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 9370 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 any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Monday, October 7, 2019

More to the Flag Officers

By Anna Von Reitz

For my Facebook readers -- you can't see this text in color, but perhaps it can be posted in color on the websites.  It is apparent that many people don't know that the British Commonwealth/Territorial System is under the thumb and forefinger of the Pope, and so is the Municipal Government System.

Read that: King John was King of the Commonwealth, and so his heirs inherit that role. They operate the Commonwealth for the Pope. 

And the Roman Pontiff has operated the City of Rome, aka, Urban Trust, and the whole Municipal Government System worldwide, since 753 BC.

So now you can see that both these offices --- Pope and Pontiff --- have been vested in one man for centuries.

And both these seemingly disparate operations, the British Commonwealth and the worldwide Municipal Government, have in fact been two pockets in the same set of pants.  Or clerical robes.


For brevity I am replying in blue and red. And for sanity, I am starting a new thread. The questions and statements coming back from the Flag Officers appear in black.

How could the Declaration of Independence be a founding doc if the King was given control of the Money and Banking as Arch-treasurer and had control of the States Body Politic as Prince Elector of the United States of America. It does not state the United States.   

Anna Replies: It [The Treaty of Paris, 1783] is talking --- plainly--- about "the" United States of America, which I have told you--- at least ten times--- is the British Territorial United States of America, and NOT our unincorporated Federation of States known as The United States of America.  

[Anna Continued] Can't you literally see the difference between the Proper Name: The United States of America, and the doppleganger operating "in our name" as "the" United States of America?

[Anna Continued] Once you realize that they are talking about the King in his role as the King of the Commonwealth and his rights and duties with respect to the British Territorial United States of America, it makes perfect sense that he would be the "Prince Elector and blah, blah, blah" of a British Territorial --- that is, Commonwealth --- entity.

[From Flags]: This is the founding doc whether you agree or not. And is also why none that claim to represent us are allowed to take an oath to "the Constitution for the United States of America" repeating the words written as the title stated in the Preamble.

I[Anna Replies:] It's the Founding Document --- one of them --- of "the" United States of America,  but certainly not the Founding Document of The United States of America.  And pray tell, exactly why a British Subject ever would be allowed to take an Oath to an American Constitution, when they have their own Constitution --- The Constitution of the United States of America --- to uphold?   You see?  The language and the "styles" used are completely consistent throughout.  And so is the logic. 

[Continued:] There is the Federal Constitution for the States of America (the original Confederation of States formed under The Articles of Confederation in 1781).  That one is called "The Constitution for the States of America"

There is the British Territorial Constitution for "the" United States of America called, logically enough, "The Constitution of the United States of America". 

[Continued:] There is the Municipal Constitution for "the" United States, and it is called --- logically and consistently throughout our history:  "The Constitution of the United States".

[Continued:] It is all right there in front of your face.  You are men who can tunnel their way through an infinity of numbers and complex schematic diagrams.  Why is it necessary to demonstrate this by making little color charts before you notice the different names involved here?   And come to the brilliant conclusion that everything you have brought up proves what I have been telling you all along?

[Flags:] Why did the first use of the Emergency and War Power Act by George Washington actually do in 1791. Washington used the "Emergency Power" portion of the Act at Hamilton’s insistence, to use an existing private bank, controlled by the Crown through its British Board of Trade, to become the first bank of the United States. So what did Lincoln and Roosevelt do with the War Power Act and why was it allowed.

[Anna Replies:] So, let's decode this situation with the clear understanding that "the" United States refers to what?  The Municipal Government authorized at Article I, Section 8, Clause 17. 

[Continued:] The passage above translates as --- George Washington used a Crown Bank to become the first bank of "the" United States --- that is, the Municipal Government.   And so what? 

[Continued;] Why wouldn't he use a British Crown bank as the bank for the Municipal Government?  They are both under the thumb of and working for the benefit of the Pope--- one directly, and one indirectly.  Both pockets flow to Rome.

[Continued:] Remember that just before the Magna Carta was enacted, King John had had a little dust up with Pope Innocent.  As a result, there was a role reversal.  Instead of John being the Grantor of the Commonwealth lands to the Church and the Church working for the King, he agreed to be the Pope's Servant and to act as the Church's Overseer of the Commonwealth lands.  

