Page 65 of 92 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 912

Thread: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

  1. #641
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by ziero0 View Post
    Private property is both the cornerstone and the holy grail of common law. No private property is where trusts excel. Practically everything is done with trusts these days. What you think of as public law is nothing more than private trust law. Uses and usufructs. Private property is not stolen or taken from you by public officials. Private property is seized because your use is no longer useful for your survival. Private property is seized because you fail to return payment to the trust when your usufruct produces an income.

    Uses are for your survival only. Usufruct is for your use and enjoyment. Remember that part about 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'? That 'pursuit of happiness' is the usufruct. The enjoyment is where taxes come from. Everyone in the trust wants to be happy with you (aka 'share the wealth').

    I don't know why you aren't happy about this state of affairs unless perhaps you still believe in private property rather than everyone sharing everything in common.

    Some of the people who are sharing did not get the message, like can you say Soros, Stalin, Hitler, Windsor, Rockefeller, Rothschild, and a few other names of that ilk who think that blowing up and killing is sharing. They seem to know the principle what's your's is mine and what's mine is mine.

    You can only write law for land that you own and seems that US Person's are land that they own. So stop volunteering to be a US Person.

  2. #642
    Platinum
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,142
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 485 Times in 332 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjon View Post
    You can only write law for land that you own and seems that US Person's are land that they own. So stop volunteering to be a US Person.
    The issues go quite a bit deeper than that. You only own that which you create. If I create a birth certificate then I own that birth certificate. The concept of writing law for land seems odd to me since land obeys its' own laws and can take no cognizance of laws.

    Fiction exists in the quantum world as waves. Observation modifies fiction and creates a paradyme called reality. Reality behaves as particles.

    If you respond to a command then that means you are subservient to the command issuer. The superior gets to impose his/her will. When your spouse tells you 'Honey, will you take out the trash' you should by rights throw the baggage out.

  3. #643
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Anna von Reitz
    3 hrs

    Apples and Oranges.

    The job before us is to gather together a crate of apples.

    US Citizens equals oranges. Americans equals apples.

    It seems simple enough, doesn't it?

    Today I got an angry message from Tim in Pennsylvania asking what I know about Beacon 37 and the Republic and what they are trying to do?

    I know that Beacon 37 and the Republic and yes, the National Assembly, are all welcoming US Citizens as members, and that means that no, they can't assemble an actual American State --- which is what needs to be done.

    Back in 2011, I got involved in RuSA--- the "Republic"--- under Tim Turner's leadership.

    When I realized they were off track, I went public and told Tim that he was crossing jurisdictions and that we couldn't do that.

    He stomped all over me and would not listen to a word I said; six months later he was in jail serving an 18 year sentence.

    Then, in 2015, I met Bruce Doucette.
    His heart was in the right place and we became good friends, but within months, he had gotten sidetracked, too, and was doing the same thing as Tim Turner ---- crossing jurisdictions.

    Again, I warned him. Like Tim Turner, he wouldn't listen. Three months later he was arrested and now he's in jail serving a 38 year sentence.

    This should be enough to prove that I know what I am talking about, but there are still those "experts" out there who won't draw the line between apples and oranges.

    Here's what I told Tim in Pennsylvania verbatim:
    "I know that Beacon 37 and the Republic and RuSA and yes, National Assembly, too--- all welcome and include US Citizens.

    And so far as what I am advocating, that is all I need to know.

    These organizations are not able to assemble the actual States, nor are they able to reconstruct the Federal States of States that Americans are owed.

    As a result, they are just competing against the actual effort that needs to be made, drawing off resources, and confusing the issues.

    You "can't get there from here" is their problem and always has been and more importantly--always will be.

    I am not kidding either when I point out that the Territorial Government is under obligation to arrest any United States Citizens engaged in "assembling" or claiming to assemble.

    This is the same kind of error that put Bruce Doucette in jail for 38 years and it is not happening to me or anyone who follows what I am doing.
    So make up your mind and do one or the other-- assemble the actual State and act as one of the People , or get out of the way and stop trying to confuse yourself and your other agenda with me or anything I am doing."
    This is the way it is, and the way it has to be.

