Link from which Dunford’s statement, appearing further down this page, was taken: http://www.ascensionwithearth.com/2016/02/breaking-news-judge-anna-von-reitz-now.html
I decided today that I wanted to get to the bottom of what is going on with General Dunford, Anna von Reitz, and the New Republic. I have spent much of the day documenting and writing about what I have learned, almost as I have learned it. I invite you to consider my ideas, and most importantly, I invite you to consider my conclusion. I ask you not to post a comment unless and until you have read my statement carefully and viewed the links. If you haven’t that kind of interest that’s just fine, but then I am not going to take time to read your comments.
Many thanks and hugs,
* * *
Why does William Mount (in the video below) even refer to Ben Fulford and at a later time to the Ashtar Command? If people don’t realize yet that Ben is a CIA operative, and the Ashtar Command is a hoax, well, you can also continue to believe this fiction about General Dunsford. Today, I can find no info from Mount. At this crucial time, Mount seems to have gone silent.
One of the initial statement’s I published from Anna can be seen HERE. It is a letter to General Dunsford, notifying him, as I see it, that all steps have been taken to establish the New Republic.
Anna’s statement of Clarification about her work with Dunford is also important to the total picture; I’m posting it in full below, with my highlights added. As I see it, she IS working for Dunford; she does not deny it. She calls it the New Republic and gives her reasons why she is not working with him, reasons that I think do not hold water – she is not acting as ‘his legal’ counsel. Sorry, but that’s not good enough for me!
I am not a legal counsel for the General (Dunford). We are all working on reclaiming American assets for Americans. For right now, it’s improper to call what we are doing a “New Republic”— that will require a public education process, each one making their political status (citizenship, etc.) choices, the election of Fiduciary Deputies from each State to attend a Continental Congress to either amend or abolish the existing actual Constitution.
For now, we have saved The Constitution for the united States of America. The rats sought to “vacate” the contract by entering the UNITED STATES, INC. into bankruptcy without naming a successor to contract. That left the “federal” side of the contract vacant and flapping in the wind. We formed an agreement with the American Native Nations — the Athabasca and Lakota– to fulfill the federal side. We issued two sets of Sovereign Letters Patent, one to reaffirm the united States of America, and one to establish a new arrangement with the Native people to bring them out of their POW status and incarceration in the Jurisdiction of the Sea and put them back on the land as free, sovereign, and independent people. We then sealed this arrangement with a Declaration of Joint Sovereignty, spelling out the intent of our actions. These actions were sent by Registered Mail to the Pope, the Queen, the UN Security Council, the United Nations Secretary General and others.
For the first time since the original Constitution was adopted, the federal side of the contract is now in the hands of Americans devoted to America— not British (Federal Reserve) or French (IMF) interlopers. For the first time, the Federal Agents have a vested interest in truly and honestly protecting America and Americans, because if they hurt or plunder us, they hurt and plunder themselves.
And now we are all going after the assets that are owed to Americans which have been purloined by international banks and the “governmental services corporations” they have run as storefronts — under conditions of gross fraud and deceit.
Please note there is no “statute of limitation” on the crime of fraud, much less malicious fraud tort claims.
* * *
Apparently, Anna’s words have made the statement below, the actual subject of this post from the General, ‘incorrect’. But I’m wondering if you, my readers, understand fully what the New Republic will entail for us, as Americans? This is what I am trying to figure out. It sounds just wonderful, but in reality is it? Will it be?
When something becomes confusing, as confusing as this situation has become — for example, she works for him, but she doesn’t —not really, I tend to think ‘smoke and mirrors’ is involved, and I’m trying my best to figure it all out! Is this situation for real, or is it not? ? ?
* * *
Here is the statement from General Dunford, as suggested in the title of this post:
RV/INTELLIGENCE ALERT – FEBRUARY 2, 2016
A PENTAGON OFFICIAL WORKING WITH THE NEW REPUBLIC HAS JUST INFORMED ME THAT JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ IS THE ASSIGNED COUNCIL OF LAW FOR GENERAL DUNFORD AND THE NEW REPUBLIC.
Gen. Joseph F. Dunford, Jr.a
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ IS THE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE NEW REPUBLIC. . .
JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ HAS FILED LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND IS NOW SUING IN EFFORTS TO RETURN THE ASSETS STOLEN FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
* * *
So far my questions are:
Can the American Constitution be ‘saved’ for us? If is a contract that we have made, while it can be stolen from us because of our ignorance of it, how can it be either saved or destroyed?
From my experience with Anna, when she did not answer Leonard Harview’s questions, today for daring to question her I will be put down with arrogance, but this doesn’t deter me. I have a right to ask questions!
