FourWinds10.com - Delivering Truth Around the World
Custom Search

JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ: TO THE FLAG OFFICERS

JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ

Smaller Font Larger Font RSS 2.0

To the Flag Officers:

 Monday, October 7, 2019

I have been accused of "not answering" your questions. I have in fact answered your questions and it behooves you to study the answers.

These answers are being made Public and Published so that nobody can misrepresent the situation or a word I say. If you have any other questions, forward them to me; otherwise, I and everyone else in the world will assume that you have in fact and in truth been answered, and that you now understand fully what you are dealing with and what your duty is.

Question 1: Who administered my "Oath of Office"?

I am a Justice of the Peace, an Officer of a State of the Union ---- not a "State of State". We do not now and never have taken "Oaths" of Office. We honor the Separation of Church and State, as clearly enunciated in Everson v. Board of Education, and also honor the Law of the Land, which in the western world means the Bible, which forbids the taking of oaths.

Both these foreign practices, oath-taking and impersonation in office, originate under the international law of the sea. As a result, the only judges who take Oaths of Office are Federal Judges---either outright while sitting on a US Federal Court bench, or as a Jurist for Hire working for an enfranchised State of State.

Those who serve the actual State simply "accept" the Office we are elected to serve as a Public Duty. If you were familiar with the history of the judiciary and land law, you would already know this.

I am working for the State as defined here at (1), not a STATE OF STATE member of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ---the definition listed as (5):

1856- A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.

(1) Definition of United States of America: The name of this country. The United States, now thirty-one

in number, are Alabama,Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland,Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and California. “

(5) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law.

Please note that Bouvier's is the only Law Dictionary ever adopted for use by the Congress and it is therefore the controlling authority in these matters.

Second, as you know, only Bar Attorneys may serve in Federal Courts and "federalized" --- that is, incorporated State of State Courts. This is because they deal in international law of the sea and in global law of commerce. The definition of "bar attorney" taken from an 1801 British Merchant Marine Handbook is "international shipping clerk". They are supposed to function as Customs Agents aboard ship or be employed in Customs Houses on land. Now, it doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to determine that we are not aboard ship and I am not involved in administering anything in a Customs House, either. The better question is --- what in the hell are all these foreign shipping clerks doing here in our court buildings? And the answer is: the extension of the international law of the sea onto the land is a trespass that was allowed as an "Emergency" measure by the Congress acting in 1865 --- a trespass that has never been adequately corrected because the Reconstruction was never completed. If you were familiar with the history of the establishment of the Federal [Military] District Courts, you would know this, too.

Here is where the Sea Courts came ashore:

March 2, 1867 (14 Stat. 428), divided the ten Southern states into five military districts, each to be commanded by an officer not below the rank of brigadier general. Under the act the primary duties of these commanders were "to protect all persons in their rights of person and property, to suppress insurrection, disorder, and violence, and to punish, or cause to be punished, all disturbers of the public peace and criminals."

Ever since, the use of these courts has expanded, even though they are by definition foreign with respect to our civilian population and lack valid jurisdiction.

That does not mean that our land jurisdiction courts ceased to function, merely that sea courts became common and people forgot (as the present question proves) the difference between land and sea courts.

Third, as you may have cause to know, in 1819, an Amendment to The Constitution of the united States of America was ratified by the States, prohibiting anyone in receipt of foreign titles of nobility from occupying any public office in our Federal government. That includes Bar Attorneys who are all in receipt of the title "Esquire". Though the States are not bound by the contracts of the States of States, we felt it best to honor this prohibition and not allow land jurisdiction justices to be members of the Bar, which creates a natural conflict of interest, and is inappropriate and unnecessary anyway, as we don't practice the law of the sea in our courts.

I hope this adequately explains: (1) why neither I nor any other Justice of the Peace takes an "Oath" of Office; and (2) why our civilian courts practice land law, not sea law; and (3) why our Justices don't have or don't retain any membership in the Bar Associations.

