Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 10,360 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. WHAT THEY WRITE IS THEIR OWN OPINION, just as what I write is my own.


Showing posts sorted by relevance for query 14th amendment. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query 14th amendment. Sort by date Show all posts

Friday, April 23, 2021

Foreword to the 14th Amendment Documents

 By Anna Von Reitz

We are publishing documents that have been "sealed" by the courts.  If you didn't get a copy prior to them being sealed by the courts, you won't be able to get a copy without a Court Order now, so be thankful that other Americans were on the ball 55 years ago.  And that we are making copies provided to us available to all Fifty State Assemblies now. 

You will see some curious language in these documents, which will only be understandable with some help.  

For example, the reference to a "memorial" to the Congress of the United States of America, is confusing until you realize that they are talking about a Territorial Congress and organization that is defunct, from the perspective of a "Successor" Municipal Congress operating in 1967, and which has inherited issues that have been left unresolved by their Territorial Predecessors. 

Also please recognize that these issues were not and cannot be addressed by the Municipal Congress (despite the ferocious debate and exposure by representatives of the STATE OF GEORGIA) because they are referring back to Territorial Government  actions and initiatives--- actions which exist outside the jurisdiction and scope of the Municipal Congress and their ability to correct. 

What they are debating in 1967 actually happened 101 years earlier, in 1866 --- so we take you back to the record of the action taken by the 39th Congress under examination.  Let's call that "14th Amendment - Record 1" which shows where and when the 14th Amendment entered the public view.  



Bear in mind that this 14th Amendment action is being taken by the British-backed Territorial "Congress" in 1866, and that as Allies of the Northern State-of-States, they have just "won" the Civil War against the Papist-backed Municipal Government and its Southern State-of-State Allies--- so they are imposing penalties and seeking war reparations and they are redefining the Municipal (Federal Civil Service) Officers and citizenry, along with the Rebels of the Southern State of State organizations, as "Fourteenth Amendment citizens" as a means to extract booty from them.  

Then we show you the Resolution coming out of the STATE OF GEORGIA Municipal General Assembly in 1957, which was the "immediate cause" of the Municipal Congressional Debate ten years later in 1967.  Let's call that "14th Amendment - Record 2".  Remember is a Municipal Government body, the STATE OF GEORGIA calling the entire proceedings of the Territorial Government's  "Fourteenth Amendment" --and especially its lack of ratification by the actual States --  into question. 



As of 1957, the members of the Municipal STATE OF GEORGIA don't understand that their General Assembly and even their Municipal CONGRESS, cannot change actions taken by the Territorial Government.

Next, we show the actual Congressional Record of the debate that took place in 1967 in the 90th Municipal CONGRESS.  That should be noted as "14th Amendment - Record 3".  Here they lay out all the dirt on the Fourteenth Amendment, why it is illegal, fraudulent, and unconstitutional. 




Next, we show the Primary Result: having Unconstitutional Laws included as part of the Public Record, and leaving average people to decide either to apply these "laws" at their own risk, which district court judges do every day-- or not.   Call that "14th Amendment - Record 4" and note that this conundrum is the source of so-called "Judicial Discretion" being practiced in the Territorial Courts to this day. 



The Fourteenth Amendment is the first of a great many unconstitutional statutory "laws" and "codes" adopted by the Territorial United States Government in the purported absence of our lawful government. 

The only entity with the power to stop the perpetuation of such "laws" and void their selective enforcement on our soil is The United States of America -- our unincorporated Federation of States.   There is no other body remaining that has the cross-jurisdictional authority to dispense with these foreign legislative acts and also to enforce the Constitutional Guarantees against the other Principals responsible for this mess. 

Finally, we show the Secondary Result: Continuing Trespass.  The example given is about a public trespass on private property versus a public nuisance, but the same exact issues apply when the Territorial Government persists in applying it's unconstitutional private laws either to foreign Municipal PERSONS and their property, or to Americans who are Third Parties stuck in the middle of this cross-jurisdictional mess.  Call this explanation of Continuing Trespass -- which is what we are suffering along with the Municipal PERSONS we are deliberately mistaken for --- "14th Amendment - Record 5". 



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

See this article and over 3100 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

Friday, February 12, 2021

The Constitutionally Repugnant Reconstruction Acts Impose 14th Amendment via Martial Law Powers In Time of Peace.

 By Anna Von Reitz

See better formatting of this article here:

