Regarding an alleged "judge" in ALASKA

The CAPACITY/Capacity issue is so popularly misunderstood by various activist groups that this author has received some very "energetic" responses.  There's a very clear distinction between those who have realized that there's more to the story than has been kicked around in/by the patriot groups and those who have already reached "saturation" and have stopped thinking about what it is that they're saying or arguing.

To the defense of those committed to false premises in their legal positions, the reality is a wicked paradigm shift.  Also down that path, some have been opposing the system for so long that they're overwhelmed with information.  Working within that deluge of misdirection is not unlike trying to get a drink from a high-pressure fire hose in full operation.

There comes a time when it's easier to stop trying to figure it out and to hold tightly to whatever may be the perspective at the time of that shut down of further inquiry than to continue to try to tread water in that turbulent sea of misinformation.  This author refers to that event of "No more input, please," as "saturation," and at "saturation," the mind is simply not interested in taking in anything else/more.

Those running this present system, which system depends 100% on misdirection and out-and-out deceit, know that many will succumb to "saturation."  A great many Americans are interested in learning more about how to deal with the deceit and the related systemic problems/issues, but since they are not exactly equipped to analyze the enormity of the information that's "out there," they get only so far into it and then just stop. That doesn't mean that all of them stop participating at some level or other.  It means that they stop looking critically at the whole of the information, i.e., they stop analyzing what they're saying, i.e., they just stop "thinking."  They shift over into cognitive-dissonance-based responsiveness, and that's emotional not logical in its foundational basis.  They get this or that line of "analysis" in mind as "the it" for purposes of coming to understand the situation, and instead of challenging their own initial conclusions, they advance down those paths pell mell.  It's a lot easier for most of those minds to continue rather than to examine into the misdirection of the "underground" information, i.e., their personal conclusions in the matter, much of which is very deliberately planted misinformation. 

Because those running the present system of deceit know that "saturation" is very real, there are all kinds of agent provocateur sources espousing the wildest of non-sense.  Not all sources of non-sense are agent provocateur in nature, but the result is the same.  Those who actually depend on that non-sense are looking to "break INTO jail."


In specific response to the CAPACITY/Capacity issue (which is not the difference between a corporation and a human being (living soul, but rather (simply or merely) the difference between the LEGAL PERSON recognized in the present maritime system and the Legal Person recognized in the Common Law system; i.e., it's a "choice of law" distinction, not a "separate person" distinction), a name came up. 

Anna von Reitz (Fritz, von Fritz) (associated with the Alaska Supreme Court)

Associated with that name is the title/office "judge."

Another related name has also come up: Anna Marie Riezinger, purportedly with an Alaska Superior Court (a trial court).

The concepts this author has seen published under that name are nuts beyond comprehension.  It's at the decades-old base of patriot-think, and it's the sort of thing that gets people into (serious) trouble, not necessarily directly by the use/assertion of it, but rather as a result of relying on it.

Here's what this author found in about 10 minutes of internet search.  The point of this note is to request information from those who have found something other than this.  Bottom line, if a party by that name is a judge in ALASKA, in any of its courts, trial or appellate, it's a very carefully guarded secret within, or perhaps from, the judiciary in that STATE.

A search in the official ALASKA Bar Association website for an Anna von Reitz, Anna von Fritz, Anna Fritz, and Anna Riezinger, returns a "no Records found" sort of note.  This author concludes that there is no such member of the ALASKA Bar Association.  This author would expect that an actual judge would have such membership.  In TEXAS it's an (absolute) requirement.  This author doesn't know that it's the same in ALASKA, but this author expects that any state judicial officer, especially one purportedly sitting on the STATE's High Court, would be a member of that STATE's Bar Association, even if it's 100% voluntary to participate.

https://www.alaskabar.org/servlet/content/member_login.html  (click Directories, or the down arrow next to that, to get to the next link -- Member list)

https://www.alaskabar.org/servlet/content/member_login.html


So, again, if anyone digging more into this finds a different result, this author would be very interested to learn that information.


Continuing, here's a page that lists all the judges in ALASKA: http://www.ajc.state.ak.us/judges/judgemain.html

There's one name that starts with a V: Philip R. Volland.

There's no Fritz, Reitz, von Fritz, von Reitz, or Riezinger who is a current judge on any bench in ALASKA.

