Debunking The American States Assembly
There are many people in the world today that believe our country has been hijacked. The source of this hijacking, in their opinion, happened with Abraham Lincoln during the civil war. In this post, we’re going to take a look at each of their claims and attempt to offer an alternate view of the goings on.
It is claimed that this is our true American flag and that the one we all fly is a wartime flag. However, a tiny bit of research on the subject brings out a few points that might be considered relevant. First, George Washington was our very first president and you can find writings by him where he was working on an American Flag. At the beginning of the war, a flag similar to this was flown, but it was made up as a joke against Britain as it was their flag upside down or something similar. However, Congress passed legislation describing what our flag should look like but offered only a few suggestions. One was a blue background with white stars in the corner. Other legislation added more stars and stripes as other states were added and eventually it went back to fewer lines and more stars. There are documents from the time that prove this, but these people will not let that flag go. They also offer zero proof of why they even made the claim in the first place.
If you are interested in reading a bit more history on our flag visit this site. It is funny how much misinformation we were fed in school. To be completely fair, here is another site that somewhat backs their claim, but again, doesn’t have bills in congress to back it up. Strike One!
The Constitution Was Changed
You’ll notice in each of the above images that the title of the Constitution is different. The original Constitution had no title and in almost all cases of copies, it is contained within a document of other subject matter, such as the Bill of Rights and/or state constitutions. As a result, the printing company that makes the copies titles each section. Their use of Capital Letters or the words within the title is created by them. However, there are many people out there that claim Abraham Lincoln changed the title to trick us all into thinking everything was normal when in reality he had created a second government to control us all as slaves.
They also point to the word “for” being changed to the word “of” and that there are two different constitutions out there. However, when pressed, none of the said people can produce copies of these two documents. If they do attempt to do so, they will usually provide two identical copies, all the while acting as though they are different. Another tactic used by these people is to get offended when questioned on any of these matters, so be careful not to ask too many questions. Strike Two!
Abraham Lincoln Was No Longer President
This is a favorite of mine, and I’m not sure if the state assembly people make this claim or if it was others, however, it goes like this. When the 7 southern states withdrew from the Union of States, it caused the union to fall apart and therefore Lincoln was no longer President of anything. He didn’t have the ability to start a war or to call together a congress. When I heard this, I was taken aback. Does this mean that if even a single state were to withdraw from the Union that the entire country falls apart? If an entire board of directors withdraws from a company, does that mean the company no longer exists? There were after all, still 24 states in the union, that were doing business as usual.
Abraham had a tough job no doubt. How to keep the union together when the southern states fled, but to say he was no longer president over anything is ridiculous. The next thing that happened almost immediately, was the southern states attacked the Federal forts. Now you have the union being attacked by people that were an original part of their group. To say they did not have the right to defend themselves, right or wrong would appear to be dishonest. We can argue the fact that there might have been a better course than killing thousands of people, but in the end, it happened the way it happened. Strike Three!
The Lieber Code was adopted by Lincoln to Control The Country Under Military Law
During the civil war, there were a lot of bad things being done in the name of the war. Lieber had been in earlier wars and seen what went on, and was tasked with coming up with rules the military should operate under in order to maintain some semblance of humanity. These rules for the most part make sense, however, there are a few questions after the fact that should probably be answered. The claim though is that these laws were created and are still in effect today, proving the country is being ruled by martial law and not Constitutional law.
Whether or not this is true would be a much larger debate, but I wanted to offer a few things to ponder anyway. I am also not an authority on the Lieber code as I’ve only read about half of it before I went to sleep.
First, we had 7 states which eventually became 11 involved in the rebellion. If this Martial Law was declared as a result of the war, would it not only exist in these states alone? If it were never recalled shouldn’t the military be more involved in what is going on? Would we still have cases going to the Supreme Court that overrule decisions made by our government? Would the military still be prevented from operating within our borders? Why would congress be working on a bill now, in 2022, that allows the military to operate against citizens, if they already had Martial Law? While proving we are not operating under Martial Law would be very difficult to do, it would seem by the goings on, that we seem to be operating under the Constitution. We hope… Strike Four!
The Original 13th Amendment Prevented Attornies From Holding Office
This one gets extremely interesting indeed. From what research I have conducted so far, it would appear, indeedy, that it was changed. Why it was changed and the history of it all is a mystery and here is a site that goes into a lot more detail than I’m going to do here, that proves it did in fact exist. However, I want to focus more on the claim that it prevented attorneys from serving in the government.
