How They Fuck With You Using Law and Language

This is an interesting read I came across, supposedly written by Judge Anna von Reitz. I cannot vouche for her, if she exists or what she says, but it's provocative.

TLDR- don't be a goldfish in a bowl, but essentially, our so called government uses sneaky legal language, entrapment and deceit to gain your consent to be ruled by it. And by it, I refer to the artificial entity called The United States (Inc) since it is technically a corporation.


MILITARY AND AMERICANS  - LISTEN UP!!!

JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ 

[https://scannedretina]   Got my She-Bear on after listening long enough to Mr. Wolfgram.  He backed off and asked some decent things in decent words, so I replied.  It is an explanation that might help with military personnel - something they might understand better.

The word "constitution” applies to a whole range of contracts involving indebtedness--in this case, the debt the States incurred when they mutually contracted for services from the new federal company they created. Look up the word "constitution” in any legal dictionary.  That would be a real good place for any "constitutional scholar” to start. 

There are "constitutions” all over the planet-- they all revolve around indebtedness. That"s why it was called a "Constitution”-  It"s a business contract-- an equity contract--a commercial contract, nothing more or less, split into two distinct parts-- a public trust indenture and a commercial services agreement.

The only sense in which The Constitution is the "Supreme Law of the Land” is that it is NOT the Supreme Law of the Sea.  

The landed (E)states agreed to delegate nineteen enumerated "powers” to the federal government-"powers” in the sense of "mandates to perform”nineteen functions normally reserved to sovereign states and to receive and pay for these services.  

It also limited the powers of the federal government at the same time, mandating a separation of powers between land and sea.    

From the perspective of the District of Columbia City State operating in 1789- which was and still is operating in a foreign and maritime jurisdiction-  the Constitution is literally the "Law of the Land”-- that is, the law that the Federales are required to observe when operating on the land of the domestic states.

If you are a sailor and you go on liberty in a port of call, you are very definitely aware of both the law of the land and the law of the sea, because while you are on shore you have to pay attention to the local law - or the land police will arrest you-and at the same time, you have to be aware of the law of the sea-because if you disobey your captain or go AWOL from his ship, you will be subject to court martial in the Navy.  

What happens in real life in this analogy?  The sailor goes ashore, gets drunk, gets in a brawl, busts up a local pub, breaks a local baker"s nose, and gets arrested by the local cops.  They call the military police.  The military police take charge of the miscreant and throw him in their separate jail.  The charges against him are brought before a military court, not a civilian court. He is subject to a tougher, more draconian standard of law-- that of Admiralty-and is penalized for his misbehavior according to the Law of the Sea even though the brawl took place on land.  Why?  

Because sailors, like merchant mariners, are all subject to the Law of the Sea, even when they are on land.  Sailors are subject to Admiralty and Merchant Mariners are subject to Civil Maritime.  

What happens if a Landsman were allowed on board a ship and did the same exact kinds of things--went on board to a dinner party, got drunk, got into a brawl on board ship, got arrested by the military police on board? The civil authorities would come collect him and throw him in their jail.  The complaint would be addressed in the jurisdiction of the land, according to the Law of the Land-because he is an inhabitant of the land, even though the offense took place on board a ship. 

If you are former USMC Recon, you are fully aware of what I am talking about, and no doubt have had direct experience with precisely these sorts of situations, so you have no reason to disbelieve a word I am saying. 

So now you ask- how to return to "that” status, meaning your birthright status as an inhabitant of the land, owed the American Common Law, and in possession of all your Natural and Unalienable Rights, able to control your own government and enforce the guarantees of The Constitution? 

First, you"ve got to make it clear that you aren"t a sailor or a merchant mariner.  

Literally. 

Because that is what these rats have claimed about you.  They have claimed that you "voluntarily” entered their "federal” maritime jurisdiction and accepted their "US citizenship” instead of maintaining your natural State Citizenship and chose to be subject to the Law of the Sea- not the Law of the Land that they owe you under The Constitution.  This is why these courts refuse to hear Constitutional arguments and hold people in contempt when they try to bring forward their Constitutional guarantees.  Oh, yes, the guarantees still exist, but they don"t apply to "US citizens”, just like the laws of the land don"t apply to sailors.  

By doing this legal chicanery these cretins have removed you from your natural habitation on the land and deprived you of the American Common Law you are owed and they have made you subject to their foreign "law”, instead-- which is NOT national in character, but internatonal.  Remember a Merchant Mariner is subject to the law of Civil Maritime even when on the land and a sailor is subject to Admiralty Law even when on the land. 

