For All The Jural Assemblies - 27 International Jurisdiction

By Anna Von Reitz

One of the most important things to remember is that in America and for purpose of the American Government, the word "interstate" is completely synonymous with the word "international".  This is because each State is in fact its own country and its own nation. 

For the sake of streamlining certain functions and creating uniformity in some areas to bulwark our strength (such as military operations and expenses) and to expedite free trade (such as interstate banking services) our States have agreed to act together as members of an unincorporated Federation of States known as The United States of America --- but each and every "power" that this Holding Company has or can delegate derives from the member States and powers which they intrinsically possess.  And the member States remain sovereign. 

As we saw, the national soil jurisdiction is controlled by unincorporated republican states which are members of The United States. 

The international jurisdiction is controlled by unincorporated States which are members of The United States of America, a Federation of States

The international jurisdiction controlled by your State has three components, air, land, and sea. 

We have discussed the international land jurisdiction of the States briefly and described it generally as the thick layer of rock and material underlying the top six inches of soil. Land obviously includes your State's mineral and groundwater resources. The international land jurisdiction of your State is also

able to appear in some contexts above the soil -- as it does when we build railroads and post roads and post offices and interstate highways and interstate electrical services. 

These are transit lanes and service stations on land analogous to sea lanes and docks in the jurisdiction of the sea-- resulting in routes and infrastructure that have been created to deliver interstate/international or global services within your State.  Because this interstate/international infrastructure is within the borders of your State such facilities remain under State control, but because of their international nature and their role as part of the connecting service web other States depend on, they fall under your State's international land jurisdiction and function under international law.

Both the railroads and the post offices have been used to promote various in-roads against local law and control. Many States have allowed these foreign international entities to exercise the right of Eminent Domain, for example, which allows them to "condemn" public and private property --essentially commandeering it-- to allow construction of infrastructure.   

Thus, these enterprises have been allowed to abuse both public and private property owners for their own benefit using the excuse that the Public Good they provide outweighs the loss to other's property rights.

Similar arguments have been advanced with less success to excuse the imposition of "property taxes" on landowners within each State to pay for public services, such as snow removal on pubic roads. This places a disproportionate and arbitrary burden on the landlords that is non-consensual and is in fact an unlawful conversion of property rights.

The Territorial State of State that is functioning in a "care-taking" capacity and mandating these practices in our States of the Union has no actual authority to impose upon the States and People in this way, and instead of presuming upon the landlords should be paying back dividends and lease fees and compensating the States and People for the use of their resources. 

An examination of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports of each Territorial and Municipal State-of-State organization reveals that the income these organizations receive from the use of our State resources each year is far in excess of all expenses and that largess should, logically, be available to pay for public services such as snow removal and fire departments without any additional taxation.  However, without active and competent input from the State Jural Assemblies, the For-Hire State of State employees and their corporate legislatures have padded their own pension plans instead.

The Checks and Balances System has been totally out of whack in this country because the State Jural Assemblies have not been meeting regularly, have not weighed in on the deployment of State income, have not protected private property rights, have not insisted on the enforcement of the Public Law, and haven't been doing their job representing the interests of the actual State and People.

Also, because these interstate/international businesses are operating in international jurisdiction but are interfacing directly with our State's soil jurisdiction, there are conflicts of law that result. 

The most visible  part of this conflict of law arises from the fact that these private and international business organizations functioning under international law have been allowed to employ "Pinkertons" -- private law enforcement agencies -- within the boundaries of each State, and these LEO organizations have proliferated and been hired as subcontractors in other venues to substitute for actual peacekeeping officials and officers.

Law enforcement officers are, generally speaking: (1) not familiar with the Public Law, having been trained to enforce the "code and statutory law" of the international jurisdiction instead; and (2) are not properly directed to enforce the Public Law, even when they are hired to do so.

