steep. There is more truth in 100 year old law books free from google]

[Bigjon]

What We Know About “YOU” (https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2017/03/07/what-we-know-about-you/)

Posted on March 7, 2017 (https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2017/03/07/what-we-know-about-you/)by David Robinson (https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/author/drobin88/)
https://mainerepublicemailalert.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/12405-judge2banna.png?w=640

Judge Anna von Reitz

Here is what we know so far— the “UNITED STATES” subrogated our NAMES under an insurance policy. This was required because they are still operating under the Reconstruction Acts and trying to pretend that we are “unknown” babies “found” on a “battlefield” by the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE which is obligated to then issue an insurance indemnity receipt under the provisions of the Lieber Code. The Birth Certificate is an insurance indemnity receipt and it identifies YOU as being a ward of the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, in their custody.

But what is “YOU”—?
It’s an ACCOUNT, as in bank ACCOUNT set up in your name….. first of all. And from that meager beginning, they have spun off an array of “associated” names and accounts—- until in 1976 they had to redefine “YOU” as an “International Organization”. That same year, they passed the International Organizations Act granting “YOU” immunity.

Okay, so your NAME is an ACCOUNT belonging to an International Organization which is immune from prosecution…..and all this is news to you, right?

Well, howsoever that may be, this explains two things that have long been a matter of curiosity and debate.

When you look up the federal government “Masterfile” associated with your NAME you find that “YOU” are always without exception involved in some kind of nefarious occupation having to do with Alcohol, Tobacco, or Firearms. When I tunneled through the red tape and the “Special Code Book” that deciphers all the numerical codes found in “YOUR” Masterfile, it turned out that “I” was running a rum distillery on the island of Barbados……and my husband was an arms dealer in South America!

This was big— and at the time—-baffling news to us.

Obviously, neither one of us had ever done any such thing, but that is what the Masterfile attached to our NAMES said.

Please note that Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms are all federally controlled substances—-they can tax these for revenue and control transportation of these products and license people engaged in these industries.

So now you can understand why the Masterfiles associated with our NAMES were involved in producing alcohol and selling firearms —- to bring our NAMES under US Government control and subject “US” to their codes, regulations, and controls.

So if our NAMES are international organizations that are supposed to have immunity from prosecution— how is it that these NAMES are being prosecuted as DEFENDANTS in all these courts?

Remember that these things that appear to be NAMES aren’t. They are ACCOUNT designators. Just like you can arbitrarily create an account designator using numbers — for example, bank routing numbers — you can use letters, too. And that is what these unspeakable vermin did. They used the letters of your name to create an ACCOUNT.

They could just as well have used “SSRDAEGR” as your account designation or
“1442351-BA445” or anything else in the wide world, but instead they infringed upon your given name and used those letters in that particular sequence as the account designator for the express purpose of confusing you (and nearly everyone else) and defrauding you.

So, thinking of “YOUR NAME” as an ACCOUNT designation instead of as your name, what immediately appears?

Ah, so….. an ACCOUNT has a plus side and a minus side. Assets come in one side as additions to the ACCOUNT and debts come in the other side of the ACCOUNT as subtractions to the ACCOUNT. When you subtract the debts from the assets you “balance” the account and can see how much you have left after paying off the debts and you will either have a positive remaining balance or you will be overdrawn.

So what did the rotten vermin do? They set up your ACCOUNT as two separate linked ACCOUNTS.

All the debts are posted against the ACCOUNT that appears to be your name, for example, JOHN MARK BROWN and placed under a numbered sub-account that you will recognize as “YOUR” Social Security or Taxpayer Identification Number: 123-45-6789.

All the assets are posted to the ACCOUNT that appears to be your name, for example, BROWN, JOHN MARK and placed under a numbered sub-account that is the same as “YOUR” Social Security or Taxpayer Identification Number in this form: 123456789. Same number, without the dashes.

Then to make the fraud scheme complete, you create two different agencies to do the bookkeeping.

You make the IRS responsible for tracking and collecting the debt side account. And you make THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE responsible for tracking the asset side of the account. Two completely different agencies, different addresses, different offices, different job assignments —both working under deceptively similar names—-and for the most part unaware of the other’s activities, and then heavily compartmentalized within each agency so that one hand really doesn’t know what the other is doing for the most part—–and you make sure that the accounts never get balanced.

The debts just keep accruing until the Account Holder pays them out of his own pocket, and the assets never get applied. And since the “Account Holder” — the real man named John Mark Brown doesn’t know a thing about any of this, he never gets to use or enjoy any of the assets being socked away in slush funds under his NAME.

