(Thanks, C. :)

Reader Charles Miller writes:

=====

Dear Hobie.

Your choice to publish this or not.
From my perspective until the issues are framed specifically and agreed to be on the discussion table with intent to clarify, fine tune issues as things flow, and commitment to full resolutions, discussions involving Anna’ s operations produce no real value.
Those following defective discussions will always be more confused than when they began.

The simple fact is when the public record can-not or will-not be presented for review there is something missing.
Reading a public document with dictionary in hand is a skill most Americans have.
This is where true understanding takes place, inside the individual.

Those following a piper get led where the piper is going rather than looking at the map themselves and deciding where their own destination is.

Finding fellow travelers is always a welcome experience and makes the journey more enjoyable.

I do-not believe I am miss understanding, misconstructing Anna’s statements or positions in any way, shape or form.

Every piece Anna presented in her documented response to 3 constitutions is the same.
CONCLUSIONS based and formed as delivered as fact.
This is called bait and switch.
This tactic is founded on others fear and the selling of a fear mitigation.

Anna’s conclusions are based on misconstructions of open public source documents available to any American.
And the conclusions are that the states are businesses, subcontractors, or something other than what they were intended to be.
I have no argument with that point. In fact I have extensive experience in dealing in that world of dark illusions.
The conclusions are based on the same documents that I just presented.
All artificial persons or operations like she claims require a construction document to begin their operations.
Without the documents of the foundation creating these operations being an evidence the only conclusion possible is that it was done in secrecy and by subversion.
Where are the documents so a valid discussion could be held?
Anna’s position exposes completely that she will address subversion and the secrecy before addressing the real root issue of the People’s powers found in the foundational documents.

I have stated over and over prior, the only energy the corruption gets is what you give it by discussing it and spreading it.
If that same amount of energy was focused on solutions we would certainly see a difference in our society at the moment.

Comparing the conclusions to the actual documents exposes the conclusions as either good faith misconstruction, or, deception.
This statement is correct and accurate due to fact of record.
As a sidenote I have spoken to between 20 or 30 people that attempted to ask Anna for the same kind of verifications. None have, no one, has ever received a response. Each of these people contacted me to see if they can sort out the real root of what was being discussed across the board.
To each I provided links to some of the articles published on RMN as well as other works with the invitation to think for themselves. I cautioned each to think for themselves, do not believe me or anyone else but they make up their own mind.

The bottom line is that then until the parties are at the table with a common subject matter to discuss no solutions will ever be born.
Discussing the results of what happened, Will never expose the root problem.
When the subject matter of a discussion is confusions or misconstructions the only result of this conversation is more confusion and misconstruction.

My point is why would any American seeking to make their life better, having available to them the foundational documents that are still in force and effect, ever discuss misconstructions or conclusions or results of corruption?
What is so frightening and scary about referring to the foundational documents as valid in force, recognized worldwide in the public record and beginning discussions about how to make those work right now?

My invitation to open discussions about the root problems, referencing the foundational documents of our country and the legal relationships between the People and the governments we created is still open and will remain open.
The point is We the People have the template and the foundation to work from in well-documented public record.
Now, all that is required is the hard work to truly understand our positions and begin to execute them holding our public servants accountable.

Published on RMN is a a document, Public Servants Letter and Pledge, that lays out the issues in a very clear manner.
The link provided to ISR.SOLUTIONS provides a core document execution settling the Lagan relationships between the People and the governments We created. Covers are the personal identity, ownership of the name, political loyalties, recognition of both legal and commercial standings at full capacities.
The premise is conclusive.
NO ONE MAY DETERMINE ANY ONE ELSES POLITICAL, LEGAL, COMMERCIAL IDENTITIES WITHOUT TRESPASS AND SLAVERY BEING EXPOSED.
I invite all of your readers to study these documents and then ask themselves the question of what happens when public servants begin to receive them?
I think the answers would be quite illuminating!

*************************************************************