The Power of the Non-domestic “No”

   Judge Anna von Reitz

When dealing with the Federales it is important to remember that all their forms and all their communications are written from their perspective. Thus, when they say “domestic” they are talking about “domestic” with respect to them and their jurisdiction. We are “non-domestic” and “alien” with respect to them.

This results in some very odd ways of referring to us in their Federal Code — for example, calling us “non-resident aliens” in the Tax Code. They are saying that you are not naturally within their jurisdiction. You don’t live in their territory and are foreign with respect to them.

The same applies with courts and juries. Courts and juries have no ability or reason to address you unless you are a Federal employee or a dependent. They cannot provide a jury of your peers and have no right to subject you to any of their statutory laws or codes, unless you trespass upon their turf—and what constitutes their turf is highly arguable.

For example, federal highways might in some circumstances be considered within their enforcement area, but since we hold the international land jurisdiction there are vast stretches of interstate highway where they have no business addressing you and your vehicle at all.

They might have a proprietary interest in a Federal Game Management Area, but two steps away on state land they have no authority at all.

We used to be far more aware of these niceties, but we have in recent years suffered “area creep” as the Federales have secretively sought to claim jurisdiction over more and more land and more facilities that are in fact ours and owed to us.

We should not be asleep and allow them to declare all these local, county, and state properties to be federal areas in any sense. This simply adds layers of government to our land and our lives that we do not want or need, but which we get stuck paying for.

They have a motive for extending their service areas and in view of the extra costs and often unwelcome extension of their statutory codes and regulations, we have the motive to restrict them. Afterall, do we really need city, county, state, and federal government all “serving” one little spot in Kansas?

Probably not, but like high-pressure magazine salesmen, they will be there “serving” you, if you do not object and they will constantly expand the range of their services, too, so that they can tax you more and exert more power over you and your neighbors.

As I was saying yesterday, people desperately need to start thinking of government in terms of business. It’s here to “serve” you, and it is up to you to firmly declare when you have been “served” enough. It’s also up to you to put your foot down and declare where their limits are.

For example, the Municipal United States Government — the oligarchy allowed to Congress which is allowed to rule over the District of Columbia by Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of their Constitution– is clearly supposed to be limited to the ten square miles set aside for it.

But thanks to “area creep” they have created entire Municipal STATES OF STATES for themselves and extended their Municipal laws and services all over our states, and then charged us for this “service” and sought to impose all their regulations on us, too.

Well, we can argue all day over whether this is “constitutional” or not, but the quickest way to put an end to it, is to point out that they are vastly overstepping their service area and that we won’t pay for their services and won’t recognize their jurisdiction as anything applicable to us.

This deprives them of both of their prime motivation to be on our land in the first place— which is to charge us for more “services” and gain coercive power over us on a local level.

If we wake up and say, sorry, not paying for it, and furthermore, not subject to it, they are forced to pay for their own activities and their municipal courts— which make their money by enforcing regulations that no average American is subject to — naturally dwindle and die.

Not only do our purses get a break, we can breathe easier, too, and stop worrying about the latest anti-chewing gum laws and federal employee nose-hair regulations.

Just as we deal with obnoxious salesmen trying to sell us other products we don’t want or need, curtailing all this inappropriate and unwanted “government” activity starts with telling the purveyors one little word —- “No.”


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.