    Otherwise, I would be open to the same kind of attack as what happened to Turner and Doucette --- and more importantly, so would the innocent people who are taking action to build actual State Assemblies.

    I owe it to myself and my own good sense and to the people who are depending in Good Faith on the knowledge I share with them, not to make this mistake and not to be associated with anyone who does make this mistake.

    I am an apple assembling with other apples. I am staying in my lane and giving nobody cause to claim otherwise.

    When and if I see any commingling of my message with these other organizations, I take exception to it and draw the line--- both privately and in public.

    Last night I gave Jocelyn at PaperUpNow.com the same message I gave Tim Turner and Bruce Doucette.

    She has been advertising the Republic as a resource in the same breath as she has been presenting my paperwork --- but the Republic as an organization hasn't ever made correction and is still crossing jurisdictions.

    I turned my back on Tim Turner and RuSA though I didn't want to. I turned my back on Bruce Doucette and wept bitterly-- for him and for all of us.

    But an orange is an orange and an apple is an apple, and neither I nor the people struggling to assemble the actual States of the Union can afford these kinds of mistakes.

    It's nobody's "fault". It doesn't imply any moral judgement. It's just a terrible and costly mistake that a great many people make. The way is broad that leads to destruction, but the way to Life is narrow and hard.

    The fact remains that if your task is to gather a crate of apples, you have to know what apples are-----and you have to recognize the difference between apples and oranges.


  4. #644
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Anna von Reitz
    2 hrs

    The Day Before Easter

    The day before Easter, Jesus is dead. It's the Sabbath. The entire City of Jerusalem is quiet as the day dawns. For most people on that sunny spring day, it was just another Sabbath and the quiet was just the normal peace of the Sabbath.

    For a certain family and a small circle of friends, the quiet was of a different kind: a stunned and horrified silence, the kind where your mind reels and you can't say anything, because there is nothing to say---and nothing to do. He's dead.

    So you sit hunched over with your stomach muscles knotted up against the pain and you hug yourself and all you can think is -- how could this happen? How could this possibly be?

    And even though you were there, it doesn't seem real.
    One moment, he's lauded and praised-- hosannah in the highest!---and the next moment, this dull blank horror. This nothingness.

    Mary, his Mother, is prostrate with grief. The rest of the family gathers around her, but it's no good. There is nothing anyone can say. She knots her hands together and weeps until she is exhausted and falls asleep, only to awaken to this nightmare and weep again.

    Nothing will ever be the same. Nothing will ever be as good.

    And what about all God's promises and the prophets now? What about the miracles?

    It all comes down to this today: he's dead. He's gone. He will never laugh with us again, never play, never stop to comfort some poor beggar, never touch another leper.

    The heaviness of it is unbearable. And underlying the thick miasma of shock and loss, is fear. The Chief Priests and the Romans are vengeful. Who will be next?

    We have heard about the strange thing that happened in the temple, how the temple curtain, a very thick and heavy curtain, was torn in two by unseen hands, just ripped assunder like a piece of paper.

    Dully, we wonder how that could happen, too, and what does it mean? God has left the temple? The Holy of Holies stands open to the breeze. There is nothing the Priests can do.

    The divorce is final.

    Furtively, we think back on all the things he said. Pictures of him, little snippets, the sound of his voice-- and we crunch up and weep again until our sides ache, until we can't catch our breath.

    It seems that except for the little group keeping watch over Mary, we've all crawled away to our own spot to grieve, some upstairs, some downstairs, some in the garden, some on the city wall, some lingering in the street, flaccid as empty sacks.

    He loved us. For a while in this turbulent world, we felt loved. We felt secure. We felt hopeful. Excited. And now this. He's dead and nothing will ever be the same again.

    The brutal, arrogant Romans won, and the worst of it is that our own people betrayed him to the Romans. The Chief Priests. The Pharisees. The Scribes. The Levites. All those we were taught to respect and trust, our leaders, betrayed him and betrayed us.