Everyone please read the above statement as many times as necessary to glean the grist of it.
Our two (2) foreign Federal Subcontractors have, for their own benefit and enrichment, continued to promote the idea that the Civil War never ended, and that we, the American people, are unknown persons "presumed to be" Enemy Combatants until proven otherwise.
As shill Psyops Officer Robert Horton recounts, they also persist in claiming that the Civil War, which was an undeclared commercial mercenary conflict and not a "war" at all --- was a proper war, allowing them to claim immunity and right of conquest when it wasn't, doesn't, and never did.
This is all just bunko and legally convenient, as-- if this deceit is accepted--- it allows the Territorial U.S. Citizens to presume that we are Municipal citizens of the United States, subject to search and seizure, and it allows the Municipal United States Government (set up as the Municipal Corporation of the District of Columbia) to presume that we are subject to them and that we owe all their debts.
Neither thing happens to be true.
What is true is that we, the people of this country, and our legitimate government in international jurisdiction, The United States of America [Unincorporated] and our national governments vested in our State Assemblies, are still here, still operating, now in Session ---and together with our members, due every jot of every "Federal" Constitution.
That is what is true and all the rest of this criminal bunk is just that--- bunk.
I am publishing here for the edification of the entire world the stripped down historical research and timeline necessary to come to these same conclusions for yourselves and to explicitly detail how and why this country is still messing around with and suffering from "legal issues" created by an undeclared mercenary conflict that ended over a century and a half ago.
Our deepest thanks to Geoffrey Jacob Caputo and the State Nationals Association for this knock-down, drag-out, and absolutely correct step-by-step analysis of the history, legal actions, and results --- which was completed many years ago, and which stands to inform everyone worldwide:
"I. Constitutionally Repugnant Reconstruction Acts Impose 14th Amendment via Martial Law Powers In Time of Peace 1861 The object of the Civil from 1861 to 1865 was not for the Southern States to be conquered or subjugated.1 1865 January 31 - 13th Amendment Proposed to the States May 10 - President Johnson Proclaimed the end of the Hostilities on land with the only duty left to arrest the former insurgency’s vessels at sea.2 STATES WHICH RATIFIED 13th AMENDMENT February 9 – Virginia ; February 17 - Louisiana, April 7 – Tennessee ; April 14 - Arkansas, November 13 - South Carolina , December 2 - Alabama, December 4 - North Carolina December 4 - Renegade members of the 39th Congress, at the inception of the 1st session on, 1865; suggested the denial of seats in the House and the Senate to the Southern States on the baseless allegation that they had no legal governments and were in rebellion. 3 December 6 - Georgia ratifies 13th Amdmt December 18 - 13th Amendment was declared ratified 4 December 28 – Florida (Florida again ratified on June 9, 1868, upon its adoption of a new constitution ) 1866 March 3 - 39th Congress resolves the denial of seats in the House and the Senate to the Southern States in the house on baseless allegations of rebellion.5 April 2 - President Johnson proclaimed the insurrection at an end in all the Southern States except It was further proclaimed that each State’s civil authority was to be restored and that they had shown sufficient evidence of loyalty to the Union by conforming to Johnson’s policies of incorporating the 13th amendment into legislation.6 June 16 - 14th Amendment (called Article XIV) was proposed by the 39th Congress Ist session by joint resolution 48 to “the legislatures of the several States” .7 August 20 - President Johnson further proclaimed Peace on and gave notice of the resumption of civil government in the States which had seceded. 8 October 1866 to 1867 - Southern and non-southern States reject 14th Amndmt. – Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Louisiana Mississippi, and many non southern states. 1867 February 8 - One month before the first Reconstruction Act was colorably implemented, the 39th Congress introduced Bill 1143 entitled, “A Bill To establish an additional article of war for the more complete suppression of the insurrection against the United States”. 9 March 2 – First Reconstruction Act colorably “enacted”10 ; President Johnson Vetoes The Act11 March 23 – Second Reconstruction Act12 ; President Johnson Vetoes The Act13 July 19 – Third Reconstruction Act14 ; President Johnson Vetoes The Act15 1868 March 11 – Fourth Reconstruction Act16 June 25 - North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida are colorably “re-admitted” back into the Union as a new body politic of a 14th Amendment citizentry due to adopting the 14th Amendment. 17 July 9, 1868 – 14th Amendment COLORABLY IMPOSED due to 28 states’ alleged ratification. II. Constitutional Violations of the 39th & 40th Congresses in Imposing The Reconstruction Acts & Amend. XIV 1 House Journal - July 22, 1861. p.123 / Senate Journal - July 25, 1861.p.92 2 13 STAT 757 Presidential Proclamation 35 3 Senate Journal, starting @ p. 7 4 13 STAT. 774 5 House Journal, March 3, 1866. Page 353 6 14 STAT 811 – 813 7 14 STAT 358 8 14 STAT 814 9 Committee on Reconstruction Bill 1143 10 14 Stat. 428 11 House Journal March 2, 1867 - Page 563 12 15 Stat. 2 13 House Journal March 23, 1867 - Page 99 14 15 Stat. 14 15 House Journal July 19, 1867 - Page 171 16 15 STAT 41 17 15 STAT 73 1. Art. V § 5 of The Constitution of The United States of America (CFUSA) “and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.” Violation: The House Journal, March 3, 1866 - Page 353 1. Art. III § 3 CFUSA says, “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” Violation: The Reconstruction Acts 1. The Reconstruction Acts were inconsistent with criteria for martial law provisions as required in The Constitution for the United States of America. See EX PARTE MILLIGAN 71 US 2 (1866) 39th Congress had no evidence of the states being in rebellion. Civil authority was restored in that the courts of the Southern States were open and the slaves were free pursuant to the 13th amendment. The only Martial Rule which can exist during times of peace according to the Constitution is the code of laws enacted by Congress for the government of the national forces in which martial law could only apply to the soldier and not to the citizen, then the Reconstruction acts were unconstitutional because it applied military law only to the citizen and not to the soldier. 1. Art. I §. 9 cl. 3 CFUSA: says “ No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” Violation: Everyone in the southern states was, in a blanket fashion, declared guilty of rebellion and penalized via unlawful military rule. 1. Art. IV §. 4 CFUSA says “ The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” Violation: The 39th Congress unlawfully denied the Southern States a republican form of government by acting contrary to Art. IV §. 4 1. Art. 1 §. 8 cl.17 CFUSA that the Congress is “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dockYards and other needful Buildings . . .” Violation: The 39th Congress exercised exclusive legislation (Reconstruction Acts) outside their District unlawfully. 1. Art IV § 3 says that, “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.” Violation: The 39th Congress formed a new unlawful, defacto state within each of the several dejure states without the consent of the Dejure state bodies politic. Additional Notes DE JURE. Rightfully; lawfully; by legal title. Contrasted with de facto 4 Bla. Com. 77 How a Dejure state, such as Florida, is formed: [5 Stat. 742.] Statute II. Chap. XLVII.-- An Act for the admission of the states of Iowa and Florida into the Union . . . whereas, the people of the Territory of Florida did, in like manner, by their delegates, on the eleventh day of January, eighteen hundred and thirty-nine, form for themselves a constitution and State government [Act of March 3, 1845, ch. 75 and ch 76.], both of which said constitutions are republican; and said conventions having asked the admission of their respective Territories into the Union as States, on equal footing with the original States: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled , That the States of Iowa and Florida be, and the same are hereby, declared to be States of the United States of America, and are hereby admitted into the Union on equal footing with the original States, in all respects whatsoever. Florida’s original government could only be abolished by the consent of the people: Florida Constitution of 1838 Article I Section 2 : That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and established for their benefit; and, therefore, they have, at all times, an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may deem expedient. The Reconstruction Acts were constitutionally repugnant war powers which abolished The Southern States’ original governments against their consent and formed a new state/nation/body politic composed of “14th Amendment U.S. Citizens” 15 STAT 73 (June 25, 1868) says , "WHEREAS the people of North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida have, in pursuance of the provisions of an act entitled `An act for the more efficient government of the rebel States,' passed March 2nd, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, and the acts supplementary thereto [see note 4, post], framed constitutions of State government which are republican, and have adopted said constitutions by large majorities of the votes [363 U.S. 121, 136] cast at the elections held for the ratification or rejection of the same: Therefore, "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That each of the States of North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida, shall be entitled and admitted to representation in Congress as a State of the Union when the legislature of such State shall have duly ratified the amendment to the Constitution of the United States proposed by the Thirty-ninth Congress, and known as Article fourteen upon the following fundamental conditions . . .” De facto government. One that maintains itself by a display of force against the will of the rightful legal government and is successful, at least temporarily, in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its own in lieu thereof. Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition (1951) page 504. Wortham v. Walker, 133 Tex. 255, 128 S.W.2d 1138, 1145 As a result, NEW DEFACTO STATES were formed, because new constitutions and new legislatures were formed via the 14th amendment: Coleman v. Miller, 507 U. S. 448, 59 S. Ct. 972 says ,“The legislatures of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina had rejected the amendment in November and December, 1866. New governments were erected in those States (and in others) under the direction of Congress. The new legislatures ratified the amendment, that of North Carolina on July 4, 1868, that of South Carolina on July 9, 1868, and that of Georgia on July 21, 1868." The object of the Civil from 1861 to 1865 was not for the Southern States to be conquered or subjugated, and was not intended to impair the rights of the states: The House Journal - July 22, 1861. p.123 / Senate Journal - July 25, 1861.p.92 both read, “Mr. Crittenden submitted the following resolution, viz: . . .that this war is not waged on their part in any spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution, and to preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.” The 14th Amendment created a dual nationality status in which Federal Citizenship status was conjoined with an inseperable State “resident/citizen” status. This formed a new body politic which impaired the original body politic of those who possessed the singular state national and [citizen] status by disenfranchising them from voting. (see notes in III) III. Dejure vs. Defacto Status 1. Federal Citizenship Versus State Citizenship a. The term “citizen of the United States” never referred to a unified National form of citizenship, but that of a singular “state” citizenship status until the passage of the 14th Amendment. “ The slaves recently emancipated by proclamation, and subsequently by Constitutional Amendment, have no civil status. They should be made citizens. We do not, by making them citizens, make them voters,—we do not, in this Constitutional Amendment, attempt to force them upon Southern white men as equals at the ballot-box; but we do intend that they shall be admitted to citizenship, that they shall have the protection of the laws, that they shall not, any more than the rebels shall, be deprived of life, of liberty, of property, without due process of law, and that “they shall not be denied the equal protection of the law.” And in making this extension of citizenship, we are not confining the breadth and scope of our efforts to the negro. It is for the white man as well. We intend to make citizenship National. Heretofore, a man has been a citizen of the United States because he was a citizen of some-one of the States: now, we propose to reverse that, and make him a citizen of any State where he chooses to reside, by defining in advance his National citizenship—and our Amendment declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside.” This Amendment will prove a great beneficence to this generation, and to all who shall succeed us in the rights of American citizenship; and we ask the people of the revolted States to consent to this condition as an antecedent step to their re-admission to Congress with Senators and Representatives.” POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS LEGISLATIVE, DIPLOMATIC, AND POPULAR 1856-1886 § 61. The Reconstruction Problem- JAMES G. BLAINE. NORWICH, CONN. THE HENRY BILL PUBLISHING COMPANY 1887 b. Before the passage of Amend. XIV the United States, for citizenship and nationality purposes, was considered to be a plural collective of separate nations. 1. 2 STAT 153 , An act to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and to repeal the acts heretofore passéd on that subject, says “Be it enacted, &c, That any alien, being a free white person, may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States, or any of them…” 2. Amendment XIII. §1. says “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” c. After the passage of Amend. XIV the United States, for citizenship and nationality purposes, was considered to be a singular entity. 1. 8 USC § 1483 (a) says , “Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (7) of §1481 (a) of this title, no national of the United States can lose United States nationality under this chapter while within the United States or any of its outlying possessions” d. The language in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (14 Stat. 27) set the premise for this aforementioned unified National Citizenship as decreed in Amend. XIV. 1. CONGRESS'S POWER TO ENFORCE AMEND. XIV RIGHTS: LESSONS FROM FEDERAL REMEDIES THE FRAMERS ENACTED by Robert J. Kaczorowski Copyright © 2005 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College Harvard Journal on Legislation (JOL) - Volume 42, Number 1, Winter 2005 says that : “Because the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 are central to the meaning and scope of the Amend. XIV , it is necessary to examine the statute's provisions. In brief, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 conferred U.S. citizenship on all Americans” e. There is evidence that the several Union states had power to confer their respective state citizenship before & around the time of the Civil Rights Act and the “citizen of the United States” status written in the Civil Rights Act was only a unified Federal citizenship. 1. March 27, 1866 - Johnson’s Veto of the Civil Rights Act - Senate Journal, p.279: says that, “By the first section of the bill ; ‘all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States’. It does not purport to declare or confer any other right of citizenship than federal citizenship. It does not purport to give these classes of persons any status as citizens of States, except that which may result from their status as citizens of the United States. The power to confer the right of State citizenship is just as exclusively with the several States as the power to confer the right of federal citizenship is with Congress.” 2. Ex Parte Knowles 5 Cal. 300 (1855) "A citizen of any one of the States of the union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. To conceive a citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of some one of the States, is totally foreign to the idea, and inconsistent with the proper construction and common understanding of the expression as use in the Constitution, which must be deduced from its various other provisions. The object then to be obtained, by the exercise of the power of naturalization, was to make citizens of the respective States” 3. Sharon v. Hill, (1885) 26 F 337, 343."Prior to the adoption of this amendment, strictly speaking, there were no citizens of the United States, but only some one of them. Congress had the power "to establish an uniform rule of naturalization," but not the power to make a naturalized alien a citizen of any state. But the states generally provided that such persons might, on sufficient residence therein, become citizens thereof, and then the courts held, ab convenienti, rather than otherwise, that they became ipso facto citizens of the United States”.
If you are living in the United States and NOT declared to be a state national or State Citizen and one of the people belonging to our nation-states, you are "ipsofacto" presumed to be a citizen of the United States, and, under the 14th Amendment, "citizens of the United States" are criminals and slaves by definition.

