Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 3300 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove unwarranted personal attacks. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Sunday, February 25, 2018

What Isn't There and Why It Is Important


By Anna Von Reitz

In seeking the historical truth it is necessary to not only look at what is present, but also what isn't there ---that should be.

I have pointed out that what we call "The American Civil War" was never actually a war, but was an illegal commercial mercenary action carried out on our shores by the Hired Help.

How can I prove this?  There is no formal Declaration of War and no Peace Treaty ending the so-called civil war. 

It was a "conflict" like the Vietnam "Conflict".

In the same way I can prove that the bulk of the Reconstruction Acts remain in effect for the Territorial United States Government, by the absence of any wholesale repeal of those acts.

And it is the same way with The Articles of Confederation formed in 1781.

We have all been fed this "explanation" that the Constitutions superseded the Articles of Confederation, but this is not so and is merely a convenient assumption, because again--- there is no action ending or repealing The Articles of Confederation recorded anywhere. 

If they weren't repealed, they were obviously not superseded.  

Instead, the "perpetual Union of States" these Articles of Confederation created survived the adoption of the constitutions just fine, and were in fact included as part of the process as parties to The Constitution for the united States of America. 

"States of America" was and is the doing-business-as-name of the Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation.  You can now see that they were the parties holding the National level Constitution in the federal government.  (Read my monograph, America: Some Assembly Required to see how the actual structure worked.) http://annavonreitz.com/americasomeassemblyrequired.pdf

Some break-away members of this Confederation attempted to dissolve the "perpetual Union" established by The Articles of Confederation  by forming The Confederate States of America, but they lacked the unanimous support required to do so. 

It would be tempting to assume that fighting broke out among the member states of the Confederation as a result of this schism, but because Abraham Lincoln was a Bar Member, we can be sure that that is not the case, either.

The Titles of Nobility Amendment made part of The Constitution for the united States of America in 1819 precluded Lincoln from holding any office related to the States of America.  He could only act as President of the foreign companies providing Territorial and Municipal government services-- that is, the British United States of America (Company) and the Holy Roman Empire's United States (Company).

Thus what you are really witnessing as "The American Civil War" was an internal federal government cat-fight among some members of the States of America who broke away and attempted to form a new union of southern states doing business as The Confederate States of America against the British Territorial franchise and its ally the Holy Roman Empire's Municipal franchise.

The end result is that these foreign governmental services providers "won" their contest against The Confederate States of America, but could never claim any victory over the States of America represented by all the people and states that remained loyal to the original Union of States formed under The Articles of Confederation.

This then gives rise to the peculiar claim made by the Territorial and Municipal United States Governments that our National Government has been in "abeyance" for 150 years, and which has been their excuse for secretively usurping and preying upon the American states and people. 

Why have you never heard that your government was thought to be in abeyance?   Why have you never known that Abraham Lincoln could not possibly function as the President of the united States of America?  Why were you always given the "impression" that The Articles of Confederation simply disappeared after the Constitutional Conventions? 

Well, now you know.  It's because of what isn't there in the public records, what has been deliberately obfuscated and hidden and destroyed and "explained away" by the foreign Hired Help, which has helped itself to our natural resources and controlled and misdirected our government, and eaten out the substance of our labor, and waged surreptitious "war" against their employers, and illegally conscripted our young people to fight in wars for profit, and generally speaking, has operated as a rogue and criminal entity for six generations---and has done so under conditions of fraud, deceit, breach of trust, and violation of commercial contract.

This secretive and self-interested commandeering of our lawfully established government by the British Monarchs and the Holy See and their misuse of our delegated authority has meant that America has been their store front, their puppet, and via this deceit we have been blamed for their misdeeds and saddled with their debts and oppressed by their tax collectors.

This is why James Clinton Belcher has issued the Declarations and Proclamations ending any presumed "abeyance" of our government, acting as the Hereditary Head of State for The United States of America (unincorporated)---which is our sovereign level government in international jurisdictions.

It remains for us all to take action to fully restore the local county jural assemblies owed to our actual states, to assemble our lawful state conventions, and to convene a Continental Congress to address these matters. The foxes have been guarding our hen house for six generations. Nobody has been minding the store, though it has appeared otherwise. The facts of the matter are now set before us and the international community has been fully informed.


 ----------------------------
See this article and over 800 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

 To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.

18 comments:

  1. From time to time the top appeals court will act like constitution is fine.but we have been transformed in 1871 to a body corporate . We're in the Constitution let's us be treated like a corporate entity ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. probably doesnt answer your question, but related.

      tricky part is "corporate" literally can also just mean "group of people", i.e. no "business" entity per se. it can also presumably mean a single natural person, if there is noone else in that "group", but most people dont consider that a "majority".

      that "corporate" usage is perhaps less used nowadays, but i found it on case mentioned in www.freesovereignandindependent.com if i recall correctly. believe this is penhallow v. doanes administrators, 17-something or other. page 5 of that site.

      the court tried to clarify "what does it mean to prosecute/sue/take to court a state?"

      and the judge reasoned this meant "collectively everyone in that state is being taken to court".

      and the judge reasoned just because the constitution states courts can hear one way, the other clearly applies too, e.g. "joe schmoe versus new york" also means "new york versus joe schmoe" is possible (some people argued it was only one way, but judge pointed out other parts of constitution imply it had to have meant both ways, likewise it would not make sense only one side could bring such an action, with other side not having the same right)

      of course, with "federal citizens" "residing" in the "states" and also being "state citizens" this muddies things.

      that should partially answer your question. i guess you are hinting at the difference between joe schmoe, individual versus joe schmoe, new yorker. presumably the latter is included when someone sues "new york"

      one state suing another state IIRC is also a thing. so, that means "everyone in state x, suing everyone in state y"

      now, of course, they dont haul everyone to court, or even notify them. the "representatives" (and their reps, etc.) likely claim to handle such things on behalf of everyone in the state.