    It seems that there will be no tomorrow. It seems like this day will never end. It drags on so slowly, it seems as if time itself has stopped, and we are stuck just staring at the wall, alone with this great gaping emptiness, wavering back and forth between numbness and waves of grief.

    Drawing a deep breath is so difficult to do without choking, as if even our lungs have shrunk down to nothing, and over and over we tell ourselves-- so this is how it ends.

    Shame, disgrace, and torture, the death of a criminal, accused of being a necromancer who brought the dead back to life, mocked as a failed king. Scourged, stabbed, and crucified.

    For what? For the sin of helping the helpless. For restoring the blind and the sick?

    Wildly, like birds, our thoughts dart back and forth. It can't be the end. Yet, it is.

    It's spring. All over the countryside the grass is green again, the trees are blossoming. It doesn't seem possible. It doesn't seem real. Any moment, we will hear his voice in the courtyard and the noisy entourage of disciples and crowds of people who always follow him, seeking help.

    Where are they now? Cowed down in despair. The light and the hope has guttered out. Nobody can replace him.
    Nobody can help. Now, more than ever before, we feel alone, disoriented, knocked sideways--and empty.

    So empty.
    It's the day before Easter.


  5. #645
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Anna von Reitz
    23 hrs

    The History of Legal vs. Lawful

    I wind up talking with and arguing with a lot of lawyers, most of whom are greatly amused (or scandalized) when I tell them that all the laws of mankind derive from religion and that they are all involved in administering a religious belief system.

    These are not, for the most part, what you would call "religious" people.
    They are, as a group, about as hard-bitten, sophisticated, cynical, power-hungry, and greedy as it is possible for people to be.

    They laugh and snort when I tell them this. They nearly always stop and their eyes widen and then they cough or guffaw. Believe me, to a man, none of them have been taught the nature of their profession in any law school in America.

    It's like talking to a prostitute who doesn't know that what she is doing is sex. I should be the one that is laughing, but somehow it doesn't strike me as funny. It strikes me as sad, and maybe pathetic.

    All these smart, cagey, highly educated, highly paid, highly respected people, and most of them don't have a clue about what they are doing.
    Those that are aware that there is a difference between "lawful" and "legal" are rare, and those that do know, don't know the origin of the distinction between the two.

    Let's begin by asking ourselves --- does God, the Creator, make any mistakes?

    So.... how is it that Ishmael is born before Isaac? Ishmael is the lawful heir of Abraham, the first born of Abraham's bloodline. He was denied his Father's blessing because of a jealous woman.

    How is it that Esau is born before Jacob? Esau is the lawful heir of Isaac, the first born of Isaac"s bloodline, not Jacob. He was denied his Father's blessing because of deceit.

    I have observed before that there are two gods in the Bible, and one must be careful to discern which one is talking, turn by turn.

    So when we hear, "I have hated Esau, and Jacob I have loved." --- we need to stop and think: Jacob is a sneaky, deceptive, lying little rat. Who would love him? Ah, of course, the Father of All Lies is speaking here.

    The Great Deceiver loves a deceiver, just as the True God loves an honest man.

    So there are the Lawful Heirs by birthright, and there are the Legal Heirs by Blessing --- and what exactly is the nature of this "blessing"? It is a title --- a name.

    A legal fiction. A deception. A mask. A person. This is what Jacob inherits as a result of his deception: another deception.

    And we all know where this is coming from, right? From the Father of All Lies.

    Jacob gets his karmic return. He is deceived by his Father-in-Law, Laban, and given Leah instead of Rachel in marriage. He is deceived into thinking his son, Joseph, is dead.

    But what else do we notice?
    The Lawful Heirs are the ones taking it in the shorts all the time. It's the thieves, the deceivers, the jealous and dishonest and self-motivated ones who win, win, win, and it is the innocent Lawful Heirs who lose, lose, lose.

    Same thing with Jesus. He is the Lawful Heir, but he is denied.
    WT......?

    Caiphas wins. Sure, it cost him thirty pieces of silver, but he wins.

    What is the take-home message here? Bad guys win, good guys are losers, nobody obeys the law----the actual law, so, forgetaboutit?

    The True God makes dumb mistakes, lets the Devil win, forgets about and marginalizes those who are wronged?

