Log in



Do Your Ears Hang Low?

Tuesday, March 28th, 2017 by

http://www.paulstramer.net/2017/03/do-your-ears-hang-low.html

By Anna Von Reitz

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 theRepublic. 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. 1-308” 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.

See this article and over 500 others on Anna’s website here:

www.annavonreitz.com

Lawful Government

Comments are closed.


SEO Powered By SEOPressor