I'm as I type, watching my township Board meeting as I am part of a handful of residents holding their local government's feet to the fire. Been involved for almost 4 years thanks to "learning how to play the game". It's slow work but we have had several good size wins AND we are from all political backgrounds. They just don't know how MAGA I am as I don't react to their small digs. Again, because I've learned to play the game. I had the opportunity to lead locally for a neighborhood win. I realized I needed to deep dive into how our local politics ran (democrat/independent) and started going to all of the meetings. Such an eye opening job! Who's making sure your local government is on the up and up?
Just incredible! Wow. I havent read it all yet but enough to know yall have a plan that will work. Community involvement appears to be the key. Thank you both for all the hard work to get this out. This will help us all.
US and Western economic and societal problems stem from collective popular failure to ensure that governments issue asset backed, interest free money to facilitate adequate economic activities and social interactions.
Money is only a social lubricant, a means for facilitating the exchange of goods and services. Money doesn’t DO anything, people do. Westerners have been indoctrinated from cradle to grave in the false belief that money is needed to produce wealth and welfare whereas in truth human ingenuity and labour, acting upon available national natural resources, produces those things.
Banksters' MONOPOLISATION of the global monetary system has been a deliberately gradual process.
Western governments are gradually decimating their populations and taking control of every facet of the lives of the survivors, making them increasingly dependent and infantile. This results from governments inculcating children and adults with the idea that money is a necessary ingredient in the production process when it isn’t, it’s merely a lubricant used to facilitate human interactions.
The result is endless corruption and disfunctionality which enables the banks’ owners and controllers to also covertly own governments and use them to steal the wealth and welfare of nations; and to require governments and politicians to pretend that the situation is intractable and can only be improved by ever-more government control. Thus justifying constantly growing government intrusion into peoples' domestic affairs and further control of personal and social life.
In reality the solution to child, aged and healthcare, housing shortages, homelessness, poverty and all humanity's societal ills is simple. Deconstruct governmental control of community life by having government Treasuries perform their primary job, namely issuing asset backed, interest free money to pay for necessary construction of community infrastructure and performance of needed social services. Funding needed societal development using Treasury created interest-free money would prevent hoarding and increase the velocity of money circulation via spending which would automatically increase wealth and prosperity. This can be done without inflation provided that governments honestly require “value for money” when issuing contracts.
Issuance of interest free money would also eliminate the Boom/Bust economic cycle that always ends in recessions and depressions created by usurious banks in furtherance of their theft of private property. Inflation is actually a devaluation of the currency caused by the fact that banks demand interest payments on "loans" BUT never purport to issue any of their electronic debt token currency to pay loan interest. Accordingly the banks must continually issue loans for ever-greater increasing amounts of their fiat debt token currency or their monetary system will collapse. Historically fiat 'money' systems only last about 50-55 years. Our current system started in the US in 1971.
Since the creation of the US Federal Reserve System in 1913; and in Australia, since the untimely death of Sir Dennison Miller in 1923 (https://truthout.org/articles/ellen-brown-what-a-government-can-do-with-its-own-bank/), the US and Australian governments have increasingly granted private corporate banks the right to dictate what constitutes their nations' money; AND to control the quantity and distribution of that money supply. Banks now pretend that electronic digital debt tokens (created out of thin air, using key strokes on computers), constitute money.They don't. There is almost no real money in physical circulation today. All that most Western nations have is electronic book entry fiat debt note tokens circulating in 'the ether'.
To compound the problem, the US corporate government and the Australian corporate government and many other governments give a select few private corporate banks a free MONOPOLY on money creation and distribution. The result is that banks pretend to create money but DON’T. Moreover, because the US and many other governments have ceded their right to create their nation’s 'money' to private corporate banks, those banks now choose when to flood their pretend 'loan money' into the economy and when to curtail it, enabling them to create Booms and Busts (recessions and depressions)
The Fed, the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and all Rothschilds' controlled Central banks and local banks LIE to national populations by calling their fraudulent loan process “fractional reserve banking” whereunder they pretend to loan money at interest (usury) by merely typing digits into clients’ bank accounts and calling those book entries ‘money’. The banks then DEMAND that clients PAY them the sum of money represented by those digital book entries in client bank account(s) PLUS compounding interest on those chimerical loan mounts until clients pay them those amounts in full. In other words banks fraudulently pretend to loan money to clients (who are creditors NOT debtors because they promise to pay, and do pay, the loan amounts appearing in their accounts), and then demand that clients pay them the notional amount of money appearing in the client’s bank account PLUS compound interest on that book entry (debt token) monetary sum until it is fully paid to the bank. This is 'highway' or more accurately 'BANK('S) robbery.
