My Reply to More Questions — Purportedly from Flag Officers:

anna-2  by Anna von Reitz

My Reply to More Questions — Purportedly from Flag Officers:

I have been assured that I am corresponding with a liaison for the Flag Officers of this country, and there has been some corroboration of that, but I am beginning to think that my leg is being pulled. If this is indicative of the level of knowledge possessed by military officers at the Flag level, we are all in a lot of trouble. See for yourselves:

From Flags:

I don’t know where to begin except to say this Judge Anna woman needs help. Some serious help because she shouldn’t believe the crap she writes and spews as it makes her seem to be a very delusional person. Maybe someone is feeding her this crap and she bought into it. We pray she gets some help. Paul, I will only communicate with you so at least you know of the truth do, document and we share – and it’s free Plus, POTUS and Barr are very aware of what we have done and what’s in queue.

From Anna:

Then why is it that Senior JAG Officials agree with me and not with you? Why is it that they have told everyone the truth — that there have been hundreds if not thousands of such “Arbitration Awards” over the years, and not one of them fulfilled? I am aware of this. Why aren’t you, if you are such an expert?

Where were you when General Roy took the Farm Union Cases to the United States Supreme Court? Why do I know what they told him and you don’t? Face it, you just got involved in all this —at most 3-4 years ago– and you are trying to assert that you know more about it than someone who has spent more than forty years studying this situation. Keep going on like this, and you will continue to be utterly useless and also in dereliction of duty.

From Flags:

Paul, you may want to ask her, how is a claim (Phil’s) of your actual birthrights from the Creator not superior to a fiction of law American?

From Anna:

Apples and oranges again, or more like apples and kumquats. The Kingdom of Heaven has nothing to do with “the” Kingdom of God. Same basic confusion. Same logic default. Maybe if you get one “Aha!” moment, you will be able to see it all, but until then, you just make assumptions and more assumptions, and in the process try to put words in my mouth.

I have been in the front lines with Kurt Kallenbach, revealing that the Divine Origin of each of us has been “papered over” by the “birth day” (recorded entrance time) and then again by the “birth date” (registered exit time). The situation is like being marooned at sea and claiming to be, instead, out in the middle of Kansas.

Our actual point of incarnation occurs by an Act of God resulting in fertilization of an egg and formation of a unique zygote from which all else follows. That’s the truth and that’s where our Divine Birthright originates from, along with our Natural and Unalienable Rights. But Phil made no reference to any of that. He stayed firmly out to sea. So who is “delusional”?

From Flags:

She claims State national is highest yet now claims American? Where are the docs allowing all capacities, characters, conditions, status and standings utilized and effectuated today by the alleged government? Why doesn’t she post proof of her definitions? It seems she is always saying in a round about way this is the way it is and so what.

From Anna:

That’s because even though I gave you explicit directions and proof of exactly where these different kinds of political status are defined — and repeat myself — you still try to pretend that I haven’t answered you when I have answered you—and far more than one time.

Here it is again:

American State National defined at: 8 USC 1101 (a) 21.

American State Citizen defined at: 8 USC 1101 (a) 22 (B).

United States Citizen and Municipal citizen of the United States defined in any of the three (3) Constitutions at: Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3 and Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2.

And as for me saying, “So what?” — it’s because you are bringing forward non-issues as if they were issues, or as if they were cause for surprise or discussion. Why wouldn’t the King be Arch-Treasurer of a British Territorial corporation doing business as “the” United States of America?

That doesn’t make him Arch-Treasurer of the American Federation of States doing business as The United States of America—-which is what you are trying to claim.

From Flags:

I am sure during our next meeting which is to be held again at the Charlottesville Winery I could really impress the Flag Officers and Eric if I could produce J Pegs from Anna of the 3 Constitutions she speaks of. But she won’t and you know why.

From Anna:

And why would I have to provide you with anything that you can easily go out and obtain for yourself and which you have a duty to obtain—- and follow —- if you call yourself a “Flag Officer”?

Go to the Congressional Library —like we all did— to satisfy yourself that I am not just making this up, because, with your disgusting attitude, I could give you mint condition copies of the original documents delivered on a silver platter, and you would say I faked them.

Remember these are the names and dates of the Constitutions:

1. The Constitution for the united States of America (1787)

2. The Constitution of the United States of America (1789)

3. The Constitution of the United States (1790)

And don’t try to pretend (again) that your lack of Due Diligence is my fault or responsibility.

From Flags:

At this point, the Flag asked me to tell Anna they would like to speak with the continental marshals she claims to be working with and what is their contact info? I told them that’s the BS she makes up to keep her ignorant lemming followers continuing to follow her music of baiting hope never to deliver anything. Yes, that request was made in jest as they have read much of the incoherent statements and claims on her website.

From Anna:

I suggest that they speak directly with Senior Chief Marshal Tresa Haywood. I will give Paul the contact information to pass on to you. She is nice and polite, but, she has her ducks in order —and isn’t likely to take any guff or put up with any insulting presumptions. Read that: incoming stovepipe.

From Flags:

I and those around me follow the law and most of them are old and some very old and hidden from most. Arbitration in its common law form developed in England; in the Middle Ages, in tribunals such as the Courts of the Boroughs. Courts became suspicious of arbitration; for example, in Kill v. Hollister (1746), an English court ruled that the arbitration agreement could ‘oust’ courts of law and equity of jurisdiction. Arbitration was common in the early United States, with George Washington serving as an arbiter on an occasion. And the Arbitration process has been used ever since. However, it’s been used mostly by the self-serving imposters.

From Anna:

“Arbitration” is Law-by-Contract, and it doesn’t work unless there is an Arbitration Clause built into the contract to begin with.

Trying to enforce a one-sided arbitration results in attempted unilateral contracting process, which is why none of these numerous “successful” arbitration actions work.

Both the people bringing the issue and the people issuing the judgment didn’t check: (1) the status and standing of the Claimant relative to the Claim; (2) the existence of an Arbitration Clause in the contract; (3) the proper jurisdiction of the Law being addressed, which must match the jurisdiction which the Claimant is claiming.

Phil loses on all three counts.

As I keep trying to tell you, as far as law is concerned, there are no living men in the international jurisdiction of the sea, nor in the global jurisdiction of the air —either one.

So Phil has an unenforceable arbitration award and you are trying to make yourselves out to be Great Sages.

For the record:

Arbitration only works and exists in the realm of contract law.

So here is Phil Hudok, claiming to be a living man owed all his rights, using a process of contract law that only applies to corporations and officers of corporations, that is, to Persons, and trying to apply it to a contract that has no arbitration clause applicable to him. Brilliant. Simply brilliant.

Why don’t you all stop embarrassing yourselves? It only gets worse from here on.

_________________________________________________________

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.