Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Anna von Reitz
40 mins ·
Three Levels of Pecking Order
There are three levels of pecking order in the world we live in:
1. Living people, who are unincorporated and sovereign beings.
2. Lawful Persons, that are corporate, but not incorporated.
3. Legal Persons, that incorporated entities.
How does this work? Living people create Lawful Persons and Lawful Persons create Legal Persons.
Your living parents thought up a name and gave it to you. First your parents created you, and then, they created your Lawful Person.
They might also create a small unincorporated business and name it -- thereby creating another Lawful Person.
So this is the relationship between living people and Lawful Persons.
Lawful Persons can be "converted" into Legal Persons by changing the jurisdiction in which these Persons are operating.
When a Lawful Person is shanghaied off the land and into the jurisdiction of the sea without their knowledge or consent, as we Americans were, this is called an "unlawful conversion".
Via unlawful and non-consensual conversion all our Lawful Persons were "presumed" to be "Legal Persons" beginning in 1933.
Since the name appears the same either way, regardless of the capacity in which we are acting, it is impossible to look at a piece of paper, read a name like "Shaun Patrick Murray" and tell whether a man is operating as a "Lawful Person" or in a "Legal Person" capacity.
When our shanghaied Legal Person wakes up and declares and records their return to the land and soil jurisdiction they are heir to, this results in a "lawful conversion" back to Lawful Person status.
This is what we are doing when we purposefully extract our Proper Names and return them to the land and soil of our home States and reclaim our birthright political status as American State Nationals or American State Citizens. We are "on the record" lawfully converting the presumed "Legal Person" back into a "Lawful Person".
Please really notice this and grasp the fact that on paper, "Shaun Patrick Murray" a Lawful Person standing on the land and soil of California, looks exactly the same as "Shaun Patrick Murray" a Legal Person on a boat a hundred miles out at sea.
In the first case, Shaun Patrick is living under the Public Law of California as a Private Person. In the second case, Shaun Patrick is living under the International Law of the Sea and is a Ward (a Public Person) of the State of California.
See the difference in law and status that was created by the filthy, rotten, dirty Roosevelt Administration? It unlawfully converted the identity and political status and capacity of the innocent American People to that of homeless "Wards" of the British Territorial States of States.
It was the crime of the century.
It also unlawfully converted them from being heirs of this country and inheritors of the constitutional guarantees to being British subjects of the Queen and also subjected the victims of this monstrous betray to maritime and admiralty law.
Okay, so that's the Sting Operation and "Switcheroo" the British Territorial United States Government pulled on us in 1933.... the conversion by fiat of legal presumption of our entire population, their unlawful conversion of our Lawful Persons into Legal Persons, and also their non-consensual press-ganging and transport of trusting Americans into the foreign international jurisdiction of the sea as "wards" and "Public Persons" of their States of States.
But what about Legal Persons that exist by consent?
Some people like a life at sea and they are, of course, able to choose that option. Many do, when they sign up to serve in the U.S. Military. However, when they retire, they are eligible to return home to the land and soil of their home States, like anyone else who has been working overseas for a foreign corporation.
There are also Legal Persons of other kinds. One may take a step further into the airy-fairy world of international commerce and form an incorporated PERSON. Such incorporated PERSONS can be formed by either Lawful Persons or Legal Persons, depending upon their permanent domicile.
Incorporated PERSONS have to be formed under a charter or convention that stipulates their nature, purpose and aims, structure, kind of business, officers, any limitations, and form of law and resolution they are standing under.
Typically, incorporated PERSONS are chartered by a government, that is, by other pre-existing Legal Persons
or LEGAL PERSONS.
In this country, this could be a Territorial State of State, a Municipal STATE OF STATE, or directly by their parent corporations which are, of course, already Legal Persons or LEGAL PERSONS themselves.
If a Lawful Person creates an incorporated PERSON via Patent or buys or accepts such a PERSON as a gift (what the Municipal United States does when it "confers" a Municipal PERSON/CITIZEN as a gift to every Territorial United States Citizen/Ward of the State) they are free to domicile that PERSON wherever they wish in the world, and that PERSON then "stands under" the law of the country where they are domiciled, regardless of where else they might be.
This is what we do as Lawful Persons when we seize upon the Assumed NAMES derived from our Proper Names and declare their permanent domicile on the land and soil of one of the States. The PERSONS associated with us because they are NAMED after us, are then no longer standing under the laws of Puerto Rico, but under the Public Law of -- for example -- Maine.
Lawful Person can operate in the capacity of LEGAL PERSONS/ MUNICIPAL CITIZENS but seldom have any reason to, unless they go to work for the Municipal United States Government as Federal Civil Service Employees. Like their brethren in the U.S. Military, they can return home to their States and resume life as Lawful Persons once they are severed from or retire from their Federal Municipal jobs.
So are you one of the "people" living on the soil jurisdiction of your Republican State or acting as one of the Lawful Persons called "People" populating the land Jurisdiction of your State of the Union, or are you acting as a Legal Person known as a "United States Citizen" or acting as a Legal PERSON known as a "Citizen of the United States" or....