These private security agencies have become abusive and have failed to recognize the fact that the People of the State are living under the Public Law and, except when they are actually on a train, in a post office, or otherwise in direct contact with these limited international land jurisdiction functions--railroads, electrical power line right of ways, post offices, etc., the living People of each State are not subject to international law within the boundaries of their States.

Territorial State of State employees and Municipal STATE OF STATE employees, are subject to international law, but the States and People are not --- until and unless we directly interface with a railroad, post office, or other interstate/international utility --- for example, we rob a Post Office, vandalize a power pole, or commit murder on a railroad right of way.  

The Territorial and Municipal organizations in each State have discovered that they can make money by arresting people and filling up prison facilities, which has led to the proliferation of more and more oppressive statutory "laws" and burgeoning prison populations. 

This Prisons for Profit scheme is a direct affront to our sovereignty in which People of each State are deliberately mischaracterized as Territorial or Municipal "Persons", held to be subject to Territorial and/or Municipal international law, and incarcerated at our expense. This is not only an abuse of our People, it is an abuse of our Purses by our employees.

They are profiting themselves by arresting us under color of law, charging us under statutory laws we are not naturally obligated to obey, and then charging our States for the service of putting us in jail.   

More abuses include registration and copyrighting of our private Given Names as property belonging to State of State and/or Municipal STATE OF STATE organizations, conferring of Federal citizenship obligations via unconscionable contracts, seizure, manipulation, and patenting of our unique DNA, securitization of living people as assets belonging to these organizations, and the bonding of public and private property belonging to our States and People for the debts of these "state of state" organizations.

These are actions readily recognizable as crimes that have been going on in our country for decades via the abuse of our State's international jurisdiction.

This has only been made possible because our trusting people have been deliberately kept unaware of the false claims being made against them by their employees, and our State Jural Assemblies have not assembled and kept watch on the proverbial store.  

The international sea jurisdiction belonging to each State varies according the individual State's location and geography.  Thanks to the Great Lakes and abundant large navigable rivers, plus sea coasts on three sides of our country, most States have ample and direct access to the transport of goods and services via these natural conduits. 

Generally speaking, the British Monarch is supposed to be acting as the Trustee of all Americans and all American shipping on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways, and as such, our States should not have a great deal to worry about --- however, as more and more Americans have unwittingly allowed themselves to be mischaracterized as Territorial or Municipal "citizens" instead of reclaiming/retaining their birthright political status, the British Monarchs have been encouraged to escape their duty owed to the States and People, and eager to profit themselves from the States of States and Persons, instead.

The Coast Guard owed to each seaboard State has been allowed to run amok and been privatized and misdirected similar to what has gone on with the hired law enforcement officers being used to substitute for peacekeeping officials and Officers of the Law.   As a result, the Coast Guard has become a clearinghouse for smuggling and theft from the States and People instead of a bulwark in our defense. 

Port Authorities have similarly been employed in the interests of international crime and exportation of Americans, both literally and figuratively, along with our resources, using ports of entry and "Free Trade Zones" established in virtually every State. 

The international air space owed to each State has similarly been abused to favor international business interests and placed the profits of these commercial interests above any benefit owed to the States and People of this country.  We are constantly bombarded with false advertising and propaganda from foreign sources clogging up our public air waves, and no effort is being made to impose any better standards. 

Media monopolies have become common and other monopolies have grown up uninhibited by the proper application of Public Interest anti-trust and anti-monopoly legislation.  Although these issues often bridge upon commerce rather than international trade, the State Jural Assemblies have a potent voice that needs to be heard in Washington, DC, and elsewhere.

What goes on in our States is fundamentally under the authority and control of the People of each State, so this is all hash that we need to settle with our employees and service providers and international Trustees. 

In order to do our job, we have to choose to act in our birthright political capacity as one of the People of our State of the Union, and make public declaration of this fact by recording our deliberate and permanent expatriation from any "presumed" federal citizenship obligation. 

If we fulfill our obligations as State Nationals and/or State Citizens and/or State Electors, we will have more than enough to do.