Now, this entire "set up" is conceived in fraud and is in violation of the Constitutions, but we have to individually and as an entire people, address this situation, expose it, and finish the Reconstruction before this Mess is put to bed.

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

How fraudulent contracts have brought American down.

----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Baker 
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 6:17 AM
Subject: Elkhart Sheriff Upholds Constitution

A few week ago Elkhart Sheriff Rogers appeared at a public meeting in South Bend, Indiana along with our Congresswoman Jackie Walorski and stated that he would not enforce any gun confiscation laws.  That statement brought forth a lot of negative comments in the People's Forum of the Elkhart Truth newspaper along would some very good articles by supporters of his position.  The absolute ignorance of many of the negative comments prompted me to write a letter to the People's Forum and it was printed June 16, 2013.
My article is printed below. Bill
    
Over the past month there have been a number of views express in the People's Forum both pro and con about Sheriff Rogers defending the US Constitution by refusing to enforce clearly unconstitutional gun laws.  I am really disturbed by the absolute ignorance displayed by the number of opinions that oppose Sheriff's position.
The biggest concern of our founding fathers was an all powerful federal government.  That's why the 2nd and 14th Amendments were added to the constitution.  They are there to protect the rights of the people. Today the federal government is becoming exactly what the founding fathers feared.
The 2nd amendment clearly states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  What part of the word infringed do these critics not understand.  Look up infringed in the dictionary.  Governments at all levels have passed laws infringing our rights concerning gun laws.  All of them clearly unconstitutional and would be so declared if it were not for a politiczed and corrupt court system at all levels. 
The 14th Amendment clearly states that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States."  This amendment is also violated on a regular basis by our state governments.
We should all be thankful that we have a Sheriff that takes seriously his oath of office.  I wish those other elected officials we elect to office and courts would do the same.
Bill Baker

To: Bill Baker
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: Elkhart Sheriff Upholds Constitution

The problem is that we can not have privileges and immunities at the same time as having rights.
Either we are 14th amendment citizens with privileges and immunities granted by government, OR we are sovereigns who wrote (ordained and established) the
constitution FOR GOVERNMENT TO FOLLOW, which guards our God Given RIGHTS (which are not privileges and immunities granted by government).
Of course the people who wrote against the sheriff don't get that, and probably most of the people who wrote for him don't get it either.
That is why the corrupt courts don't allow constitutional arguments on behalf of 14th amendment citizens. They have no standing, because they gave up their
rights in trade for privileges and immunities, although not voluntarily mostly. The courts argue that once you take part in their system you have volunteered.
But before God, that was all done with fraud, deception, threat, duress, coercion, and intimidation, therefore those so called "contracts" are all null and void,
and entirely without force and effect in God's eyes, and there will definitely be a war over that at some point.  These corrupt leftists, including judges, have their mind made up they will own the whole world, and if they can't own it, they will burn it to the ground.
Paul

From: Paul Lewis  
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: Elkhart Sheriff Upholds Constitution

Well said, my friend. 

Those privileges and immunities are also called "civil rights" which come from Roman civil law. The 14th amendment and the civil rights were created to give the blacks privileges and immunities after the civil war. They were not considered state citizens so they were made U.S. government property citizens.

All the fuss over the years about "equal" civil rights the we hear from government has been not to give the black rights equal to whites but rather to make the rights of the whites equal to those of the blacks; nothing more than privileges and immunities.

Clearly their so-called contracts are fraudulent. I now believe that they are only a portion of the problem; sort of a diversion if you will. They appear to be the problem but underlying them is, I believe, the real crux of the problem. Virtually every document people fill out and complete, to vote, to buy a gun, to buy insurance, to open a bank account, to get a job, etc etc asks a question; Are you a U.S. citizen? 

We voluntarily claim that status and that status is what puts people into their jurisdiction. We voluntarily claim it but it is because we define it geographically while they define it politically. The difference is tremendous and disastrous. 

I am of the opinion, based on my research, that everything goes back to that status; income taxes and all of it. The U.S. was always foreign to the states so claiming U.S. citizenship changes nationality to a foreign jurisdiction rather than the nationality of birth, ie the state of birth. The 14th amendment brought jurisdication of the federal government into the states because U.S. citizens are "subject to their jurisdiction" and are "their" or "its" people.
neo

Neo:
You are correct in your conclusion about our volunteering, but it usually is unknowingly. They have deliberately hidden parts of every contract we "volunteer" into,
and that my friend is fraud, and makes the contract "unilateral".  At law, a unilateral contract is always null and void. Fraudulent contracts that attempt to hide
the provisions of the contract itself are always null and void. But added to that is the fact that most of these so called contracts are pushed on the people with some kind of deception, and usually threat of prosecution or confiscation, which is coercion and intimidation at it's worst.
That additional evil force is justification for almost any retaliation on the part of the people in their own defense, as it usually removes their very means to their own livelihood or their own life itself in some cases.  God is not mocked forever, and he keeps perfect records of every one of these evil actions against the people.
Like I said, at some point there is going to be a war over these issues. Many people now believe that all this was done unlawfully, even though there was the appearance of legislation, because it was done OUTSIDE the supreme law. One great example is the so called "income tax" or 16th amendment, which was never ratified. See http://www.paulstramer.net/2013/05/red-beckman-speaks-4.html
If, in fact it was never a law, how much does THAT one scream to high heaven for vengeance?
Then there is the big lie that Obama was eligible to be a president, and we haven't touched the 17th Amendment, the 14th Amendment (who actually voted for it) and the 13th Amendment.
There is a lot wrong with our country, and one of the worst problems is that many judges KNOW ALL THIS and perpetuate it day after day, and never are any of them ever brought to justice for their crimes. 
My fear is that sooner or later, before we can get a handle on all this, they are going to persecute someone who is not as level headed as you and I, and that person is going to erupt into horrible violence, which will be used by the left to start the martial law war against the people.
I hope and pray we can stop all this with education and a renewal of the principles in Dr. Edwin Vieira's book "The Sword and Sovereignty" before that happens.
But I am slowly losing the conviction that it can be stopped short of a complete and utter collapse, and extreme suffering.
God have Mercy on us.
Paul Stramer  KC7MEZ
Eureka Montana

Get "The Sword and Sovereignty" here:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Sword-Sovereignty-Constitutional-Principles/dp/0967175941/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1371669607&sr=8-1&keywords=the+sword+and+sovereignty

I agree completely. If there was ever truly hope of changing things and resolving the issues peacefully, I suspect they are slipping away from us rapidly now. Back about 3 years ago my suspicions were that it would not be resolved without much bloodshed and loss of life. Like you I have tried to inform and educate all I could because I saw knowledge and truth as our last and best hope of curbing a violent outbreak.

