By Anna Von Reitz
I have mentioned many times before that if you become aware of a crime or even reasonably suspect that a crime has been or is being committed, you have an obligation to: (1) report it to the authorities; (2) take reasonable action against it.
Reporting it to the authorities assumes that there are responsible law-abiding authorities to report it to, which has not been the case in Britain and The United States for many years. However, we report it to them anyway, to make them 100% personally and commercially liable for their acts and omissions. And also to clear your skirts.
The “Reasonable Action” part beyond the obligation to report crime is a less obvious and ill-defined aspect. What, exactly, is “reasonable”?
Most people and the common law agree that it is not necessary to risk your own life — you can, but you don’t have to — to meet this requirement.
You simply have to take whatever action you can “reasonably” take to resist crimes, such as coming to the aid of victims, refusing to take illegal orders, organizing groups (Neighborhood Watch, State Assembly Militias, Childrens’ Health Defense Fund) to fight crime, organizing boycotts and work stoppages and similar actions to bring criminal agendas to a stop, organizing legal actions to involuntarily dissolve criminal corporations (e.g., Pfizer) and underlying crime syndicates (e.g., World Economic Forum).
If you don’t take every reasonable action you can take, you may be considered an accomplice or enabler, and be brought to justice yourself, as if you were part of the criminal activity itself by acquiescence.
Americans who watched the “Lonesome Dove” mini-series some years ago may have cause to remember the character of Jake Spoon, who was hung by his own friends, Gus and Captain McCall. He went down as a murdering horse thief, because he was riding with a gang of murdering horse thieves — and despite his claim that he didn’t murder anyone or steal any horses himself, he had to be treated as if he did, because he did nothing to resist the crimes committed by his companions or bring aid to the victims.
That’s the way actual Public Law works. Be forewarned. Conspirators and collaborators are on the same path to destruction.
If the corporations that are providing us with “governmental services” are engaged in criminal activity, as all of ours self-evidently now are, we have the absolute lawful and legal right and moral obligation to not pay taxes to them. We also have the absolute lawful and legal right and moral obligation to demand and enact their immediate involuntary dissolution and removal of the corporate veil to allow full prosecution.
As most of our courts all operate under one of two forms of international law — maritime and admiralty — and as these have been imposed and interpreted on our shores by British Territorial Courts and British BAR Attorneys, this Golden Oldie (reposted below) from the British Lawful Rebellion organization back in the day is especially potent, both here and in the British Isles and throughout the former Commonwealth, as all the same laws and arguments apply:
Republished in full with permission from Matt at TheTruthwillout.com by Lawful Rebellion.org:
Legal and lawful tax withholding
Are you aware that paying taxes is actually unlawful and illegal? Let’s show you why:
In accordance with domestic law and international law if you have reasonable cause to suspect that HM Government are involved in criminal activity, you are obligated by law to withhold any and all forms of funding and support.
HM Government unlawfully and illegally authorised HM Armed Forces to invade Iraq, as well as Afghanistan and Libya, and kill over 1.4 million people and counting, including over 450,000 children and counting. They had no UN authorisation, no mandate whatsoever, yet they committed and continue to commit mass murder, terrorism and crimes against humanity totally illegally and unlawfully. This is not fiction this is recognised FACT! Recognised as fact by the UN itself, the Malaysian Capital’s War Crime Tribunal and the Foreign Affairs Office to name a very, very small few; many more will shortly be shown.
Ok, let’s not reinvent the wheel here. There is a great deal of background information to be perused and gleaned from such websites as: http://taxrebellion.wordpress.com/. We STRONGLY urge and recommend you spend a couple of hours or so on that site first so you arm yourself with the much needed background knowledge, confidence and conviction that not only are war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and terrorism being committed in your name, but also why withholding any and all forms of funding and/or support from HM Government is the absolutely lawful, legal and conscionable thing to do. By the time you have finished reading all the information provided for you here on this subject, you will be stunned and shocked at what you have learnt!