From that same website, ALASKA SUPREME COURT justices, alphabetically:

Joel H. Bolger - Supreme Court

Dana Fabe - Supreme Court [per Wikipedia, the present Chief Justice]

Peter J. Maassen - Supreme Court

Craig F. Stowers - Supreme Court

Daniel E. Winfree - Supreme Court

What has happened in TEXAS, as one example of the developments down this path, is the development of at least two republic/Republic of Texas groups, and there may be more.  They purport to be "the" original, Common Law organization, and they believe that by asserting a different political structure that they've insulated themselves from "this state."  They also believe that concepts that were always non-sense in "this state" somehow become valid because they've set up a separate "church."  There is even proof of international recognition of at least one of the Texas groups.  Nothing about any of that turns non-sense into competent legal analysis or doctrine.

Right now, it appears that something similar is going on in ALASKA.  Whoever this "Anna von Reitz/Fritz Riezinger" person is, or whatever she's part of, she's not a judicial officer in/of ALASKA.

Another clue about the dubious nature of the title of "judge" is this. A genuine, actual, "real" judicial officer would never engage in email discussions.  It's a direct violation of judicial ethics.  It's the epitome of "advisory rulings."


There are a lot of true American's out there who are long-since frustrated with this present system and the legal concepts it relies upon and utilizes.  However, it's always been a misdirection play to throw any "constitution" at anything going on "governmentally" in "this state."  (A lesson this author learned the hard way.)  It's always been a misdirection play to throw Common Law at anything going on "governmentally" in "this state."  And, it's always been a misdirection play to think that political activity, whether within "this state" or separate from "this state," is going to change or benefit anyone or anything.  As for politics within "this state," as limited as that source of relief is, there is the dimmest of rays of hope for that line of activity.  As for finding relief by setting up a politically different entity (church), there can be no relief from "this state" while using the "choice of law" of "this state" via the use of "funny money."  Even then, it's not the political separation that stands any remote shot at providing relief but rather the commercial activity that is separate from "this state" (presuming both that a system of honest weights and measures is used and the entire concept of "dollar" is avoided, among the rest of what keeps the "choice of law" clearly beyond "this state") that is what provides the relief (if relief is to be found).

To solve a problem, it must first be identified correctly.  Where the "solution" is to set up some intellectual island somewhere on which concepts that never provide(d) relief in "this state" are somehow competent, the problem has not yet been identified correctly.  Politics is not a "solution" to the problems we face via "this state."  The place called "this state" functions commercially, thus individually.  There's nothing about "group think" that changes any individual's commercial obligations in/to "this state." 

There are solutions, but it's a study that produces the result of getting one's mind around the problem far enough to see the problem for exactly what it is.  Many want to pretend that the problem is something other than what it is, and for that reason, they understand neither the problem nor the (obvious) solution.

To address the problem at its core, it's this:  as a people, we're God-hating, God-defying pagans.  For this reason, God is Judging us, via War, Famine, Pestilence (Disease, Plague), and this present "Beast" system.  To recognize the Judgments for what they are is to see that we're under Divine Judgment.  To see that we're under Divine Judgment is to recognize, eventually, that whatever we're doing in the way of relating to our Lord, Savior, High Priest, King, and God ain't working out so good at the moment.  And, to address a couple of popular topics, abortion and homosexuality are effects not causes of our Judgment.  These are two of the many confirmations that we're well into Judgment.  (What is the book of Revelation all about?  God appears to us in the form of Judgment, after which comes restoration and establishment of His Kingdom.) Those in doubt as to what needs to change in the hearts and minds of Americans are well-advised to make inquiry of Him down that very path.  Those genuinely and sincerely seeking out that answer will be shown the answer.  The thoughts above (and in prior and future notes) are intended to facilitate a bit more time-effective understanding of the starting place, but even then, we are taught to test/challenge everything.  By so doing, we come to understand and discern His voice.

There's a lot of non-sense "out there," and there are a great number of people who enjoy the taste of their very-moldy, stale swill.  Many will never have the internal fortitude to reexamine their own paradigms to challenge themselves in order to get loose from the prison in their own minds.  That's Ok, because it takes only a few to blaze the path.  That path-blazing is still quite active, and as that path is paved, there will be others find it and follow it.  Toward that end, the efforts of Legal Reality continue.

Harmon L. Taylor
Legal Reality
Dallas, Texas