There are too many instances of abusive behavior being exhibited by authorities around the country and, as you say, sooner or later there will one incident too many or in the wrong place at the wrong time. God help us when it comes unglued.
neo

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

The RED AMENDMENT - How your freedom was STOLEN to benefit the world's elite!

How your liberty was subverted by fraud and deception, before you were born, and how the corrupt judicial system perpetuates the fraud, and sucks your livelyhood and heritage for their own profit.

Listen to the audio: http: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/audios.html    Look for The Red Amendment and pick your format.

Read the documentation:  http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/us_citizen_examined.pdf

You have contracts with the corporate United States de facto government which you were tricked into participating in. You have no freedoms under their judicial system, because you have unwittingly traded them for privileges and benefits which are man made. Did you ever sign under the penalties of perjury? Do you have a birth certificate? Did you ever read it?  Do you have a drivers license? Did you trade your right to travel in for a privilege of driving?

How was this done? 


It's all fraud. Did they have your permission? Well yes and no. On paper maybe, but we have all been told we have a Constitution that is supposed to guarantee our God given rights. That's what they tell you. That is a lie in practice. That is why you can't get justice in any court in the land. That is why they tell you that you have no standing.

The question you have to answer for yourself is this:  Did you VOLUNTEER to give up your rights in favor of privileges and benefits, and what are you going to do about it?

If we once realize the fraud, what can we do to correct and remedy the problem?  After 140 years of the fraud, how can it be corrected and fixed?

Are we going to continue to participate and associate with "criminals and insurgents" that have subverted and continue to subvert the Supreme Law of our land?  We all have some decisions to make soon.

At what point does the "Rule of Law" become a liability because of the subversion of the law itself?
When these laws increase at the rate of 15,000 new "laws" per year are they really binding in God's eyes?
When does it become manditory to obey God's laws rather than human law that has been subverted by criminals in government and the judicial system? At what point does the old addage of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" become evil?  How could anyone be required to keep up with all the so called "laws" (codes and statutes) since the beginning, let alone the 15,000 new codes and statutes put on the books each and every year just in this country?  How, in God's Holy Name, can perfectly law abiding people be made into "criminals" at the stroke of a pen? The fact is they can't, and God knows it.

In the end there will be JUSTICE delivered by the perfect Judge, Jesus Christ, and all the corruption will be ended.  So pick a side and live accordingly.  When judges want you to worship them, refuse, or take a chance on offending the real and supreme judge!

For some solutions:  http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/   Watch the videos!

From the Information furnished with the above video:


Prior to the alleged ratification of the 14th Amendment, there was no legal definition of a "citizen of the United States", as everyone had primary citizenship in one of the several states. The Constitution referred to the sovereign state citizen, and no one else. Those who went to Washington, D.C. or outside the several states were commonly called "citizens of the United States." In the Constitution for the United States, the term was used to identify state citizens who were eligible under the suffrage laws to hold office, and they were required under the Constitution to have primary allegiance to one of the several states.


Since that term was not specifically defined in the U.S. Constitution, Congress in 1868 took advantage of this term and utilized it in the so-called 14th Amendment to describe a NEW type of "citizen" whose primary allegiance was to the federal government, i.e. Washington, D.C. and not to one of the several states of the union. Thus, using the term as used in the U.S. Constitution to mislead and confuse the people as to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution.

Many people have mistaken the citizen as denominated in the 14th Amendment to mean the same one in the original constitution, this is in error. The "citizen of the united states" as used in the constitution is not the same as the citizen of the United States used after the 14th Amendment. So all the elected officials are NOT sitting in the office constitutionally, they are merely impostors created by the 14th Amendment. The current President Clinton, is a U.S. citizen, and therefore not the "citizen of the united states" defined in the Constitution for the United States, neither the federal senators nor any congressmen are seated constitutionally. These facts being true, then all the federal laws are invalid for want of constitutionality.

The 14th Amendment creates and defines citizenship of the United States. It had long been contended, and had been held by many learned authorities, and had never been judicially decided to the contrary, that there was no such thing as a citizen of the United States, except by first becoming a citizen of some state. United States v. Anthony (1874), 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (No. 14,459), 830.

We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several states. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of its own who owe it allegiance, and whose rights, within its jurisdiction, it must protect. The same person may be at the same time a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a state, but his rights of citizenship under one of these governments will be different from those he has under the other. U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875).

In other words, you do not have to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a state citizen. This was held to be true by the Maryland Supreme Court in 1966 wherein the state:

Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state. Crosse v. Bd. of Supvr,s of Elections, 221 A.2d. 431 (1966)

The federal government was never given any authority to encroach upon the private affairs of the citizens in the several states of the union, unless they were involved in import or export activity, neither were they given authority to reach a citizen of Germany living in Germany. In fact, the states could refuse to enforce any act of congress, that they felt was outside the intent of the granting of limited powers to the federal government. This is called interposition or nullification. Several state supreme courts have in the past refused to uphold federal laws within their states.
http://www.redamendment.net/home/

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

Friday, July 12, 2019

Citizenship Is the Issue --- in a Way, It's the Only Issue


By Anna Von Reitz

A lot of people are blowing gaskets about Mr. Trump's Executive Order regarding citizenship records. Citizenship is a dire issue, but only partially because of all the illegal aliens pouring over our borders. 

When the corporate Territorial Constitution was adopted in 1868, nine million Americans, a huge section of the population at that time, was deliberately disenfranchised under the infamous 14th Amendment.  

This Great Disenfranchisement arose because the Pope's Municipal Government sided with the Confederate States of America.  Citizens of the United States (as opposed to United States Citizens) were denied the ability to vote in Territorial Elections.  

That prohibition has never been lifted.  

Technically, Nancy Pelosi and most of her supporters are Enemies under the 14th Amendment, subject to arrest, and not eligible to vote.  

If William P Barr can read, the Trump Administration has grounds to pull another Great Disenfranchisement --- not that these people ever had the right to vote under the 14th Amendment anyway.  

They've been allowed to, and haven't been prosecuted for doing so, but the 14th Amendment is clear on the point that it is a crime for them to vote in Territorial Elections. 

What has happened over time is that the Civil Government has passed itself off as the Civilian Government, and the prohibitions that were meant to be applied against the Municipal Citizenry, have instead been mis-applied to the General Populace --- us, the State Nationals and State Citizens, who aren't supposed to vote in Territorial elections for completely different reasons.  

The Territorial Government has been engaged in a de facto mercenary "war" with the Municipal Government for decades, but rather than fight each other, they have combined forces to prey upon the rest of us.  Now that we have stuttered awake and objected to this, locating the real "enemy" has begun, as it has to. 

It's like Parliamentary Procedure, once the question has been called, it has been called. 

So fasten your seat belts. 

There are other reasons that the citizenship question is crucial.  Here's a sampling. 

The Territorial United States Government constantly touts itself as a "democracy"--- a democracy needs a mandate of 51% to govern.  They can't ever achieve a mandate until and unless they know how many citizens they have. 

By international law, the Territorial United States can only impose upon and presume upon its own citizenry.  

We, American State Nationals and American State Citizens, are Third Parties who have nothing to do with their mercenary squabbles.  We are supposed to be properly identified as Internationally Protected Persons under the Geneva Conventions.  

The fact that we have instead been deliberately mis-identified as one form or another of Territorial or Municipal US Citizen,  is both a crime and a disgrace.  

