By Anna Von Reitz
Often, very often, we've had cause at the Federation level to stop and contemplate the failures of our American Government. How did something so brilliantly conceived and bulwarked in every way, fall into such disrepair and forgetfulness?
There were certainly evil and conspiratorial forces allied against us, betrayal from within our Federal Subcontractors and their workforce, treachery from Treaty Partners --- yet what fundamental flaws led to this present circumstance?
We've thought long and hard about this topic, above and beyond the actions of other interests seeking our downfall. What did we fail to do? What mistakes were made that need to be addressed going forward.
(1) Failure to properly educate and indoctrinate our children.
The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing and they knew why in great detail. This is demonstrated by Thomas Jefferson's listing of grievances provided in The Unanimous Declaration of Independence, and later in the protective provisions provided in the federal Constitutions and the discussions leading up to their adoption.
Unfortunately, the Sons and Grandsons who escaped the evils enumerated, didn't sufficiently understand and value the protections that their Fathers earned for them. This is most evident in the case of John Quicy Adams, who allowed foreign interests to unduly influence him throughout his career.
(2) Failure to pay sufficient attention to banking and bank activities.
Although a boring and odious topic for most people, banking is unavoidably one of the most important aspects of maintaining a sound currency and economy --- and if we as a government are to protect our people and their assets, we must pay attention to it.
Coming out of the Revolutionary War, the British Territorial population left within our borders was struggling under a great war debt levied on them by the British Monarch.
These people had fought bravely for King George in both the French and Indian War and the War of Independence and had spent lavishly on armaments and supplies to support the King's forces in both cases. With the conclusion of the War of Independence, they were saddled with the costs of both Wars.
This led to them entering into repeated loans and associations with foreign banks and the banks hiring bill collectors to ride herd on their "American" investments. The Federal Reserve of that era was engaged to manage this debt, but the Tories have never been able to pay off these war debts, much less their share of the British Crown's subsequent "wars". This is part of their National Debt to this day.
The new American Government had significant war debts, too, that led to mortgaging land assets held by the various new States and the creation of the "United States Bank" as a means to manage and repay this debt. President Andrew Jackson managed to pay off this obligation and "kill the bank", so that American landholdings and sovereignty were preserved going into the 1840's.
Over the years of usurpation and deliberate efforts to impersonate us and substitute British Territorial government for American Government, the interlopers have, of course, misrepresented their debts as our debts.
Avoiding this kind of malfeasance and fraud requires keeping a sharper eye on finances and especially on any borrowing that is necessary and the collateralization of any assets encumbered by such borrowing.
(3) Greater attention to contracts and contract language and natural limitations built into jurisdictions.
One of the "Great Faults" pointed out by Jefferson Davis, who served as the President of the Confederate States of America, and who was arguably one of the greatest legal scholars to ever live in this country, was the language used in The Articles of Confederation.
These Articles presumed to create a "perpetual union" -- an aim that was and is beyond the scope of the air jurisdiction to maintain in the same sense that it applied to the natural union of land and soil. It was this self-evident flaw that the Union Army enforced--- but the enforcement in no way legitimizes the failed contract.
As Davis pointed out, the union between land and soil is unavoidable and reciprocal in nature, but no such binding force can be found to justify a perpetual union of business interests. The contract itself, meaning The Articles of Confederation, was fatally flawed and the Southern States were not obligated to honor it as a result.
We wouldn't argue with Jefferson Davis on this point; his suppositional analysis of the subject matter is deadly accurate to this day, and if we are faced with rewriting new Articles of Confederation as a part of reconstruction of the missing cylinders of our governmental engine, we will have to pay far more attention to the language and the practical limitations of such a contract.
(4) Stipulated periodic review of Treaty performances and alteration of legal jargon.
Our Forefathers accepted that if something isn't broken, don't fix it; accordingly, they waited for Treaty violations to occur and for some harm to come from the violation before addressing it.
They were managing a land and soil based government and were not very attuned to the shifting, wheedling, constantly changing Law of the Sea -- so they underestimated the power of this seemingly alien form of law and its ability to creep up upon the land -- which is how a large part of the evils practiced against us came to be.
If, every two to four years, our government had disciplined itself to review contract performance by the Federal Subcontractors, and if we had published this review and required corrections, we wouldn't be in the present circumstance because the Public would have been expecting the result of the review and would have been alerted to the fact that a third of the total intended government was missing.
It was the lack of such a periodic review and publication of it for Public cognizance that allowed the remaining foreign-based Federal Subcontractors to usurp upon us so successfully and for so long.
This is also how the Federal Subcontractor's performance continued to erode until we have been faced with the specter of corporate "public policy" being allowed to overstand the Federal Constitutions.
Without Public Review of performance and public knowledge of the Treaties and contracts under review, the Federal Subcontractors were left to their own reconnaissance and the foxes were indeed in charge of the hen house.
A similar periodic review of legal jargon to forestall its use to redefine parties to contract and other abuses would have been very useful in forestalling many of the specific evils visited upon us. Constant redefinitions of the words "United States" and "United States of America", obfuscations resulting from failure to add words like "Incorporated", and redefinitions of words like "person" to function as legal terms, have promoted the frauds against us. We obviously need to closely scrutinize the Law of the Sea and changes in legal jargon that are detrimental to us.
(5) A thorough and Public understanding of the crimes of unlawful conversion, impersonation, barratry, and monopolization.
The only way for a crime to be committed without consequence is: (1) failure by the public to recognize it as a crime; and (2) lack of a means to enforce against it.
The personage crimes of impersonation and barratry leading to the further crimes of unlawful conversion and monopolization have featured heavily in the current malaise.
