Americans ----Stop Citing Federal Code

 By Anna Von Reitz

The only people who (generally-speaking) have to obey and pay attention to Federal Code are Federal Employees.  

That should be pretty obvious, but where people get confused is that in a small percentage of circumstances, Federal Code DOES apply to people who are otherwise not obligated. 

This is because about 8% of all Federal Code ever published (specifically those things that are published in the Congressional Record as opposed to the Federal Register) concern the special circumstances wherein an otherwise average American becomes subject to Federal Code. 

We become subject to Federal Code when we voluntarily enter Federal buildings and other enclaves.  Every time you enter a Post Office, for example, you are on their turf and are expected to honor their law. 

Same way when we enter army bases and other government facilities.  It's their little bubble and while in their bubble, we have to obey their rules. 

The same applies when you engage -- voluntarily --- always note that it has to be voluntary on your part -- in the interstate manufacture, transportation, or sale of "federally regulated substances" which are limited in our case to: alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. 

Note that intrastate (activities occurring totally within your State of the Union) manufacture, transportation or sale of alcohol, tobacco and firearms in-state is  NOT subject to any federal regulation. 

The State of State organizations try to horn in and pretend that they are acting as custodians of the State interest and sneak in compliance with whatever their parent corporations are selling, like restrictions on marijuana and hemp products, for example --- but they actually have no contract to act as custodians and now that our State Assemblies are in Session, the State Assemblies get to speak to the activities of the State of State organizations purportedly undertaken on our behalf. 

These State of State organizations are corporate franchises of the Federal parent corporation, so if the parent has no regulatory authority, neither do the franchises. 

Read this: unless you are voluntarily participating in a federally regulated activity or voluntarily entering federal premises, and engaging in activities that the federal government is authorized to regulate, Federal Code does not apply to you, Joe Average American. 

The only reason an average American would have to cite Federal Code would be if: (1) they are voluntarily engaging in a federally regulated activity or entered upon federal turf and are asking questions about it, or (2) they are reminding their Public Employees of the limitations of their roles, in which case, they need to plainly state their intention and reason for citing Federal Code. 

Inappropriate references to Federal Code have been a bane for the patriot community for many years, and have led to many people being subjected to false arrest, fines, and jail time, because when you cite Federal Code it creates a reasonable presumption that you are standing under Federal Code --- unless you take pains to explicitly say, "You are a public employee so I am reminding you of the Federal Code." 

However, remember that only U.S. Citizens are bound to Federal Code in general. 

Municipal United States employees are only bound to Title 50, so you can get into trouble citing any other portions of Federal Code to them.  

And how many of you can tell the difference between a U.S. Citizen and a Municipal citizen? 

Joe Average American is better off not talking about Federal Code at all, unless of course he does so in the form of pointed questions about Federal Code. 

Such as: 

How does the law you are relying on define a "Motor Vehicle" and, come to that, how do you presume that my car is a motor vehicle? 

(Their answer: you registered it. Your answer: I was forced to register under color of law, wasn't I?  And we all know that, don't we?)

You can get away with anything in these courts and they cannot touch you so long as you phrase it as a question.  

Are you arresting me, and if so, under what authority? 

Why am I not being provided with an attorney? 

Where is the emergency, Officer?  (They aren't supposed to stop you in the absence of an emergency.) 

Where is the contract obligating me to obey you or your legislature? (State of State Constitutions were not ratified by you or your State, so....) 

What guarantees will you give me if I comply? 

What equitable consideration have I received in exchange for my assets? 

Is a home mortgage a public debt? 

Once a home mortgage is paid off, who owns the home? 

What is my status if I pay off a mortgage? (All the time you are paying a mortgage you are considered a tenant in your own home, and once you pay it off, you are considered a Lease-holder to a future Lease Purchase Agreement which is never forthcoming.) 

Why would I or anyone else enter into a mortgage if the nature and terms of the mortgage were fully disclosed? 

If my car is a commercial vehicle, why isn't the purchase price and all interest and other costs associated with it 100% tax deductible? 