Non-bank counterfeiters are greedy, they don’t levy an annual compound interest charge on the fraudulent currency they 'pass'.
In fact, all bank clients allegedly owing principal and interest to banks for notional loan monies appearing in their bank accounts are actually creditors i.e. they actually OWN any monies paid to their banks for principal and interest and hence such funds should be returned to them along with property deeds and quiet possession. Why? Because their Cestui Que Trust held by the Treasury under the ‘Strawman’ mechanism has reimbursed the bank for the principal price; and interest payments were paid under false pretences. In other words the fraud includes the banks using their clients’ loan documentation to seek reimbursement of the stated loan amount from the US Treasury (and other relevant Treasuries) under the “Strawman” mechanism. Barton Buhtz explains that mechanism as it operates in the US: https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/UCC/InvestigativeReportUCC.pdf
This theft of national wealth and human birthrights and the consequent enslavement of whole populations is organised and facilitated by the privately owned US Inc and similar government corporations in other nations as follows:
The US Inc and other bankster controlled corporate governments like the Commonwealth of Australia and Westminster (England Inc.), fail to perform their primary function which is to have their respective Treasury organisations issue the money needed to facilitate adequate operation of government functions and the nation’s economy.
The US Inc et al give free licences to select private corporations to issue money well knowing that those corporations do not issue any money but merely pretend to issue it while demanding that their client’s pay them the sums of money the bank records in the clients’ bank account(s) PLUS additional sums of money fraudulently called interest on the notional (phantom) fiat debt token ‘money’ recorded in clients' bank accounts.
The US Inc (and other relevant corporate governments) threatens to prosecute and do prosecute, fine and imprison anyone who tries to conduct business by bartering commercially or issuing genuine asset backed money.
To ensure that this EXTORTION racket is effective the US Inc (and relevant corporate governments in other nations) authorises affiliated private policing and judicial corporations to prosecute and punish with fines and imprisonment anyone who seeks to barter commercially or to issue asset backed money to facilitate commercial or other societal functions.
The result of this gigantic fraud is that the bulk of US (and other relevant nations' wealth) is syphoned off to private shareholders of banking corporations. Those bank owners are globalists largely domiciled in tax havens leaving USans and other affected national populations scrabbling for the scraps of the productivity and wealth created by their ingenuity and labour, exercised using their respective national natural resources.
The impoverishment of affected nations isn’t the end of this process. Because the banks totally control distribution of what the US (and other affected nations) use as money, the banks are also able to ensure that their owners and their mates get unrestricted quantities of it and can therefore buy everything so that their theft of each nation’s wealth and welfare won’t stop until they own everything at which point, as the WEF has told us, YOU’LL OWN NOTHING AND BE HAPPY!
A corporation is a legal entity, acting as a single unit distinct from its owners, with the capacity to sue, be sued, lend, and borrow. It's primarily governed by state laws, which dictate its formation, operation, and dissolution. Some aspects, like securities regulation, fall under federal law. A key advantage of a corporation is limited liability, shielding shareholders' personal assets beyond their investment in the corporation. However, traditional corporations face double-taxation, as they're taxed at the corporate level and shareholders are taxed on dividends.
According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School, a corporation is an entity that acts as a single, fictional person. It can sue, be sued, lend, and borrow. Corporations are primarily authorized and governed by state law, with many states following the Model Business Corporation Act provided by the American Bar Association (ABA). These state corporation laws typically require articles of incorporation to document the corporation's creation and to provide provisions regarding the management of internal affairs.
The first corporation in the sense we understand it today — a business entity recognized as a person under the law — was the Bank of North America, which was chartered in 1781 to fund the American Revolutionary War.
As for government corporations, the first significant one in the U.S. was the federally chartered Second Bank of the United States, established in 1816. However, the modern era of federal government corporations really began in the 20th century with entities like the Tennessee Valley Authority, created in 1933.
While primarily governed by state law, certain aspects of corporations are governed by federal law. In particular, the Securities Act of 1933 requires most corporations offering stock to file with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and to regularly disclose financial statements and other executive information.
The authority to grant corporations is typically vested in the states, and each state has its own laws governing the formation, operation, and dissolution of corporations. A corporation is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners (shareholders). It is created by filing articles of incorporation with the state's secretary of state and is governed by its bylaws, which are the rules and regulations enacted by a corporation for its own governance.
Key characteristics of a corporation include:
1. Shareholders: These are the owners of the corporation. They hold shares of the corporation's stock, and their ownership stake is proportionate to the amount of stock they own.
2. Board of Directors: The shareholders elect a board of directors, which has the responsibility of managing the corporation's business and affairs.