In law it is widely accepted throughout the world that if you become aware of, or have reasonable cause to suspect, that an organisation or person is involved in criminal activity, and yet you continue to fund and support said organisation or person, then you are guilty of committing a crime by association – commonly known as an ‘accessory’ or ‘abettor’ and committing an ‘ancillary offence’. For example, from the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861
And from the International Criminal Court Act 2001
Did you know that if a person knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that crimes against humanity, war crimes and/or terrorism are or even just may be being committed by HM Government and HM Armed Forces, there are specific laws that obligates said person to withhold funding – such as taxes?
What is the official interpretation of ‘terrorism’ as stated in the Terrorism Act 2000
And section 15 of the same Act states very clearly…
Now read that last bit ‘2’ (b) again: knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that it [money/funds/tax] will or may be used for the purposes of terrorism. So, all that is required is reasonable cause to suspect that taxes or any other funds will or may be used to fund criminal activity; in this particular case ‘terrorism’.
What about Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, and War Crimes?
Click on this link to be redirected to article 6, 7 and 8 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001:
As you can see for yourself, it is quite clear that all three of these crimes have been and are being committed on the people of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
People of Britain (and the world) deceived and lied to…that’s ‘fraud’ right?
This is where it gets even more interesting because according to the Fraud Act 2006 it would be safe to conclude that HM Government and HM Parliament are perpetual offenders on a daily basis! So here goes; Section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006
Section 2 – Fraud by false representation
Section 3 – Fraud by failing to disclose information
Section 4 – Fraud by abuse of position
So ‘conspiracy’ must have been committed right?
The offence of conspiracy – according to the Criminal Law Act 1977
And according to the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 and here
Suffice to say that if a person knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that funding or any other support will or may be used for the purposes of terrorism, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, fraud or conspiracy etcetera, said person is absolutely obligated both by law and conscience to withhold any and all forms of funding and/or support from the organisation or person(s) suspected of committing said crimes.
Evidence for reasonable cause to suspect criminal activity:
Ok, so let’s imagine that through your own research and beliefs you have decided to give Notice to HM Government that you are obligated by law and conscience to withhold tax, due to you having [overwhelmingly] reasonable cause to suspect that funds will or may be used to support criminal activity. Firstly, you would need enough information to demonstrate to yourself and others why and how you have reasonable cause to suspect criminal activity by HM Government, HM Armed Forces and HM Parliament may be taking place. Let’s be clear here, you do NOT need to provide evidence to prove a crime beyond reasonable doubt as you would if you were the prosecutor in a criminal lawsuit. The only requirement in this instance is enough supporting evidence to demonstrate why you have reasonable cause to suspect that a crime may be being committed; and that is extremely easy to do in this case!
So imagine if the following people (listed below) had already gone before you and stated that they believe or have reasonable cause to suspect the Iraq war is unlawful and illegal:
- Kofi Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations
•All 27 lawyers of the Foreign Affairs Office – headed by Senior Legal Advisor Sir Michael Wood
•Elizabeth Wilmshurst, former Deputy Legal Adviser
•Independent enquiry lead by Dutch Supreme Court Judge Willibrord Davids
•Lady Manningham-Buller, former MI5 Chief
•Hans Blix, former United Nations chief arms inspector
•Sir Christopher Meyer, former UK ambassador to the US
•Major General Michael Laurie, former Head of the Defence Intelligence Staff
•Dr David Kelly, former United Nations weapon inspector
•Robin Cook, former Foreign Secretary, Leader of the House of Commons
•Nick Clegg, current Deputy Prime Minister
•Professor Philippe Sands QC Director of the Centre on International Courts and Tribunals
•Professor Robert Black QC Professor of Scots law, Edinburgh University, and architect of the Lockerbie trial in The Hague
•Professor Sean Murphy Associate professor of law at George Washington University
•Professor Vaughan Lowe Chichele Professor of Public International Law, All Souls College, Oxford
•Professor James Crawford Whewell Professor of International Law, Jesus College, Cambridge
•Professor Mary Kaldor Professor of global governance, London School of Economics
•Professor Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics
•Jan Kavan, the president of the UN General Assembly
•Judge Abdul Kadar Sulaiman, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
•Judge Salleh Buang, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
•Judge Tunku Sofiah Jewa, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
•Judge Alfred L. Webre, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
•Judge Shad Saleem Faruqi, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
Well, imagine no more…they already have! And this is in no way a comprehensive list.
