Worldwide there was a decidedly de-consolidating result that appeared to affect the largest colonial country left which was Great Britain. This appears to have forced the British Crown to pivot into the "Commonwealth" which was defacto continued stealth colonization and control via British currency and/or installation of Central Banks in all former colonies. This may have been done to conceal the direct ownership of so much land by the British Royal Family, specifically the Queen; Also, note the resulting destruction of the British Pound as the world reserve currency which was long-in-the-tooth, but does not seem to be an optimal outcome for a British Royal family and their banker buddies that were supposedly in FULL CONTROL.
Overall, the effects of WW II appeared to be a "taking away" of lots of formerly British-controlled assets if one assumes that strong man Stalin (control of Eastern Europe) was a quasi-nationalist and MI-6 had not fully penetrated and taken control of the Secret Police/KGB until after Stalin's death on March 5, 1953 (age 74) [which may have been an assassination by the same MI-6].
Note that Stalin was first celebrated by Time magazine and New York Times (1920s-30s) while they thought he was a globalist puppet. But once he got off the chain (unknown date) they reviled him as an evil Totalitarian dictator (see similar treatment of Hitler).
RELEVANCE TO Q OPERATION AND CURRENT WORLDWIDE EVENTS
I think this is relevant to NOW because it appears that the rest of the Commonwealth being dismantled is underway. Here is sauce from 2021 when Barbados left the Commonwealth and became and independent Republic: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/29/barbados-set-to-become-a-republic-ditching-british-queen ;There are some breadcrumbs that Reagan and Thatcher were attempting to dismantle parts of the Commonwealth in the early 1980s, but their efforts got blocked/interrupted.
Pharaonic ruler colors of blue and gold in Commonwealth flags:
Barbados Flag is Interesting with some familiar colors: https://greatawakening.win/p/15IqskP27Y/barbados-a-likely-human-traffick/c/
Commonwealth Flag is Quite Interesting: https://greatawakening.win/p/16aT36JyAl/presenting-the-flag-of-the-briti/c/
Nauru Flag has same colors: https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXbNZut8/mr-pindar-sir-the-qtards-have-di/c/
Ukrainian Flag for comparison: https://patriots.win/p/16aANFwvZR/happy-presidents-day-to-the-pres/c/
Additional parallel to NOW is the pending WW III which appears to be getting used to dismantle the US "debt dollar" as the world reserve currency AND dismantle US control of numerous countries worldwide that have had governments "installed" by the US via CIA/State Department operations (Ukraine being the prime example). Note the creation of BRIC and the nationalist-oriented alliance that is developing there to counter the US "debt dollar". BRIC by BRIC post:https://greatawakening.win/p/15JAJemTbi/gold-will-destroy-the-federal-re/c/
Your analysis about how we entered the maritime law and how sovereign humans became strawmen person, and hence bringing them under the jurisdiction of the maritime law.
I like to remind people that there are broadly 3 areas of law.
Common Law (Law of the Land) - applies to sovereign human beings and given to us from Bible. As long as you dont grievously hurt, rape or kill someone, you are not going to have anything to answer under Common Law.
Maritime Law (Law of water) - applies to contracts between fictitious entities. Currently, as long as we go accept our "all caps fictional personhood", we will be subject to this law.
Trust Law (Law of air) - is the most superior of all laws. When you are acting as a fiduciary for someone else or for a Trust, this law applies.
I think the slippery slop from sovereign humans to fictitious all caps personhood happened for a while, definitely from the time of the Civil war. By the time Fed, IRS and Birth certificate systems were implemented, we were technically already in this phase, but it would only work if all the judges, lawyers, politicians etc completely bought into this and believed this.
I believe those final stages of converting all institutions, officially, to treat us as fictional entities and make us subject to maritime law was fully accomplished in 1938. Of course the world war that broke out conveniently after that was the perfect way to ensure no one had a chance to realise this.
Yes, you've got it right. L.A.W (Land->Air-Water).
The amazing trick they're pulling off now is their "In Rem" jurisdiction however. This is like next level legal trickery. The judge can put on the appropriate hat of any of the 3 at any given time during a proceeding, always in an effort to benefit he and his benefactors the most.
So basically, you never know what's going on from word to word, moment to moment in a court proceeding. The judge can agree and say "sure, you're a "natural person" living man I'm looking at and talking to" in one moment, and then in the next ask you to agree you're the person named John Q Public on your driver's license? And you of course say, "well yes, that's me". But in that moment, although he agreed the he was looking at and talking to the natural person you think you are, which would make this a common law proceeding, in the next breath, via verbal words alone, he got you to admit you're the artificial person "JOHN Q PUBLIC" on your driver's license, and then BAM, your case has now been converted to Special Admiralty/Maritime in that split second, you none the wiser for it.
This is "In Rem" jurisdiction, meaning by the choice of the judge.
Juris-Diction -> Oath/Law-Spoken. Do you see that it's words? In the olden days of European feudal lords, the serf/peasant declared his oath, with words alone, to his feudal lord...as there weren't pens and paper readily handy all the time in those days. You swore your oath in front of witnesses by saying you agreed to follow the rules/laws of Lord Such-And-Such in return for his protection and benefits. This was your "Juris-Diction". You "spoke" that you swore your oath to follow your leige lord's rules.