The original 13th amendment that happens to exist in the Main Constitution of 1825, well before the Civil War, read as follows:
If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honor, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office or trust or profit under them, or either of them.
As you can see, this was added to prevent notable people from Europe from coming here and taking over our government. It says nothing about attorneys. Another claim along these lines is that the BAR is part of Britain and therefore would be a title of nobility. The problem with this is many. First off, Lincoln was elected President, he was an attorney, and the clause was definitely in the Constitution during his period. Secondly, each state has its own form of a Bar association and it is why attorneys can’t practice law in all 50 states. They must have passed a local bar test first. Which gets us to the largest problem of all which is that bar is a word, not an acronym! So while these people try to pretend it means “British Attorney Registry” or some other crazy name, it in fact is nothing more than a group of barristas as defined by Websters: “the whole body of barristers or lawyers qualified to practice in the courts of any jurisdiction”. Strike Five!
And yet, where did this amendment go and why was it replaced with a Slavery amendment? This was never done constitutionally as there would be a 14th amendment removing it.
You Are Registered As a Corporation At Birth
I am going to attempt to keep this out of the weeds by only covering their points. However, there is ample reason to believe this particular claim is true. I’ll touch on this first and then provide their claim. In this country, we have a 5th amendment right that allows us to NOT bear whiteness against ourselves. We also have taxing powers laid out that state any and all taxes must be uniform among all citizens. Yet, somehow, our government makes us fill out tax forms, bear witness against ourselves, and pay different tax rates. I argue they can’t actually force this and instead operate much like the mafia in scaring us to do it ourselves, but that is another story indeed.
For this story, we need to know what is claimed by our leaders of this movement, and here is Anna herself: “The Birth Certificate will have your name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS”. This is actually a very long and complicated story and I’m not 100% that she’s wrong here. The issue at hand is that I have a copy of my birth certificate from 1967 and another for my son in 2011. Neither have our names in all capital letters so I’m a bit confused as to what that means. This conversation about birth certificates from their point of view can get into the weeds very quickly, but here are a few thoughts on the matter.
A state or country on the surface would need to know people’s ages in order to insure they were of age to work, fight, carry a gun, and so forth. They would also need to know for sure you were born here in order to insure they were not placing a foreigner into a position of power. How you’d be able to enforce laws without proving who someone was and how old they were would seem insane.
These same people also claim you shouldn’t need a driver’s license or any other type of identification as it violates your rights. While this sounds awesome on the surface, from a criminal standpoint, it would again seem insane to think you’re going to be tasked with keeping everyone safe by not knowing who anyone actually was. Car tags? The same thing, they say you should have no tags but never offer how you’d be able to catch a thief or a hit and run suspect if no one can identify their car other than to say it was blue and going fast.
While I am 100% on board that our government is out of control with Income tax along with the entire Banking system, I think they take it too far. For a country to function there has to be at least some basic way to identify people in order to deter crime. Imagine a world where no one knew you, you could just ride up, shoot someone and leave. Oh wait, we had that with the old west.
I could go on with some of the other claims, but these are the primary points brought up over and over. I do not disagree with these guys on the fact that the current government is out of control and globalists are attempting to destroy us from within. These are all facts. However, if our constitution was truly subverted in the 1800s, then we’re actually under a different government than we thought and they won, we lose. It would be like China coming in and taking over our country. We can all sit here and cry about us having a Constitution and they are violating it, but at the end of the day, they took the country. In order to get that sort of takeover back, you’d have to raise up and fight, not write a bunch of letters.
At the end of the day, I hope these guys are wrong. It will be far easier for us to push our government back to obeying our rights than to reestablish the entire government from scratch. If the bankers really were smart enough to trick us all into being slaves, then I’d argue, slaves we are. Looking outside though, I still see enough of a Constitution that it makes it difficult for them to do much without ending up in court and they are starting to lose there as well. The last thing we need and the first thing they would want is for us to all abandoned our government and try to start a new one. Anna, while a good American, was not elected president of our new country, nor were any of her people that do what she says. To even begin setting up elections, courts, police, and all the rest of the stuff required to run a government would be overwhelming if not impossible.
So stay in the fight, good people. Don’t be distracted by those attempting to make the English language wordier than it already is.