3. Officers: The board of directors appoints officers (such as a CEO, CFO, etc.) who manage the day-to-day operations of the corporation.
4. Limited Liability: Shareholders have limited liability for the corporation's debts and obligations. This means that shareholders are not personally responsible for the corporation's debts; their liability is limited to the amount they have invested in the corporation.
5. Articles of Incorporation: This is the document that establishes the existence of a corporation. It is filed with a state government and includes information such as the corporation's name, purpose, duration, and the number of shares it is authorized to issue.
6. Bylaws: These are the internal rules and procedures for the conduct of a corporation. They set forth the structure of the corporation and govern the relationships among the corporation, its directors, officers, and shareholders.
Fact 9 - Corporation, Government and Municipal Corporations
Understand this, a corporation, a government, and a municipal corporation are distinct entities, each with its unique characteristics and functions.
1. Corporation: A corporation is a legal entity, birthed by individuals, stockholders, or shareholders, with the mission of conducting business. It operates under its articles of incorporation and bylaws, with a defined structure that includes a board of directors and officers. Its primary objective is to generate profits for its shareholders. It's a battlefield of commerce, where victory is measured in profits
2. Government: A government is a system or group of individuals governing an organized community, often a state. In the case of our United States, the federal government is established by the Constitution, which outlines the structure of the government and the rights and responsibilities of its branches and officials. The primary purpose of the government is not to generate profits, but to provide services and protections to its citizens, maintain order, and uphold the rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution. It's the guardian of our society, ensuring order and justice!
3. Municipal Corporation: A municipal corporation is a type of public corporation created by a city, town, or other municipality. It is a legal entity separate from the citizens it serves and has the power to perform specific governmental functions at the local level, such as zoning, public transportation, and waste management. While it has a corporate status, its primary purpose is not to generate profits but to provide services to its residents. It operates under a charter granted by the state, which outlines its powers and responsibilities. It's the machinery of local governance, ensuring the smooth running of our communities!
In summary, while these entities may share some characteristics, they are fundamentally different. A corporation is primarily profit-driven, a government is service-oriented with a focus on maintaining order and protecting citizens' rights, and a municipal corporation, while having a corporate status, is a local governmental entity focused on providing specific services to its residents.
The concept of personhood, in its legal sense, is not an inherent attribute but a status conferred upon an entity by the law. It is a construct, a theoretical framework that allows us to navigate the complexities of legal relationships. However, this construct has its limitations and cannot be universally applied.
The U.S. Constitution, for instance, is not an entity that can be granted personhood. It is a document, a set of principles and guidelines that shape the structure of our federal republic. It does not have the capacity to engage in legal relationships or perform legal actions. It is a creator of law, not a subject of it.
At the same time, the federal government, while it possesses certain characteristics akin to a corporation, is not a corporation. It is an institution, a body politic established by the Constitution to govern the nation. It can create corporations, but it does not become a corporation by doing so. Its existence and functions are defined by the Constitution, not by the laws of business and commerce.
The notion of the federal government as a corporation, or as a person, is a misinterpretation of the concept of legal personhood. Legal personhood is a status that allows an entity to participate in the legal system. It does not transform the nature of the entity itself.
In essence, the Constitution is a blueprint for a federal republic, not a corporation. The federal government, while it can engage in legal activities and create corporations, is not a corporation or a person. These distinctions are not merely semantic, but fundamental to our understanding of the nature of our government and the legal system.
Fact 7 - The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871: Governance of Washington D.C.
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.”
The Organic Act of 1871 was a key maneuver in the strategic formation of Washington D.C. as a federal territory, deploying a local government structure for the city. However, it's crucial to understand that this act did not transform D.C. into a business corporation. Instead, it designated D.C. as a municipal corporation, a form of local government, distinct from a private, profit-seeking corporation. Importantly, while D.C. is a federal district, it does not equate to being the federal government itself. The federal government is a broader entity that encompasses all three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial, operating nationwide, not confined to the geographical boundaries of D.C.
Before the Act of 1871, D.C. was first established by Congress via the Residence Act on July 16, 1790. Then, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801, by Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, formally placed D.C. under control of the Congress and organized the unincorporated territories Washington County and Alexandria County within it. Then, the Organic Act of 1871, the one in question, created a territorial government for D.C.
The District of Columbia was a battlefield of governance, divided between two municipalities, Washington and Georgetown, each with their own local governments. The rest of the district was under the control of the federal government. The Act of 1871 consolidated these three entities into one, creating a single municipal government for the entire District of Columbia. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates “a Government for D.C.” as it says in the Act.