    So it seems, if the Bible is to be believed.
    Right up until Jesus is resurrected.

    Here, finally, is how the Lawful Heir won.

    How does it feel to spend your brief lives in misery and fear, scrabbling after trinkets and gold and titles given by other men?

    How does that inheritance compare to the gift of eternal life and health and joy, given by the True God?

    It turns out that the Lawful Heirs have a different kind of inheritance, an inheritance on a completely different scale, an inheritance of a completely different nature.

    It is, for example, the Lawful Heirs who inherit the Earth: the land and soil. It is no mistake that the Americans claim their Lawful Persons.

    Blessed be the peacekeepers and the honest men and women in every country and nation.

    Blessed be the Heirs of the Living God.

    Blessed be those who hear these words and heed them.

    And may the lawyers among us finally learn what their real job is.


  6. #646
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Anna von Reitz
    20 hrs

    For All The Jural Assemblies- 49 Republic or Republican, Civil or Civilian

    As is now apparent to everyone, confusion and semantic deceits are the stock-and-trade of crooked lawyers.

    It should come as no surprise that these same devices which seek to confuse "Citizens of The United States" with "citizens of the United States" and to pass off "the State of Wyoming" for "The State of Wyoming" have been employed to promote other self-interested gambits.

    There is right now a concerted effort to confuse "Republics" with "Republican States" and to pass off the "Civil Government" for the "Civilian Government" we are owed.

    Most people in America are not well-prepared to recognize this ruse for what it is, because the study of Latin even in the Church has been suppressed since the 1960's.

    However, there are still a few dinosaurs, present company included, who do recognize Latin and do have the ability to properly interpret the full one-third of our Founding Documents which are written in Latin. So it is up to us to clue the rest of you in to the fine points.

    What our Forefathers built and what they envisioned from the start was a "republican" state and a "republican form of government". Please note those two letters "an" that are attached to the word "republic". In Latin, this converts the word from the male gender to the female gender, and conveys a significantly different meaning than the word, "republic".

    With a "republican form of government" everyone in this country has both rights and responsibilities. Everyone has the right to own land and other property interests. Everyone has a duty to uphold the public law.
    Everyone has a duty to defend our country. Our nation extends down to the poorest and up to the richest among us. We are all equal in our political status, all enabled to elect fiduciary deputies to conduct our public business, all equally protected under the Public Law.

    In a "republican state" the population is organized similar to the present government of the Swiss Cantons.

    The job of American governance begins around the kitchen table, which is the focus of power, because the ultimate source of political power in a republican state is vested in the living people and extends outward from the family to the community to the county to the state to the country as a whole.

    The living people occupy the pinnacle of power in a republican state and they are what is known as the civilian government.

    By now you have noticed that those two pesky little letters "an" are also attached to the word "civil" to create the word "civilian".

    As in the above example of "republican" versus "republic", the addition of "an" to the word "civil" converts it to "civilian" and converts the gender of the Latin from male to female, which changes the meaning and flavor of the word. "Civil" can refer to any function of government that is not military, but "civilian" can only refer to the people as in "civilian population" -- themselves.

    Thus a "civil action" is not necessarily a "civilian action", and vice versa.

    Now we've looked at what a "republican state" and a "republican form of government" implies and also noted the difference between "civil" and "civilian". It's time we looked at the male counterparts -- "republic" and "civil".

    You may be sure that if our Forefathers had meant to establish "State Republics" instead of "republican states" they had the command of language and thought to do so. The fact that they did not create "State Republics" and did not choose this as their form of government should raise some red flags in the minds of those who are mistakenly describing our States of the Union as "Republics".

    Americans have never had any "State Republics" much less have we embraced "a" political Republic to represent our Federation of States. We have never embraced "democracy" either, apart from the concept that everyone's power at the ballot box is equal.

    Those who are spouting off about "a" Republic and "State Republics" are either: (1) ignorant; or (2) undeclared agents of the Municipal Government of Washington, DC. --- trying to foist their foreign form of government off onto unwary Americans, using more semantic deceits.