[Continued;] Read that as: the King of the British Commonwealth works for the Pope, and so do his descendants down to the present day.  George Washington was a descent of King John and all but two "Presidents of the United States"  have been descendants of King John. That is why they hate Trump so much. He's not a descendant of King John.  From their perspective, he's a "common" Dutch Interloper.

[Continued:] Also remember that the British Commonwealth equals the British Territories. 

[Continued:] So George Washington, a descendant of King John, was working for the Pope as Comptroller of the Municipal United States Government, and the British Crown was working for the Pope, too.  So why on Earth wouldn't George Washington do business with a British Crown bank? 

[Continued:] They-- the British Commonwealth and the Pope's Municipal Government--aka, City of Rome Government, aka, Holy Roman Empire (HRE)  worked together hand-in-glove for five hundred years before the American War of Independence.  They continued to work together during Washington's Administration, and during the Lincoln Administration, and during the Roosevelt Administration ---and they still do, and religion --- at least any Christian religion --- has nothing to do with it at all. 


See this article and over 2000 others on Anna's website here:

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

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

Further Clarification for the Flag Officers and Everyone Else:

By Anna Von Reitz

The groups organized by the Michigan General Jural Assembly failed the test and did not organize properly.  

In order to function as actual State Assemblies, those thus organized must be acting in the capacity of American State Nationals (people) or American State Citizens (People) ---- and not acting as any variety of "US" Citizen.  

You find the definition of American State National at 8 USC 1101 (a) 21, and you find the definition of American State Citizen at 8 USC 1101 (a) 22 B.  

The two varieties of United States Citizen are created by the Federal Constitutions ---- they are British Territorial United States Citizens and Papal Municipal citizens of the United States, defined at Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2 and Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3.  

As you can all now very clearly see, these are (4) different political statuses.  

American State Nationals (people) owe no obligation to the government, beyond keeping the peace.  

American State Citizens voluntarily serve their State Government and are the "People" entitled to enforce the constitutional agreements.  

British Territorials owe their allegiance to the British Monarch. 

Municipal citizens owe their allegiance to the Pope.  

Period. It's plain.  It's simple.  It's right in front of all our faces.  That is the way it is.  That is the way it has always been.  And furthermore..... 

Only Americans can assemble American States.  

If anyone needs help understanding that and why that is true, they need to go back to school and check their logic circuits, too.  

Failure to notice that crucial fact ---- that Americans are the only ones who can assemble American States ---- and honor it and organize accordingly,  results in organizations that don't have the correct political status, standing and jurisdiction to function as State Assemblies. 

MGJA let everybody through the door and didn't bother to screen and explain and help people get their paperwork in order and their declarations recorded. 

As a result, the organizations that MGJA built are not State Assemblies.  

They are more "State of State" organizations--- so-called Private Membership Associations---  created by an admixture of confused Americans and both varieties of Federal Citizens milling around. 

No doubt that result was what some of the organizers intended.  

The law and the definitions are clear.  There is no basis for argument. 

If you want to assemble a valid American State Assembly, the people doing this have to declare the fact that they are Americans and operating in the capacity of American State Citizens. 

If you want to do something else ---- like organizing another duplicitous British or Municipal State of State organization to act "for" us in our "absence" --- well, then, both British United States Citizens and Municipal citizens of the United States can participate.  

And this is what MGJA has done, because it failed to properly restrict and define its membership. 

I have explained this to Destry Payne and to the "Alaska Jural Assembly" and to the members of MGJA, and they have plowed right on making false claims for themselves and creating trouble for those of us engaged in assembling the actual States of the Union.  

So much so, that I have come to the conclusion that this is not just a matter of mistake or ignorance --- but a deliberate effort on the part of some persons,  to co-opt and mislead, and sell us a "State of State" instead of a State---again. 

What else can I --- or you --- or anyone else conclude?  Read the definitions.  Follow the logic.  

Can British Territorial Citizens from Puerto Rico constitute Rhode Island?   Can Papist Municipal citizens of the United States constitute Wisconsin?  

No, it's not possible that they can or should, and in 150 years, they never have. All they can do is organize "State of State" organizations to slyly substitute for the American States of States we are owed.   

The American States Assembly is assembling the actual States of the Union now, much to the disgruntlement of those who have benefited themselves from mismanaging our business affairs "for" us, in our "absence", while operating "in our names" in Gross Breach of Trust. 