If Mr. Trump wants to do the right thing and run the Territorial Government according to Hoyle and Doyle, then he must not rely on the falsified citizenship records that have been kept by the agencies.  

He needs to come all the way clean, tell people what "citizenship" really means, honestly describe the kinds of citizenship there are in this country,  and let Americans step forward under conditions of full disclosure and identify themselves as: (1) Non-citizens (includes State Nationals); (2) Territorial Citizens (United States Citizens); (3) Municipal Citizens (Citizens of the United States; (4) Permanent Legal Residents (Foreigners Granted Asylum); (5) State Citizens. 

Our form of Government requires State Citizens to maintain a singular Citizenship obligation to their State of the Union, which is why we cannot vote in Territorial Government Elections. 

The Territorial Government allows Dual Citizenship, but at least one of those citizenship obligations must be to the Territorial Government.  

The Municipal Government also allows Dual Citizenship, but anyone with this citizenship is prohibited from voting in Territorial Elections by the 14th Amendment. 

Millions of people who are citizens of The United States have been deliberately with malice aforethought misidentified as citizens of "the" United States --- the Municipal Government, instead.  

This makes it appear that we are enemies of the Territorial Government, and that we are involved as "enemies" in their perennial hard-scrabble with the Municipal Government, and leaves us subject to all manner of abuses and false claims in commerce.  

This international crime has to stop.  

We must be accorded the protections of the Geneva Conventions and assisted in our efforts to correct the falsified records and claim our actual political status ---- but the only way that this good and necessary result can be accomplished is by being honest about the situation, explaining it to the whole population, and then letting people self-identify under conditions of full disclosure. 

A final area where the issue of citizenship comes push to shove arises under various United Nations treaties and conventions.  Many UN Treaties require that the signatories agree to only conduct tests of weapons and geoengineering (weather warfare) and similar research on their own domestic population. 

Currently, millions of Americans are being subjected to unconscionable contracting processes and are being "targeted" as guinea pigs in various Department of Defense weapons and population control tests---- all based on the false premise that these Americans are part of the "US" domestic population and are "US Citizens" of one kind or another--- when they aren't.  

The "US" whether defined as the Territorial Government or the Municipal Government or even if and when the original Federal Government structure is restored, is a foreign entity with respect to us and our States of the Union.  It was set up that way from the beginning and it is still that way now.  

Americans living and working in the States of the Union are not "domestic" with respect to the Federal United States, so when we are misidentified and targeted as "US Citizens" and used as guinea pigs by Federal Agencies and Defense Contractors, another international crime and treaty violation is taking place.  

Think of all the nasty experimental drugs and weapons that were first tested on our military personnel being applied in the same way to our civilian population. 

If it was outrageous and immoral and unacceptable that they exposed our boys to Agent Orange and experimental drugs and brain-washing,  how much worse and broader spectrum is it that our whole population has been exposed to nanobit and coal ash pollution via chem trails?  Suffered devastating floods and earthquakes due to scalar tests?   Been poisoned by adding fluorine and chlorine to our drinking water?  Lead in our vaccines and dental amalgams? 

Being a "US" Citizen of either stripe exposes us to life-threatening misery, unjust laws, punitive taxation, and many, many other undisclosed ills.  The phrase "misery loves company" comes to mind.  Nobody in their right mind would voluntarily and knowingly accept either form of "US Citizenship" in preference to their birthright political status---- at least not as the Territorial and Municipal Governments are currently managed---- which is perhaps part of the reason why the Perpetrators have sunk to such low levels of moral depravity and Breach of Trust. 

It was originally an honor and a knowing sacrifice to serve our country as a member of either the Territorial or Municipal Governments.  Americans undertaking the Dual Citizenship required by either the military or the civil service were required to undergo a lengthy process of Notices and to prove their good moral character and to explicitly and repeatedly affirm their decision to enter Federal Citizenship status.  See the first Naturalization Act. 

Today we still recognize the sacrifices of the military and the civil service, but fail to recognize our own.  Millions of Americans have been commandeered, kidnapped, press-ganged, suffered enslavement, peonage, and unlawful conversion of their assets, unjust taxation, false arrest, and confiscation of their assets---- in the biggest identity theft scheme in history, and it all revolves around the issue of citizenship.  

Mr. Trump has started down a long road, but it is a necessary road if he is to fulfill the offer he made in his First Inaugural Address --- an offer to give this country back to the American people.  We heard, acknowledged, and accepted his offer.  And now all we have to do is agree on making a clean breast of the citizenship issues and how best to serve the people of this country and deliver the good faith service they deserve. 

A great many international efforts are being made and much pressure is being brought to bear on the US Military to straighten itself up and do the right thing. That includes issuing the correct Geneva Convention identifications that American State Nationals and American State Citizens are owed.  It includes assisting our efforts to get our civilian government fully reconstructed and operational again.  It includes full disclosure of the issues surrounding citizenship.  

Freedom begins at home. 

Thank you, Mr. Trump.  Now go the final mile and don't rely on the falsified records of the Federal Agencies to provide the information you need.  This issue -- citizenship--- requires a national plebiscite, a national discussion, and full disclosure. 

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

See this article and over 1900 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

Friday, March 19, 2021

About Preambles to Acts Versus The Preamble

 By Anna Von Reitz

There have been a great many people suddenly entering the realm of historical legal research --- because they just as suddenly noticed that this was important and that they ought to be interested. They are coming from many different backgrounds and various indoctrinations and belief systems.
Some are getting hung up on the issues surrounding "The Preamble" versus the numerous preambles and enactment clauses added to various Acts of Congress, including those merely "styled" as Amendments to the Corporate Constitution that made its appearance in 1868.
From then on, whenever you see references to "the" Constitution of the United States of America, you will know that the Corporate Articles of Incorporation styled as "a" constitution is under discussion, and when you see references to "The Constitution of the United States of America" you will know that the actual Territorial Constitution is being discussed.
The Proper Names of Things expressed in English include the Definite Article--- "the" is part of the actual name of The United States, The United States of America, The State of New York, etc. This affirms the principle that there is only one United States, one United States of America, and one State of New York; all other versions exist as euphemisms referencing the foreign powers that exercise delegated powers.
The State of New York = actual American business organization doing business for New York.
"the" State of New York = Territorial business organization substituting itself for The State of New York in our purported absence.
"the" STATE OF NEW YORK = Municipal business organization that shouldn't exist impersonating "the" State of New York.
With that in mind, I offer these insights into the arguments surrounding The Preamble to the Federal Constitutions, and all the various other "preambles" to Acts of Congress:
Please note that what was under discussion (in the particular question I was asked about) was the "Preamble" to the 14th Amendment, not the Preamble added to the Federal Constitutions at the same time as the Bill of Rights.
"The Preamble" of the Federal Constitutions was added to create a National Trust --- and to obligate all Parties to uphold it. It is one of the reasons that the Vermin are liable for negligence and treason for creating and then pillaging National Trust property.
If you read the Preamble you will see that it creates an Express Trust, with the Donors -- "We, the People" -- bequeathing their rights, assets, and responsibilities to their "Progeny" ---- all those who will come after and stand in the same political status.
The language of the Preamble is often misunderstood as creating a trust that benefited only those who were creating the trust and their direct descendants, but this is not the case.
Those creating the Trust were acting in the capacity of State Citizens --- and as such, were acting in the specific capacity of Lawful Persons. They were bequeathing everything to the Lawful Persons who would follow in their footsteps as one of the People of this nation --- those who would take up the responsibilities of self-government and caretaking the Public Interest and upholding the Public Law.
This is why, among other things, it is so important for Americans to wake up and fully embrace their heritage. You can't sit on the sidelines with respect to this inheritance. The blessings and rights go hand in hand with hard work and responsibilities.
Those who will act as State Citizens and stand as the "Progeny" of the Founding Fathers are the Inheritors of the National Trust established by the Preamble. They protect themselves and protect all other Americans by accepting the responsibilities of self-governance on an international level. By standing in that capacity, they inherit the offices of their Forefathers and are their true "progeny" both in flesh and in lawful capacity.
The Preamble to the 14th Amendment by contrast, which failed to gain enough votes to pass, is the Enrollment Clause which must be present in order for it to be recorded as a Public Law; the failure of the 14th Amendment Preamble indicates that whatever it was, the body felt that the 14th Amendment could not be applied to the General Public, and as a result, it would only be published on the Federal Register, not the Federal Record.