As you can see, it's impossible for you to intelligently choose such a capacity or even know what form of law you are operating under, until someone explains all this.
Nobody does. So you are like an infant, defenseless, left adrift in a sea of deceit and breach of trust.
Most lawyers in this country don't even know all this.
They have been trained to process certain kinds of financial transactions and make it look good, or as the Rules of the Federal Courts put it, "provide an appearance of Justice".
Most of lawyers know nothing about actual Public Law.
Most of them don't even know that we have the option of acting as Lawful Persons, because their education has been so one-sided.
Most lawyers don't know that their Attorney Escrow Accounts are being used launder money and transfer money all over the world, either. They don't know that they have been set up to be the Fall Guys, along with the military Generals, for the bankers and politicians.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Quote:
CHAPTER XVI. OF PERSONS, AUTHORS, AND THINGS PERSONATED
A Person What
A PERSON, is he "whose words or actions are considered, either as his own, or as representing the words or actions of an other man, or of any other thing to whom they are attributed, whether Truly or by Fiction."
Anna's definition is distorted by attempting to read multiple statutes dealing with the topic. Hobbes on the other hand predates her by 400 years and I believe his definition is preferred.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ziero0
Anna's definition is distorted by attempting to read multiple statutes dealing with the topic. Hobbes on the other hand predates her by 400 years and I believe his definition is preferred.
I've never heard of the Hobbes law dictionary?
Maybe you could point out a law dictionary that backs up your claim.
The point is I can comprehend Anna's definition and have no idea how to apply Hobbes definition to the situation at hand..
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigjon
I've never heard of the Hobbes law dictionary?
Maybe you could point out a law dictionary that backs up your claim.
The point is I can comprehend Anna's definition and have no idea how to apply Hobbes definition to the situation at hand..
I have been known to consult childrens books as sources of Law ... notably Uncle Remus. Dictionaries are for what they intend ... DICTION. How to speak or pronounce. The meaning of DICTIONary has become distorted over the years.
In any event Hobbes can be consulted here ... refer to ch XVI
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3207/3207-h/3207-h.htm
With Hobbes you don't get a singular person attached to a singular Man or Woman. In fact you create a person for each word you speak or every action you take or each agent you admit to your Stable. According to Hobbes God was personated thrice ... but I believe His personation to be unlimited.
The system favors some persons. The system punishes other persons. You might want to consider a person as a sticky-note that gets plastered on your jacket. None of them are YOU but if you happen to fall into the category AUTHOR then you get the candy or the stick.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Well in order to have order, you have to invent names for categories. The def you provide says one name covers everything; which to me sounds like dis-order.
I'll stick with Anna.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigjon
Well in order to have order....
Here is a law of nature for you:
The universe tends toward maximum disorder.
https://www.realclearscience.com/ima...ortex_edit.jpg
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
[QUOTE=ziero0;948837]Here is a law of nature for you:
The universe tends toward maximum disorder.
[\QUOTE]
If you look close enough there is order inside that disorder and you can name the elements and put them in a book called aerodynamic engineering.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigjon
you can name the elements and put them in a book called aerodynamic engineering.
You don't suppose that is the same book acknowledged as an authority by the designers of the 737 MAX?
Here is an example of the universe at work on chaos:
The customs house in New Orleans was built in 1850 on swampground. They excavated a city block, filled it with cypress logs and built a 4 story granite structure on it that survives intact to this day. The building floats on a raft.
In 1970 a mile away Tulane University erected a 10 story library building on pilings. The architect forgot to include the weight of the books when sizing the pilings and so now there are steps down to the 1st floor.
Now you would think that 120 years of writing books and performing designs with computer would have made the world a better place.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Anna von Reitz
5 hrs ·
For All The Jural Assemblies 46 - No Pledges Ever
We all grew up being exposed to "The Pledge of Allegiance" as schoolchildren. We were indoctrinated from an early age to mindlessly recite something without knowing what it really meant.
Start with the fact that a "Pledge" is a Feudal Oath given by a Serf or Tenant to a sovereign, promising "allegiance" another word from the feudal relationship vocabulary, subjecting yourself to the sovereign and promising to support and protect the sovereign.
And what was standing in the "sovereign" position in "The Pledge of Allegiance"?
The flag of something calling itself "the United States of America" --- they just didn't bother to tell anyone which United States of America.
Most Americans have been kept from ever knowing that there are many different variations of both "United States" and "United States of America" and yes, it does matter which one you are talking about.
There is the unincorporated version of The United States which refers to the sovereign soil jurisdiction State Republics and their "Union" formed in 1776, and there is the unincorporated version of The United States of America, our Holding Company formed September 9, 1776, which refers to the sovereign International Land Jurisdiction of the unincorporated States of the Union.
These are the two entities that Americans naturally think of when someone says, "United States" or "United States of America", but in addition to these unincorporated entities that hold the land and soil jurisdictions of our country, there are other incorporated entities that are supposed to work for our States and People.
These include two other "kinds" of United States and United States of America that operate in the Municipal jurisdiction of the the Holy Roman Empire and the International Jurisdiction of the Sea, respectively.