The organization in Fairbanks calling itself the Alaska Jural Assembly was never properly defined and fell into the MGJA errors and omissions, with the result that they were never part of the American States Assembly and not following the law and requirements to become a legitimate American State Assembly.  

We now have a majority of the States properly organized and populated. We have our political status, standing, and jurisdiction nailed down.  The Alaska State Assembly is not headquartered in Fairbanks, as anyone who cares to look can see.  

As I will also briefly point out ---- a Jural Assembly is only part of a State Assembly.  It's an important part, but only a part.  No organization existing merely as a "Jural Assembly" has the power of a State of the Union.  

So, this is the way it goes ---- Americans to the right, US citizens to the left.  

I am sorry the people in Fairbanks and those working for the MGJA  fell off the Logic Wagon, but they did.  They are all welcome to correct their errors and if they are Americans, welcome to come home again and join their actual State Assembly. 


See this article and over 2000 others on Anna's website here:

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

How do we use your donations?  Find out here. 

To the Flag Officers:

By Anna Von Reitz

I have been accused of "not answering" your questions. I have in fact answered your questions and it behooves you to study the answers.
These answers are being made Public and Published so that nobody can misrepresent the situation or a word I say. If you have any other questions, forward them to me; otherwise, I and everyone else in the world will assume that you have in fact and in truth been answered, and that you now understand fully what you are dealing with and what your duty is.
Question 1: Who administered my "Oath of Office"?
I am a Justice of the Peace, an Officer of a State of the Union ---- not a "State of State". We do not now and never have taken "Oaths" of Office. We honor the Separation of Church and State, as clearly enunciated in Everson v. Board of Education, and also honor the Law of the Land, which in the western world means the Bible, which forbids the taking of oaths.
Both these foreign practices, oath-taking and impersonation in office, originate under the international law of the sea. As a result, the only judges who take Oaths of Office are Federal Judges---either outright while sitting on a US Federal Court bench, or as a Jurist for Hire working for an enfranchised State of State.
Those who serve the actual State simply "accept" the Office we are elected to serve as a Public Duty. If you were familiar with the history of the judiciary and land law, you would already know this.
I am working for the State as defined here at (1), not a STATE OF STATE member of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ---the definition listed as (5):
1856- A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.
(1) Definition of United States of America: The name of this country. The United States, now thirty-one
in number, are Alabama,Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland,Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and California. “
(5) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law.
Please note that Bouvier's is the only Law Dictionary ever adopted for use by the Congress and it is therefore the controlling authority in these matters.
Second, as you know, only Bar Attorneys may serve in Federal Courts and "federalized" --- that is, incorporated State of State Courts. This is because they deal in international law of the sea and in global law of commerce. The definition of "bar attorney" taken from an 1801 British Merchant Marine Handbook is "international shipping clerk". They are supposed to function as Customs Agents aboard ship or be employed in Customs Houses on land. Now, it doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to determine that we are not aboard ship and I am not involved in administering anything in a Customs House, either. The better question is --- what in the hell are all these foreign shipping clerks doing here in our court buildings? And the answer is: the extension of the international law of the sea onto the land is a trespass that was allowed as an "Emergency" measure by the Congress acting in 1865 --- a trespass that has never been adequately corrected because the Reconstruction was never completed. If you were familiar with the history of the establishment of the Federal [Military] District Courts, you would know this, too.
Here is where the Sea Courts came ashore:
March 2, 1867 (14 Stat. 428), divided the ten Southern states into five military districts, each to be commanded by an officer not below the rank of brigadier general. Under the act the primary duties of these commanders were "to protect all persons in their rights of person and property, to suppress insurrection, disorder, and violence, and to punish, or cause to be punished, all disturbers of the public peace and criminals."
Ever since, the use of these courts has expanded, even though they are by definition foreign with respect to our civilian population and lack valid jurisdiction.
That does not mean that our land jurisdiction courts ceased to function, merely that sea courts became common and people forgot (as the present question proves) the difference between land and sea courts.