Given what evidence has been provided, I would bet a small sum that you will find the 14th Amendment published on the Federal Register, but never published on the Record.

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

See this article and over 3000 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

How do we use your donations?  Find out here. 

Monday, June 9, 2014

THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE 14th AMENDMENT

The following is a treatise on the unconstitutionality of the Fourteenth Amendment, based upon the most comprehensive research and documentation of every angle in the unlawful procedures involved in its purported adoption.
This work was done, and is offered with a realization that the federal courts are not ready to give consideration to the subject, because the U. S. Supreme Court and inferior courts have used the the 14th Amendment to enlarge upon their ungranted powers without limit or reserve.
Socialist organized and directed violent mass demonstrations and armed rebellion in the nation's capital and in many American cities are extorting from Congress more and more radical legislation. These "laws" threaten basic personal freedom, private property rights and encroach upon and destroy more and more the constitutional right of self-government by the people on state and local levels. Executive orders extend toward further federal control of every aspect of life in the Nation, either by shutting off federal funds to those who will not subscribe to their forced dictums or by court injunctive orders to the same effect.
There lies the greatest danger to our country's future: so that the end result in the next or succeeding generation can only be a deteriorated industrial empire and a weakened national defense, which must result in abject surrender to our mortal enemy,-- world-wide Socialism and Totalitarianism. That is the ultimate end of the subversive use of the unconstitutional 14th Amendment.
It is hoped that this treatise, exposing the absolute unconstitutionality of the l4th amendment, will be given sufficient general circulation and publicity to awaken a "consensus" of public sentiment to reach the seats of power in Washington, D. C., so that ultimately the stamp of unconstitutionality may be placed upon the 14th amendment, and constitutional government and national sanity once more may prevail.


Cites and References:
Congressional Record.
Senate, 84th Con. 1st Session., Vol. 101, pp. 7119 to 7124;
Senate, 86th Con., 2nd Session., Vol. 106, pp. 4036 to 4038;
Senate, 89th Con., 1st Session., Vol. III, pp. 10669 to 10671.

See the entire article here:  http://www.barefootsworld.net/14uncon.html

Thursday, February 11, 2010

The Day Our Country Was Stolen

How the 14th Amendment [sic] Enslaved Us All Without a Shot Fired

essay by John E. Trumane
Byline : L. C. Lyon

Most Americans would agree that we, as a people, are treated by our public servants -- the judges, politicians, law enforcement and bureaucrats who are paid their salaries by our taxes -- as if we were in complete bondage to them. When we joke about being slaves to the Government, we don't realize that we are exactly correct, joke or not. In fact, all those 99% of Americans who call themselves "U.S. citizens" are actually subjects of the corporate United States Government -- not the sovereign states of the Union. The moment you uttered your first cry on American soil you became the chattel property of the corporation known as the 'United States of America' which, because of the federal debt, handed title (Birth Certificate) to your body and soul to the Federal Reserve Bank to be held in the archives of the Department of Health and Human Services.

As incredible as this sounds, it is sadly true. The next question is: How did I automatically become subject to a government when I'm supposedly a free American? How did this all come about that I should be made to register myself, my family and all that I own, and be made to obey oppressive laws and forfeit almost half of my earnings upon threat of jail? Only those who are "subject" to a government can be made to do these things. Free American Inhabitants are subject to no one but God, and all the laws and responsibilities which that Divine allegiance entails.

Which "United States" Do You Live In?

The answer to the above question goes back to the American Civil War. The war that was supposedly fought to free the slaves from bondage actually did just the opposite for all Americans then and in the future. By enacting the 14th Amendment (which technically is an Article, not a true amendment, but that's a topic for another discussion), a whole nation of newly freed slaves and free-born white American Inhabitants became "citizens of the United States", i.e. of a federal government corporation at the stroke of a pen and without a shot being fired.

Because we Americans are a different breed and demand the right to personal freedom, those who had planned decades ago to enslave us (even if it took generations to do so) knew that as long as we were armed and willing to fight to maintain our freedom, the only way to accomplish this enslavement was by deception.

To proceed further, we must understand that there are two "United States". There is the "united States" (note the small "u" in "united") which describes the ideological and geographical position of the sovereign states of America. An individual was the voluntary inhabitant of the state in which he resided. If he did not like the laws or practices of that state, he could simply move to another state. Each state was sovereign to itself and could not be forced to accept the laws and practices of any other state.

The "United States of America", however, is the name of the corporate entity (note the capital "U" in "United") that exists to carry out the functions delegated to it by the States for the protection of the Union. This corporate entity's jurisdiction is supposed to be (according to the Constitution) confined to the District of Columbia, the federal territories and the federal enclaves. Enclaves are areas within a State's boundaries which are ceded to the Federal Government by the State Legislature.

Anyone can come under the direct jurisdiction of the corporate United States in three ways:
(1) by living in one ofits territories (Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, etc.)

(2) by living in the District of Columbia, or

(3) simply by choice.

Back when America still had vast territories not-yet-become states and several thousands of people lived in these territories, these people had no rights protected by state sovereignty. They lived under federal jurisdiction, which was the reason why people living in territories were so anxious to achieve statehood. The President could order federal troops in to any territory and enact any edicts he wanted. Once a territory became a state, it had sovereignty and from that point on the state's rights prevailed.

So, if you don't live in a territory or enclave and you don't live in the District of Columbia, then the only way you could have fallen under the jurisdiction of the United States Government is by choice. But neither I, nor any one I know, voluntarily or knowingly surrendered their personal sovereignty to the Government, which means that it (our sovereignty) was taken from us by deception.

This deception, which took place in the year 1868, is what this article will explain -- how our ancestors were tricked and coerced in to giving up their rights (and ours!) to the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.

Civil War Sets the Stage for Takeover

The Constitution for the United States of America specifies in the opening paragraph that the Constitution was written for the newly formed corporation, not for us, the People living in America. Our rights come from God and are inalienable. They do not come from a piece of paper. And, because the Federal Government exists only on paper -- a man-created entity -- it can also be dismantled any time We the People decide it has become a threat to our inalienable God-given rights of sovereignty.

The Constitution is the contract between those who administer the Government's affairs and the People of the united States. In essence, it states that the People will give the Government certain powers necessary to administer the defense of the States and control the commerce into the States from foreign countries. In exchange, the State governments (not the individual people -- direct taxation by the Federal Government is unconstitutional) would provide the Federal Government the money it needs to operate. The Federal Government had limited powers. In fact, the Bill of Rights was hotly debated at the time of its passage because there were several people who wisely cautioned that the Bill of Rights would eventually be construed as rights endowed by the Constitution, not protected by it (which is exactly what has happened).

How often do you hear patriots mistakenly vow to defend "their Constitutional rights"? This thinking reflects the decades of public school brain washing to which we have all been subjected. We need to correct each other and understand that our rights are God-given, not constitutional.

So, how does the Civil War enter into this present-day power struggle between the Federal Government and Us, the People? Slavery was not the true underlying reason for the war. It was an emotional, social issue that was used as an excuse to incite people to go to war, people who did not realize that foreign agencies were responsible for that conflict. International bankers, seeing the slavery issue as an opportunity not only to divide the country but make millions of dollars as well, fanned the flames of debate until, under cover of the most bloody war in the history of the world, they were to accomplish that very objective -- the complete take over of America. They almost succeeded years sooner except for the intervention of one man -- President Abraham Lincoln.

"Honest Abe" Knew the Truth

President Lincoln was against slavery but he understood that it was wrong to force the southern States to give up slavery -- to force Federal jurisdiction over the issue of States' Rights. Four of the southern States were already considering the abolition of slavery, but they couldn't just abandon it overnight. It would take time. After all their whole economy was built upon slavery. A sudden disruption would bankrupt the South. Lincoln understood this. But, it wasn't until Lincoln got into office that he began to see the whole picture. He learned that the war was begun by the International Bankers as a means of dividing the country in two, forcing both sides to borrow heavily from the Bankers to pay war debts. Then, when failing to repay those loans, the divided America would be forced into bankruptcy. The Rothschilds and other bankers could then simply foreclose on the corporations known as the United States of America and the Confederate States of America. President Lincoln knew he had to keep the nation together at all costs -- including war.