The members of our State Jural Assemblies have the critical role and function of nullifying unconstitutional and repugnant laws, upholding and enforcing the Public Law including the Constitutions, and controlling the soil (national) and land (international) jurisdictions of our State.

Beginning with the fact that we are not acting as Federal "Persons" and are not accepting any Federal "citizenship" obligations, for all the reasons cited above and far more beyond the scope of this small discussion, our State Jural Assemblies must act to direct the proper administration of the international land jurisdiction we are heir to, and to bring effective complaints to our federal service providers and international Trustees regarding the misuse and abuse of the international sea and air jurisdiction of our States. 

As brief as this discussion has been, the issues raised are compelling and should be enough to convince any American that effective action must be taken to restore the People and the States and the Public Law. 

----------------------------

See this article and over 1500 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

Would the government let Jesus cure cancer?

Would the government let Jesus cure cancer? (To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.) In the 1990s, I watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine. The defendant was prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced in the body and b) it was effective. The prosecution moved to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant. The judge agreed. Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison for several years. This is how the federal bureaucracy operates. "Do you have a government-issued license to heal? No? You're a criminal.  End of story." I believe that if Jesus of Nazareth were walking the Earth today, in the United States, he would be arrested on the same grounds. This would be particularly so if he were curing cancer. Imagine this extreme case: In a stadium packed with 50,000 people who have been diagnosed with cancer, Jesus of Nazareth waves his hand and cures all of them in a few seconds. Now he is threatening the profits of many companies, to say nothing of the power of the government, which backs the chemo-radiation-surgery monopoly to the hilt. So he is arrested. He is put on trial. He opts to defend himself without an attorney. He tells the court that curing cancer is no crime. The prosecuting attorney objects. "Your Honor," he says, "whether or not this man has cured cancer is beside the point. He has no license to practice medicine. That is why we are here today. We are simply establishing that a) he was practicing medicine and b) he has no government-issued license. That is the scope of this proceeding." The judge agrees. The verdict is issued. Guilty. Of course, on another front, the major media, who depend for their existence on pharmaceutical advertising, take the ball and run with it. The networks and major newspapers seek out "experts," who emphatically state that what Jesus of Nazareth "performed" in the stadium was mere hypnotism. It was placebo effect. Whatever sudden "remissions" may have occurred are just temporary. Tragically, the cancers will return. Not only that, these 50,000 people have effectively been sidetracked and diverted from seeking "real care from real doctors." With chemo, with radiation, with surgery, they would have stood a chance of surviving and living long normal lives. Other media pundits send up this flag: "Many of those present in the stadium were clinging bitterly to their religion. They refuse to accept science. They are living in the past. They favor superstition over real medical care. In fact, they are threatening the whole basis of healthcare, since other confused and deluded Americans may now turn away from doctors and seek snake-oil salesmen and preachers for healing." From the highest perches of political power in this country, the word quietly goes out to the media: don't follow up on those people who were in the stadium; don't try to track them; don't compile statistics on their survival rates; move on to other stories (distractions); let this whole madness die down. But among the citizenry, an awareness spreads: the government is controlling healing through its issuance of licenses. That's how the government is essentially protecting one form of "healing" and enabling it to become an all-encompassing cartel. What would be the alternative to licenses? Contracts. Contracts are agreements entered into by consenting adults, who assume responsibility for the outcomes. In the case of healing, a contract would specify that people have a right to be wrong. Let's say two consenting adults, Jim and Frank, agree to allow Frank to treat Jim for his arthritis with water from a well on Frank's land. The two men acknowledge that no liability will be attached to the outcome. In other words, whether Jim gets better or gets worse, no one is going file a suit. No one is going to go to the government for redress of wrongs. The well water may be wonderful or it may be completely useless. Both men understand and acknowledge that. But they assert a right to try the treatment, because they are free. Immediately people say, "This is ridiculous. Water can't cure arthritis. Frank is cheating Jim. Jim is a victim. He needs to see a doctor. He needs to go on arthritis drugs." No, Jim doesn't have to do anything. He is free. To put it another way, Jim has the right to be right or wrong. It's his decision, which is beyond the scope of any authority. If government tries to remove that right from all of us, it is essentially saying it knows what is correct, it knows what is true, it knows what we need and require, and it's going to give it to us even if it has to shove it down our throats. Does that sound like freedom to you? If Jesus of Nazareth lived in the United States today, and if he went around curing cancer, he would be arrested. He wouldn't be charged with blasphemy or treason. He would be charged with something much simpler and more mundane: practicing medicine without a license. And he would be convicted and sentenced. Because the government, in its throne of corruption, in its partnership with corporations, wants to monopolize proprietary and illegal interests. Use this link to order Jon's Matrix Collections. Jon Rappoport The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can find this article and more at NoMoreFakeNews.

