"Creative Freedom or Mechanized Tyranny - No Third Way"
28.) "Mind-bending interview with the brilliant Catherine Austin Fitts by Dark Journalist, Daniel Liszt"
Date: 9/20/2015 6:04:11 AM ( 6 y ) ... viewed 820 times
September 20, 2015 -
We are approaching the first quarter moon (known as a time of crisis/opportunity) and the Cheeta is working her way around this "square" (sun square moon). Although I have already accepted the anticipation of the "Great Change" (spoken of by Richard Rudd in Gene Keys) within the next ten years, the following forecast date of 2020 adds an element of "urgency" in my mind.
This is Fitts' sixth appearance on Dark Journalist,
in what the interviewer says, "Will be remembered
as the most amazing, insightful, gripping, stunning
and controversial Dark Journalist episode on record,
[Fitts] reveals that her deep research has shown
that America is now at a major crossroads and has
two choices for the country that we will become by
the year 2020: Creative Freedom or Mechanized
Tyranny, there is no third way."
For its part, the non-partisan military contracting site,
Deagel.com projects a very grim 2025 for the US,
with a population decline from today's 318,890,000
down to 64, 879,100 (!) and the GDP ranking slipping
from #1 to #13. Deagel's explanation for this is the
imminent collapse of the Western Financial System
and a mass-migration of Americans to south-of-the
border. Similar conditions are forecasted for Western
Deagel Forecast 2025
We are, indeed living in "interesting times."
Fitts exposes the globalist group, which has
covertly infiltrated the power nodes of our society in
corporations, governments and NGOs. Her nickname
for this group is "Mr. Global".
Fitts witnessed their criminal actions close-up,
when she worked under George HW Bush as the
Assistant Secretary at HUD. She'd previously
seen their markings as a Managing Partner at the
now-defunct but then-powerful Wall St. Firm, Dillon
Read & Co., which switched hands numerous times
in the wake of the mini '91 crash (triggered by the
1st Gulf War and by the Fed raising interest rates,
which could have been repeated last week, had
Janet Yellin done the same).
Fitts has profound insights into current geopolitical,
societal and economic developments, tracing the
design of "Mr. Global's" Master Plan.
The Plan is disturbing to say the least: automation,
AI, robotics, centralized control, domestic
militarization, dragnet surveillance, GMO agriculture,
the drain of the Black Budget on the US' financial
and natural resources, and the final destruction of
the US middle class.
She demonstrates the correlation between the
Common Core curriculum and Obamacare, as ways
to standardize education and medical care, in order
to automate these, as well and to use the citizens of
the US as a financial resource, like never before.
The Common Core educational system (which has
been imposed on most financially-ailing US States,
in the form of Federal bribery) is the ideal way to
transform American children into slavish automatons,
who are socially disabled and turned into blank
slates, all the easier to be driven by mass-brainwave-
entrainment technology, via frequencies emanating
from their SmartPhones; wreaking devastation
among the upcoming generations of the US, by
neutering their creative abilities and their capacity
for mental growth and self-determination.
February 11, 2019 - Don't Have To "Go South" To Expatiate!
According to Ann Reitz - one misconception about correcting your political status is: ... that people have to give up things like Social Security payments or medical coverage owed to them by Federal Government agencies, if they reclaim their birthright political status.
Most Americans never knowingly left their birthright political status. This was merely a self-interested legal presumption being misapplied to millions of people based on equally self-interested falsification of registration documents and improper demands that we "apply" for Social Security, "register" to vote in what appeared to be public elections, and so on.
Having to take action to rebut this legal presumption is anti-intuitive to most people and the resulting confusion is paralyzing, especially when they assume that they will lose pension dividends and health care and other things of value that they are owed.
Fortunately, the only thing we lose is the ability to vote in private elections hosted by foreign corporations, which is quickly made up for, as we hold our own public elections, instead.