    The Municipal United States Government doing business as "the" United States, operates as a separate plenary oligarchy that is structured as an independent international city-state. It is its own separate little country plopped down in the middle of the District of Columbia, which is run in turn by the Territorial United States Government. This Municipal city state is run entirely according to the whims of the members of Congress.
    See Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitutions to see where this is allowed.

    The Municipal Government is "inhabited" exclusively by "persons" --- not "populated" by "people"-- and these persons are functioning as either: (1) Oligarchs with unrestricted power; or (2) some form of "Citizen of the United States" --- a corporate officer or municipal employee or dependent of the Municipal Government; or (3) a SLAVE -- a corporation chartered under the auspices of this separate government.

    Note that these are decidedly not "republican states" and as separate STATE oligarchies under the plenary control of the members of Congress are not operating as any "republican form of government", either.

    As we saw earlier, the word "civil" can be applied to any function of government that is not military, and that is in fact how the Municipal United States Government is described as the "Civil Government" --- please note because this is extremely important ---- it is not the civilian government, which is our government, to which both the Civil Government (Municipal) and the Military Government (Territorial) owe Good Faith Service.

    It is the Municipal Government which has styled itself as "a" Roman-style Republic and which has usurped outside its stipulated boundaries and functions to create for itself a shadow government of Municipal STATES OF STATES which are styled as "Republics" and as "State Republics".

    This separate "Civil Government" which is here on our shores providing federal non-military services [think Postal Service, Customs Houses, Tax Collection, etc.] under the provisions of The Constitution of the United States, is the source of the oft-noted symbol of the Roman Fasces -- a bundle of sticks -- that appears around the Federal Capitol and on various seals and emblems associated with this element of the Federal Government.

    Unfortunately, the members of Congress elected by "US Citizens" and "Citizens of the United States" ---- have gone into business for themselves, while we, purportedly anyway, have been "absent".

    This False Claim against our Government of the People, for the People, and by the People, has been promoted using the excuse that the original "States of States" serving our States of the Union ceased to function after the Civil War. We can answer this easily enough by saying, "So what?"

    Our States of the Union have never ceased to function, and as the source of all the "Delegated Powers" that the Federal Government ever exercised, our States are competent by definition to take over and run any aspect of government that is otherwise unfulfilled --- Federal, State, County, or otherwise.

    The current attempts by the Municipal Government and its Undeclared Agents to promote their "Republic" as a substitute for our unincorporated United States of America and to promote their "State Republics" ---- which are merely foreign commercial corporation franchises---as a substitute for our "republican states" is at best attempted international commercial fraud and at worst open treason against our Lawful Government and against the Constitutions we are owed.

    This is especially concerning as regards the issue of citizenship.

    Those serving the Federal Government and their Dependents have always been afforded Dual Citizenship with the intention that those Americans providing Federal Services would be able to retain the protections of their American State National status at the same time that they worked as either "United States Citizens" or as "Citizens of the United States".

    Unfortunately, many members of the current Federal Government branches have abused this generous arrangement to adopt totally foreign citizenship obligations. Some consider themselves Dual Citizens of the Territorial and Municipal Governments. Others, like many members of Congress, have styled themselves as Municipal Government Citizens and citizens of entirely foreign countries. Many Democrats and some Republicans function as citizens of their plenary oligarchy and also citizens of Israel, Monaco, England, and so on.

    As such, these people are expatriating themselves from any association with our States and our Lawful Government, placing themselves outside of our Constitutions and our Public Law, while still pretending to be our "Representatives" and to have our permission to charge their expenses against our credit.

    This allows them, at least superficially, to operate as foreigners immune from prosecution on our shores. But, please note, this sword cuts both ways.

    At the point they violate our Public Law, they are simply foreign criminals on our shores, like illegal immigrants, subject to international arrest warrants and detainment. They are owed no protection under the constitutions, and owed no loyalty, as they have betrayed their own country and their countrymen alike.

    Also to the point, as their actual political status was not disclosed to those voting in the corporate elections, they need to be deprived of office and have their elections overturned. Remember that they work under contract, and for a contract to be binding, it must be fully disclosed.