These incorporated versions are "doing business names" of foreign corporations that are on our shores, purportedly to provide specified governmental services under the provisions of their respective Constitutions.
Their "United States" which is actually "the United States, Inc." is run by the members of the Territorial Congress acting as the government of the Washington, DC Municipality, which is an independent international city state like Vatican City and the Inner City of London known as Westminster and more recently, New York City and the United Nations have made bold to become ---without our permission, separate international governments standing on the land and soil of New York.
Time for the People of New York to wake up and put these Freebooters in their place, but that's another story.
Right now, just take in the fact that "United States" in this context means the Municipal Government being run by the members of Congress as a "plenary oligarchy" that is only supposed to operate and exist within the ten miles square of the District of Columbia. [Article I, Section 8, Clause 17]
Also take note that when this version of incorporated foreign "United States" is being referenced, the definite article associated with it is not capitalized and not part of the name. That is, our actual government's Proper Name is "The United States", while their strictly limited foreign Municipal government providing services "in our names" is "the" United States.
The same sort of confusion occurs with "the" United States of America, which refers to the British Territorial service providers under contract to our States. In the same way, the Proper Name of our unincorporated version is "The United States of America" and "The" is both capitalized and part of the name. Their foreign incorporated version --- again --- is "the" United States of America.
So when we look at their "Pledge of Allegiance" what do we see? Which "United States of America" is being referenced? Ours or the British version?
We already know that a "Pledge" is a Feudal Oath and we know our Founders weren't into Feudalism, so we should not be surprised to observe that the Queen's subjects are pledging themselves to "the" United States of America via their Pledge of Allegiance to the Queen and the British Territorial corporation doing business as "the" United States of America.
Read it and weep:
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America" ---- this is the war flag of the British Territorial Commercial Corporation doing business "in our name" --- the United States of America, Inc.
"and to the Republic for which it stands" ----- we got a passing mention and a presumed Dual Citizenship obligation thrown in.
"one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" ---- and the problem with this is? (1) It isn't clear which "God" we are subjecting ourselves to; (2) they are just subcontractors and we owe them no more loyalty than they show us; (3) we, Americans, enjoy freedom, not "liberty" which is what British sailors get when they arrive in ports of call.
As you can see, pledging is a British thing. It has nothing to do with us, our American Government, or any natural obligation we have as Americans.
Americans don't do pledges because we are sovereigns in our own right, and pledging to a foreign sovereign obligates us to serve them instead of serving our own sovereignty.
So we never, ever, under any circumstance make "pledges" to anyone or anything, including the flag being flown "for" us by a British Territorial Corporation.
Think of the insanity of what is being employed against us? A living man subjects himself to an inanimate symbol like a flag? Can you think of a worse form of idolatry?
This innocent-sounding "pledge" disrespects all three major western religions. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all forbid the worship of idols.
Yet, here we have had generations of clueless American schoolchildren -- and adults, too--- pledging their lives and substance to an inanimate object, an idol, being used under contract by a British Territorial Commercial Corporation as a war flag.
Needless to say, this venal and undisclosed practice of "pledging" has to stop and it has to be known and repudiated by any and every thinking man and woman in this country.
No sentient Christian, Jew, or Muslim can ever take such a pledge, nor should they.
If you do knowingly ever take a "pledge" of any kind, be aware that whatever you are "pledging" is encumbered and that whatever you are "pledging to" becomes the ruler over you.
Do you want to be ruled over by a war flag being borrowed from our actual government by a British Territorial Commercial Company operating out of Puerto Rico under Spanish Law and calling itself "the United States of America"?
Didn't think so, but had to ask, because that is what happens when you recite "The Pledge of Allegiance".
Much of what we have been told in Public Schools across America and also taught to accept and to do, is wrong, or a half truth, or a sin by omission leading us to make wrong assumptions to our detriment.
This is just one particularly evil example of betrayal of our trust.
As American State Jural Assembly members we never take pledges. We operate in our capacity as Lawful Persons and the only sovereign State we serve is our own.
Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigjon
We operate in our capacity as Lawful Persons and the only sovereign State we serve is our own.
See now here is Anna gets into trouble with her definition of 'person'. The problem is grammar related. 'Lawful' is an adjective. All adjectives act to reduce the population of the noun being discussed. She is using 'Person' capitalized as a noun. Actually according to Hobbes 'person' is a verb. Conversion of a verb to a noun is an act of creation. In my opinion this conversion is involved in the criminal act of slaughtering a language.
The conversion of verbs to nouns is done by a process called 'nominalization'. An example is 'the holocaust'. Holocaust has always been used in the English language to refer to a horrible event. Such an event has been discussed concerning the situation in Europe during WWII. This event was not nominalized and called by the name 'the holocaust' until 1957. Now the verb sense of holocaust is still available but the singular sense as a noun will be forever linked to WWII.
Person is a verb .... an action, a word or representation. Refer to a Person and it becomes a noun. In prison you will only find Nouns. No verbs are permitted to pass the entrance gate to the prison.
And just to be entirely accurate, 'Persons' might refer to multiple verbs or a committee (such as a jural society) of individual 'Person'.