The Law of the Land is the law of nations and states.  

The Law of the Sea is international in nature.    

Think about it.   

All nations exist on the land.  They all have their laws.  But the sea is not chopped up into nations.  It is contiguous and flows around, between, and against the land.  It is international in nature. 

Imagine for a moment that you are in an international court of law, designed to address the conflicts between many different peoples and nations.  Do they care what the "law” of South Africa is?   Or Uzbekistan?  Or Paraguay?   No.  It"s one law, applicable to all entities before it.   So what good does it do for us to demand that our American Constitution be followed, when we are in international jurisdiction, presumed to be subject to the Law of the Sea instead?  Now you are beginning to see the essence of the problem.  

The Federal Government has been operated under conditions of semantic deceit and fraud by the Federal Reserve System doing business as the "United States of America, Inc.” and later, by the IMF doing business as the UNITED STATES (INC).  These banking cartels operating "similarly named” governmental services corporations have colluded to seize and misappropriate our credit and to hypothecate debt against our assets, and they have done this under international law by creating trusts and transmitting utilities merely named after us and by committing a crime known as personage against us-which involves deliberately confusing a corporation like "J.C. PENNY” with a living man named james-clarenceenny”.  

They have named several such legal fiction entities after you.  Say your name is john-percy:wolfgram?  There"s a foreign situs trust established to benefit the Federal ”State” of _________wherever you were born.   There"s an ESTATE trust operating as "JOHN PERCY WOLFGRAM” in Puerto Rico, benefiting the UNITED STATES (INC.)   

And just recently the rats have booted up a transmitting utility doing business as "JOHN P. WOLFGRAM” under United Nations auspices. 

All these legal fictions bearing your name are being operated in foreign international jurisdictions under the Law of the Sea and none of them have a damned thing to do with you, except to function as devices to defraud you and control you and enslave you and lay false claims against your labor and other property assets.   

THAT is the problem.  And it is not a matter of politics and it is not anything to do with "interpreting” The Constitution.  It is a matter of pure corruption and criminality.  It requires a  police action on an international scale, by which the nations of the land revolt against this "System” and send the perpetrators-- bankers and lawyers-to jail for a very long time. 

Now, if you are at all what you say you are, if you are sincere in wanting to discuss The Constitution and getting back to a point where we have a say in our governance, realize that we have to come home to land jurisdiction first and foremost to do that.  We cannot let them "define” us as either merchant mariners nor as sailors-- not "US citizens” or "United States Citizens” or any of the other fanciful corporate variations.  We have to claim our birthright citizenship on the land as "Wisconsin State Citizens” or "Ohio State Citizens” --etc.

Once upon a time it was proper in some contexts for Americans to describe themselves as "Citizens of the State of Wisconsin”-–but since 1868 the entire meaning of that phrase has been changed, because the "federal government”- a foreign, for profit, privately owned corporation under contract to provide governmental services- established franchises and named them after the real "State of Wisconsin” or "State of Montana” so that when you say you are a "Citizen of the State of Ohio” it is impossible to tell whether you are talking about the land based American "State” or the maritime based "Federal State” of the same name.  

This is all about fraud via semantic deceit, abuse of the right of usufruct wrongly claimed by these run amok corporations and personage.  
These are crimes being committed against you and your family and your country by foreign usurpers-criminal banking cartels and lawyers.  
So until these "larger issues” are addressed, the interpretation of the Constitution is not really a big concern.  
Stuffing the heads of certain business men into a toilet in Puerto Rico is more of a direct concern

 

How could we make sure we are not brianwashed? Establishing your personal sovereignty would be a good place to start. Although in thus tangled web of bullshit it can be tricky.

A good example for me, is the gay rights movement. They were (IMO) lead to demand permission to be able to marry etc. When, if sovereign, they wouldn't ask a damn soul for permission. They wanted the perks of insurance and other such benefits. The problem wasn't that they didn't get the special treatment like heterosexual marriages, the problem is that heterosexual marriages shouldn't either. What fucking business does the government have in our marriages? I will jot be getting a fucking marriage certificate, like I earned an award for being a proper slave. I'll get a common law marriage and say fuck them and their perks.

I wish I was older so I could have influenced the movement in this way when they were a powerful movement. I think I'm a bit too late now.