When Congressman Louis T. McFadden first raised the alarm during the early years of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt administration and called out the "unlawful conversion" being pursued by the British Territorial and Municipal Corporations acting as our Federal Subcontractors and Service Providers --- hardly anyone in the Public knew what he was talking about.
Going forward, every housewife and school child must have a firm grasp of "impersonation", "identity theft", "enfranchisement", "barratry", "unlawful conversion" and "monopoly".
Some would argue that the board game "Monopoly" has taught us all we need to know about how monopoly works; but what it does not teach sufficiently are the evils of monopoly and the way monopolies lead to the exercise of coercive power.
(6) Enforcement against monopolies failed.
There are reasons why monopolies are both illegal and unlawful, but we have been seduced by the Siren Song of Monopoly -- especially Public Monopolies -- and have succumbed far too readily to their evil charms.
The argument in favor of Public Monopolies like the Post Office includes standardization of service and expeditious regulation of that service. This comes at the cost of ever-increasing cost creep and expansion of the "service" -- whatever it is -- amid the perils of self-regulation.
Monopolies of public services unavoidably makes the public dependent on the Service Provider. The servant becomes the master in such a scenario and the public suffers accordingly. Competition from other delivery services such as Federal Express and DHL in this country and worldwide helps keep the Post Office in bounds, but other Public Monopolies have flourished and gone astray and caused harm to an unbelievable extent.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is one example. They are an "agency" -- a hired subcontractor of our Federal Subcontractors --
with virtually no competition or meaningful oversight. This private, unelected, and unaccountable entity has been allowed arbitrary and inappropriate power to decide food and drug safety issues.
Not surprisingly, the FDA has also been paid to look the other way -- to approve food and drugs and additives and practices that should have never been approved by a rational being.
For example, in a recent FDA public service notice campaign, people are being warned that tobacco manufacturers have been allowed to add addictive substances to their products. That much is true-- but the FDA is still painting "nicotine", which is naturally found in tobacco, as the addictive substance, and that is untrue. Nicotine isn't addictive. It's other separate compounds that don't naturally occur in tobacco which are deliberately added to tobacco products to make them addictive --- and the FDA approved this practice.
Millions of Americans have been hooked on tobacco products and suffered harm to their pocketbooks and physical health as a result; why would an agency watchdog permit the tobacco companies to add known addictive substances to their naturally un-addictive product?
Answer: the Federal Government gets a cut of the profits from its ability to regulate alcohol, tobacco, and firearms.
This kind of dirty dealing against the Public Interest and in favor of the profiteering of incorporated entities, has become commonplace, while corrupt privatized organizations are entrusted to perform actual service to the Public --- like outlawing the purposeful addition of addictive substances to foods, drinks, and drugs.
Inevitably, the creation of monopoly interests like the Food and Drug Administration imbued with coercive regulatory powers that are abused or omitted against the Public Interest, start out with the premise of: we're good people, we wouldn't ever abuse the Public....
Throughout our history, this same naive premise has infiltrated key decisions and the temptation to establish monopolies in an effort to control various functions has repeatedly won out over more sober and realistic means of oversight.
Just because we are good people and we mean well and we would never harm the Public Interest doesn't mean that fifteen years from now our replacements have the same moral character and devotion. Thus, monopolies, especially Public Monopolies, must be viewed with a jaundiced eye that takes in the possibility of future corruption and abuses of monopoly power, even if the present crew is impeccable.
Even worse than straight up privatized monopolies like the Food and Drug Administration are the self-regulatory bodies that have been entrusted with the oversight of entire sectors of the industrial economy.
Where profit is involved, and may be adversely impacted by such trivial concerns as public health, no industry can be trusted to discipline itself. And no industry should be protected from liability for its acts and omissions.
As we go forward we must overhaul all the means of public oversight currently in existence and find better answers.
(7) Proliferation of private insurance and insurance companies.
The lust to profit from actuarial tables has been unmatched since the days of Rome.
Private insurance is legalized gambling.
When the "government" service providers seize upon private or public property and mortgage it to generate credit for them to spend, those same service providers should be responsible for ensuring the safe return of such property. Instead, they impose on the private owner to provide them with insurance for their risk management and their unseen use of the victim's property asset.
This filthy little quid pro quo --- forcing people to buy private insurance for assets that have been surreptitiously "securitized" for use as government contractor collateral --- has created a huge, burgeoning insurance sector economy.
The victims, of course, don't know that their house or their car has been seized upon as collateral by the criminal corporations acting as government service providers. The victims think they are buying insurance to protect their own assets, but instead, they are buying insurance to protect assets the governmental services contractors have purloined --- and should be insuring themselves.
This entire fraud scheme brought to us by our erstwhile "governmental service providers" --- both their undisclosed use of our private assets as collateral benefiting them and their demand that we insure the assets they are using against loss --- are outrageous impositions that have created the private insurance industry out of thin air.
This entire scenario is criminal. The undisclosed use of private property assets as collateral for commercial debt, like the demand that the victims pay for insuring the purloined collateral against damage or loss -- is insufferable.
This points out the need to closely examine and potentially outlaw private insurance and certainly to outlaw undisclosed securitization of private assets -- including the securitization of our labor as a public asset, which amounts to either peonage or slavery -- going forward
This critique of our American Government and its "United States" Federal Subcontractors' practices reveals a prevailing theme -- failure to adequately inform and educate the American Public by failure to establish consistent notification, review, and reporting requirements, along with failure to establish periodic review of treaty and contract performance published for Public Review.
We won't make the same mistakes again.
Granna
------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
