Hoax and Hoaxers

By Anna Von Reitz

There is a tradition of hoaxing and hexing that came to Britain with the Romans. It quickly caught on, and when the British — especially British sailors — settled in America, they brought this tradition along. 

It is part and parcel of the superstitions of the Romans and the sea-faring Phoenicians, many of whom worshiped The Father of All Lies as a deity, because they profited themselves by perpetuating hoaxes and frauds of all kinds.  

If one is to believe one’s direct observation and a British Merchant Mariner’s Handbook from 1801 (and 1803 and 1811) all Bar Attorneys are International Shipping Clerks, supposed to be engaged aboard ships and in Custom’s Houses to direct collection of tariffs and fees as import duties and taxes, as well as impounding illicit shipments of contraband goods, handling insurance claims, and cashing out bottomry bonds.  

Well, well, well, what do the astute observe going on in what are supposed to be our courtrooms?  

There have been active efforts to discredit both the testimony of Judge Dale and the evidence accrued by Rod Class, to decry the testimony of Melvin Stamper, author of “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”, and to claim that I am not a Judge— which I am in the parochial and popular sense, though in fact, I am a Justice and outrank a “Judge” by several country miles. 
All these attacks hinge on the presumption of the perpetrators that they are in possession of some truth, though in fact they are often the most abject victims of the actual hoaxes involved—- clueless tax collection agents, law enforcement officials who don’t know that there is any difference between a Law and a Statute, and similar purveyors of common — but totally incorrect — knowledge.  

Forgive them, Father, but sock them in the nose for me. 

They need a righteous correction and exposure of their sins to save their souls. 

Here’s an example of it that has been admitted by the perpetrators of the the fraud known as “Black’s Law Dictionary”, all published by Reuter’s in Canada sixteen (16) years ago, and yet, the so-called “courts” continue to use Black’s Law Dictionary and Law Schools continue to promote it, and Westlaw continues to publish it—- how’s this for a hoax for you? 

Published on: May 28th, 2003, Modified on: May 28th, 2003, Montreal, PQ (Reuters) – Sarah Medhurst (nee Black) shocked journalists and legal scholars at a press conference held at the Black family estate Monday when she revealed that Black’s Law Dictionary, a highly regarded legal reference text, was originally written as a joke by her eccentric great grandfather Henry Campbell Black.

Medhurst appeared unapologetic, suggesting that the Black family had never tried very hard to keep it a secret. “Have any of you actually taken the time to read it?” she asked, flipping open the renowned text.& nbsp; “Look at page 840 for instance. ‘John-a-Nokes’? Or how about page 347? ‘Correality – the quality or state of being correal.” She then cast a challenging look around the room.

Medhurst admitted that the entire Black family has participated in the century-long ruse, working together to generate content for the ever-expanding text. She credits her Uncle Bertrand with developing one of their most successful filler techniques: “We created more than 30 new entries just by using the word ‘actual’. Actual agency – see agency. Actual allegiance – see allegiance. Actual authority – see authority. And on and on – you get the idea.”

Medhurst admits that the family started to get lazy in later editions, at times resorting to stealing terms from other dictionaries. “I remember one time my brother pulled ‘Le Roi’ (literally: “the king”) right out of his French-English dictionary to meet the deadline for the 5th edition while on a three-week ski trip in the French Alps.”

She claims the ploy has been used sparingly, however, and that the family put a stop to the practice when her brother started bringing the Official Scrabble Dictionary to editorial meetings.

Henry Campbell Black had never intended – or even imagined – that his dictionary would become the authoritative source for legal terminology. “My great granddad had actually written the text for an upcoming firm skit night”, Medhurst explains. “It was his way of showing how convoluted and, well, pompous the legal profession had become.”

The dictionary became an instant hit, however, and Henry Black’s comedic intentions went unnoticed. When the money started to roll in, Black elected to pursue a highly lucrative career in legal publishing instead of becoming a marginally talented prop comic.

When asked why the family is revealing the fake after all this time, Medhurst stated that they had grown tired of living a lie, and were genuinely concerned that the universally accepted legal lexicon “is actually just a bunch of made-up gibberish.”

The family is asking that lawyers and students alike immediately dispose of any editions of Black’s Law Dictionary into the nearest trash receptacle or recycle bin.West Group, the current publisher of Black’s, could not be reached for comment.
So, if their favorite dictionary is a hoax, and they are supposed to be working as Shipping Clerks in Custom’s Houses, how much more do you really need to know?    What has been passing as “the law” and the courts in this country for the past 150 years is a gigantic fraud.  A combined British and Roman hoax in their grand tradition of Fraud for Profit. 

The Municipal United States Government functions under Roman Civil Law.  A prime chestnut of Roman Civil Law is a Maxim thus stated: “Let him who will be deceived, be deceived.”  This means that if you don’t have brains enough to object to the fraud, you get what you deserve under Roman Law.  You get fleeced and the Roman Civil Law will do nothing to protect you.  

However, the same law requires that fraud once discovered, vitiates everything, clear back to the root of the fraud— wherever and whenever it began.  This is why every “Act” as in “Actors” and plays and stages—-of the Municipal Congress since the 1860’s to today, contains this one-line disclaimer as part of their Enabling Clause:  “This Act shall not effect any right thus previously established.”  

This means that under Roman Civil Law, we are being constantly Grandfathered-in, with all rights brought forward. 

This is so that if they get caught, they can raise their palms and smirk and say, “See?  We didn’t actually do anything wrong.” 

But they have done a gross amount of damage and they have acted in criminal Breach of Trust, and they do owe the return of all our purloined property, all our rights, titles, and interests, plus the profit from their use and abuse by our “volunteer” usufructs, whose services were never needed nor requested in this capacity in the first place.  

For the record — the only Law Dictionary ever approved for use by our Congress — is Bouvier’s.  


See this article and over 2000 others on Anna’s website here: www.annavonreitz.com

To support this work look for the PayPal buttons on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.