The Organic Act of 1871 did not convert D.C. or the United States into a business corporation. The act simply established a local government for D.C. under the legal framework of a municipal corporation. This is a clear distinction between a municipal corporation, which is a form of local government, and a business corporation.
The Act of 1871 did not change the status of the United States or turn it into a corporation. Instead, it changed the local government structure of the District of Columbia. The term "corporation" in this context refers to a municipal corporation, a term used to describe a local governing body, such as a city or town. It does not imply that the United States became a business corporation.
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871: This act established a local government for the District of Columbia (D.C.) under the legal classification of a "municipal corporation." This classification is one of several ways local governments can be legally organized, along with "charter," "home rule," and "general law" classifications.
A. "municipal corporation" is a city or town that has been incorporated and has a legal identity separate from its residents. In this case, D.C. was designated as a municipal corporation, a form of local government, distinct from a private, profit-seeking corporation.
B. "charter," like the one established for D.C., is a legal document that establishes a city or town.
C. "Home rule" refers to the degree of autonomy granted to a local government by the state. While D.C. is not a state and does not have home rule from a state, it does have a unique status and degree of autonomy as the nation's capital.
D. "General law" or “Local Government Law” cities or towns are those that are governed by the general laws of the state. In the case of D.C., it is governed by federal laws, as it is a federal district
Furthermore, the Act of 1871 was later replaced by the Act of 1874, which abolished the territorial government and put the District of Columbia back under direct federal control. Then, in 1973, Congress enacted the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, providing for an elected mayor and city council for the District.
The Act of 1871 was a significant piece of legislation in the history of the District of Columbia's governance, but it did not turn the United States into a corporation. The United States remains a federal republic, as established by the Constitution.
Because D.C. is a central hub, in a great country, with a beneficial corporation law, many of the world’s most powerful corporations have headquarters there. That does include the IMF and other international banks and businesses. Which, you know, is good for the country. What, would you rather their headquarters be somewhere else?
The Absence of a Second Constitution: The claim that there is a second U.S. Constitution is not supported by historical or legal evidence. There is only one U.S. Constitution, which has been amended 27 times since its ratification. The Constitution is a foundational document that has guided the development of the U.S. legal and political system for over two centuries.
The terms "United States" and "Government" are defined with precision across different sections of the U.S. Code, their meaning often hinging on the context in which they are used. These definitions collectively establish the United States as a sovereign entity, a fortress with jurisdiction over certain territories. They illuminate the structure of the U.S. Government, including its executive, judicial, and legislative branches, the pillars that hold our nation upright. They also define the nature of government corporations and their relationship to the U.S. Government. Here's your briefing:
1. 18 U.S. Code § 5: This code marks the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, underscoring its sovereignty over all places and waters, continental or insular, under its jurisdiction. This includes all states, territories, and possessions of the United States.
2. 5 U.S. Code § 103: This code defines a "Government corporation" as a corporation owned or controlled by the U.S. Government, highlighting the government's capacity to establish entities to carry out specific functions. It also differentiates corporations owned by the government and those merely controlled by it, indicating the varying degrees of government involvement in different entities.
3. 5 U.S. Code § 5921: This code further defines the term "Government" as the Government of the United States, reinforcing the concept of the U.S. as a sovereign entity. It also provides geographical definitions of the United States, distinguishing between the continental U.S. and its territories and possessions.
4. 5 U.S. Code § 2101: This code defines the "civil service" as all appointive positions in the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the U.S. Government, excluding positions in the uniformed services. This highlights the structure and scope of the U.S. Government.
5. 36 U.S. Code § 151710: This code clarifies that the U.S. Government is not liable for any debts, defaults, acts, or omissions of a corporation, and that the full faith and credit of the Government does not extend to any obligation of the corporation. This underscores the legal distinction between the U.S. Government and the corporations it owns or controls.
These codes collectively establish the United States as a sovereign entity with its own territorial jurisdiction, government structure, and the ability to create and control corporations. They also clarify the legal distinction between the U.S. Government and the corporations it owns or controls. Now, let's march forward with this knowledge.
Fact 6 - Federal Corporations:
The federal government does have entities that are classified as "federal corporations." These are created by Congress to undertake commercial activities on behalf of the government. They are established to provide a public service and are often independent or government-owned corporations. Here are some examples of federal corporations:
1. United States Postal Service (USPS): An independent agency of the federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States.
2. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA): A federally owned corporation in the United States created by congressional charter in May 1933 to provide navigation, flood control, electricity generation, fertilizer manufacturing, and economic development in the Tennessee Valley, a region particularly affected by the Great Depression.
3. Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB): A non-profit corporation created by an act of the United States Congress and funded by the federal government to promote public broadcasting.