And this is what's happening today. This is why the judge always first gets you to agree to the name (strawman) at the beginning of the court proceeding and why the police officer always needs your driver's license (strawman) and registration (property handed over to the king) before he can proceed with ticketing you.
You're literally "Swearing an oath" to the feudal lords that run the show today.
Quite a deception, eh? You gotta hand it to 'em though, it's bloody ingenious!
I always thought LAW meant Lying As Work. I like it the elemental analogy though. The trickiest thing with trust law are finding good resources and navigating the morass of potential missteps. Ive study these topics as much as I am able to and I find the widest knowledge gaps I am still working through are for trust formation and maintenance. There are a lot of different opinions out there
Boy you got that right. Law schools (aka LEGAL brainwashing institutions) stopped offering courses on trusts in the early 1960s with only the rare and seemingly undesirable "elective" course still around.
If you've read "The Art of Passing the Buck vol. 1", you'll have some deeper understanding of the topics you mention. I haven't sprung for volume 2 of this book due to its exorbitant cost - almost $600 - but I may in the near future. I wish our libraries actually carried REAL books of knowledge, but alas, they carry everything but. Astonishing that even they have succumbed to the marxist/communist infiltration.
Thank you for this reference. I found them archived but if I get what Iām looking for out of it I will gladly acquire the volumes.
Correct. This In-Rem is nothing but trickery, but listening to David Straight, it seems that you can avoid falling into the trap by answering questions carefully.
When asked this, you are supposed to say that you are here to represent the Trust name "JOHN Q PUBLIC" in such and such capacity (Administrator? Trustee - I think it depends on the situation as to whats best)
You never accept that you are the same person on your DL or Birth Certificate etc.
You literally make sure the Judge has to put aside his three hats, one after another, and then he will have no choice but to dispose the case.
Caveat Emptor - David Straight is a mixed bag of information. He's improved his "pitch" over the years, but he's still missing a ton of vital information. He's so sure of himself because he's been studying law and the legal system for over 20 years which enables him to handle any tricky situation, much like Anna Von Reitz. But if you don't have all the education, you'll almost certainly fall into one of a million different traps.
The problem both David and Anna don't address is that even before you step up to the BAR, you are PRESUMED to be almost a dozen different things not working in your favor. And if you do not rebut each and every presumption before you even walk into the court room, you'll lose. Further, unfortunately, if you have not rebutted these presumptions IN WRITING long prior to your court appearance, your verbal rebuttals will simply be whitewashed by the judge and you'll be walked over. Filling out a form that you're a "State National" ahead of time is not enough, nor getting an updated passport, etc. This is simply not enough.
The judge references all your paperwork in Lexus Nexus, that you have a bank account admitting you're the "trustee" for the strawman ALL CAPS NAME, as well as your address, with federal zone "zip code" and two-letter state abbreviation that you accept as being a "Resident" in the "Federal District", plus your utility bills, mortgages, loans, taxes, social security, yada yada yada. All of these are tacit admissions and agreements that you're "Accepting the privileges and benefits" on offer to the chattel U.S. Citizens.
One guy goes so far to say that if you hold and/or transact in FRNs (dollars), you're tacitly agreeing that you're their chattel property. I don't agree with this guy on this, but just offering another perspective.
The best "Middle Path", I believe, is indeed filing several documents in your county taking claim and ownership over your "person" and "property" just as the people "in the know" do. By doing this, you are likely to never be called into the courtroom in the first place, once the judge is aware of your filings and notices. But even should you find yourself in such a situation, you bring all your paperwork along and must be able to withstand the judges questioning about it. So in effect, paperwork plus a solid understanding of the game being played is your best bet.
All that being said, nothing can prevent the judge from walking over you, calling for a psyche evaluation, putting you in contempt of court and throwing you in jail for a few days, etc. if you're not being a good little sheep. It's happened to many before who weren't FULLY prepared to deal with the judge, most importantly, IN HONOR and not as a belligerent opponent to the court/judge, which is the quickest way to get yourself into this situation and should never be attempted.
I can share some guys with you that I think have these sorts of things mostly covered and figured out if you're interested. One of the guys even writes amicus briefs for both David Straight and Anna Von Reitz followers who got themselves caught up in some situations and find themselves in jail or on the hook with heavy fines and penalties.
The big problem with Straight and Reitz is you won't find a lot of success stories coming from their followers. As soon as some of them get into tricky situations, they often find themselves wrapped up in a world of problems they weren't expecting. And there's very little David and Anna can do for them at that point.
To sum up, this whole sovereign/lawful/patriot movement has really only been figured out fully in the past couple of years as far as I can tell. Many of the pioneers and forerunners of it ultimately got tripped up along the way and found themselves in jail as a result.
I agree, this whole area is still being understood and everyone, including Straight and Anna are probably missing some pieces of the puzzle. I would definitely be interested in any guys you can share - always looking to expand my horizons.
I also agree that unless a person themselves understands the ins and outs of all this, even better than most judges, trying it out in a courtroom can be very risky. I am also curious to hear about success stories, but hear them very very occasionally.
Ultimately, I think these things will become important Post-Awakening, when the whole world needs to start afresh as free humans.
I personally dont believe this, but if there is a possibility of that interpretation, we need to dig into the Fed charter to understand it (Its something I have been meaning to do for a while now)
Also even the bankers and elites deal with FRNs, so they would not want to taint themselves in this way.