The Three Federal Populations - Retrospective Details

 By Anna Von Reitz

I am forwarding a pdf copy of the Georgetown Law Review, November, 1912, and directing your attention to the first article by Hannis Taylor. 

https://annavonreitz.com/georgetownlawjournal.pdf

Please consider that unique work by Pelatiah Webster, The Constitution for the united States of America adopted in 1787 and resulting in what would later be termed, the Federal Constitution, or, The Constitution of the United States (old language conventions apply here with "the United States" then being synonymous with The United States as defined in 1851). 

Most Americans have heard vaguely of "the Federal Constitution" and "the Federal Republic" but even in 1912 during a review celebrating the 125th Anniversary of this key document, people writing for the Georgetown Law Journal had lost track of the actual name of the Constitution being celebrated and were ignorant of the 1851 change in style conventions, too. 

The less favored in society are left to suppose, erroneously, that Pelatiah Webster's famous work was the same as The Constitution of the United States that we see published under that name today by the Municipal Government in Washington, DC. 

What a comedy of errors promulgating more errors. 

Even in 1912, more than a hundred years ago, nobody remembered the actual architect of the 1787 Constitution,  and nobody remembered the style convention changes of 1851, either, so we wind up talking about "the Constitution" and don't even know the actual name of the document or the identity and nature of the political body that issued it.   

This country is well and truly lost, if a mammoth effort of self-education is not made. 

The Federal Constitution issued in 1787 was titled The Constitution for the united States of America --note the use of the word "for" which is unique and the use of the word "united" as an adjective written in small case letters.   

This was a second run at crafting a Constitution for the Confederation of States doing business as the States of America.  The original effort, The Articles of Confederation, begun in January 1777 and ratified in 1781, left much to be desired. 

The States of America was a doing-business-as name of the original Union nation-states, which joined their individual State of State organizations into a Confederation with the intention of leveraging their mutual economic and trade interests in international and global jurisdictions.  

It was this Confederation of State of State business organizations that operated the American Federal Services Contractor known as the Federal Republic from 1787 to April 15th 1861, and which provided the bulk of all Federal Government services during that time period. 

It was this Confederation that was rendered inoperable for lack of a quorum when the seven Southern States walked out and left it without a date set to reconvene, April 1st 1861. 

Within days, and despite Lincoln's Inaugural Address in which he declared that changing the institution of slavery in the Southern States was not his intention little more than a month prior, our country was plunged into an illegal Mercenary Conflict euphemistically called The American Civil War. 

It was the break-down of the Confederation operating under Pelatiah Webster's brainchild, The Constitution for the united States of America, that led to the spin-off Confederate States of America, which proposed to bargain independently for their trade relationships and commercial contracts.  

The intent of The Articles of Confederation was to form a "perpetual union" of the business interests of the States joined together as a single economic power. Pelatiah Webster's new Constitution first published for discussion on February 16, 1783.  

The Confederation operating as the Federal Republic was so far successful in applying the mutual economic and trade powers of the States that by the 1850's the United Kingdom and most of Europe was frightened of this new world economic power.

In unity was our safety and our strength in dealing with the rest of the world, but disagreements about economic priorities and policies between the industrialized North and agricultural South found their breaking point. 

Looking back with 20/20 hindsight it seems that there were many possible solutions short of going to war, chief among them the Federation of States' desire to simply buy all the plantation slaves and set them free.  This was what was done in England and other European countries. Why not America?

As The Articles of Confederation were already bypassed in 1787, together with the "perpetual union" clause, there was nothing so wrong with the industrialized North tending to its knitting and allowing the Southern States to do the same. They could have simply split into two camps and negotiated separate trade agreements.

Why didn't they? 

The most likely reason is that slavery was a much bigger issue than the General Public knew, and it was not an issue of only Southern economics, or injustice, or the repugnance of elitist claptrap.

No, slavery has a much deeper and darker history---and profitability for both North and South was at stake.   More to come regarding that snippet of additional history you never knew and the Dutch Government's complicity in it 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.

Fast Eddie of the Fab Five

 By Anna Von Reitz

Eddie has told everyone that I don't know what I am doing with banking ----and I have to smile.  

Eddie doesn't know what I am doing, but that's all right. I never intended that he would.   

He said that Hunter isn't a banker, too, and that's correct.  Hunter isn't a banker.  

He's a Prosperitor. 

If people had been listening to me and really hearing what I said, they would know that my Bilateral Banks are not about depositing anything, and that these new institutions ---that are somewhat analogous to credit unions but not the same--- are prepaid credit facilities instead.  

What have I said over and over and over?  

That the funds in these new banks are prepaid.  The people don't pay into the banks, the banks pay out to the people.  

That's why I don't understand why anyone would make deposits in a conventional credit union and think that they were dealing with "my" banks or with "my" version of credit unions, either. 

What we are now doing with banking has never been done before in the history of the world, but there's no reason why not.  It's not illegal or unlawful.  It's beneficial to everyone concerned. 

Just as the Lincoln Conspirators turned the world upside down, we are turning it right side up again.  

Soon, war and slavery and pollution and other kinds of crime won't be profitable anymore, so these activities will naturally fade away.  People will have to do something good to make a profit.  Plant vineyards. Raise bees. Clean the streets. Repair the plumbing. Dig the wells....

The Perps pulled off an unlawful conversion, and we are doing a lawful conversion.  

Guess who has the law on their side? 

Eddie has all the classic ear-marks of an Unwilling Snitch. He was in Federal Prison and they let him out. He says it was because of research he and Michael Kearns did, but Michael Kearns is dead and I can't ask him to confirm Eddie's backstory.  

The Federales knew Michael Kearns. They basically killed him by repeatedly arresting him and not giving him his heart medication. They could have told Eddie all about Michael and his research without breaking a sweat.

My best guess is that the Agency Goons offered Eddie a deal -- IMHO he did what he had to do to get out of jail and into a position where he could protect himself and his family.  He was being threatened, his family was being threatened (the Stick) and on the other side, he was being paid (the Carrot). 

I don't blame Eddie for that. I talk to him from time to time. He teaches me things about the conventional banking system.  I teach him about the jurisdictions and forms of law. It's amiable enough. 

If a person isn't really motivated to do evil but winds up doing it because of circumstances they can't control, it's a different matter than those who are evil for the sake of evil.  

I also forgive people who are genuinely confused and deluded.  Like the Bible says, they confuse good for evil and evil for good, but it isn't their fault that they are confused.  They are just weak-minded. 

Eddie is right ---I don't know all the ins and outs of the conventional commercial banking system. I admit it. So what?

I'm not building a conventional commercial bank, so that's a moot point. 

Eddie did damage to us and what we are accomplishing, that's true, too.  He and the other Fab Five members spread panic and fear and gossip that they knew was untrue. They've done the classic Satanist thing. 

They pretended to represent me and my banks. They did evil in my name. Then they blamed their victims, as Satanists always do, and have left Hunter to clean up and clear away the giant mess they created. 

  

Our Creator knows people better than I do, knows their internal story, why they are afraid, why they believe evil things, why they do evil things---  and the best I can do is surmise.  So, the sensible thing to do is to let the True God do the battling for us. 

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

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.

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.