4. Amtrak (National Railroad Passenger Corporation): A passenger railroad service that provides medium and long-distance intercity service in the contiguous United States and to nine Canadian cities.
5. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): A United States government corporation providing deposit insurance to depositors in U.S. commercial banks and savings institutions.
6. Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks): A system of 11 U.S. government-sponsored banks that provide reliable liquidity to member financial institutions (not individuals) to support housing finance and community investment.
Misunderstanding the nature of the U.S. government and its relationship with federal corporations can lead to missed opportunities. Here are a few examples:
1. Participation in Governance: If people believe that the government is a corporation, they might feel disempowered and less likely to participate in democratic processes like voting, running for office, or engaging in public discourse. Understanding that the government is a public institution, accountable to the people, can encourage more active participation.
2. Influence over Federal Corporations: Federal corporations are created by the government to serve public interests. If people understand this, they might be more likely to advocate for their interests within the framework of these corporations. For example, they might campaign for better service from the Postal Service or for specific programming from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
3. Policy Advocacy: If people misunderstand the nature of the government, they might also misunderstand its policies, including those that regulate corporations. This could hinder effective advocacy for policy changes.
4. Legal Rights and Protections: Misunderstanding the government could lead to a lack of awareness about the legal rights and protections that the government provides to its citizens.
Context is the compass guiding the interpretation of the law. Legal texts, including statutes, regulations, and court decisions, are not isolated islands. They are part of a larger legal archipelago and must be understood in relation to that system. Here's how context navigates the interpretation of the law.
1. Statutory Context: The words of a statute must be read in their context, alongside other provisions of the statute. This includes not just the immediate section or subsection, but the entire statute or act. The goal is to interpret the statute as a harmonious whole.
2. Historical Context: The history of a statute or a legal rule, including its original enactment, amendments, and how it has been interpreted over time, can provide vital context. This is often referred to as legislative history.
3. Purpose and Policy: Courts often gaze at the purpose or policy behind a law to aid in its interpretation. This can include the problem the law was intended to address, the goals it was meant to achieve, and the values it embodies.
4. Precedent: The way courts have interpreted a law in the past provides crucial context. Precedent, or prior judicial decisions, guide future interpretations of the law.
5. Legal Tradition and Principles: Laws are interpreted in the context of broader legal principles and traditions. For example, in criminal law, there is a principle that ambiguity in criminal statutes should be resolved in favor of the defendant (the rule of lenity).
6. Factual Context: The specific facts and circumstances of a case can influence how laws are interpreted and applied. This is particularly true in common law systems where the facts of a case can help shape the interpretation of the law.
Lawyers, like seasoned strategists, employ context in all these ways to argue for specific interpretations of the law. They might point to the statutory context, historical background, purpose and policy, precedent, legal principles, and the facts of the case to support their interpretation.
Courts, like wise generals, also utilize context in these ways when they interpret the law. Their aim is to interpret the law in a manner that is consistent with the text, history, purpose, precedent, and the specific facts and circumstances of the case. Now, armed with this knowledge, let's march forward!
FACT 3: The Constitution
The U.S. Constitution is not suspended or null and void. It is not just a document; it is the supreme law of the land. It towers over all other laws in the United States, including federal laws and Treaty’s. This principle is carved into the bedrock of Article VI of the Constitution, which declares:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
In the face of this, if a federal law dared to contradict the Constitution, that law would be branded unconstitutional and could be struck down by the courts. This is a cornerstone of the system of checks and balances established by the Constitution, a bulwark ensuring that no branch of government can overstep its authority.
1. U.S. Constitution, Article I: This is the foundation of the legislative branch of the federal government, the U.S. Congress, the body entrusted with crafting the nation's laws.
2. U.S. Constitution, Article II: This is the bedrock of the executive branch of the federal government, vested in the President of the United States. The President's duties span executing federal law, appointing federal executive, diplomatic, regulatory, and judicial officers, and steering foreign and domestic policy.
3. U.S. Constitution, Article III: This is the cornerstone of the judicial branch of the federal government, the Supreme Court and other federal courts, the bodies that interpret and apply the law in federal legal cases.
4. U.S. Constitution, Article IV: This article discusses the relationship between the states and the federal government and outlines the obligations of the states to each other.
5. U.S. Constitution, Article V: This article describes the process for amending the Constitution.
6. U.S. Constitution, Article VI: This article establishes the Constitution, and all federal laws and treaties of the United States made according to it, to be the supreme law of the land. It states that "the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the laws or constitutions of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."
7. U.S. Code, Title 1, Chapter 2, §106b: This discusses the process for adopting amendments to the Constitution.
8. U.S. Code, Title 4, Chapter 4, §101: This requires every member of a State legislature, and every executive and judicial officer of a State, to take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.
