1779 v. 928’s

By Judge Anna von Reitz | Big Lake, Alaska

People are often confused about what they “need” to do to recoup their birthright political status?  Is the 1779 Declaration all by itself sufficient?  Is there any need or reason to do the additional recordings available as “the 928’s” attached to Article 928 on my website: www.annavonreitz.com

Think of it like insurance packages.  You may only “need” basic coverage, right? But because you are you, you may actually want more protection or slightly different protection. 

Someone who has children and wants to protect them will have different “insurance” needs than someone who doesn’t have kids, for example. 

Someone who has a business, someone who has a pen name or performer’s name that they wish to protect — the list goes on—- the 928’s offer a variety of additional insurance coverages that the 1779 Declaration can’t do by itself. 

So, in a way, both are correct.  All you really need to claim back your identity, your name, your DNA, your political status—- all the crucial and universal elements — are in the 1779 Declaration. 

But if you have other or additional concerns, look at the 928 Documents to see what else you may want or need.  The most common extra is the Baby Record. The additional Certificates of Assumed Name(s) are probably the second most common add-on, because so many women adopt multiple names over their lifetimes. 

I personally recommend a formal re-conveyance that establishes a specific point in time where your “Legal Person” is lawfully and officially converted into a “Lawful Person”— that is, purposefully returned to the land and soil jurisdiction. 

This puts an endpoint on their ability to traffic you, because they don’t have a more recent primary record to claim that you are “at sea” when you are standing there with proof that you were last reported on the land. 

Now all of a sudden their presumption based on the Birth Certificate is invalidated and they have to grant that there is proof of you having returned “from the sea” jurisdiction — and therefore admissible public record evidence that your most recent public appearance places your name on the land and soil, functioning as a Lawful Person.
Oops. Now, they are caught trespassing against an American instead of playing cat and mouse with a U.S. Citizen. 

So that is one additional 928 that I personally recommend, because so much of their ability to abuse people stems from the presumption that we are still “at sea” and wandering around in their jurisdiction, instead of standing on our own. Whatever we can do and place on the public record to rebut their self-interested presumptions, the better. 

I hope this explanation will be useful and that the Coordinators and Assembly Members will make good use of it to help our new incoming members sort things out. 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.