Saved by the National Banks

Near the end of the war, the South was on its knees and the U.S. Government was nearly bankrupt. Seeing their opportunity, the Bankers offered to loan the U.S. Government enough to see it through. Lincoln said no. He would find another way.

What he did then was to ask Congress for permission to print paper money. Even though he knew it was unconstitutional (only gold and silver are lawful U.S. money), it was the only way he knew to buy provisions for the Army -- but only if the U.S. banks would accept it. They did. When Lincoln gave his word that the Government would redeem those notes for gold and silver at a later time, they believed him and honored the notes. By doing this, the planned take over by the Bankers was averted -- at that time.

The Bankers' Revenge -- Assassination

Because he had given his word to the nation's bankers, because he had promised the South that, upon surrender, the Government would help them rebuild, and because he had promised the Southerners there would be no recriminations or punishments if they again swore loyalty to the Union, Lincoln knew he had to get re-elected though he was tired, tormented by migraine headaches and worried about his suffering family life. He had to make sure those promises were kept.

Lincoln's complete thwarting of the International Bankers' plans doomed him to assassination at their hands. Papers found in Booth's locker show communications with an agent hired by the Rothschild family.

Weeks before he was killed, Lincoln knew he would die in office. His spies were reporting plots to kill him. It was only a matter of who got to him first so he met regularly with his Vice President, Andrew Johnson, and educated him as quickly as he could so that he could follow through on Lincoln's promises. Johnson listened carefully and understood what was expected of him and why. Then, after Lincoln's murder, he did exactly as he was supposed to do.

In school when we were taught this part of American history we were told that Andrew Johnson was uneducated and ignorant and fumbled continuously in office, which was supposedly why he was impeached. Johnson was of humble origin but he was an honest, self-educated man who stood firmly for what he saw clearly were the best interests of his country. This is what got him impeached.
Impeachment!

At this time the only men in Congress were those representing the northern States. After Fort Sumter, all the southern States had seceded. After Lincoln's death, Congress began passing laws to punish the South in contradiction to Lincoln's promise. Johnson began vetoing them, some times three and four times until Congress began passing them over his veto. One particular bill that he vetoed, the Civil Rights Bill, was intended to make all former slaves automatic citizens of the Federal Government and under its direct jurisdiction (and protection). This seemed like a compassionate and generous gesture to the newly freed slaves but, as Johnson pointed out, it would have serious consequences for the Negroes. In his veto message in March of 1866, Johnson pointed out the pitfalls of this bill:

He [the Negro] must, of necessity, from his previous
unfortunate condition of servitude, be less informed as to
the nature and character of our institutions than he who,
coming from abroad, has to some extent at least
familiarized himself with the principles of a government to
which he voluntarily entrusts "life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness".

The 1st Section of the bill also contains an
enumeration of the rights to be enjoyed by these classes so
made citizens "in every state and territory in the United
States". These rights are "to make and enforce contracts;
to sue, be parties and give evidence; to inherit,
purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real and personal
property"; and to have "full and equal benefit of all laws
and proceedings for the security of person and property as
is enjoyed by white citizens". So, too, they are made
subject to the same punishment, pains and penalties in
common with white citizens ....

Johnson could clearly see that to immediately place a string of governmental "rights and benefits" upon a totally naive and uneducated people as the Negroes would also make them easy prey for every carpetbagger who would trick them into contracts in which they would have no knowledge of the legal ramifications. This bill would, in effect, make the former slaves as slaves again to different masters - unscrupulous businessmen, attorneys and judges.

Johnson saw that this bill was also a means of foisting unconstitutional jurisdiction of the Federal Government in every state, thus a perfect equality of the white and colored races is attempted to be fixed by federal law in every state of the Union over the vast field of state jurisdiction covered by these enumerated rights.

If Congress can declare by law who shall hold lands, who shall testify, who shall have capacity to make a contract in a state, then Congress can by law also declare who, without regard to color or race, shall have the right to sit as a juror or as a judge, to hold any office and finally to vote "in every state and territory of the United States".

The legislation thus proposed invades the judicial power of the state. It says to every state court or judge: if you decide that this act is unconstitutional; if you refuse, under the prohibition of a state law, to allow a Negro to testify; if you hold that over such a subject matter the state law is paramount ... your error of judgment, however conscientious, shall abject you to fine and imprisonment.

The Legislative Department of the government of the United States thus takes from the Judicial Department of the states the sacred and exclusive duty of judicial decision and converts the state judge into a mere ministerial officer, bound to decide according to the will of Congress.

Johnson then continued with an additional warning as to the virtually unlimited power given to appointed agents:

The Section of the bill provides that officers and
agents of the Freedman's Bureau shall be empowered to make
arrests and also that other officers may be specially
commissioned for that purpose by the President of the United

States. It also authorizes circuit courts of the United
States and the superior courts of the territories to
appoint, without limitation, commissioners who are to be
charged with the performance of quasi-judicial duties.

These numerous agents are made to constitute a sort of
police, in addition to the military, and are authorized to
summon a posse comitatus and even to call to their aid such
portion of the land and naval forces of the United States or
of the militia ....

This extraordinary power is to be conferred upon agents
irresponsible to the government and to the people, to whose
number the discretion of the commissioners is the only limit
and in whose hands such authority might be made a terrible
engine of wrong, oppression and fraud.

The 7th Section provides that a fee ... shall be paid
to each commissioner in every case brought before him, and a
fee ... to his deputy or deputies for each person he or they
may arrest and take before any such commissioner ....

All those fees are to be "paid out of the Treasury of
the United States" whether there is a conviction or not;
but in the case of conviction they are to be recoverable
from the defendant. It seems to me that under the influence
of such temptations, bad men might convert any law, however
beneficent, into an instrument of persecution and fraud.
To me, the details of the bill seem fraught with evil.
It is another step, or rather stride, toward centralization
and the concentration of all legislative powers in the
national government.
It is plain to see here that President Johnson saw far into the future as to the potential for legal and political abuse of such arbitrary powers -- powers that had never before been placed into the hands of a bureaucracy that had not been subjected to referendum by the people or constitutional question by any federal court. This bill (which was passed over Johnson's veto) did, in fact, set the precedent for hundreds of federal, state and local bureaucracies that have since choked the life blood of millions of Americans.

Also, this bill blatantly usurped all States Rights and opened a very wide door for the further usurpation of these rights using other social agendas.

The reason Andrew Johnson was impeached was because he fought so hard against this bill and the subsequent 14th Amendment. His enemies purposely did not mention to the press (nor to the public) the legal and political ramifications of this bill which Johnson had so succinctly pointed out but, instead, they broadcasted the notion that he was reneging on Lincoln's promises to "heal the wounds" of the nation by fighting full rights for the Negro -- thus making it an emotional social issue.

In fact, Johnson was keeping Lincoln's promises by trying to protect the rights of the newly freed slaves, as well as the rights of those states which knew their own former slaves better than anyone, and knew the Negroes were not yet ready for the responsibilities of citizenship. As Johnson had predicted, after passage of the bill so many of the Negroes had, indeed, been robbed of goods and property by white charlatans and/or thrown into jails for breaking commercial laws they did not understand that, when the Negroes did come to full awareness of the massive duplicity perpetrated by these scoundrels, a racial hatred and mistrust of all whites became a nationwide phenomenon that has never been erased to this day.

The Final Axe Falls

After the bill was passed over Johnson's veto, and there was no general hue and cry from the public, Congress then proceeded with the next step -- the 14th Amendment. In order to understand the ramifications of this heinous act of Congress, it must be analyzed section-by-section:

ARTICLE XIV. Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in
the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of
the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

In the very first line, the amendment states that all persons born (all babies from this point on) or naturalized (the newly freed slaves who were then just inhabitants of America) are now citizens of the United States (the Federal Government) and of the State (the State Government) where they lived. From the Declaration of Independence on, all people in America who lived here were Americans, residing in a particular geographical state, and free to move from state to state or even to another country. The Federal Government, according to the Constitution, is a corporate fiction that does the bidding of the body of collective states called Congress. At this time, the state governments had similar limited jurisdiction over their inhabitants, as did the federal government. The state government's primary function was to act as a collective voice of all its inhabitants to convey their wishes to Congress. Congress controlled the federal government.