Only one “side” of the ACCOUNT is immune—- the asset side. It has to be that way, because remember that the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE is on the hook guaranteeing that YOU come to no harm.
The debt side of the ACCOUNT is totally open to attack.

So the vermin bring their claim as a debt addressed against the debt side account, JOHN MARK BROWN, and drag “HIM” and the Account Holder into court demanding payment. And good ole clueless Account Holder John Mark Brown pays it out of his own pocket, because they force him to do so. He either pays it, or they turn off HIS lights stop picking up HIS garbage and send armed robbers acting under color of law to evict HIM from HIS house.

The IRS does the same thing— they address their claims of tax indebtedness to HIM and unless the Account Holder pays, “HE” gets hauled into court and accused all sorts of crimes and assessed all sorts of fines and late fees and if these aren’t paid up and settled, the Account Holder gets thrown in jail.

Are you all following along here and grasping how this has been done to you and how you have been endlessly fleeced, coerced, defrauded, cheated, bilked, and extorted by this “System”?

Oh, it’s a “System” all right—- in true gangland terminology, it’s a “System” that would make the Mafia blush.

And it has been here operating full tilt on your soil without a valid excuse in the world for being here since 1934.

It has been cranking away with the full knowledge of the Roman Pontiff, the Holy See, the Vatican, the British Crown, the Lord Mayor of London, the Queen, and the various “US Presidents” who are all fully responsible for defrauding the American states and people.

How have they gotten away with it? By coercive abuse of power — extortion, racketeering, kidnapping, identity theft, copyright infringement—- and all under the false pretense of still being at “war” ever since the so-called American Civil War and having “War Powers”.

As long as we are on the subject of fraud— which has no statute of limitations at all — the so-called “American Civil War” was not a war. It was an illegal and unlawful mercenary conflict carried out on our shores. How do we know this?

In order to be a true war and to fall under the international Laws of War, it would have to have a formal Declaration of War made by the national body competent to make such a declaration. No such declaration exists. Oh, Abraham Lincoln made “a” declaration beginning the hostilities, but he wasn’t authorized to actually declare war —- and he didn’t. Likewise, there is no actual Peace Treaty ending any such war. And there is absolutely no provision for any special “War Powers” or “Emergency Powers” granted by the actual states and people to the United States Congress, either.

So how have they been cooking all this crap up? That is the subject of our book, “You Know Something is Wrong When…..An American Affidavit of Probable Cause” available on amazon.com. (http://amazon.com/)

[Glass]

The commentary is full of anger. and indignation. It an understandable reaction. Been there..... but now I would ask, which is the part that causes the indignation? The apparent existence of the account / system OR the lack of knowledge about the existence of the account / system?

Or is it some perception that you're missing out on some share of something?

How do you feel about it NOW you know about the account / system?

Not an immediate reaction but how you feel about it once you've let it percolate for a while?

Do you want to destroy it? Do you want to use it?

Should you destroy it? Should you use it?

If the account / system is there, why are these people still coming to you? if they set it up to rip you off without you knowing, why are they not going straight to the account / system?

How is value created? If there is anger because someone is taking value, how did the value get there? Does the value come - in part - from what these people are apparently doing with your "stuff"? If they weren't doing these things would there be as much value there or any value at all?

Would you have to be doing those things to make the value if they were not? Could you? Would there be less value or any value if they weren't doing it?

[Bigjon]

Well I don't really feel anything about it. As I'm totally unaware of it, other than I have to pay income taxes to a government that craps all over us doing things I hate paying for.

I wish it would go away as we would be far better off without it and all the scum it brings.

Basically I still wonder if anything she posts is correct as she puts up very little in the way of documentary evidence.

I can only go by past experience, my folks died and I got my inheritance and don't really understand what difference it would make if I went down the road she's on. From what I've seen it's a tough road fraught with all sorts of challenges from TPTB.

That is one side of my story, the other side wants to believe what she is saying as it jives with my education. America is a Republic with each State being a separate country each with it's own Constitution. And all the evidence says she's right as that is what I lived growing up in rural Minnesota. That is what the schools taught me. I can still remember my first teacher grades 1 through 3 Olive Benson saying she did not think it was right that people who worked for the federal government were allowed to vote in our elections, because the founders had put them in a small area of Washington DC and never envisioned that they would come to occupy all the state areas and how they were a threat to our way of life and if they were not stopped they would destroy America... SHE WAS RIGHT!