by Anna Von Reitz
Dear Friends,
Last night all Hell broke loose--- but in a good sense. For many years
people have sought to determine the source, meaning, and implications of the use
of all capital letter naming conventions. Why should such a name as "JOHN HENRY
DOE" exist? How is it different from "John Henry Doe"? Or "john henry doe"
for that matter?
I have researched it and written memorandums on the results that show that
the use of these different "styles" were used in Ancient Roman Civil Law as a
means of distinguishing between free men, bondservants, and slaves, with the
"john henry doe" stile indicating a free man, and "John Henry Doe" indicating a
bondservant, and "JOHN HENRY DOE" indicating a slave.
The implications of this ancient history taken together with the
circumstance surrounding the end of the Civil War (with millions of freed slaves
representing "abandoned property" at least to some criminally minded members of
the Congress) and the adoption of the 14th Amendment to the Corporate
"Constitution" in 1868 and "corporate citizenship" with it----- are obvious
without a degree in rocket science.
And now, thanks to friends and fellow researchers in Australia we have the
nails to this coffin and are enabled to issue the attached Judicial Notice of
Fraud and Violation and Order to Cease and Desist.
It is perhaps most fitting that this comes on the eve of the Memorial Day
Weekend, when we remember all the good men and women who have fought and died
for freedom, and our obligations to them to make sure that freedom for all men
and women is secured against the schemes and crimes of perpetrators both foreign
and domestic.
God bless you all and may you be assured that your cause is just and your
vision righteous as you continue the work of restoring America and putting an
end to the crimes and the breaches of trust that have plagued the entire
world.
Judge Anna
Here is the Notice to the Hague:
http://annavonreitz.com/haguenoticeoffraud.pdf
Some questions about the exact text referenced and the grammar used in my Order have arisen
The Cease and Desist is in regard to the use of the conventions of the Glossa and the Glossa itself, if this question is in regard to the Order I released. I don’t pretend to know or speak to the other cease and desist that you advertised at the same time.
Some questions about the exact text referenced and the grammar used in my Order have arisen so I will take the opportunity to respond to those known queries—
There are two books (one is more like a booklet) — the Chicago Manuel of Style and The Chicago Manuel of Styles both of which adequately describe the use and misuse of the Glossa — all capital letters– form of American Sign Language in court proceedings.
The rest of the word may be a bit confusing and it may appear that verbs and subjects mismatch but in fact I am making a distinction in Legalese between the conventions that use the Glossa and the Glossa itself and making both subject to the Order.
This means that if anyone uses all capital letter NAMES in a court case as a means of identifying a corporate “person” separate from but represented by a living man of the same name, this convention is prohibited along with the use of the Glossa itself.
Both the practice and the object are grounds for claims of misrepresentation, non-disclosure, and fraud.
Hope that clears things up for everyone.
Judge Anna
I too give thanks to your friends and fellow researchers in Australia who have discovered the nails to put into coffin of the NAME. Will these "nails" be shown to us too?
ReplyDeleteM