The rule of Common Law, which was the law of the land at that time, was carried out exclusively by the County Sheriff -- the Common Law concept of Posse Comitatus. Neither the State nor the Federal Government had any jurisdiction in the County where Home Rule was the law. Only by permission or invitation by the Sheriff could either of the other two governments step foot in his County. The Civil Rights Bill, in one bold act, forced Federal Government jurisdiction into the sanctity of State rule. But Posse Comitatus still reigned in each state, and the conspirators found the way to usurp jurisdiction here through the 14th Amendment.

Citizens, Subjects = Slaves

In order for any government to grab power and maintain it, it must have "subjects" or "citizens". According to Black's Law Dictionary (Sixth Edition), "Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associated capacity, have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a government for the promotion of their general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights. (Herriot v. City of Seattle, 81 Wash.2d. 48, 500 P.2d. 101, 109)"

So, by declaration of the 14th Amendment, all persons born from that point forward and all naturalized people had just become 'citizens' (i.e. subjects) of the United States Government, obviously without their knowledge (babies) or understanding (the Negroes). The Federal Government had just reached past the jurisdictional boundaries of the state and county lines and claimed all its babies and all Negroes.

In Section 2, it then states that only males 21 years of age who are citizens of the United States may be allowed to vote in Federal and State elections. That means that only those men who willingly claimed U.S. citizenship on voter's registration cards (though they didn't realize the implications) were also brought in as subjects of the Federal Government. (The Federal Government's power and control are growing fast!) However, it stipulated that those who had participated in rebellion (the South) were excluded.

The Back Door
At this point any intelligent person can figure out that the Conspirators who were using this Amendment to claim all Americans as its citizens -- by deception -- were obviously performing an illegal and unconstitutional act. The conspirators in Congress (and every Congressman knew what was being perpetrated, and either promoted it or simply pretended not to notice) established a "loophole" for themselves and to cover themselves in case people began to catch on. This loophole was 15 Statutes at Large, Chapter 249 (Section 1), enacted July 27, 1868, one day before the 14th Amendment was declared "ratified". You will not see this statute published any where except in very old books. The Conspirators do not want their "citizens" to know
it exists, and it has never been repealed. The text follows:
CHAP. CCXLIX. -- An Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign States

Whereas the right of expatriation is a natural and
inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment
of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness; and whereas in the recognition of this principle
this government has freely received emigrants from all
nations, and invested them with the rights of citizenship;
and whereas it is claimed that such American citizens, with
their descendants, are subjects of foreign states, owing
allegiance to the governments thereof; and whereas it is
necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this claim
of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally
disavowed: Therefore,
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That any declaration, instruction, opinion,
order, or decision of any officers of this government which
denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of
expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the
fundamental principles of this government.

On the surface, this seems to guarantee that "foreigners" who live in the borders of America cannot be forced to claim citizenship. But, what this also says is that anyone who wishes to expatriate (i.e. renounce their U.S. citizenship) may do so, by inherent right and no one can deny him this right.

The Conspirators knew that the "letter of the law" having been satisfied with this exemption from compelled performance (having U.S. citizenship thrust upon us), they could then hide the exemption from general view, start promoting the "benefits" of U.S. citizenship in the media (and later, in public schools) and begin setting up all of us for manipulation to obey millions of codes, statutes, and laws; exacting fines for breaking these laws and extracting license fees and taxes upon penalty of seizure or jail.

Free American Inhabitants are not subject to the Federal Government by virtue of their not claiming U.S. citizenship. Those of us who have renounced our U.S. citizenship and declared our status as American Inhabitants, using 15 Statutes at Large as the legal foundation for this Declaration of Status, are the only
ones living in the united States of America. The rest of America (U.S. citizens -- about 99%) are living in a 4th dimension, i.e. in a fictitious corporation called the United States of America. As far as America is concerned (except that 1%), there's nobody home!
Slavery by Election

We can see that in the 14th Amendment those Southerners who had participated in the Civil War were excluded from this "benefit" (U.S. Citizenship) on purpose -- to punish them so severely with sanctions, punishing fines and terrorism from the newly formed Freeman's Bureau, that a few years later, the Southerners would be grateful for any consideration the Federal Government would extend to them. When the opportunity was ripe, such a consideration was enacted -- the 15th Amendment. It reads (in part):

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to
vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or
by any State on account of race, color, or previous
condition of servitude.

By this gracious gesture, Congress extended full forgiveness to the South and restored their right to vote (at that time considered to be the most sacred right of an American). At the next national election after the enactment of this amendment, there was the largest turnout of voters this nation had ever seen. The South wanted desperately to be restored to the Union and heal their wounds. When they heard that in order to vote they had to swear allegiance to the United States of America and thus become a "citizen of the United States" (as required by the 14th Amendment), they did so willingly and without a clue as to what they had just done to themselves and to their posterity.

With the stroke of a pen the 14th Amendment and the subsequent 15th Amendment had just enslaved an entire nation without a shot being fired.
The "Forgotten" Clause

Obviously, this treacherous act by Congress was enough to have all of them hanged as traitors but there was one more act of treachery that has been overlooked by most people. Section 4 of the 14th Amendment reads:

The validity of the public debt of the United States,
authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of
pensions and bounties for services in suppressing
insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But
neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay
any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or
rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the
loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts,
obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

At that time, a hue and cry was raised concerning Lincoln's promises to "forgive" the South's debts as part of Reconstruction, with good reason. But mainly overlooked was the first part of Section 4, which says that the debts incurred by the U.S. government were not to be questioned, that the enforcers whom the Government hired to quell insurrection (today, the CIA, FBI, BATF, DEA, U.S. Marshals, HS, etc.) would be paid by the Government.

And where was the Government's money to come from?

Answer: Its newly acquired subjects -- U.S. citizens. The States had just signed into constitutional amendment the permission for the Federal Government to hire thugs and thieves to control us, to pay them with our own money, and that no question could be brought to court about the constitutionality of these actions. This is why any effort to bring a suit against the Government about the Federal debt will never be entertained by the Supreme Court!
A Dangerous Game

In Europe, Africa and other places in the world a despot simply took over a country by waging war. Here in America, however, as long as Americans were armed and prepared for hostile armed takeover, the Conspirators knew that a different technique -- a grand deception by manipulation of the laws, the courts, the schools, the media -- must be employed to obtain the same results. They waged war on us long ago but we've been too naive to see it. There are many who are waking up now but they don't see the whole picture. They think that if they reverse a certain portion of Government abuse, we can take our country back. "Tax protestors (as IRS calls them) have perfectly correct reasons to point out that they are not required to file -- but they forget they are still U.S. citizens (i.e. 'subjects'). Home schoolers fight bravely for their right to protect their children against Government control -- but they forget they are still U.S. citizens. Legal eagles have found many statutory "loop holes" to win a few battles in court -- but they forget they are still U.S. citizens.

Playing the "patriot game" without fully understanding the constitutional hold the Federal, State and local governments have over them is playing a dangerous game. They may win a few skirmishes in their battles with Government (the Government allows these "wins" to encourage us to continue wasting our energies in useless effort), but they will never win the war, and will only bring the wrath of Government down upon the head of yet another one of its subjects.

For now, at least, the Government is respecting the status of American Inhabitants. We (your publisher L. C. Lyon and writer George Sibley) have not had any legal hassles from any Government entity because we are no longer U.S. citizens. We are the same as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and all the other patriots were in their time -- free American Inhabitants. Any U.S. citizen can give up this
enslaving status at any time but it must be done properly.

If everyone in America were to take back their rights as free Americans again through the revocation process, the Government would have no more subjects and no more power!
IT'S TIME TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK!

[Minor grammatical and spelling edits were done to this essay by John E. Trumane. These edits were done without permission of the author because Mr. Trumane did not have the author's mailing address at the time the edits were done.]

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.