(They can't have it both ways. It's either a "Motor Vehicle" engaged in commerce and all costs are deductible as business expenses, or it's a private car.)

If my house mortgage represents a debt that the State Trust owes on the property and I am assuming their debt, why am I not told this?

The Truth in Lending Act requires full disclosure, so why is it that neither the bank nor the servicing agent ever mentioned the fact that the house I was buying was considered a State Trust property? 

Even after I pay the mortgage debt of the State Trust off, will I own my own home, or will it still be State Trust property? 

You get the drift.  

Asking pointed questions is the safe way to approach all matters associated with public officials and public officers of all kinds-- prosecutors, judges, political appointees, etc.

Citing Federal Code creates unnecessary risk. 

So stop citing Federal Code. 

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

See this article and over 4300 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.

The Burning House

 By Anna Von Reitz

Now many of you have heard all the many accusations lodged by members of the TROH brand against me, personally.  

I have already forewarned you how these people operate in terms of accusing their opponents of the things they do themselves. 

And now I am going to take it to an even more fundamental level of understanding. 

Imagine that you have been at work until late come home in the evening to find your home enveloped by flames and a crew of local firemen and neighbors milling about in the front yard.  

There is one man in particular, with an ash-stained face and other obvious signs that he has been fighting the fire, standing beside your dog on a leash, and a large mound of your most precious possessions.  

Your family Bible, your birth certificates and other records, your family photos, your jewelry, your bank records, your business computer and personal computer, everything that is most precious and useful to you, plus your goldfish and the plants have all been carried out of the burning house and stacked in the front yard safe and sound and your beloved dog is very happy to see you, alive and well.  

But your house is a goner. 

This man who is nonchalantly standing beside this pile of your possessions giving instructions to the rest of the neighbors in the mop up crew and casually guarding all your stuff, turns to you with great sympathy and nods and explains how he was home from work and was the first one to spot the fire and call in the fire department and get the other neighbors to help battle the blaze.  

He explains that he got in through the garage and got the dog out and then got your office and bedroom cleared out, and together with other neighbors, brought it all out of the house far enough from the blaze to save it.  Then he hot-wired the ignition of your second car and drove it over to the neighbor's. He apologizes that you will probably need a new ignition.  

Then he tells you that another neighbor is on the way with a U-Haul van they rented and paid for, for you to store your stuff securely and they will all help move it into the van for the night and give that van to you for transportation to the hotel space they've rented for you.  They've already paid for the hotel and the van for the next two weeks.  And it is a dog friendly hotel so Rover can just stay with you. 

Now, you have suffered a major shock and loss. 

You are staring at your house in ruins, smoke still billowing from the ashes.  A fireman is approaching with a clipboard in hand. You are confused and scared and beginning to cope with what all this information means. 

And you have choices about interpreting all this. 

You can: 

(A) Thank the neighbor who called the fire department and while waiting for them broke into your house and organized all the other neighbors to save your dog and all your really important stuff, including your second car. And you can thank all of them for doing their best to help and renting a van and getting you a hotel to stay in.  

Or.... 

(B) You can think -- who is this guy with all my stuff piled up in the front yard?  He must be the arsonist who is responsible for my house burning up!  Yes, he's a thief and I just ruined his plan by showing up at this moment.  He rented that U-Haul so he and his buddies could steal it. 

You see?  You've always got a choice to make, concerning what is real and what you believe about any given person and any circumstance. You can believe in what is good and right (A) or you can believe in what is diabolical and evil (B). 

And it is entirely your choice. 

At that moment, the neighbor driving the U-Haul van shows up, jumps out, sympathy all over his face.  He walks up to you and hands you the key and says, "Well, alright then, fellas.... let's get everything loaded up. Looks like it might rain on top of everything else." 

Now, it's pretty obvious that nobody is going to load up your stuff and bonk you over the head and drive off with the entire town's fire department there, so you gingerly take the keys offered and begin moving your stuff into the van.  