Third, as you may have cause to know, in 1819, an Amendment to The Constitution of the united States of America was ratified by the States, prohibiting anyone in receipt of foreign titles of nobility from occupying any public office in our Federal government. That includes Bar Attorneys who are all in receipt of the title "Esquire". Though the States are not bound by the contracts of the States of States, we felt it best to honor this prohibition and not allow land jurisdiction justices to be members of the Bar, which creates a natural conflict of interest, and is inappropriate and unnecessary anyway, as we don't practice the law of the sea in our courts.
I hope this adequately explains: (1) why neither I nor any other Justice of the Peace takes an "Oath" of Office; and (2) why our civilian courts practice land law, not sea law; and (3) why our Justices don't have or don't retain any membership in the Bar Associations.
We, the actual Justices of the civilian courts in this country have NEVER taken "oaths" of office for the reasons I have brought to your attention, so the whole presumption that I would take an Oath of Office or that it would be administered in the manner you presume, is faulty from the get-go.
2. I have no "relationship" with the current Pope, Francis, other than to serve as a vocal critic and reminder of his obligations. I had no "relationship" with Benedict XVI, either, other than a private appointment to speak on his behalf to his employees in the Municipal United States Government, and give them Notice that they are operating in "gross error" ---- in direct conflict with their duty owed to the American States and People and in violation of their employment contract.
I am not Roman Catholic. I am a member of the Universal "Catholic" Church at Large, so my business with either Pope is strictly business, and specifically, enforcement of contracts owed to Americans. I brought Benedict's attention to the misconduct of the Municipal United States Government, including The Dead Baby Scam, and did so in a way that required him to either take action against it, or be exposed as a willing accomplice to the fraud and mistreatment we have suffered.
He responded by trying to reorganize and correct the Postal District system, including the Postal District Courts, liquidate the UNITED STATES, INC. for criminal activity, and sending myself and about 900 others out into the world to tell his adherents and employees to cease and desist their impersonation of living flesh.
These practices are against both ecclesiastical law and our constitutional agreements.
The present Pope doesn't appear to care that this is so, and is bent on moving these illicit operations to a new storefront location --- the United Nations. Instead of doing away with the criminality, Francis is trying to protect and continue and expand it. This has nothing to do with religion, nor with politics in any common sense of these words; we are dealing with crime on a global and staggering level. 147 corporations are involved in an interlocking trust directorate scheme aimed at manipulating and controlling everything, destroying all conventional religions, and all national governments. Under Francis, no corrective action has been taken to dismantle or redirect these colluding corporations.
The Flag Officers need to get off their duffs and (1) realize that they have been left clueless and (2) ask themselves why?
I would venture to guess that they have been left clueless so as to better manipulate and misdirect them.
The objective of these 147 corporations and their managers is to rule the world. They are doing this under a guise of peace and love and saving the Earth from climate change and overpopulation---- but in fact, their goal is to create a worldwide system of Corporate Feudalism operated by an oppressive theocracy---- and that theocracy is not Christian. It's a pagan leftover from the days of Rome and it goes even further back, to Babylon.
My question back to the Flag Officers is, "If a Great-Grandma from Big Lake, Alaska, can see what's going on, why can't you?"
3. How is my husband the Head of State for The United States of America?
Get out your trusty Bouvier's Law Dictionary again. Look up the word "President". Tell me what you see?
A President by definition is the Chief Executive Officer of a business enterprise, not a Head of State.
Yet, every country in existence in the 1700's had to have a Head of State in order to function---- and the people who were functioning as Heads of States were all snobs, so they required that all Heads of State must be of royal lineage or have attained sovereignty by force of arms.
George Washington wanted the plum of acting in the power position of President of the United States ---- comptroller of the Pope's Municipal Government, because even back then, he realized that that was where the real power was and also the greatest threat.
George was a Cousin of King George III and a direct descendant of King John, who was "King of the British Commonwealth".
It's important that you grasp the fact that there has not been a true British Monarch since 1066, and William the Conqueror made sure that there never would be again. Upon his death in 1087, he rewarded his loyal Norman Barons by making them all "sovereigns in their own right" and bequeathing them permanent landholdings throughout England. They remained Barons and under fealty to him and his progeny in France, but in England they were all kings in their own right. He did not give his son, John, any land at all---- hence, John's nickname, "John Lacklands".