We, the actual Justices of the civilian courts in this country have NEVER taken "oaths" of office for the reasons I have brought to your attention, so the whole presumption that I would take an Oath of Office or that it would be administered in the manner you presume, is faulty from the get-go.

2. I have no "relationship" with the current Pope, Francis, other than to serve as a vocal critic and reminder of his obligations. I had no "relationship" with Benedict XVI, either, other than a private appointment to speak on his behalf to his employees in the Municipal United States Government, and give them Notice that they are operating in "gross error" ---- in direct conflict with their duty owed to the American States and People and in violation of their employment contract.

I am not Roman Catholic. I am a member of the Universal "Catholic" Church at Large, so my business with either Pope is strictly business, and specifically, enforcement of contracts owed to Americans. I brought Benedict's attention to the misconduct of the Municipal United States Government, including The Dead Baby Scam, and did so in a way that required him to either take action against it, or be exposed as a willing accomplice to the fraud and mistreatment we have suffered.

He responded by trying to reorganize and correct the Postal District system, including the Postal District Courts, liquidate the UNITED STATES, INC. for criminal activity, and sending myself and about 900 others out into the world to tell his adherents and employees to cease and desist their impersonation of living flesh.

These practices are against both ecclesiastical law and our constitutional agreements.

The present Pope doesn't appear to care that this is so, and is bent on moving these illicit operations to a new storefront location --- the United Nations. Instead of doing away with the criminality, Francis is trying to protect and continue and expand it. This has nothing to do with religion, nor with politics in any common sense of these words; we are dealing with crime on a global and staggering level. 147 corporations are involved in an interlocking trust directorate scheme aimed at manipulating and controlling everything, destroying all conventional religions, and all national governments. Under Francis, no corrective action has been taken to dismantle or redirect these colluding corporations.

The Flag Officers need to get off their duffs and (1) realize that they have been left clueless and (2) ask themselves why?

I would venture to guess that they have been left clueless so as to better manipulate and misdirect them.

The objective of these 147 corporations and their managers is to rule the world. They are doing this under a guise of peace and love and saving the Earth from climate change and overpopulation---- but in fact, their goal is to create a worldwide system of Corporate Feudalism operated by an oppressive theocracy---- and that theocracy is not Christian. It's a pagan leftover from the days of Rome and it goes even further back, to Babylon.

My question back to the Flag Officers is, "If a Great-Grandma from Big Lake, Alaska, can see what's going on, why can't you?"

3. How is my husband the Head of State for The United States of America?

Get out your trusty Bouvier's Law Dictionary again. Look up the word "President". Tell me what you see?

A President by definition is the Chief Executive Officer of a business enterprise, not a Head of State.

Yet, every country in existence in the 1700's had to have a Head of State in order to function---- and the people who were functioning as Heads of States were all snobs, so they required that all Heads of State must be of royal lineage or have attained sovereignty by force of arms.

George Washington wanted the plum of acting in the power position of President of the United States ---- comptroller of the Pope's Municipal Government, because even back then, he realized that that was where the real power was and also the greatest threat.

George was a Cousin of King George III and a direct descendant of King John, who was "King of the British Commonwealth".

It's important that you grasp the fact that there has not been a true British Monarch since 1066, and William the Conqueror made sure that there never would be again. Upon his death in 1087, he rewarded his loyal Norman Barons by making them all "sovereigns in their own right" and bequeathing them permanent landholdings throughout England. They remained Barons and under fealty to him and his progeny in France, but in England they were all kings in their own right. He did not give his son, John, any land at all---- hence, John's nickname, "John Lacklands".

John was, however, the hereditary Grantor of the Commonwealth ---- the waste lands and properties granted by the former kings of England to the Church to be developed and used for the support of the poor and infirm, and the Normans respected the Church holdings. John had a little spat with the then-Pope, which resulted in a role reversal. Instead of him acting as Grantor and letting the Church develop his lands for their purposes, he became the Church's Administrator, responsible for overseeing the Commonwealth lands. This is the primary Office the Queen still occupies --- Queen of the British Commonwealth --- and the only office related to the land that John's progeny are heirs to. This is where King John became a tool for the Pope, and this is also how all the British Monarchs from John's line also became tools of the Popes, regardless of their religion.