FACT 4: The United Nations Charter
The United Nations Charter is an international treaty that constitutes part of the "supreme Law of the Land" in the United States, as established by the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2). Consequently, U.S. courts are obligated to uphold the provisions of the Charter, subject to certain constitutional limitations.
The phrase "subject to certain constitutional limitations" indicates that the incorporation of international treaties into U.S. domestic law must be in harmony with the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution holds the status of the supreme law of the land, outlining the structure of the federal government and delineating the powers and limitations of each branch. According to the Supremacy Clause, treaties ratified by the United States possess binding force and take precedence over conflicting state laws.
However, the U.S. Constitution also imposes specific constraints on the authority of the federal government and safeguards individual rights. It assigns powers to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, thereby requiring that any governmental actions, including those related to treaties, align with these constitutional provisions.
In interpreting and resolving conflicts between treaties and constitutional provisions, the U.S. courts play a vital role. Should concerns arise regarding a potential violation of the U.S. Constitution by an action taken under a treaty, such as the United Nations Charter, the issue can be raised in the appropriate judicial forum. The courts possess the authority to determine the constitutionality of laws, treaties, and government actions.
Therefore, the statement encompasses the general principle that while the United States is bound by treaties, including the United Nations Charter, any actions carried out under these treaties must adhere to the limitations and provisions set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
It is important to consider the following points in relation to the enforcement of international treaties in U.S. domestic law:
1. Division of Powers: The U.S. Constitution divides powers between the federal government and the states. If a treaty provision requires action that falls outside the constitutional authority of the federal government, that provision may not be enforceable in U.S. law.
2. Individual Rights: The U.S. Constitution guarantees certain individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion. If a treaty provision conflicts with these rights, the constitutional rights take precedence in U.S. courts.
3. Non-Self-Executing Treaties: Some treaties or treaty provisions are considered "non-self-executing," meaning they do not automatically become enforceable U.S. law upon ratification. Instead, they necessitate the passage of implementing legislation by Congress. If such legislation is not enacted, the treaty provisions may not be enforceable in U.S. courts.
4. Supremacy of the Constitution: The U.S. Constitution holds the position of supreme law of the land. Any treaty that contradicts the Constitution cannot be enforced in U.S. courts.
The enforcement of the United Nations Charter in U.S. courts has been limited in practice. Many of its provisions are broadly phrased and aspirational, not intended for direct enforcement in domestic courts. Furthermore, the United States has often maintained that disputes involving its obligations under the Charter should be resolved through international, rather than domestic, processes.
While the U.S. Supreme Court has stated on numerous occasions that treaties may be rendered void if they contravene the Constitution, there is no clear instance where the Court has directly ruled a treaty unconstitutional. Cases have arisen where decisions seemed to be influenced by constitutional considerations, but the Court has not explicitly declared a treaty unconstitutional.
The article also discusses the case of Missouri v. Holland, where Justice Holmes suggested that treaties may have a distinct status from federal laws concerning the Constitution. However, this interpretation has been subject to debate, and the prevailing consensus is that treaties, like federal laws, must comply with the provisions of the Constitution.
“Few dare to voice dissenting opinions in our current climate. Could it be that we have devolved into a democracy where the majority's whims dictate the course? Is it merely easier to follow the tide? I say, not for this man! “
Is the constitution flawed? Are we dealing with a broken Constitution? Many individuals in our community associate the Constitution with various theories that apparently have a long history. However, I must admit that I struggle to comprehend these theories because, if our goal is to safeguard the republic, it seems counterproductive to create barriers in doing so.
What do I mean by this? Considering theories that have supposedly emerged over a span of 100 years, what do we do with them now? How can we rectify potential discrepancies between multiple constitutions or address claims that our government is no longer functioning in the best interest of the American people, without a functioning court system? Should we focus on educating one another? That may be a worthy endeavor, but then the challenge lies in determining what knowledge and skills we should impart. Should we prioritize actionable steps or indulge in wishful thinking?
Perhaps my sentiments are slightly embittered due to experiences with theories that arose in the past when we started 17th SOG. And even though we thoroughly debunked them they persist to this day. I firmly believe that such distractions hinder progress. Even if these theories hold some truth, what is our course of action? Where do we turn? Many people seem inclined to give up; some already have. I yearn for meaningful action, and the only way to strip away the influence of corporations, if they indeed exist, or to clarify which constitution holds authority, or by holding justices accountable is to act within your locality. If the Supreme Court no longer serves our interests, we must regain control by actively engaging in our civic duties.