Arkansas grocery ad warns ‘Heaven has a wall’

Found here:
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2019/feb/11/arkansas-grocery-store-ad-message-referring-immigr/

#Net4TruthUSA – 383 – Last Chance, America

Found Here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW2_wNOga-o

For All The State Jural Assemblies - 26 The National Jurisdiction: Soil

By Anna Von Reitz

In our discussion of the American Government that we are heir to, we identified three "unions" of various kinds of "states" that existed long prior to the creation of the Federal Government. 

They were and are:

The United States -- a union of soil jurisdiction "landed (e)states"  formed by the former colonies via Unanimous Declaration issued July 1, 1776, published July 4, 1776. This is our "national jurisdiction". Each state has defined geographical boundaries.

The United States of America - a federation of Land Jurisdiction States formed September 9, 1776 for the purpose of joint operations in international jurisdiction, including the international land and sea jurisdictions. This is our international jurisdiction. Each State has defined geographical boundaries.

The States of America -- a confederation of inchoate "States of States" formed under The Articles of Confederation, March 1, 1781, for the purpose of conducting the business of the States in global commercial jurisdiction.  These "Federal States of States" have no defined geographical boundaries and exist only on paper.  (These are the "Missing" Federal States of States.)

Please note --- all this is our American Government, which existed prior to and which created the Federal Government as an "instrumentality" to provide services to the States and People of this country.

Let's look briefly at our "national jurisdiction" --- the soil jurisdiction of each state in The United States.

Imagine the familiar outline of your State of the Union.  Got it? 

Now pretend you are slicing it like a layer cake horizontally, taking the top six inches of the soil off.  It has the same outline and shape, but not much depth. 

This is your state's national soil jurisdiction.

We call all the rest underneath the soil "the land". The land is also shaped exactly like the outline of your State of the Union, but it is a much thicker layer, miles deep, and it forms your State's international land jurisdiction.  

Together we call this "the land and soil" of your State of the Union.  The two jurisdictions -- the national soil jurisdiction state and the international Land Jurisdiction State -- are both geographically defined and both work together hand in glove.

So, what does the "national" soil jurisdiction of your State do and how does it operate? 

The first thing it does is guarantee local control. 

This is the level of the "state republics" and "republican states" guaranteed by the constitutional contracts.

The soil level states are seldom referenced in print, but when they are, they appear in all small letters: maine, virginia, florida, etc.  These are the member states of The United States.

When we are born we all enter the world via the soil jurisdiction of our state, and are in the political status of a "man of the soil" known as "jus soli" or a "state national". 

This determines our basic nationality. We are, for example, "virginians" and because we are "virginians" we are also considered "Virginians".  This in turn identifies us as "Americans" for international purposes.  

When we are born, we are not "citizens" of anything.

Being a "citizen" implies an obligation to serve a government.  It is patently ridiculous to claim that a newborn baby has an obligation to serve any government, nonetheless, certain disreputable governmental services corporations have made exactly such claims against babies born in America for several generations. This is part of what we need to address.

It is the "jus soli" status of the baby that leads to the political status at the State level of State National.  Neither one have any obligation to serve any government at all; they are required to obey the Public Law and keep the peace and other than that, they are free as birds.