It takes a little while to start coming out of your shock, but the need to get everything moved gets you moving, too.  Blood starts flowing again. Other neighbors start helping. As you drive away you see your second car parked in the neighbor's driveway. 

It occurs to you that if he knew how to hot-wire your ignition to save it, he also knew how to hot-wire it to steal it.  You glance at your hungry dog sitting in the passenger seat beside you, and somehow, you just "know" that when you get to the hotel, the room will be rented just as these good men told you. 

You finally know what to believe because of all the little nuances of things, the words, the information, the way the keys to the U-Haul were handed to you, the look on the man's face, the fact that your dog liked him, just a whole pile up of things that logically fit together.  

And you notice that, in spite of this great disaster, everything that really mattered was saved, and that you are now back in control of things. 

In the morning, you wake up and begin sorting through and organizing and you're on your way to a new and different life.  You are still in shock from the loss of your home, but also in shock from realizing all that your neighbors just did for you.  

They could have stolen all your valuables, but they didn't.  And it wasn't just because you showed up at an inopportune moment.  It was because they acted on your behalf with goodwill and honesty.  They did this without really knowing you from Adam and risked life and limb going back and forth from the smoke-filled house to do it. 

Of course, there is the alternative scenario that the "Fearless Floyds" of the world want you to believe and in that scenario, you don't go to the hotel prepared for you, because you are afraid that its a set-up, and that there's a gang of robbers waiting for you.  So you drive up the highway and park at a secluded spot and sleep in the van for the night. 

In the morning you wake up all mean-spirited and cranky and overwhelmed by your losses, focused only on your losses -- not all the stuff that was saved and which is now secured in the back of the van --- and you are angry about the whole circumstance, wondering who these evil people are who hauled all your stuff out of the house?  

Why you?  Why was your house targeted by these arsonists?  What are you going to do about it?  And so on.  

It's the same with the present circumstance in our world. 

You can use your common sense and intuition, or you can use an evil imagination tainted by years of Hollywood, bad experiences, suspicion, and anger. 

Notice that it's your own fault that you spent the night cramped up in the cab of a U-Haul that you didn't pay for and that it's your neighbors on the hook for it if you destroy the van or steal it.  

Uh-duh. Turns out that they've risked themselves to help you, and they could have just stood on the sidewalk and watched your house burn. 

This is all about your choices and what you choose to believe in and how well you can reason your way through things and whether or not you have intuition enough to feel your way through, even if the facts are all jumbled and conflicted in your mind. 

It's also about time and how long and how many facts have to accrue before you know for sure what to believe and not to believe.  

So for all who are unsure and all those running around like Henny-Penny shouting, "The sky is falling!  The sky is falling!  And it's all because of Anna that it is!" --- remember that your own beliefs dictate your experience. 

If you choose to stay in the van all night and suck your thumb, that's your choice. 

If you choose to wake up after a good night's sleep and face the day with courage and a little optimism and restored faith, that's your choice, too. 

Your house is still burned and your really important stuff is still saved, either way.  

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

See this article and over 4300 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.

For All Members and Coordinators

 By Anna Von Reitz

“Fearless Floyd” is all TROH —The Reign of the Heavens Society— and you know who they are. Plagiarized Frank O’Collins work Ucantia and claimed it was their own.  Set up another offshore corporation and called it “The United States of America"— Incorporated, just like the Scottish Interloper after the Civil War. They advertised that anyone who joined their group after midnight on December 21st 2012 would be of lesser status forever, while those who signed up before that date would be part of the 144,000 elite rulers of the planet— showing a whole New Age Cultist side to the organization. 

They are Liars. And they accuse others of what they do themselves. 

So now they are accusing me of being a Liar and Scammer.  They robbed Frank O’Collins of his life’s work and then accused him of stealing from them. 

That’s the ilk of “people” you are dealing with now. But remember what I told you— they always accuse others of what they are doing themselves. 

The key point is that the Global Family Private Membership Association Credit Union is NOT part of the new Blue Dot Bilateral Bank System and it never was. 

Whoever told people that it was were lying. 

Hunter never offered anyone 22% interest.