See Leonard’s exchange with her HERE. I think it’s well worth your time! Is Anna coming from a place of love and caring for her fellow countrymen — or plain sarcasm like that often employed by those who belong to what KrisAnne calls The Cult of the Expert, as she apparently tries to put Leonard in his place? Is she trying to educate us or simply shut someone down who is asking too many uncomfortable questions? Because of my understanding of the paradigm into which we are moving, I think these questions are extremely relevant! I didn’t like her attitude then, and I don’t like it now.
Kris Anne says – and I totally agree — that the recovery of our Constitution should come gradually in a process as we Americans begin to understand not only how we seem to have lost our sovereignty, but how the Constitution seems to have been subtly ‘changed’, mindyou — without our consent. Then, we can come together as a nation of people with mature understanding — and decide together to reestablish as it should be.
My feelings and thoughts about this are that there are too many here in the United States whose educational background — for whatever reason — has been so stunted that it will take a major effort on our and their parts for this to happen. (I’m hoping when the financial collapse sets in, then people will be forced to look more quickly at these issues.) If, however, the Constitution is restored in any other way, I believe we are going to be left, once again, with an ‘us vs. them mentality’, which is exactly what has been the control device used successfully against us so far: divide and conquer!
If General Dunford, or Anna, or anyone else is able to restore our Republic without our even understanding what it is that is being restored, then, IMO, we are setting ourselves up for much more of the same: rule by psychopaths, who will ‘get around’ us every single time, just as I fear they are trying to do now.
This could be a very painful lesson that will go on for years – perhaps until such a leader as Putin emerges for us! The Russians have learned their lessons in the hardest of ways, through the death and destruction caused by the psychopaths — just think what they suffered in WWII! I pray God we don’t have to learn in the same way. When it comes down to having our country or not having our country, the only thing that should matter to all of us is that we have our country — together!
Here is a link to a short statement Putin has just made, and I urge you to consider his words:
Late today, I received an email from Leonard Harview, stating what he thinks those working to establish the ‘new republic’ are seeking to do, and this statement makes it very, very clear what they are up to — the highlights are mine — and I hope that reasonable people will think deeply on this and begin to decide for themselves the honesty of what is going on with General Dunsford, The New Republic, and most particularly with Anna von Reitz.
In my own mind, I have finally been able to clarify the lack of honesty and transparency in which these people are dealing — and what the result will be for all of us, should we be willing to accept their ‘new republic’, and I earnestly request that you no longer bring any of their efforts to my blog.
What you choose to believe is your choice — and from what I have read elsewhere, you may well create your own reality — so that you can learn from it, but I can no longer waste my time on this topic. What Leonard suggests below to my way of thinking, takes a period of time, the kind of time KrisAnne Hall is advocating, because living in freedom requires people who are really mature.
If you have listened on KrisAnne Hall’s recent post to the initial interview with university students HERE, you may have been appalled to realize just how far the people of the United States, IMO, are far from being in that place.
* * *
Leonard’s extremely helpful words:
Most of what was written by me in direct response to Anna and to which you linked above already explains what these people are attempting, and I did so via direct questions/comments to Anna. They are trying to coax the people into their camouflaged governmental jurisdiction which will eventually be worse than what we enjoy today with the exception that there will only be about 200 million or so left on earth to comply with such a Babylonian debt-slave-type jurisdiction. This means the elimination of over 7 billion people brought on by the law of conquest.
The bottom line is the fact that the people must be freed. I mean really free to a point where one can do anything they desire as long as no one is harmed, no one’s property is damaged and of course, all lawful contracts and I truly mean lawful contracts are honored.
Another decent explanation would be that everyone is considered a King or Queen without subjects. Malum In Se jurisdiction which is natural law, and a good example is Anglo Saxon Common Law and not the Common Law of today. Anything other than public officials subscribing to an oath to the people as opposed to a government is ripe for the same old shit storm of oppression. The people could sign an individual Declaration of Independence (DOI) as opposed to one signed by a few (Our current DOI as an example) which they claim applies to all. I mean after all, some may not want to be free and would rather be enslaved. It’s really about free will choice for all people. The globalists can have all who competently elect to be enslaved by them; however, the way they have done their deeds to date lacks true disclosure/transparency via deceit yet some may still elect to go with them even if full disclosure/transparency is the case.
Thomas’ idea is to have a public trust set up in place of a government and constitution. There would be lawful courts of record set up under a jural society with no judges, no prosecutors, and no grand juries. If the people elect to have some sort of constitution drawn up, it would be imperative to not have the judiciary as part of such constitution because the courts of record absolutely 100% needs to be in control of the people as opposed to some government structure like we have today because look what such has got us today.