The basic dictum of the national soil jurisdiction is, "Harm none and be harmed none."

Likewise, the republic states and their state republics are seldom referenced in print and even more seldom are they officially populated and used to conduct business --- but they can be.  This results in a quorum of state nationals opting to act as state citizens, and invoking the national soil jurisdiction of their State of the Union to conduct national-level business.

For these purposes, Texas is a nation.  Pennsylvania is a nation. 

The soil jurisdiction also includes surface water, so each state republic also has a republic of state attached to it, and for business purposes, you have  "The Texas Republic" operating the soil jurisdiction of Texas and "The Republic of Texas" operating the surface water jurisdiction of Texas.

All of these entities are unincorporated and operate as unincorporated businesses. 

They are owned and operated by the people who are native to Texas and those who have been "naturalized".

Naturalization at the State level is a process of having a home inside the borders of the State for at least a year and a day, without committing any felonies or taking public assistance, and firmly declaring on the public record your desire and intention (after meeting the basic requirements) to make that State your permanent home.

In the old days this was done by taking out three small ads in the local papers over a period of 90 days, and there is still no obstruction to doing this now.  In this way, a guy from Florida can adopt Texas as his home, for example, or a "U.S. Citizen" born in Croatia or Washington, DC, can become a Minnesotan.

Obviously, the soil is like the skin on a body.  By owning and controlling the skin, the local people retain the vast majority of the power of government if they act in their proper capacity and organize to do so.  Everyone is standing on the soil, so the power of arrest basically belongs to the soil jurisdiction and the republican state authorities and their county/County Sheriffs.

However, operating the Soil and Land jurisdictions of our States of the Union requires us to forswear and expatriate from any other citizenship, including any federal citizenship.

Most Americans do not realize that they have been kidnapped on paper into a foreign jurisdiction and misidentified as either "United States Citizens" or "Citizens of the United States" or "US CITIZENS" almost from birth, a circumstance that keeps us from actually owning land and controlling our own assets. 

In fact, most States of the Union became severely de-populated prior to this current effort, simply because people didn't realize that they were the victims of unconscionable contracting activities by their own employees.

Coming home to the "land and soil" of your State means that you are eligible to inherit all that you have been deprived of, that you come under the Public Law, instead of any private "Statutory Law", that you can exercise local control of your land and surface water resources, and that you can operate your "republican states" ---that is, the national soil jurisdiction of your State of the Union, again. 

So long as you see the advantage of doing so and educate yourselves and declare your birthright political status--- and work with others of like-mind to restore the "land and soil" jurisdiction government owed to this country--- there isn't a power on Earth than can stop you from inheriting and controlling what is rightfully yours. 

----------------------------

See this article and over 1500 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

By Their Works

By Anna Von Reitz

I have always preferred to think of myself as a "Christian", a member of the Universal Church, and have always regarded doctrinal and denominational differences as big question marks. 

There may indeed be only one correct doctrine in the end, but just as easily there might be no correct doctrine ever created by man.  The same goes for denominations.  So far as I know, God did not come down to Earth and declare a schism between Catholics and Methodists and Baptists and Mennonites and Baptists and....  men and their differing opinions did all that.

Judging from the number of times the Disciples had to be directly corrected, and even with the help of the Holy Spirit ---accounting for our egos, bad hearing, temptations, and other faults--- I don't put my faith in doctrines promulgated by men. 

This is why I have an inclusive and broad view of religion. So long as people are trying to live honorable and peaceful lives, taking care of each other and their families and communities, I tend to call that "good". Live and let live.

We will all get our corrections when the time comes.

But when "Christians" harbor organized crime within their Church and benefit from it....

When they act as Trustees in Gross Breach of Trust with respect to entire countries and billions of people suffer....

When they take crimes and sins like pedophilia and make them into sacraments....

When there is no end to this relativism and wishy-washy spineless lack of basic ethics and honesty....

When they twist any reasonable plausible recognizable definition of "Christianity" into something else....

