By Anna Von Reitz
Most of the time I am patient and explain things as well as I can and as often as necessary, but once in a while, I lose my temper --- just get worn down and pop off at someone who hits me at the wrong moment with something that has been a cause of irritation for days or months or even years. This recently happened with Robert and I would like to apologize.
He wrote to me about the issue of "Affidavits of Truth". He assumed that I was using Certificates to replace Affidavits and referenced an article of mine where I explained that living people who are acting in their unincorporated Lawful Person capacity can't make Affidavits ----- only corporations (like franchises) or officers of corporations can make Affidavits. The rest of us must label our presentations as "Testimony in the Form of an Affidavit".
This is part of the Court Rules and part of the reason that our Testimony doesn't get heard in Court. Another reason is that too many people file their paperwork with the Court Clerk and don't file it with the Prosecutor directly and with the District Attorney.
They aren't obliged to accept your Testimony, read it, react to it or respond to it until and unless you label it properly for what it is and present it to them. Directly.
There is a difference between an "Affidavit" and "Testimony in the Form of an Affidavit", just as there is a difference between a "State of State" and an actual "State".
I get worn out trying to teach people who don't read things closely enough to notice these differences for themselves, and I can get really frustrated with those who still don't notice these things AFTER I have pointed them out.
If a man asserts that he is operating exclusively as a Lawful Person and is owed exemption and exoneration, but then turns around and submits an "Affidavit" instead of a "Testimony in the Form of an Affidavit" he has presented conflicting information.
He is claiming to act in one capacity and then, by submitting an "Affidavit of Truth" instead of "Testimony in the Form of an Affidavit" is demonstrating that he is in fact operating in a completely different capacity. It's like a Colonel in the Army showing up in full dress uniform and claiming that he's a civilian.
If we are going to deal competently with the many issues facing this country, we must all learn to read things much more closely, with more attention to what the words actually say and how things are labeled and named.
So, I am sorry for losing my temper, Robert. It was just the straw that broke the camel's back after months of trying to draw people's attention to similar facts:
A State is not a State of State.
A State of State is not a STATE OF STATE.
An Affidavit is not Testimony in the Form of an Affidavit.
A United States Citizen is not a Citizen of the United States.
An American State National is not a US Citizen.
The United State [Unincorporated] is not the United States, Inc.
The United States of America [Unincorporated] is not the USA, Inc.
Indictments are not Presentments.
A Republican State is not a Republic, etc., etc., etc...
As confusing as the rats have made this, I actually have great sympathy with people who are threading their way through the maze and who care enough to do so. I'm sorry, Robert. Please forgive me for being Grandma Grump.
See this article and over 1600 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.