---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Anna von Reitz <avannavon@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 3:59 PM
Subject: Do Your Ears Hang Low?
How
many of you remember the children's song, "Do Your Ears Hang Low?" ---
Remember this line--- "Do your ears hang low? Do they wobble to and
fro? Can you throw them over your shoulder like a Continental
Soldier?....."
This song dates
from Revolutionary War times. Although it sounds silly and children
still delight in it, the "ears" the rowdy Colonists were talking about
weren't attached to their heads, and the song was regularly sung by
those same Continental Soldiers on the march--- similar to the Marines
singing "Sound Off!" as they march.
As
the song makes very clear, there were soldiers called "Continental
Soldiers" -- and it is also clear that they were the American soldiers
fighting in the Revolutionary War. What other "Continental Soldiers"
have you ever heard of?
They
were called "Continental Soldiers" and sometimes just "Continentals"
because they were landsmen not sailors, and they were protecting their
land from British invasion.
Continental
Soldier equals "Land Soldier" and Continental United States equals
"Land United States". It was the militias of the land that defeated the
British sea-borne attackers.
Please
note these same soldiers were called "Colonial Soldiers" or just
"Colonials". This in turn references the fact that the Revolutionary
War was supported by the 13 Colonies.
What do you know--- or should you know--- about the 13 Colonies?
First,
they were all very different, not just in location, but in derivation.
Some of the colonies were established by England--- New England and
Virginia, for example--- and were funded in the early days by British
investment companies: New England Company, Virginia Company, etc.
Others
were founded by other European Monarchies and their investment
companies--- New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, for
example, were not founded or financed by England.
Catholic Delaware and Maryland stood cheek and jowl with Protestant Virginia Colony.
This
should give everyone a clue that when the American Colonies stood up
together and acted as one accord as Americans, it was not as the popular
historians would have you believe a matter of a united America standing
against the British. It was a matter of colonies of various European
nations breaking away from the domination of Europe, and in the case of
Maryland and Delaware-- breaking away from the control of the Pope.
Nothing
like it had ever been seen in the history of the world. No colony had
ever broken free of the grip of the sponsoring nation. And here you had
thirteen of them, all going for broke, and repudiating the claims
of the assorted European Monarchies and the Pope, together, at once.
As
such, the American Revolution was a revolution of thought, a new idea,
and that idea was that men have the right of freewill and
self-determination given them by their Creator, and no man--- no
Monarch, no Pope -- has the right to dictate another's conscience, lay
claim to his body or his land or his assets, or otherwise inflict taxes
and "injuries" or require payments for services rendered without his
consent.
It wasn't just the
King of England being given a send up. It was the King of France, the
King of the Netherlands, the King of Denmark, the King of Spain-----all
the European Monarchs and the Pope----being given their walking papers.
So
now you have some key information that has been missing, perhaps, from
your education on these subjects. I had Michael R. Hamilton send me an
email and accuse me of just making up the name "Continental United
States" and "Continental Marshals".
Well,
if I made it up, then I would own the copyright to it, correct? And
there would be no need for the flap over who "owns" or doesn't own the
Continental Marshals service.
But, regrettably, I didn't think of it. The Founders did.
The
need for the Continental Marshals arose soon after the adoption of the
actual Constitution, and it arose as a result of splitting the
international jurisdiction owed to the united Colonies acting as the
united "States of America" into delegated and undelegated powers.
In
1790, George Washington organized the first United States Districts and
the first US Marshals service as a part of the fall-out of the federal
Judiciary Act. They were assigned to protect the newly mandated federal
maritime and admiralty courts. They served in the delegated
international jurisdiction created by The Constitution.
In
the same year, Benjamin Franklin organized the Continental Marshals to
operate within the already established Postal Districts, to protect the
Post Offices and Post Roads. Over time, the Continental (Land) Marshals
became known as Federal Marshals. They served the states and the people
to maintain and enforce the Public Law governing the undelegated
portion of international jurisdiction that was retained by the states
and the people. (Amendment X of the Bill of Rights).
Easily
within my lifetime and most of yours, you have heard of both "Federal
Marshals" and "US Marshals" but probably never knew the difference.
Confusion
reigns because from the foundations of this country there have always
been two (or more) entities calling themselves the "United States".
To shed more light on this circumstance, I am here reprinting all of one of the immortal Howard Freeman's articles.
Please
note that since Howard wrote this some time back in the 1990's or
2000's, the Uniform Commercial Code has been renumbered and the actual
Code Section that allows you to retain your constitutional guarantees is
no longer UCC 1-207, but is now instead UCC 1-308.
Also
note the confusion that arises at the end of the article when even
Howard Freeman used "Federal" as a catch-all term instead of
distinguishing between "US" (delegated) and "Federal" (non-delegated)
powers.