Does the Crown own the United States? The United States is a sovereign entity. The Treaty of Paris, in its first article, unambiguously states that His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the United States as free, sovereign, and independent states. This, to me, is an incontrovertible fact. The question then becomes what is "sovereignty?” Let's explore the meaning of "sovereignty" in the 17th and 18th centuries.
In the 1700 and 1800s, the term "sovereignty" generally referred to the supreme power or authority held by a monarch or ruler. It encompassed the idea of absolute and undivided control over a particular territory or domain. During this time, the concept of sovereignty was closely tied to the divine right of kings, which asserted that monarchs derived their authority directly from God.
In international relations, the principle of sovereignty emphasized the independent and autonomous nature of nation-states. It underscored the notion that each nation had the right to govern its internal affairs without interference from external powers. This understanding of sovereignty played a significant role in shaping the political landscape and the conduct of diplomacy during the 19th century.
However, there was something very special happening during the mid-17th and 18th centuries. Something that would profoundly alter the meaning of sovereignty. The concept of freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness started to bloom. This transformation began with the advent of the First Great Awakening. It was a time when individuals recognized their ability to establish a personal relationship with God, and these seeds would ignite the flames of the Revolutionary War. Thus, sovereignty, which held a particular significance for the crown, held a contrasting interpretation for the patriots.
Allow me to present some arguments that may offer alternative perspectives. The driving force behind my involvement with “We The People” was a profound sense of needing to investigate matters firsthand. I reached a point where I could no longer rely on the trustworthiness of others. Having delved into one of these theories and uncovering the truth with my teammates at 17th SOG, I find it increasingly challenging to simply accept a single theory without personally verifying its validity. This same principle applied to local governance as well. Amidst claims of stolen elections and the perceived futility of local action, I felt compelled to investigate and determine the truth for myself. Through this process, I discovered that my decision to do so was indeed the correct one. I did not discover if cheating occurred, but I did see where it could have.
I recognize that these findings may not be readily embraced or accepted by all. However, for those who hold the belief that the U.S. is a corporation, I would argue that civic participation is the key to effecting change. Most individuals, not all but most, I've encountered who subscribe to this theory refuse to partake in civic duties. This seems counterproductive, if not suspicious. Could it be that our adversaries are promoting this belief to undermine civic participation? It's a consideration worth pondering.
Are we not seekers of truth? I often hear the terms "Truther" or "Truth Seeker," yet I see only a handful who truly embody these titles. Researchers, perhaps? Again, they are few and far between. The theory that the United States is a corporation should incense every patriot! This is another term widely used, yet seldom embodied, patriot. I am going to share what I have unearthed with just a few days of research. These are what I believe are the facts that I have uncovered.
Fact 1: I The Crown does not own the United States, a claim often cited as a reason for the U.S. being a corporation. Nor does any other entity.
Fact 2: The contextual interpretation of law matters, it’s the framework to which our society revolves around. Understanding how lawyers and judges interpret laws is vital in helping put things into perspective.
Fact 3: The Constitution establishes our federal republic, and it cannot be incorporated; all laws are based upon it, and nothing supersedes it.
Fact 4: The United Nations Charter is an international treaty, “subject to certain constitutional limitations” that constitutes part of the "supreme Law of the Land" in the United States.
Fact 5: The terms "United States" and "Government" are defined with precision across different sections of the U.S. Code, their meaning often hinging on the context in which they are used.
Fact 6: The federal government does have entities that are classified as "federal corporations." These are created by Congress to undertake commercial activities on behalf of the government.
Fact 7: The Organic Act of 1871 is another topic I felt necessary to cover, as it contributes to the confusion for many people.
Fact 8: Defining what a corporation is important to understand when determining if the United States is a corporation or not.
Fact 9: Comparing a corporation to a government and a municipal corporation, I felt, was equally important to include in this discourse.
Fact 10: Bringing all these facts together in a “Bloodline” format to prove that from the beginning of the United States, there was no way possible for the United States to be a “corporation.”
Having laid out these ten critical facts, we are now better equipped to delve into the heart of the matter. These facts serve as the foundation for our discussion, providing us with the necessary context and understanding to dissect the complex question of whether the United States is a corporation. From exploring the theory of the Crown's ownership of the U.S., to understanding the nature of our Constitution and the interpretation of laws, to examining the role of federal corporations and the implications of the Organic Act of 1871, we have a comprehensive roadmap to guide our exploration. Let us now transition into a deeper analysis of these facts and unravel the intricate tapestry of this discourse.
FACT 1: The Crown Owning the United States
The Treaty of Paris, which marked the conclusion of the American Revolutionary War, does not contain any provision or language suggesting that Britain retained any sovereignty or ownership over the United States.
In fact, Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris unambiguously states: "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof."