Then I protest -- because they are not just giving themselves a bad name, they are disgracing all those who answer to the name "Christian".

And they are disgracing Christ. 

If a Christian will not stand up for the memory of Yeshuah and his Teaching and his Living Spirit, who will?

I have been polite. I have been patient. I have been supportive of Church reform all across the board. 

I have often stood in the gap and defended people who are trying to do the right thing though their sins be as scarlet and also defended the millions of completely innocent Christians who are being disgraced and misrepresented.

Yes, I have called forth the Loyal Angels of the Living God and I am not ever going to be wishy-washy about that. Nor will I apologize.    

Being a Christian is not a "relative thing" subject to "interpretation" via some kind of "fluid definition" that suddenly includes cannibalism and the rape of little children. No.

That's not "Christianity" you feckless, shameless Liars.

That's Satanism, and by your works you shall be known.

----------------------------

See this article and over 1500 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

For All The State Jural Assemblies - 25 State Electors, State Nationals, and State Citizens

By Anna Von Reitz

Okay, let's try it again:

State Nationals = everyone born within the physical geographical borders of a State. A National has no particular duty to serve the State other than to obey the Public Law (Non-Statutory Law)  and keep the peace.

State Citizens = those State Nationals who additionally choose to serve the State Government in some capacity, such as Jurors, Militia Members, elected officials, or hired officers.

State Electors = those State Nationals who own land in the State and meet other requirements such as legal age, etc., to participate in State Elections.

You can be either: (1) a State National or (2) a State Citizen.

Being a State National or a State Citizen does not necessarily mean that you qualify to be a State Elector.  You can be part of the State Jural Assembly and serve as a Juror without being a State Elector.  You can be elected to a Public Office, such as Sheriff, without being able to vote for yourself.

This is because of the pesky issue of letting non-landowners vote on questions that only affect landowners, and therefore the requirement that State Electors be landowners.

----------------------------

See this article and over 1500 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

Answers to Common Questions and Misconceptions for the Jural Assemblies

By Anna Von Reitz

1. Misconception Number One: that colored people and women are not welcome to join State Jural Assemblies.

This idea derives from the fact that to be on safe ground legally and lawfully, the State Jural Assemblies need to go back and pick up where at least some of them left off -- in 1860.  They need to re-establish a Quorum of Jurors qualified by 1860 standards, and that Quorum then needs to update the membership rules to officially include people of color and women. 

Please note that in the days of slavery there were both white and colored slaves in this country, and "indentured servants" too --- none of whom could act as State Electors. 

The real qualifier was land ownership and neither slaves nor indentured servants could own land, hence, could not act as Electors.

However, both black men and Native men who were Free and who owned land in a State, could act as State Jural Assembly Members and still can.

The important idea behind all this was that nobody not tied to the State by commitment to the Land of that State should have a voice in the affairs of that State. 

If you think about this, it is a reasonable requirement: otherwise, people  passing through the State could cast votes with no skin in the game. They could, with a large enough population of transients (known as "residents"), dictate to and obligate those people who are actually committed to living in and building their businesses in that State.  

We see some attempt at this with the current Border Crisis, where people  foreign to the State and with no actual material commitment to say, California, are influencing public policy and helping themselves to public assistance and dictating elections --- all with no substantial actual and material commitment to California.

This is why our States all require Electors to hold only one citizenship --- State Citizenship.  They also require State Citizens to be landowners.  Color requirements as such, don't actually exist in the American States and never did, except in limited portions of the Deep South.

The more potent issue in 1860 and today is the capacity in which we are acting. 

The affect of having the Territorial Congress arbitrarily "confer" citizenships on people and then claiming that they are acting as "persons" via a process of undisclosed enfranchisement, has established a situation in which average Americans are now almost uniformly "presumed" to be in the condition of either indentured servitude to the Queen, or slaves owned by the Municipal United States Government, or both.  

It isn't until we take action to Expatriate from any such presumed federal citizenship that we can actually own land in fact, and therefore qualify as State Citizens and as State Electors.