It was to avoid this
confusion that I suggested resurrecting the original name "Continental
Marshals" and using that instead of "Federal Marshals" so that people
would more readily grasp the fact that the Continental Marshals work for
the land jurisdiction states and the people and be able to set them
apart from "United States Marshals" who work for the incorporated UNITED
STATES, INC.
Thanks to both
ignorance and guile in some quarters, the re-use of the name
"Continental Marshals" was used to spawn a new and different
confusion--- at least in the minds of some less informed people--- who
have attempted to call state militiamen "continental marshals".
It
boils down to this, folks--- the states of the union have the iron-clad
guarantee that they can keep their "well-regulated militias" and they
need to make use of that guarantee by retaining that name for their
state-based armed forces. There is a fundamental guarantee lost by
calling militiamen "marshals".
When
we knowingly operate in the international jurisdiction of the sea, we
have historical precedent going back to Ben Franklin for using officers
called "Continental Marshals" and later "Federal Marshals" to
enforce the undelegated international jurisdiction owed to the states
and people.
If we want to retain
our freedom and restore our lawful government instead of going off the
tracks and engaging in an insurrectionist folly, it only makes sense to
cut the confusion to the bone and call offices and officers by their
historically correct names.
As
you read this article, "The Two United States and the Law" also bear in
mind that since Freeman wrote this---and although what he says
remains fundamentally true---another sleight of hand has taken place and
the original "United States" he correctly refers to as the "continental
United States" has dropped completely off the board (unless we
resurrect it) and the "Two United States" currently being employed by
the rats in Congress are the Territorial United States (what Freeman
calls the "Federal United States") and the Municipal United States, so
that we are denied access to any of the constitutional guarantees as
long as we submit to being counted either "United States Citizens" or
"citizens of the United States":
The Two United States and the Law
by Howard Freeman
Our
forefathers, weary of the oppressive measures that King George III’s
government forced upon them, in common declared their independence from
England in 1776. They were not expected to be successful in that
resistance. The moneyed people had backed England for two major reasons.
First, our forefathers wanted a rigid, written Constitution “set in
concrete.” They were familiar with the so-called Constitution of England
which consisted largely of customs, precedents, traditions, and
understandings, often vague and always flexible. They wanted the
principle of English common law, that an act done by any official person
or law-making body beyond his or its legal competence was simply void.
Second, the thirteen little
colonies desired to base their union on substance (gold and silver) —
real money. They well knew how the despotic governments of Europe were
mortgaged to the hilt — lock, stock, and barrel, the land, the people,
everything — to certain wealthy men who controlled the banks, the
currency, and all credit, who lent credit but did not loan gold and
silver!
The United States of America was made up of a union
of what is now fifty sovereign States, a three-branch (legislative,
executive, and judicial) Republic known as The United States of America,
or as termed in this article, the Continental United States. Its
citizenry live in one of the fifty States, and its laws are based on the
Constitution, which is based on Common Law.
Less
than one hundred years after we became a nation, a loophole was
discovered in the Constitution by cunning lawyers in league with the
international bankers. They realized that a separate nation existed, by
the same name, that Congress had created in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17. This “United States” is a Legislative Democracy
within the Constitutional Republic, and is known as the Federal United
States. It has exclusive, unlimited rule over its citizenry, the
residents of the District of Columbia, the territories and enclaves
(Guam, Midway Islands, Wake Island, Puerto Rico, etc.), and anyone who
is a citizen by way of the 14th Amendment (naturalized citizens).
Both United States have the same Congress that rules in both nations. One “United States,”
the Republic of fifty States, has the “stars and stripes” as its flag,
but without any fringe on it. The Federal United States’ flag is the
stars and stripes with a yellow fringe, seen in all the courts. The
abbreviations of the States of the Continental United States are, with
or without the zip codes, Ala., Alas., Ariz., Ark., Cal., etc. The
abbreviations of the States under the jurisdiction of the Federal United
States, the Legislative Democracy, are AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, etc.
(without any periods).
Under the Constitution, based on Common Law, the Republic of the Continental United States provides for legal cases (1) at Law, (2) in Equity, and (3) in Admiralty:
(1)
Law is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful
defense. It is the will of the majority, the organization of the natural
right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for
individual forces, to do only what the individual forces have a natural
and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties;
to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us
all. Since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person,
liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for
the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person,
liberty, or property of individuals or groups. Law allows you to do
anything you want to, as long as you don’t infringe upon the life,
liberty or property of anyone else. Law does not compel performance.
Today’s so-called laws (ordinances, statutes, acts, regulations, orders,
precepts, etc.) are often erroneously perceived as law, but just
because something is called a “law” does not necessarily make it a law.
[There is a difference between “legal” and “lawful.” Anything the
government does is legal, but it may not be lawful.]