Being a member of the PMA was never a requirement to get an account in “my” new Bank. 

Nobody here told anyone to open multiple bank accounts in various Federal Reserve affiliated banks. 

We have proof that a small group of people known as the “Fab Five” repeatedly told these lies to people and used strong arm tactics to coerce them and scare them. 

But Hunter and I didn’t tell them to do this. This was all stuff they were doing and saying on their own. 

So they pretended to be “representing” us and did these evil things and then they sabotaged the LRS and started the bank run on the State of California Credit Union.

Where have we seen this before? How many times have I told you what they do and how they do it? 

This whole “issue” has nothing whatsoever to do with me or our banks or our Assemblies. Zero. And Hunter did nothing wrong. He has been working overtime to clean up the mess they dumped on him and the PMA Credit Union. 

So be assured that their payback is coming and will be swift and just.  They are mad at me and lying their butts off because I had already captured their STRAWMEN and placed liens on them the last time they attacked me.  This time I am going to exercise those liens and take effective action to put an end to their evil organization once and for all.  What they have wished on others will be returned. 

Anna Maria

About "American Sign Language" and Parse Syntax

 By Anna Von Reitz

It's not what you think. 

When people say "sign language" we think of the hand signals pioneered by teachers of the deaf as a way to communicate without verbalizations, but there is another meaning to the words "American Sign Language" which literally conceives of language as symbol groups akin to business signs or Hieroglyphs.  

This form of "American Sign Language" is the new cover for an old evil known as "Dog Latin". 

The essence of Dog Latin is to use Latin grammar and style conventions and English words (or words from any other language) to cobble together what appears to be English, but is not English. It's actually gobbledygook on the page, but people still endeavor to read it and make sense of it. 

Latin uses all-capital letters when referencing slave populations and that's why this is called "Dog Latin" --that is, Latin for uneducated and ignorant "dogs".  

The most recent iteration of the use of Dog Latin (first used about 1500 years ago during the reign of the Roman Emperor Justinian) has been Parse Syntax, popularized by David-Wynn:Miller and Russell-J:Gould. 

During the week that we met with Russell in Texas, he made many claims for his copyrighted language conventions, including that it was mathematically correct -- which I promptly disproved. 

Then, he claimed that it was more precise than English or Latin.  I proved that Parse-Syntax can't reliably distinguish between a pickle and a cucumber. 

He told us that he signed a contract with the Vatican as a service provider and that Parse Syntax would be replacing "Legalese" and would be the language of all commercial contracts in the future. 

Legalese is a horrible excuse for a language, but Parse Syntax would be worse; Parse Syntax is just as wonky and deceitful as Legalese, but it is also hideously precise about its construction and punctuation.  One hyphen or colon or space out of place could void a whole agreement or change its meaning.  

Russell did not appear to know or care about the horrors he was about to unleash upon the world; he struggled for five days to perfect a single page contract in Parse Syntax and thought that this was just fine. 

Now, from digging around in my published and recorded documents, people have observed that I appear to use Parse Syntax for some things, but that is only an appearance. 

Faced with the threat of having world commerce reliant on such a horrible copyrighted language, my husband created his own copyrighted version of Dog Latin for use on the land, which has its own style conventions and punctuations. That is what I am using in my published recordings--- Jim's version, not Russell's. 

Having a second version makes it nearly impossible for the Vatican to carry forward with the purported intent to adopt Parse Syntax as the official language of commerce.  

And even if that disaster did happen, having a second version for use on the land means that we could continue to access the commercial jurisdiction without reference to the King's watery realm and without using Russell"s copyright. 

Using any form of Dog Latin is a joke, but those who take it seriously insist on being addressed in this quasi-language, so James came to the rescue and provided a separate version that is under Public Copyright. 

This prevents any bottleneck or special despotism related to Russell's private copyrighted version. 

We sincerely hope that the Universal Postal Union will reconsider its use of any form of Dog Latin, and we do not recommend the use of Dog Latin whether our version or Russell's. It is a "viperous text" neither fish nor fowl, not suited to plain speaking and certainly not mathematically correct and not ever likely to promote quiet contracts. 