      Delete
    2. "corporate" "corpse" "habeus corpus" means "body" of course.

      so a group of people is a "corporation" anytime they act "as one body", any incorporated "entity" or not.

      that type of "corporation" does not automatically imply "commerce" "commercial paper" etc. although that might follow.

      that type of "corporation" i believe is part and parcel of any type of "state". even private people, if they claim to be a "texan" etc. they are part of that "body corporate". totally separate from incorporated "business" commerce "commercial" "civil law" entities, as they may be unincorporated, but acting as a "single body".

      Delete
    3. i should emphasize that case i cited was "citizens of one state suing another state" or vice versa.

      the "federal citizens can also be state citizens and reside in a state" muddies things. that was never anticipated.

      i have read elsewhere "congress can make a rule of naturalization" strictly meant they can make a rule, but states have to implement it, and it was meant to promote state citizenship, not restrict it, like "regulate commerce amongst the states" etc. that source claimed "congress" of course granted themselves the power to "implement" it later, parts of civil rights and/or reconstruction IIRC.

      what also blurs things is "congress" now makes "corporations" and/or "public/private partnerships". publically funded and liability, "private" profits.

      i dont believe that is anywhere, but they will say it is "necessary to carry out their other tasks"

      see "maxim" bouviers 1856, www.dict.org a delegate cannot re-delegate. appointing one person by default disallows anyone else not named.

      so they violate that all the time :/

      Delete
  2. Time to break out the rubber boots and the Shynola slickers and getting some "shoulder" length rubber gloves from the veterinarian. We have some animals to take care of; and don't forget the safety glasses.? You wouldn't want to get a mote in your eyes...or any thing else...for that matter!

    ReplyDelete
  3. We need "Diplomatic Immunity" as Americans along with complimental "passport statuses" that alerts all other corporate controlled countries that we cannot be touched or we can command our embacies and entire military forces to come to our aid, even if that means destroying that entire country just for one American..that was the original reason for those 19 delegations of authority in the first place...if they won't act on our behave, then they all have to be replaced or dismantled completely..!! Our military won t like that very much..!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am in agreement. I have created an ID at ansis.org, but until we get some formal recognition by white hats still in the corporate side, we are mere cannon fodder! Whom do ww appeal to? The UN? Not likely. We need an internationally recognized form of passport distinguishing us

      Delete
    2. Try World Service Authority in Washington, D.C. I believe they have been around since 1953. I haven't gotten mine yet but plan to. Have read they are honored most everywhere. They issue world passports and id's.

      Delete
  4. I would like the SOURCE "proving" we have this "hereditary Sec. of State"!!! I make the claim that I am "king of the world" and my tax rate for providing for your subsistence is 100% so send me ALL of your money as a sign of your obeisance!!! Until PROOF of said statement is provided, we must treat this as the deluded rantings of a mentally disturbed person!!! Guess anna and her husband didn't quite READ that 13th/ amendment stating NO titles of nobility, but we are led to believe that we have had a "hereditary" Sec. of state all of these years!!! PROOF PLEASE!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why are you "Unknown"?
      Afraid to expose yourself?
      Posting Anonymously is a well known Troll Trick!

      Delete
    2. LOL I'm just going to point out you have no clue what the a title of nobility is ? and how (whether true or a false in reality) the position of Hereditary Sec. of State counts as one ?????

      Delete
    3. i believe that position is taken.

      "king of the world" makes you "satan"

      satan is "god of this world", "satan" www.dict.org

      "my kingdom is not of this world"

      try contacting belcher foundation, looking at coat of arms, searching braintree massachusetts recofrds circa john adams (they built his house IIRC), geneology, and researching various belchers. there is one democrat in office right now I believe. there is at least one belcher road in FL IIRC. and other places.

      Delete
    4. i'm no priest, but "king of the world" is probably not something you want to be, doubly so around these parts.

      Delete
  5. its also called the enabling clauses that allow the original treaties going back and beyond the Articles of Confederation to exist and remain in tact. one cannot exist without the other as it enables the "newer" renditions but always remember any conflict of law or as Marbury V Madsison stated, if it is repugnant to the Constitution, it aint law. think of it like the bible, how can you have the bible if the old testament doesnt exist?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well yes you can supersede without repealing, if you create a new law that takes greater precedent over the old law the old law just simply goes away into obscurity never officially being repealed.
    "This word, meaning to replace, originally meant “to sit higher” than, from Latin sedere, “to sit.” "
    "Supersede means to take the place of, as by reason of superior worth or right." (By giving something a greater worth it supersedes)

    Clearly the United States (Congress assembled as per Articles of Confederation) had to convene and ratify the Constitution. This process was essentially as if the the Constitution was put in front of Congress as a new Amendment, a Congress that already existed and was passing new legislation.The question is did this new legislation "supersede" and create a new distinct entity eventually becoming superior to its creator?

    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/ressub01.asp

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. not if it is repugnant to the constitution; a conflct of law. which would be construed as special/ex post facto law or bill of attainder so yes and no but not really

      also 9th amendment becomes very important too with a renewed understanding

      Delete
  7. So does a gun and taken much more seriously....!! It just may come down to that for waiting this long to start coming out of the shadows...!@

    ReplyDelete

Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.