(2)
Equity is the jurisdiction of compelled performance (for any contract
you are a party to) and is based on what is fair in a particular
situation. The term “equity” denotes the spirit and habit of fairness,
justness, and right dealing which would regulate the intercourse of men
with men. You have no rights other than what is specified in your
contract. Equity has no criminal aspects to it.
(3) Admiralty is compelled performance plus a criminal penalty, a civil contract with a criminal penalty.
By 1938 the gradual merger procedurally between law and equity actions (i.e.,
the same court has jurisdiction over legal, equitable, and admiralty
matters) was recognized. The nation was bankrupt and was owned by its
creditors (the international bankers) who now owned everything — the
Congress, the Executive, the courts, all the States and their
legislatures and executives, all the land, and all the people.
Everything was mortgaged in the national debt. We had gone from being
sovereigns over government to subjects under government, through the use
of negotiable instruments to discharge our debts with limited
liability, instead of paying our debts at common law with gold or silver
coin.
The remainder of this article explains how this
happened, where we are today, and what remedy we have to protect
ourselves from this system.
Our Present Commercial System of “Law”
and the REMEDY Provided for Our Protection
The present commercial system of “law” has replaced the old and familiar Common Law
upon which our nation was founded. The following is the legal thread
which brought us from sovereigns over government to subjects under
government, through the use of negotiable instruments (Federal Reserve
Notes) to discharge our debts with limited liability instead of paying
our debts at common law with gold or silver coin.
The change in our system of law from public law to private commercial law was recognized by the
Supreme
Court of the United States in the Erie Railroad v. Thompkins case of
1938, after which case, in the same year, the procedures of Law were
officially blended with the procedures of Equity. Prior to 1938, all
U.S. Supreme Court decisions were based upon public law — or that system
of law that was controlled by Constitutional limitation. Since 1938,
all U.S. Supreme Court decisions are based upon what is termed public
policy.
Public policy concerns commercial transactions made
under the Negotiable Instrument’s Law, which is a branch of the
international Law Merchant. This has been codified into what is now
known as the Uniform Commercial Code,
which system of law was made uniform throughout the fifty States
through the cunning of the Congress of the United States (which “United
States” has its origin in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, as distinguished from the “United States,” which is the Union of the fifty States).
In
offering grants of negotiable paper (Federal Reserve Notes) which the
Congress gave to the fifty States of the Union for education, highways,
health, and other purposes, Congress bound all the States of the Union
into a commercial agreement with the Federal United States (as
distinguished from the Continental United States). The fifty States
accepted the “benefits” offered by the Federal United States as the
consideration of a commercial agreement between the Federal United
States and each of the corporate States. The corporate States were then
obligated to obey the Congress of the Federal United States and also to
assume their portion of the equitable debts of the Federal United States
to the international banking houses, for the credit loaned. The credit
which each State received, in the form of federal grants, was predicated
upon equitable paper.
This system of negotiable paper
binds all corporate entities of government together in a vast system of
commercial agreements and is what has altered our court system from one
under the Common Law to a Legislative Article I
Court, or Tribunal, system of commercial law. Those persons brought
before this court are held to the letter of every statute of government
on the federal, state, county, or municipal levels unless they have
exercised the REMEDY provided for them within that system of Commercial
Law whereby, when forced to use a so-called “benefit” offered, or
available, to them, from government, they may reserve their former
right, under the Common Law
guarantee of same, not to be bound by any contract, or commercial
agreement, that they did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and
intentionally.
This is exactly how the corporate entities
of state, county, and municipal governments got entangled with the
Legislative Democracy, created by Article I, Section 8, Clause 17
of the Constitution, and called here The Federal United States, to
distinguish it from the Continental United States, whose origin was in
the Union of the Sovereign States.
The same national
Congress rules the Continental United States pursuant to Constitutional
limits upon its authority, while it enjoys exclusive rule, with no
Constitutional limitations, as it legislates for the Federal United
States.
With the above information, we may ask: “How did
we, the free Preamble citizenry of the Sovereign States, lose our
guaranteed unalienable rights and be forced into acceptance of the
equitable debt obligations of the Federal United States, and also become
subject to that entity of government, and divorced from our Sovereign
States in the Republic, which we call here the Continental United
States?” We do not reside, work, or have income from any territory
subject to the direct jurisdiction of the Federal United States. These
are questions that have troubled sincere, patriotic Americans for many
years. Our lack of knowledge concerning the cunning of the legal
profession is the cause of that divorce, but a knowledge of the truth
concerning the legal thread, which caught us in its net, will restore
our former status as a free Preamble citizen of the Republic. The answer follows:
Our
national Congress works for two nations foreign to each other, and by
legal cunning both are called The United States. One is the Union
of Sovereign States, under the Constitution, termed in this article the
Continental United States. The other is a Legislative Democracy which
has its origin in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17
of the Constitution, here termed the Federal United States. Very few
people, when they see some “law” passed by Congress, ask themselves,
“Which nation was Congress working for when it passed this or that
so-called law?” Or, few ask,
“Does this particular law apply to the
Continental citizenry of the Republic, or does this particular law apply
only to residents of the District of Columbia and other named enclaves,
or territories, of the Democracy called the Federal United States?”