Please just say no to the whole prospect and do not follow my lead in publishing paperwork in Dog Latin or otherwise promoting it; I did what I did because of my role as Fiduciary and the need to establish a secondary option under Public Copyright --- not as any commendation.  

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

See this article and over 4300 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.

Reposting Good Old Malcolm Roberts

 By Anna Von Reitz

Some people are pithy and gracious trouble-makers for those who deserve trouble, and they just keep going at it for their entire lives.  Meet Malcolm Roberts and I quote his words of wisdom especially for our British, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Aussie, Canadian and other former-Commonwealth friends: 

"Did the Medical Countermeasures Consortium run #COVID? The Australian, American, British & Canadian #military forces formed this consortium to dominate COVID response. Australia joined the consortium in 2012 under the Labor-Gillard government. A military-pharmaceutical apparatus linking the USA, Australia, Canada and the UK. Operation Warp Speed: The US Department of Defense signed the first contract between the US government and #Pfizer for the purchase of US$11 billion dollars worth of #vaccines. We know our Therapeutic Goods Administration (#TGA) did not review stage 2/3 trial data and instead relied on the US FDA, which took Pfizer's word for how the trials went! Pfizer committed systemic fraud during its trials, which has come out now through whistle-blowers' testimony and in the release of Pfizer's own data. Pfizer, it seems, gave the US government the vaccine they asked for. It was developed using #gainoffunction research in conjunction with #Wuhan in #China and, of course, #AnthonyFauci. The military-pharmaceutical in action. These are matters to be dealt with in a Royal Commission. The Royal Commission that was promised by the Albanese government. Call a Royal Commission into COVID now!"

Yes, what a good idea, Malcolm. Time to roast some Pfizer buns over charcoal and follow up with investigation into the activities of the Wellcome Trust which has been a Perpetrator of medical crimes since the 1850s and the Pirbright Institute as well.

Covid isn't "just" an American or Chinese problem. 

The true genesis of the current malady started in Britain well-over a hundred years ago and simply manifested as this particular viral bioweapon now. 

All the hateful racist and elitist ideas and prejudices embodied by Lord Pirbright, Henry Wellcome and Cecil Rhodes --- and all the money they left in their endowments --- have provided the seedbed of this current genocide and its development since the 1960's. 

Time to get to the bottom of the dog pile.  A Royal Commission to flame-broil the US Perpetrators, and a Congressional Special Committee to roast their British counterparts.  

What say you, people of the world?  Shall we stop the Good Cop - Bad Cop nonsense, and dig out the root of this evil once and for all?  

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

See this article and over 4300 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.

Self-Sustaining.... My Laugh for the Day

 By Anna Von Reitz

I was recently asked if our American Government is "self-sustaining" and the answer of course, is yes. 

We don't have any choice about that. 

A government of, for, and by the people of this country must be self-sustaining in order to be sovereign. 

My husband and I have been "sustaining" the American Government for twenty-five years and so have a lot of other people, who have weighed in and sustained it through thick and thin.  

It's because of this support and sustenance that the American Government still exists today. 

But I think that more to her point, the lady asking wanted to know --- why do you take donations to keep your government running?  Don't governments have all the money in the world and the ability to print more?  

We certainly wouldn't be asking for donations if we had control of our own assets; unfortunately for the whole world, our assets were commandeered by British pirates 162 years ago, and between them, the British Monarchs, the Lord Mayors of the Inner City of London, and the Popes, have contrived to present themselves as our "representatives" and have acted as Executors de Son Tort ever since. 

So what is an "Executor de Son Tort" --? It's anyone who steps in and takes over and runs your estate as if you were dead and as if he were your lawful chosen executor--  without your agreement and usually to your detriment. 

First, they had to pretend we were "dead" and that our Government was "missing" and "in interregnum" and "absent" --- which only appeared to be the case because of things these Bounders did. 