Once we return our Given Names (also known as Trade Names) to the land and soil jurisdiction of our States of the Union, we are no longer in La-La-Land, and we can no longer be "presumed" to be in the Queen's service or the Pope's.
All the franchises they have "gifted" us with are similarly under new ownership--- American ownership, not "U.S. Citizen" ownership.
The only impact this has is that both the Queen and the Pope and all their employees are now obligated to obey the Constitutions and the Public Law of this country again, with respect to you and your assets.
The magic words are: "I accept all gifts and waive all benefits."
"Benefits" are gifts that come with strings attached-- unseen, unstipulated, undisclosed contracts and conditions that you are "presumed" to know and accept when you accept "benefits".
Thus, when they mischaracterize Social Security Earned Dividends that you and your employers paid for as "benefits" they are claiming that you are acting in the capacity of a "U.S. Citizen" or "Citizen of the United States" --- and moreover, that you are a Federal Citizen in receipt of welfare.
Now, there are many people receiving "benefits" from the Social Security Administration as public assistance that they never earned. Some never contributed a dime and are receiving thousands of dollars in medical care and support payments every month.
Those of us who unknowingly signed up for Social Security and vested in this program meant for Federal Employees are not in receipt of "benefits". Anything we get back is an "earned dividend". The import difference is that "benefits" can be discontinued at whim, whereas "earned dividends" owed to former employees have to be paid.
The situation is analogous to going to work for a foreign corporation in a foreign country. While you are in that foreign country, you obey its laws. You also obey the internal "laws" of the corporation you work for.
When you quit or retire and return home -- what happens?
You are no longer living under the laws of that foreign country, and are back living under the laws of your own country. That's for starters.
The corporation you worked for still owes you every bit of your pension plan.
That includes medical services (not benefits) and monthly dividend payments (not benefits).
It's the same way with Social Security and Medicare. They still owe you every jot, and they owe it to you as "earned dividends and services", not as "benefits".
Similarly, the franchises and ACCOUNTS held in YOUR NAME and created "for" you have been mischaracterized as belonging to "U.S. Citizens" and/or "Citizens of the United States".
These franchises and ACCOUNTS are toxic to you until you return home to the land and soil of your State of the Union via expatriation from any Federal Citizenship, and claim ownership of them as an American State National or American State Citizen.
It's the difference between "benefits" and "earned dividends" again.
As a "U.S. Citizen" or "Citizen of the United States" you are obligated to pay all the bills related to these franchises and ACCOUNTS created in YOUR NAME, but as an American State National or an American State Citizen, you are the inheritor of the assets and credits owed to these accounts.
Suffice it to say that as long as you cling to your identity as a "U.S. Citizen" or "Citizen of the United States", you are a Pauper by definition, obligated to function under foreign law, obligated to obey foreign corporation policies, obligated to pay for every whim of the British Territorial Congress--- but when you reclaim your birthright political status, you are owed the return of everything that is rightfully yours.
Your Trustees, the British Monarch and the Pope, have to act as your Trustees again ---and return your "borrowed" property, plus interest, leases, fees, etc.
So, you lose absolutely nothing of any importance when you return to your birthright political status, and you regain all that was stolen and commandeered, including your Constitutional guarantees. ...
October 22, 2019 -
There is at least one update that deserves to be noted regarding the above post of Anna's article regarding political status. The following introduces a perspective pertaining the fundamental freedom that precedes the choice regarding either a political status or a non-political one.
October 22, 2019 - Domicile -
5 The purpose of establishing government is solely to provide “protection.”
6 Those who wish to be protected by a specific government must expressly
7 consent to be protected by choosing a domicile within the civil jurisdiction
8 of that specific government. Those who have made such a choice and
9 thereby become “customers” of the protection afforded by government are
10 called by any of the following names under the civil laws of the jurisdiction
11 they have nominated to protect them:
12 1.1. “citizens”, if they were born somewhere within the country which the
13 jurisdiction is a part.