John was, however, the hereditary Grantor of the Commonwealth ---- the waste lands and properties granted by the former kings of England to the Church to be developed and used for the support of the poor and infirm, and the Normans respected the Church holdings. John had a little spat with the then-Pope, which resulted in a role reversal. Instead of him acting as Grantor and letting the Church develop his lands for their purposes, he became the Church's Administrator, responsible for overseeing the Commonwealth lands. This is the primary Office the Queen still occupies --- Queen of the British Commonwealth --- and the only office related to the land that John's progeny are heirs to. This is where King John became a tool for the Pope, and this is also how all the British Monarchs from John's line also became tools of the Popes, regardless of their religion.
Because the Norman Barons were now "sovereigns in their own right" in England, they and their progeny had the lawful power to create the Magna Carta and enforce it, no matter what King John and his heirs wanted.
This is where my husband's family, or to be more specific, his clan, inherited their sovereignty. They were all kinsmen of William the Conqueror, all part of the Belle Cher clan --- like a Scottish Clan. The head of the Clan is called "the" Belle Cher as an office, similar to "the" MacDonald.
Our Forefathers were much more aware of this history than we are today. Nobody objected to George Washington being the President and overseeing the Pope's Municipal Government; as a descendant of King John, he was naturally fitted for that Office and acceptable to the Pope. However, the former Colonists balked at having Washington also serve as Head of State. That was a bit too close to the King of England, and they certainly didn't want to get embroiled with the King of France..... or the King of Spain, which would just lead them back into a lot of European intrigue.
John Adams was a neighbor of the Belchers who lived in Braintree, Massachusetts. They introduced him to William Belcher, "the" Belcher at that time, a Colonel in the Continental Army who served at White Plains and diverse other battles. William was a "sovereign in his own right" under the terms of The Settlement of the Norman Conquest and thus enabled to serve as our country's Head of State. That's why the Great Seals of both The United States and The United States of America are visibly and actually part of the Belcher Array of Arms ----- take a good look at the various Belcher Coats of Arms and tell me what you see?
Just as his ancestor William, the Conqueror, had done in England, William Belcher declared during his lifetime that all the men who served in the Continental Army and all the children born on the land and soil of this country, would be "sovereigns in their own right" forevermore. This is memorialized in his Will, using the same basic language as used to convey such sovereignty by William, the Conqueror.
Instead of there being just a few leftover Norman scions, there were now potentially millions of Americans standing as inheritors through the Norman Conquest, heirs to the Magna Carta, all enabled as "sovereigns in their own right". William clearly meant for this to be the death knell of monarchies everywhere and for elitism in general. He believed that mankind is capable of self-government, and believed in the principles enunciated by Thomas Jefferson in The Unanimous Declaration of Independence.
That is how and why William Belcher became Head of State and also how and why Americans became "sovereigns in their own right".
Now, this is not an answer that some Flag Officers loyal to the Queen will want to hear, but it is nonetheless the truth. The present Queen readily admits that we are a "sovereign people" and does not dispute a word of this testimony and evaluation of the rights and standing involved, so it isn't a matter for her employees and officers to dispute in her behalf.
So let that sink into the pates of the Flag Officers.
They may work for the Queen, but the Queen works for us. That is how the "Delegation of Powers" is even possible. If you think about it for five seconds, you will realize that a king does not accept delegation, except from another king.
Americans are sovereigns in their own right by force of arms upon the land and soil of this country, and inheritors of the Magna Carta and sovereignty in their own right internationally via their inheritance preserved by the Norman Conquest---- through William Belcher.
You will note that all this occurs and is only important in the realm of international and global diplomacy. It has nothing to do with the day to day affairs of average Americans and by all rights, should never be anything but a source of empowerment and joy for everyone concerned---- if and when it does become important----- as it has now.
We are facing an international crisis caused by the gross criminality cited in the Answer to Question 2 ---- an attempted criminal corporate take-over of all national governments, led by the banks and the run amok Roman Catholic Church, that clearly sees this as an opportunity to create a worldwide theocracy for itself.
By the end of this month, Brexit or no Brexit, the UNITED KINGDOM (INC.) will be forced to turn over control of the British Armed Forces to the fiends in Brussels --- the UN Corporation, the stinking Vichy French and Swiss Nazi Collaborators. Unless, that is, the Flag Officers get off their dead asses, support the actual civilian government owed to this country, and bring forward our claims ---- because in fact we are the Priority Creditors of the UNITED KINGDOM and we, not Brussels, have the deciding vote.


See this article and over 2000 others on Anna's website here:

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

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.