Then, they pretended to have a "custodial interest" in our "abandoned" estates and persons, and they settled in and have bullied and pillaged and run this country and its people into the ground ever since. 

And, of course, the banks run by the same Perpetrators allowed this.  And the Bar Associations run by the same Perpetrators allowed this. 

We, the actual people who live in this country and who are in fact its government,  are the only ones who spoke up and pointed out that we are still here, hello, and we didn't appoint these fellows to act as our executors. 

Now we have to arm wrestle them to get our own assets back and put them under our own control, which is more difficult than you might think. 

These self-appointed executors and custodians have grown fat and happy from confiscating our private property illegally and taxing us unlawfully and misrepresenting us and selling us out. 

They've passed no less than 80 million administrative "laws" for us to obey  and provided hundreds of "services" we never contracted with them to provide. 

They have pretended to the rest of the world that that is all right with us and pretended that we acquiesced to all that they have done "for" us, but in fact the vast bulk of our population has been kept in the dark and fed, well, you know what we've been fed: television "programming" and still more false indoctrination in schools for the public.   

One of the things they did "for" us was to use legal jargon and semantic deceits to misidentify us as British Territorial U.S. Citizens and then, they presumed that we were under the law of the sea, and not standing on the land and soil of our country anymore.  

So they have evaded their own contractual obligations and the Constitutional Guarantees we are owed by pretending that we are not Americans.  In this way, they have endeavored to depopulate and vacate this entire country on paper, and clear the way for claims on abandonment made by themselves and their creditors.

They did this using unconscionable contracts foisted off on us while we were still babies in our cradles. 

And all the while, they pretended to be our Best Friends Forever.  They sanctimoniously talked about "freedom" while enslaving us, and have behaved just like the Raj in India. 

They got away with it and it worked so well in America simply by singing "Yankee Doodle Dandy" and otherwise keeping their mouths shut, that they decided to apply the same schtick to the rest of the known world and to unlawfully convert all the  national governments into corporations merely in the business of providing government services for profit.

Of course, this amounts to national-level identity theft and it's all a gigantic criminal fraud in breach of trust and honor.  

So, yes, our American Government is self-sustaining.  It always has been, and had to be. 

We take donations because these criminals have  cashiered our assets so that we don't have the keys to our own doors and access to our own gold.

Instead, we have to fight with their creditors and go through hell proving who we are and where we come from and what our political status is, thanks to their phony registration processes. 

So, yes, Lady in the Audience, we take donations until the day that we get cooperation to shut these phony "government corporations" down and stop their war-profiteering, until the day our own military wakes up and stops working for SERCO, and until everyone on Earth joins with us to put an end to the Raj and the thuggish corporate feudalism that goes with it.   

Yes, we are self-sustaining. We will be able to sustain ourselves a lot better once we get more of our gold and other assets back in our control, where it always should have been.  Until then, if you would like to contribute to the effort, our assemblies are gathering worldwide.  

You can send cash, checks, and money orders, stamps, information, articles, questions, insights, and prayers of assistance to me and our Federation of States to: Anna Maria Riezinger, In care of: Box 520994, Big Lake, Alaska 99652. 

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

See this article and over 4300 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.

Double Meanings for Different Things

 By Anna Von Reitz

My Readers are no strangers to the kinds of deceitful games the rats play with words and names, so it should come as no surprise that the same applies to entire phrases and definitions.

Let me offer some helpful guidance through this morass of misspeak and run through an example that is currently causing a lot of problems. 

David Straight has encouraged millions of people, especially U.S. Citizens, to "correct" their political status to that of an "American State National". He has done this on the basis of Federal Code found in Title 8--- 8 USC 1101 (a) (21) --(I think) but regardless of the exact citation, the point is that--- Number One,  he has justified this on the basis of Federal Code. 

Now, other people, also citing Federal Codes have come forward and said, "No, no, no! You can get in trouble making a claim to be an American State National....and they then cite their Federal Code sources, saying, the term "American State National" only applies to American Samoans, etc.

It's a typical Federal Code Ballywhump, where nobody is reading the Code correctly and where people are not being helped, because they don't have the tools to sort out the verbiage. 