    Bottom Line: educate everyone as to the current effort to confuse our "republican states" with their State Republics doing business as STATES OF STATES ----incorporated "STATES", and to confuse our civilian government with their own Civil Government, which is a foreign subcontractor on our shores.

    They are trying to usurp authority from our missing Federal States of States, and from our actual States of the Union, and once again, they are using semantic deceit to try to accomplish this ---- deliberately promoting their foreign "Republics" and their "Civil Government" as if these were our "republican states" and our "civilian government".

    Refuse to be confused and do not support any of these charlatans in their con game. Educate all Americans and spread the word.


  7. #647
    Platinum
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,142
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 485 Times in 332 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjon View Post
    Educate all Americans and spread the word.
    Do you have a license to practice education?

  8. #648
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by ziero0 View Post
    Do you have a license to practice education?
    Don't need no stinkin license, as god granted the right.

  9. #649
    Platinum
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,142
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 485 Times in 332 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjon View Post
    Don't need no stinkin license, as god granted the right.
    Right! That is the dominion over animals argument.

    education (n.)

    1530s, "child-rearing," also "the training of animals," from Middle French education (14c.) and directly from Latin educationem (nominative educatio) "a rearing, training," noun of action from past-participle stem of educare (see educate). Originally of instruction in social codes and manners; meaning "systematic schooling and training for work" is from 1610s.

    All education is despotism. [William Godwin, "Enquirer," 1797]

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to ziero0 For This Useful Post:

    Bigjon (22nd April 2019)

  11. #650
    Great Value Carrots Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    4,526
    Thanks
    2,272
    Thanked 1,532 Times in 904 Posts

    Re: Anna von Reitz: Answers to Questions

    Anna von Reitz
    2 hrs

    For All the Jural Assemblies - 50 Congresses

    We all think of "the" Congress, but in fact, "Congress" is a very broad word and basically means "meeting" and, to be honest, a "verbally raucous meeting" --as in a "Congress of Crows". It has in its original meaning and context none of the dignity accorded to the word today, and a return to the earlier understanding would be healthier and far more realistic for our purposes.

    The original Congress that we think of, known as "The First Continental Congress" was exactly such a meeting --- raucous and undisciplined and largely unofficial, as it was the equivalent of a Committee of the House of Burgesses meeting off-site in the City of Philadelphia, a jurisdiction foreign to the Colonies being represented. "The Second Continental Congress" was no different or better in terms of being a contentious and largely unofficial meeting of men recognized as deputies (fiscal officers) of their colonies.

    A "colony" is itself a "farm family community"--- it has no land of its own, because a king or pope or other potentate has assumed ownership of the land, nonetheless, these two Congresses of fiscal deputies sent from thirteen colonies are styled as "Continental Congresses" for a reason.

    It is from their actions that The American Revolutionary War derived, was prosecuted, and brought to the successful conclusion in which the colonists gained control of the land and soil of this country and ultimately, this portion of the North American Continent.

    The American Revolution was substantially about ownership of soil and land, about the right to expand westward (in contravention of Treaties that the King of England had with the Native Tribal Leaders) as much as it was about freedom and the rights and dignity of mankind.

    The colonists, all considered members of their respective farm family communities, whether they lived in towns or not, naturally and immediately gave rise to separate nations-- groups of people identifying with a common cultural, historical, political and geographical history.

    That is, the people of the colonies gave rise to nations once they declared their interest in the land and soil: the Colonists of Georgia--- became in the words of the (eventual) Treaty of Paris (1783) a "free, sovereign and independent people"--- Georgians, the Colonists of New York became New Yorkers, and the Colonists of Virginia became Virginians... and so on.

    Similarly, having obtained the right to the soil and land and having declared their ownership, the former colonists were suddenly in possession of land jurisdiction states that occupied the same boundaries as the former colonies, more or less, and the people who were now recognized as Georgians, New Yorkers, Virginians and so on, were left to define these new sovereign States, nail down their official borders, and in all other ways decide upon all the issues which would enable them to act as responsible members of the international community of states and nations.