Because the Norman Barons were now "sovereigns in their own right" in England, they and their progeny had the lawful power to create the Magna Carta and enforce it, no matter what King John and his heirs wanted.

This is where my husband's family, or to be more specific, his clan, inherited their sovereignty. They were all kinsmen of William the Conqueror, all part of the Belle Cher clan --- like a Scottish Clan. The head of the Clan is called "the" Belle Cher as an office, similar to "the" MacDonald.

Our Forefathers were much more aware of this history than we are today. Nobody objected to George Washington being the President and overseeing the Pope's Municipal Government; as a descendant of King John, he was naturally fitted for that Office and acceptable to the Pope. However, the former Colonists balked at having Washington also serve as Head of State. That was a bit too close to the King of England, and they certainly didn't want to get embroiled with the King of France..... or the King of Spain, which would just lead them back into a lot of European intrigue.

John Adams was a neighbor of the Belchers who lived in Braintree, Massachusetts. They introduced him to William Belcher, "the" Belcher at that time, a Colonel in the Continental Army who served at White Plains and diverse other battles. William was a "sovereign in his own right" under the terms of The Settlement of the Norman Conquest and thus enabled to serve as our country's Head of State. That's why the Great Seals of both The United States and The United States of America are visibly and actually part of the Belcher Array of Arms ----- take a good look at the various Belcher Coats of Arms and tell me what you see?

Just as his ancestor William, the Conqueror, had done in England, William Belcher declared during his lifetime that all the men who served in the Continental Army and all the children born on the land and soil of this country, would be "sovereigns in their own right" forevermore. This is memorialized in his Will, using the same basic language as used to convey such sovereignty by William, the Conqueror.

Instead of there being just a few leftover Norman scions, there were now potentially millions of Americans standing as inheritors through the Norman Conquest, heirs to the Magna Carta, all enabled as "sovereigns in their own right". William clearly meant for this to be the death knell of monarchies everywhere and for elitism in general. He believed that mankind is capable of self-government, and believed in the principles enunciated by Thomas Jefferson in The Unanimous Declaration of Independence.

That is how and why William Belcher became Head of State and also how and why Americans became "sovereigns in their own right".

Now, this is not an answer that some Flag Officers loyal to the Queen will want to hear, but it is nonetheless the truth. The present Queen readily admits that we are a "sovereign people" and does not dispute a word of this testimony and evaluation of the rights and standing involved, so it isn't a matter for her employees and officers to dispute in her behalf.

So let that sink into the pates of the Flag Officers.

They may work for the Queen, but the Queen works for us. That is how the "Delegation of Powers" is even possible. If you think about it for five seconds, you will realize that a king does not accept delegation, except from another king.

Americans are sovereigns in their own right by force of arms upon the land and soil of this country, and inheritors of the Magna Carta and sovereignty in their own right internationally via their inheritance preserved by the Norman Conquest---- through William Belcher.

You will note that all this occurs and is only important in the realm of international and global diplomacy. It has nothing to do with the day to day affairs of average Americans and by all rights, should never be anything but a source of empowerment and joy for everyone concerned---- if and when it does become important----- as it has now.

We are facing an international crisis caused by the gross criminality cited in the Answer to Question 2 ---- an attempted criminal corporate take-over of all national governments, led by the banks and the run amok Roman Catholic Church, that clearly sees this as an opportunity to create a worldwide theocracy for itself.

By the end of this month, Brexit or no Brexit, the UNITED KINGDOM (INC.) will be forced to turn over control of the British Armed Forces to the fiends in Brussels --- the UN Corporation, the stinking Vichy French and Swiss Nazi Collaborators. Unless, that is, the Flag Officers get off their dead asses, support the actual civilian government owed to this country, and bring forward our claims ---- because in fact we are the Priority Creditors of the UNITED KINGDOM and we, not Brussels, have the deciding vote.

 

http://www.paulstramer.net/2019/10/to-flag-officers.html