The question of the landownership requirement continues to be contentious. It has been argued in some States that our bodies are made of "dust" and "to dust returneth", and therefore all men and women are "landowners". This may serve the esoteric point, but doesn't answer the actual dilemma posed by non-landowners voting on issues that don't impact them, but which do impose increased tax burdens on landowners.

Women in Europe and America were able to own land and had been able to own land for centuries prior to 1860, so landownership was not the crux of the matter for women.  It was more the prevailing idea that women were gentle and needed at home,  ill-suited to the hurly-burly of politics and demands of public office, that kept them from being included in Jural Assemblies. 

Now that two World Wars and the Civil War itself have convinced us otherwise, women have claimed (and earned) equal rights, and merely updating the old State Jural Assembly rules suffices.  

It's a small burden to find 30 free men above the age of 21 who are claiming their birthright political status and who are land owners, to hold the first quorum meeting for each State Jural Assembly, but it is one that assures that the further actions of the Assemblies going forward are properly sanctioned and brought up to date.

And in no case does any of this prevent anyone at any time from: (1) expatriating from federal citizenship status, (2) participating in the State Jural Assembly organizational activities and meetings, (3) making sure that their Assembly is fully staffed, fully informed, and on firm ground going forward.

2. Misconception Number 2: that people have to give up things like Social Security payments or medical coverage owed to them by Federal Government agencies, if they reclaim their birthright political status.

Most Americans never knowingly left their birthright political status.  This was merely a self-interested legal presumption being misapplied to millions of people based on equally self-interested falsification of registration documents and improper demands that we "apply" for Social Security, "register" to vote in what appeared to be public elections, and so on.

Having to take action to rebut this legal presumption is anti-intuitive to most people and the resulting confusion is paralyzing, especially when they assume that they will lose pension dividends and health care and other things of value that they are owed. 

Fortunately, the only thing we lose is the ability to vote in private elections hosted by foreign corporations, which is quickly made up for, as we hold our own public elections, instead.

Once we return our Given Names (also known as Trade Names) to the land and soil jurisdiction of our States of the Union, we are no longer in La-La-Land, and we can no longer be "presumed" to be in the Queen's service or the Pope's. 

All the franchises they have "gifted" us with are similarly under new ownership--- American ownership, not "U.S. Citizen" ownership. 

The only impact this has is that both the Queen and the Pope and all their employees are now obligated to obey the Constitutions and the Public Law of this country again, with respect to you and your assets.

The magic words are: "I accept all gifts and waive all benefits."

"Benefits" are gifts that come with strings attached-- unseen, unstipulated, undisclosed contracts and conditions that you are "presumed" to know and accept when you accept "benefits".

Thus, when they mischaracterize Social Security Earned Dividends that you and your employers paid for as "benefits" they are claiming that you are acting in the capacity of a "U.S. Citizen" or "Citizen of the United States" --- and moreover, that you are a Federal Citizen in receipt of welfare. 

Now, there are many people receiving "benefits" from the Social Security Administration as public assistance that they never earned. Some never contributed a dime and are receiving thousands of dollars in medical care and support payments every month.  

Those of us who unknowingly signed up for Social Security and vested in this program meant for Federal Employees are not in receipt of "benefits".  Anything we get back is an "earned dividend".  The import difference is that "benefits" can be discontinued at whim, whereas "earned dividends" owed to former employees have to be paid.

The situation is analogous to going to work for a foreign corporation in a foreign country.  While you are in that foreign country, you obey its laws. You also obey the internal "laws" of the corporation you work for. 

When you quit or retire and return home -- what happens? 

You are no longer living under the laws of that foreign country, and are back living under the laws of your own country.  That's for starters.

The corporation you worked for still owes you every bit of your pension plan.

That includes medical services (not benefits) and monthly dividend payments (not benefits). 

It's the same way with Social Security and Medicare.  They still owe you every jot, and they owe it to you as "earned dividends and services", not as "benefits". 