14 1.2. “residents” (aliens) if they were born within the country in which the
15 jurisdiction is a part.
16 1.3. "inhabitants", which encompasses both "citizens", and "residents"
17 but excludes foreigners.
18 1.4. "persons".
19 1.5. "individuals".
20 Those who have not become “customers” or “protected persons” of a
21 specific government are called by any of the following names within the
22 civil laws of the jurisdiction they have refused to nominate as their protector
23 and may NOT be called by any of the names in item 1 above:
24 2.1. “nonresidents”.
25 2.2. “transient foreigners”.
26 2.3. "stateless persons".
27 2.4. “in transitu”.
28 2.5. “transient”.
29 2.6. “sojourner”.
30 2.7. “civilly dead”.
31 In law, the process of choosing a domicile within the jurisdiction of a specific
32 government is called “animus manendi”. Latin is used to describe the
33 process because judges don’t want you knowing that you can choose NOT
34 to be protected by the civil statutory law. That choice makes you a consenting
35 party to the “civil contract”, “social compact”, and “private law” that attaches
36 to and therefore protects all “inhabitants” and things physically situated on or
37 within that specific territory, venue, and jurisdiction. In a sense then, your
38 consent to a specific jurisdiction by your choice of domicile within that
39 jurisdiction is what creates the civil statutory "person", "individual", "citizen",
40 "resident", or "inhabitant" which is the only proper subject of the civil statutory
41 laws enacted by that government. In other words, choosing a domicile
42 within a specific jurisdiction causes an implied waiver of sovereign immunity,
43 because the courts admit that the term "person" does not refer to the
44 "sovereign": “Since in common usage, the term person does not include the
45 sovereign, statutes not employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude
46 it.” [United States v. Cooper Corporation, 312 U.S. 600 (1941)] “Sovereignty
47 itself is, of course, not subject to law for it is the author and source of law;”
48 [Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)] “There is no such thing as a power of
49 inherent Sovereignty in the government of the United States. In this country
50 sovereignty resides in the People, and Congress can exercise no power which
51 they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld.” [Juilliard
52 v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421 (1884)] Those who have become customers of
53 government protection by choosing a civil domicile within a specific government
54 then owe a duty to pay for the support of the protection they demand. The
55 method of paying for said protection is called “taxes”. In earlier times this kind
56 of sponsorship was called “tribute”. “TRIBUTE. Tribute in the sense of an impost
57 paid by one state to another, as a mark of subjugation, is a common feature of
58 international relationships in the biblical world. The tributary could be either a
59 hostile state or an ally. Like deportation, its purpose was to weaken a hostile
60 state. Deportation aimed at depleting the man-power. The aim of tribute was
61 probably twofold: to impoverish the subjugated state and at the same time to
62 increase the conqueror’s own revenues and to acquire commodities in short
63 supply in his own country.
1 Consequently, no court of law can interfere with your choice of legal domicile,
2 which is strictly political matter. To do otherwise would constitute compelled
3 association in violation of the First Amendment as well as direct interference
4 in the affairs of a political party, which is YOU. You are your own independent
5 political party and a sovereignty separate and distinct from the federal or state
6 sovereignties. A court of law is certainly not the proper forum, or instance, in
7 which to question or politically ridicule one's choice of domicile, whether it be
8 in front of a jury or a judge.
 "Why Domicile and Becoming a 'Taxpayer' Require Your Consent" Pg 27;
Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org
Form 05.002, Rev. 6-24-2015.
Also see: "Soil: The Essence of Organic Ag & Basis for Self-Government!"
At: Blog: "Chef Jemichel ~ The Chef-Doctor"
View Chef Jemichel's profile
Obamacare, brainwave-entrainment technology, SmartPhones, Catherine Austin Fitts, birthright political status, legal presumption, Given Names, Trade Names, land and soil jurisdiction, States of the Union, in the Queen's service, U.S. Citizen, Federal Citizen, Constitutional guarantees
Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!Print this page
Email this page