Click here to view and download the articles, reports and statements and official Judgements made by the people as listed above that becomes part of your overwhelming evidence that underpins your reasonable cause to suspect. Did you know that in 2011 the Kuala Lumpur (Malasyia’s Capital city) War Crimes Tribunal found Tony Blair, George W Bush and associates guilty of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in regards to the unlawful and illegal Iraq invasion, and made several recommendations to the United Nations regarding this? The full Judgement can be found here.
Giving Notice to HM Government:
Once you have given Notice to the appropriate parties that ‘in good mind and conscience and in accordance with law I am obligated to withhold funding and support due to having reasonable cause to suspect that criminal activity has been committed’, and supplied the evidence you have and the law that obligates you in this matter, then for any person to attempt to collect funds from you would be a criminal act, under both domestic and international law.
The Manual of Military Law states:
If a person, who is bound to obey a duly constituted superior, receives from the superior an order to do some act or make some omission which is manifestly illegal, he is under a legal duty to refuse to carry out the order and if he does carry it out he will be criminally responsible for what he does in doing so.
The Nuremburg Principles became international statute criminal law when they were adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1950. As these seven principles are the world’s primary international laws against war, it is the duty of every citizen of Member States of the United Nations to uphold and abide by these laws: [For the full pdf click here]
- Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.
- The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.
III. The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.
- The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
And just to repeat from the International Criminal Court Act 2001:
Section 55 – Meaning of “ancillary offence”
(1)References in this Part to an ancillary offence under the law of England and Wales are to—
(a)aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of an offence,
(b)inciting a person to commit an offence,
(c)attempting or conspiring to commit an offence, or
(d)assisting an offender or concealing the commission of an offence.
So for any person in an official capacity, to attempt to incite you to commit an offence, would not only be violating the law but they would be breaching public trust and therefore committing ‘Misconduct in Public Office’ which is an offence at common law and one that still carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. And if you are not aware of the huge potential power of Private Prosecution Service, we suggest you click here to download some information.
Any official that attempts to harass, threaten, coerce or incite a you to commit an offence would need to be made aware of the extremely serious offence they may be about to, or have just committed. It is quite clear to anyone who takes anything more than a cursory glance at this subject matter, that massive, despicable and heinous crimes have been and are continuing to be committed in our name, and with the tax from our sweat equity paying for it. We are forbidden by law and conscience to continue to give funds to perpetrators of these most sinister and evil crimes, and now you have the legislation to back you all the way.
Are you prepared to let the following slide:
- Crimes against humanity
- War crimes
Whilst you continue to give your support and funds?
— End of Repost— and my final two cents on today’s topic: these corporations and their Masters will try to claim “sovereign immunity”, but by descending to and operating as corporations, they lose all such claims and are reduced to the same status as any other corporation. (See Titles 5 and 22 of Federal Code, where this is fully admitted for the Federal Corporations and all their State-of-State franchises, too.)
They will also try to justify their actions by claiming that they are at “war” but this is an illegal mercenary “war” among corporations, not nations, and as such is purely criminal activity in nature. Remember that. So when they announce “wars” on “drugs” and “poverty” and “terrorism” be aware that they are inviting you to acquiesce to their lawless actions and support them in their crimes.
STOP paying to support your own demise. Quit right now. Make up your mind before April 15.
Link to original article:
Download and print:
See this article and over 4000 others on Anna’s website here: www.annavonreitz.com