And both parties are right --- to an extent. 

Let's begin with the fact that Federal Code does not apply to Joe Average in any broad way.  

You, American, eating your lunch beside a railroad track, may have unknowingly come into physical Federal jurisdiction, or maybe you knowingly entered Federal jurisdiction by going to the Post Office, and therefore need to obey the Federal Codes attached to those environs. 

You might actually be engaged in interstate commerce, though that is unlikely and an unnecessary supposition.  

You might be engaged in the manufacture, sale, or transportation of alcohol, tobacco, or firearms across state lines. 

You might be operating a boat or ship or barge.

You might be licensed as a Uniformed Officer, like a Medical Doctor or Registered Nurse.  

But, the point is, aside from such special occupations and locations, the vast majority of you are not "generally subject" to Federal Code.  

Federal Code applies to Federal employees and their direct dependents -- either military or Federal Civil Service. 

Now doesn't that make sense?  Federal Code applies to Federal Employees. Just like Federal Income means profits derived from Federal employment.

So that is the first issue: the use of Federal Code when talking about or to Joe Average American is generally speaking not appropriate.  Patriots constantly make this mistake and it is a Big Mistake.  

Ask yourself: why reference Federal Code if it does not apply to you? 

The only reason that a member of our General Public would have to reference Federal Code is to convince Public Employees that they are in violation of their own Code, and if that is what you are doing, you must make that very explicit.  

"Yes, you are a Public Employee, and here is the pertinent Federal Code you need to obey...." 

Estimates are that 92-95% of all Federal Code has no application related to Joe Average American, so, unless your are a Public Employee, please stop this pernicious habit of trying to justify everything according to Federal Code.  

I repeat: unless you are engaged in a federally regulated activity or know that you are physically in a federally regulated location -- an army base, a post office, a railroad corridor, etc. -- Federal Code does not apply to you. 

David Straight is trying to help people like himself who have, for one reason or another, a compelling reason to adopt British Territorial United States (U.S.) Citizenship.  They typically adopt this political status because of their employment and lose their Constitutional Guarantees as a result. 

He is trying to show them a way that they can reclaim their guarantees and make use of their ability to adopt Dual Citizenship/Nationality. 

So David is trying to help Federal Employees and the use of Federal Code could be appropriate, but in this case, it isn't.  Why?  Because his critics are right, the phrase "American State National" as used in Federal Code only applies to American Samoans. 

Please notice the words "as used in Federal Code".  

When these same words "American State National" are applied outside of Federal Code, in the world where actual people speak plain English, they apply to anyone born or naturalized within the physical borders of an actual State of the Union. 

So in Federal-ese, the words "American State National" refer to the political status of American Samoans.  In Common Parlance, the same words, "American State National" mean anyone born or naturalized within the physical borders of an actual State of the Union.  

How do you tell the difference between the two? 

 

When the words are written on paper, they look identical, and when they are spoken, they sound the same. 

Hints are provided from context, but the only sure way to tell the difference is to know the definition you are using and say it or write it out. 

The bureaucrats resort to using Latin conventions--- and use "American State National" to refer to American Samoans' political status, and American "state national" to refer to those born or naturalized in the States of the Union. 

Even though English is our official language, the use of Latin style conventions has been allowed as an exception since 1851. 

This just adds to the confusion for Joe Average American, who according to English, assumes that he is an American State National, when in the Federal System he is an American state national. 

Obviously, there are considerable communications obstacles embedded in this situation, obstacles that can be overcome by tediously expressing the definitions you are using, or, by adopting Latin style conventions, or both. 

Such differences can also be exploited by unscrupulous persons. 

When you are claiming your birthright political status and you are obligated to maintain U.S. Citizenship for some reason, its necessary to establish what you mean by "American State National" versus what they mean by "American State National" --- and because your meaning comes from Common Usage, it's inappropriate to reference Federal Code which assigns a totally different meaning to the same words. 

There.  Does that help?   

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

See this article and over 4300 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.