Since
these questions are seldom asked by the uninformed citizenry of the
Republic, it was an open invitation for “cunning” political leadership
to seek more power and authority over the entire citizenry of the
Republic through the medium of “legalese.” Congress deliberately failed
in its duty to provide a medium of exchange for the citizenry of the
Republic, in harmony with its Constitutional mandate. Instead, it
created an abundance of commercial credit money for the Legislative
Democracy, where it was not bound by Constitutional limitations. Then,
after having created an emergency situation, and a tremendous depression
in the Republic, Congress used its emergency authority to remove the
remaining substance (gold and silver) from the medium of exchange
belonging to the Republic, and made the negotiable instrument paper of
the Legislative Democracy (Federal United States) a legal tender for
Continental United States citizenry to use in the discharge of debts.
At
the same time, Congress granted the entire citizenry of the two nations
the “benefit” of limited liability in the discharge of all debts by
telling the citizenry that the gold and silver coins of the Republic
were out of date and cumbersome. The citizens were told that gold and
silver (substance) was no longer needed to pay their debts, that they
were now “privileged” to discharge debt with this more “convenient”
currency, issued by the Federal United States. Consequently, everyone
was forced to “go modern,” and to turn in their gold as a patriotic
gesture. The entire news media complex went along with the scam and
declared it to be a forward step for our democracy, no longer referring
to America as a Republic.
From that time on, it was a
falling light for the Republic of 1776, and a rising light for Franklin
Roosevelt’s New Deal Democracy, which overcame the depression, which was
caused by a created shortage of real money. There was created an
abundance of debt paper money, so-called, in the form of
interest-bearing negotiable instrument paper called Federal Reserve
Notes, and other forms of paperwork credit instruments.
Since
all contracts since Roosevelt’s time have the colorable consideration
of Federal Reserve Notes, instead of a genuine consideration of silver
and gold coin, all contracts are colorable contracts, and not genuine
contracts. [According to Black’s Law Dictionary (1990), colorable means
“That which is in appearance only, and not in reality, what it purports
to be, hence counterfeit, feigned, having the appearance of truth.”]
Consequently,
a new colorable jurisdiction, called a statutory jurisdiction, had to
be created to enforce the contracts. Soon the term colorable contract
was changed to the term commercial agreement to fit circumstances of the
new statutory jurisdiction, which is legislative, rather than judicial,
in nature. This jurisdiction enforces commercial agreements upon
implied consent, rather than full knowledge, as it is with the
enforcement of contracts under the Common Law.
All
of our courts today sit as legislative Tribunals, and the so-called
“statutes” of legislative bodies being enforced in these Legislative
Tribunals are not “statutes” passed by the legislative branch of our
three-branch Republic, but as “commercial obligations” to the Federal
United States for anyone in the Federal United States or in the
Continental United States who has used the equitable currency of the
Federal United States and who has accepted the “benefit,” or
“privilege,” of discharging his debts with the limited liability
“benefit” offered to him by the Federal United States … EXCEPT those who
availed themselves of the remedy within this commercial system of law,
which remedy is today found in Book 1 of the Uniform Commercial Code at
Section 207.
When used in conjunction with one’s signature,
a stamp stating “Without Prejudice U.C.C. 1-207” is sufficient to
indicate to the magistrate of any of our present Legislative Tribunals
(called “courts”) that the signer of the document has reserved his
Common Law right. He is not to be bound to the statute, or commercial
obligation, of any commercial agreement that he did not enter knowingly,
voluntarily, and intentionally, as would be the case in any Common Law
contract.
Furthermore, pursuant to U.C.C. 1-103, the
statute, being enforced as a commercial obligation of a commercial
agreement, must now be construed in harmony with the old Common Law of
America, where the tribunal/court must rule that the statute does not
apply to the individual who is wise enough and informed enough to
exercise the remedy provided in this new system of law. He retains his
former status in the Republic and fully enjoys his unalienable rights,
guaranteed to him by the Constitution
of the Republic, while those about him “curse the darkness” of
Commercial Law government, lacking the truth needed to free themselves
from a slave status under the Federal United States, even while
inhabiting territory foreign to its territorial venue.
PS---
if you want to send this to you mailing lists, best convert all the
hyperlinks in the Freeman article to plain text. Some servers are
rejecting articles with embedded hyperlinks.