    And all of this devolved upon them while they were engaged in fighting the Revolutionary War and throughout the decades following.
    Chaos reigned. And England meddled.

    Each new State issued its own currency for the purposes of trade. Some of the new States did a better, more responsible job of this than others, and prospered, but some States suffered inflation and other ills of bad monetary policy---- aided by British counterfeiting of the American States' currencies---all of which served to undermine the stability and economic viability of the new States.

    Their first attempt to issue a mutual international currency, the Continental Dollar, was counterfeited and inflated into oblivion.

    So another "Congress" was called, and this was a meeting -- a congress --- of The United States in Congress Assembled.
    Please notice the exact words and styles of the words.

    Jointly and severally, The United States, meaning those "States" that derived from the original Colonies and their Union of States formed by The Unanimous Declaration of Independence, did what? Ah, they "Assembled" for a meeting--- a Congress, but it was no longer a "Continental Congress", it was The United States Congress.

    Why?
    Because this body of delegates was meeting to discuss business that concerned a different jurisdiction. They were next meeting to discuss political (for example, international trade) and financial (currency) issues.
    Every Congress since then has met to address these sorts of issues.

    There has never again been a Continental Congress held to specifically address land and soil issues.

    As you page through the history of this country you will find that there have been many different kinds of "Congresses" called to meet, both in Philadelphia, and later in Washington, DC. The topics that these "Congresses" addressed and the nature and composition of the delegations attending these meetings have changed over time. This is always indicated by the records kept of these meetings.

    Thus we have the Continental Congresses, The United States in Congress Assembled, The United States of America in Congress Assembled, The Congress of the united States of America, The Congress of the United States, The Congress of the United States of America, and so on and on.

    Any idea or impression that there is now or has ever been an entity known as "the" Congress representing this country is just that --- an impression, not a truth, not an actuality. Instead, what has happened over time, is that a practice of electing "Congressional Delegations" has developed, and whatever kind of "Congress" meets, meets.

    Washington, DC, itself, is like a hotel or a conference center, where delegations of various kinds and statures can hold "Congresses" --- that is, meetings--- on neutral turf. The fact that "a" Congress meets in Washington, DC, grants it no special or pre-determined purpose or identity. Rather, Washington, DC, is like a bird's nest that can be occupied sequentially by robins, cuckoos, crows, and meadow larks.

    For the sake of sanity, only one such Congress can meet in Washington, DC at a time, but there have been occasions in our history when multiple complete Congressional Delegations have met at the same time, one in Philadelphia and another in New York and another in Washington, DC.

    All the Delegates of all these Congresses are empowered to speak for their own body politic and to speak to their own particular issues.

    Thus, a meeting of "The United States of America in Congress Assembled" is a meeting of Delegates who are elected by land jurisdiction States and by the People of those States who are American State Citizens, and such a Congress is empowered to exercise the full range of "powers" possessed by those States of the Union.

    A meeting of "The Congress of the United States of America" by comparison, is a meeting of Delegates elected by "United States Citizens" comprising the Territorial United States "citizenry" and such a Congress is empowered to exercise the limited range of powers and address such issues as "The Constitution of the United States of America" places in their grasp.

    You are no doubt beginning to get the true flavor of the situation that our country faces: "the" Congress presently meeting in Washington, DC, is not our Congress of the American States and People. It's "a" Congress representing Federal Citizens -- not American State Citizens.

    It has been a very long time since the People of this country exerted themselves to act in their sovereign capacity and assembled their States of the Union and sent Fiduciary Deputies to a meeting of The United States of America in Congress Assembled, and it is long overdue.

    That is why those of you who have the ability to claim your birthright political status as American State Citizens are being called to correct all the falsified Territorial United States Birth Registrations that have been issued in your names without your knowledge or consent, and also part of the reason that you are being called to Assemble your States of the Union.

    Your States will, once they are ready, elect their Delegates to attend a meeting of The United States of America in Congress Assembled, and they will then address and define those issues which only the actual States and People of this country can address.

    Most likely, this meeting of our Congress will occur in Philadelphia, owing to the fact that the Municipal and Territorial Congresses are almost continually holding court in Washington, DC.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •