The Phaserl


Oregon Standoff – A Constitutional Perspective

by Barbara Peterson, FarmWars:

Dear Sheriff Ward,

I am writing to you today to ascertain your office and position with respect to the Hammonds and the developing situation at the Bundy Ranch with respect to “Federal Officers”.

My name is Anna Maria Riezinger, also known as Anna von Reitz because my actual name is German and a mile long. I am an American Common Law Superior Court Judge in Alaska where operation of the Seventh Amendment Courts started up again in conjunction with the Common Law Grand Juries more than a year ago and I also serve as a Federal Postal District Court Judge for the Western Region.

As you can clearly see by reading the Seventh Amendment all matters pertaining to living people and their property must be addressed to Common Law Courts. How then, are the Hammonds being addressed by federal admiralty courts? The answer lies in the past.

During the Civil War the normal court system owed the people in the South shut down and did not immediately reopen. Commanders in the military districts in ten states appointed civilian tribunals to function under “Special Admiralty”—– a euphemism. For the purposes of these military tribunals, people and property could be addressed in an arbitrary fashion without regard for the Law of the Land. This was very convenient for the administrators and very unfortunate for the people.

In 1866 the Supreme Court addressed the situation in Milligan Ex Parte and decided that so long as the American Common Law Courts were running there was no excuse for the use of any form of martial law. Be advised that the American Common Law Courts are up and running. But both the military administrators and the judges and most particularly, the Bar Associations, had a taste of arbitrary power and the bit in their teeth back then—and a concerted effort to shut the Common Law Courts down began, so as to usurp their jurisdiction and “move the venue” of the local courts off the land and into the international jurisdiction of martial law and the sea, where power could be exerted against the people and their assets on the land in a comparatively arbitrary fashion.

Read More @

Help us spread the ANTIDOTE to corporate propaganda.

Please follow SGT Report on Twitter & help share the message.

4 comments to Oregon Standoff – A Constitutional Perspective

  • NIX

    Dear Sheriff Ward, In one side your the bitch of the FEDS and on the other the pitch forcks + your not doing your job. When the SHTF woudntwannabeya!

  • Larry from Montreal

    WOW! This is dynamite. I wonder what the Sheriff of Oregon will have to say about that. If he doesn’t act properly he should be replaced. It certainly is time for a revolution.

  • Sam

    Bomb Shell to the tyrants and the ignorant hired drones “just following orders” which of course is no excuse following the Nuremberg Trials of post WW2.

    I thought Stuart Rhodes of the Oath Keepers was a Constitutional atty..but, then again, Obozo claims to be one too?!

    Evidently, the crooks are crawling about all over Washington and everywhere else they can take advantage.

    Perhaps, it’s time for ropes and low branched trees… 8-/

  • Deforest

    Invigorating. Thanks for the video.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>