You may or may not remember my efforts to keep The Colorado Nine on track, the spirited arguments I had with them in the days leading up to their arrest, and how, with heavy heart, I drew the line and refused to support their action --- which I knew would be disastrous, and which was disastrous. In the aftermath, I was blamed as if I gave them bad advice, but thankfully by then my blog was well-established and the timeline, too.
The saddest thing for me was knowing the mistake they were making, and not being able to communicate the seriousness of it to them. They were utterly convinced that they were right and I was wrong. It was not the first time this has happened in forty years of slogging, nor, regrettably, the last. Patriots love each other, until they disagree, and then it's usually only after something tragic happens, that the truth comes out and stomps the issue flat.
My relationship with Family Guardian has been that kind of love-hate relationship from the start, which is now more than twenty years ago, when I first started reading their publications. About five years ago, I finally had a chance to speak with them over the phone. They are great people. True blue. I tried to explain to them why most of the Federal Code (an estimated 92%) doesn't apply to members of the General Public, and why concentrating on Federal Code and Federal Rules is oddly self-defeating.
We are, I argued, wasting our time learning a lot of gobbledygook that doesn't apply to us, and knowing their Federal Code so intimately only lends credence to the supposition that we must be U.S. Citizens or citizens of the United States. Why else would we know and argue about Federal Code citations and use Federal Forms, if we don't stand under Federal Code?
Americans don't stand under Federal Code. Thanks to Amendment Eleven we don't have to know any foreign law at all, so why not spend our wit and strength studying Public Law and American Common Law instead? As it stands, we aren't at war and don't recognize "military occupation" by our own employees.
The Federales are always shoving their Federal Code and Federal Regulations and their State-of-State Statutes in our faces as the source of their authority, and it's anti-intuitive to tell them --- what makes you think that I stand under your codes and statutes? Prove it.
It's far more natural for people to take the bait and argue, which then grants jurisdiction to their courts.
So while I have the greatest respect for FamGuard and their tireless effort and research --- and I read their publications from time to time myself --- I also know that they are looking at everything from the standpoint of the Federales, and not as Americans.
No doubt that would shock them and they'd be mad, because in their own minds, being American is what this is all about --- protecting yourselves and your families from the Vermin who have usurped upon us.
I share the same goal, but from a different perspective. Here is a typically brilliant exposition by FamGuard on the subject of Admiralty Law (Martial Law) being misapplied in our courts and the heinous Trading With the Enemy Act:
They prove that the courts are acting under Admiralty Law (Martial Law) by a process of exclusionary deduction that nobody can argue against. They expose the use of "Executive" gold-fringed flags in what appear to be our courts (used to be common to see this, but no more; the gold-fringed flags have been retired in all the courts I have recently visited) and they conjecture that the courts are operating in a "Secret Jurisdiction".
Of course, they are right about all this and I cheer them on. I could tell them why the courts were using the "Executive Flag" and presenting as "Executive Courts" if anyone had bothered to ask me, and I could also shed light on the "Secret Jurisdiction" created by "Special Admiralty Rules" tacked onto the end of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and then adopted separately as State-of-State Statutes.
The answer to all this lies in the past, in the Civil War itself, and in the Aftermath of it. This is when we first see Abraham Lincoln appearing not as The President of this country, but as "the" President-Commander of an incorporated British Crown Vessel, "the" United States of America, Incorporated. This is where he, and those with him, deceitfully substituted the American Office for the British Territorial Office of "President", and the executive powers of a Captain of a Ship were then employed in the manner of a dictator, not an American President bound by Honor and the Law of the Land.
This is how Lincoln assumed the power to start the Civil War by issuing his own Declaration, and the means he used to usurp upon the singular power of our State Delegations in Congress Assembled to Declare War; instead, Lincoln initiated a Commercial Mercenary Conflict while acting as the President of a British Corporation---- and called it a War.
I have cited the proof for this before: (1) No Declaration of War was ever issued by our Congress; (2) The soldiers were all enrolled under the auspices of States of States, not the actual States themselves. States-of-States are private business organizations under contract to provide routine governmental services for the States. The soldiers were all mustered out in the name of these business organizations, like The State of New York, not New York; (3) There is no Peace Treaty ending the so-called American Civil War. (4) Lincoln, a Bar Attorney from Illinois, was prohibited from holding any Public Office in our Government by the Titles of Nobility Amendment passed by the States in 1819 --- he could not act as The President of this country, he could only act as the President of a corporation, and wars conducted by corporations are by definition illegal Mercenary Conflicts ---- just like Vietnam.
So, there you have it, an open-ended Commercial Mercenary Conflict engendered on our shores, with no beginning and no end. The British Territorial Government fought with the North and the Papist Holy Roman Municipal Government fought with the South, so they just kept on fighting among themselves even after Lincoln's Successor, Andrew Johnson, created a Public Contract, by Proclaiming Peace on the Land on three separate occasions.
This means that "President" Johnson, for he was no more The President of this country than his Predecessor, Lincoln, nonetheless contractually bound the USA, Inc. to holding the American General Public harmless and guaranteed our "peace on the land". Why shouldn't he? The actual States have been at peace since 1814.
Unfortunately, in their ensuing discussion of the Trading With the Enemy Act, FamGuard makes the assumption that we, the American Public, are the "Enemies" being referred to, when in fact we are specifically excluded in Appendix 25, and are non-domestic with respect to the District of Columbia, so are not subject to their Congress. All the rest of the discussion, brilliant as it is, is ruined because FamGuard doesn't know which Congress (Federal, Territorial, or Municipal) is passing this Act, isn't aware of the continuing "war" between the Territorial Government and the Municipal Government, and misses the whole context of the Trading With the Enemy Act as a result.
In 1917, the British Territorial Congress passed the Trading With the Enemy Act. We know this because the actual American Federal Congress hadn't met since the Civil War, and the Municipal Congress of the United States didn't speak to the issue, because it and its citizens of the United States were still the presumed domestic (with respect to the District of Columbia) Enemies.
The reason they call it "Federal Code" is because it is encoded. No matter how brilliant you are or how diligent you are, if you don't know the conventions of a foreign language, you will be lost and unable to rightly interpret it. And that is what happens with so many Patriot organizations, not just FamGuard--- we get off track and reach wrong conclusions because we don't have the appropriate Flash Gordon or Buzz Lightyear Secret Decoder Ring and we don't know the actual history, either, so we don't know the context of what we are observing.
It's true that both fraud and treason have been committed against us by our Federal Subcontractors --- FamGuard is absolutely correct about that, but first, you have to know that they are Subcontractors and not our actual government.
See this article and over 3800 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.