Similarly, the franchises and ACCOUNTS held in YOUR NAME and created "for" you have been mischaracterized as belonging to "U.S. Citizens" and/or "Citizens of the United States".  

These franchises and ACCOUNTS are toxic to you until you return home to the land and soil of your State of the Union via expatriation from any Federal Citizenship, and claim ownership of them as an American State National or American State Citizen.

It's the difference between "benefits" and "earned dividends" again.

As a "U.S. Citizen" or "Citizen of the United States" you are obligated to pay all the bills related to these franchises and ACCOUNTS created in YOUR NAME, but as an American State National or an American State Citizen, you are the inheritor of the assets and credits owed to these accounts. 

Suffice it to say that as long as you cling to your identity as a "U.S. Citizen" or "Citizen of the United States", you are a Pauper by definition, obligated to function under foreign law, obligated to obey foreign corporation policies, obligated to pay for every whim of the British Territorial Congress--- but when you reclaim your birthright political status, you are owed the return of everything that is rightfully yours.

Your Trustees, the British Monarch and the Pope, have to act as your Trustees again ---and return your "borrowed" property, plus interest, leases, fees, etc.

So, you lose absolutely nothing of any importance when you return to your birthright political status, and you regain all that was stolen and commandeered, including your Constitutional guarantees.

As you will be conducting your own elections and dealing with your own issues and taking control of your own purse strings, you will not need to overly concern yourself with the circus in Washington, DC, and you will have no reason or desire to participate in their political parties.

The world will come back into focus and the tail will stop wagging the dog once enough people understand the circumstance and take the necessary action  -- (1) reclaim your birthright political status; (2) join your State Jural Assembly and boot it up.

----------------------------

See this article and over 1500 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

No Valid Convention of States Possible

By Anna Von Reitz

I am receiving all sorts of questions about the idea of having a "convention of States to change the Constitution".  The promoters of this idea openly admit that the "States" they are claiming to represent are incorporated entities. 

Our States are unincorporated entities.  And they are not yet organized and qualified to attempt re-writing their own Constitutions or re-chartering their own Federal States of State, much less are they prepared to address the U.S. Constitutions. 

If the organizers of this misbegotten attempt to infringe upon our names in Commerce continue, they will meet us in Court and they will lose. We will also make a formal complaint to the Queen to enforce against them as a our Trustee on the High Seas and Inland Waterways.  They will be arrested and jailed for conspiracy against the Constitution and against the actual living Constituents of this country.

Either these "persons" are so ignorant that they don't know what a "State" is, or they are deliberately trying to mislead people and seize power they don't have in another "similar names deceit" sleight of hand. 

The Missing Federal States of States are incorporated entities, but not the States of the Union.

And only the unincorporated States of the Union can re-charter (our ancestors called it "re-construct") the Missing Federal States of States. 

So, first, the unincorporated States must form and muster and the people operating them must qualify themselves and learn the ropes, then the Federal States of States must be re-constructed and take up their rightful place, and then, finally, we may contemplate a Continental Congress to take up the issue of reforming and updating the Constitutions. 

None of this can take place apart from disciplined and proper action on our parts, so we might as well knuckle down.

People need to cool their jets and learn their lessons and do the actual work set before us.  Maybe if they do, they will learn enough to qualify as actual State Jurors and then hold valid elections for State Deputies, and who knows?  Maybe they will all learn enough to be competent to tinker with the Constitutions? 

Until the people of this country learn the law and the history and do what actually needs to be done, they will constantly be in unnecessary danger of arrest and none of their actions will be taken seriously. 

Can Irishmen vote to change the Spanish government?

Can Israelis vote in Argentina's elections?

Can foreign incorporated "States" change our Constitutions? 

Go figure, everyone --- and especially those who are trying to set up some kind of "Convention of the States". 

P.S. Our States don't do "conventions" for the purpose of amending the Constitutions.  Our States meet in Continental Congresses.

----------------------------

See this article and over 1500 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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