This declaration signifies that the British King recognized the United States as free, sovereign, and independent states. Furthermore, he and his successors renounced all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the United States and every part of it. This is a clear and unequivocal affirmation of the United States' sovereignty.
Corporation!? How can the Constitution be incorporated? And by whom? Those who embrace this fallacy have truly lost their way and perhaps forgotten the core values and principles of this great nation. This is the unfortunate product of replacing civics with social studies in our schools.
Fact 2: Legal Context
Context is the compass guiding the interpretation of the law. Legal texts, including statutes, regulations, and court decisions, are not isolated islands. They are part of a larger legal archipelago and must be understood in relation to that system. Here's how context navigates the interpretation of the law.
I know you would want the crown to own the U.S but it does not. It never will. Nice try. Your points are baseless and very ignorant. I know that you want to be smart but this post did not do you justice. And your hatred towards us must be exhausting. Let go of the hatred bro. I have many factual rebuttals.
Monopolization of Money: While it's true that private banks play a significant role in the creation and distribution of money, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Banks are regulated by government agencies to ensure they operate in a safe and sound manner. Moreover, the central bank (like the Federal Reserve in the U.S. or the Reserve Bank of Australia) has the power to influence the money supply through monetary policy.
Money as a Social Lubricant: While it's true that money is a medium of exchange, it also serves as a unit of account and a store of value. These functions of money are crucial for a modern economy to function efficiently. Without money, it would be incredibly difficult to measure the value of goods and services or to save for the future. You also have this in the U.K.
Critique of Fractional Reserve Banking: Fractional reserve banking is a system that has been used successfully in many countries for centuries. It allows banks to lend out money and stimulate economic activity. The risk of bank runs (where a large number of customers withdraw their deposits due to fears that the bank might fail) is mitigated by deposit insurance schemes and central banks acting as lenders of last resort. The UK does this too.
Government Control and Influence: While it's true that governments and central banks have a significant influence over the economy, this is not necessarily a negative thing. Monetary and fiscal policies are tools that can be used to stabilize the economy, control inflation, and promote growth. The independence of central banks from political influence is generally seen as a positive thing, as it allows them to make decisions based on economic indicators rather than political pressures. It is also a matter of national security, and again, your island of a country has this too. you should clean your own house first before poorly critiquing others.
Solution: Your solution for governments to issue asset-backed, interest-free money could have unintended consequences. For example, it could lead to inflation if too much money is created, or it could stifle economic growth if not enough money is created. Moreover, it's not clear how an asset-backed currency would work in a modern economy, where the value of assets can fluctuate significantly.
Critique of Government and Banks: Your claim that governments and banks are working together to control and manipulate the population has been done since currency existed. Its the same in your country too. We will change that in my country, not sure if you will in yours. We at least still have our 2A rights, you however, have knives and forks. good luck. While it's true that governments and banks have a significant influence over the economy, this is not the same as controlling or manipulating the population. There are checks and balances in place to prevent abuses of power, including regulatory agencies, the judicial system, and democratic elections.
As for the US being a corporation is a gross misunderstanding of how local governments are formed in the US. You being from the UK, I wouldn't expect you to know how it works due to your theories you buy into. That easy to do right? Just take someone else's word without conducting proper research? . Simple research would show you the what ill post in a different reply.
I suspected that https://17sog.substack.com/ was a limited hang out to suck in the ignorant but I didn’t expect you to reveal that fact so promptly.
No doubt the reams of bullshit on your site are meant to impress the sheeple but you really need to upgrade your AI responses to be a bit more subtle. Its a rehash of all the Reuters talking points and doesn’t convey a genuine sense of concern for, let alone consideration of, the facts. At least give correspondents the courtesy of having a living human being regurgitate the “party line”.
The facts are:
Individual humans are SOVEREIGN, their inanimate corporate constructs like governments, courts, banks etc, are NOT.
ASSERTION is NOT evidence or rebuttal.
Having AI regurgitate and repeat a blizzard of lying rhetorical verbiage just adds to the enormous volume of gaslighting we get every day from governments, the MSM, useful idiots and sayanim. A smartarse AI stream of consciousness from a half-arse programmer isn’t convincing.
Re the risible “fractional reserve system” scam, GIVE ME A BREAK!
Electronic digits placed in bank accounts are NOT money, they are not even a “thing” at all, they are figments of the imagination of typists OR, if done by AI and programmed computers they are not even figments of imagination. They are ZOMBIFIED constructs.
The fact that fractional reserve banking has been used for centuries isn’t an argument let alone a justification. The longevity of the LIE illustrates the enormity of the CRIME perpetrated for centuries upon humanity by Ashkenazis, i.e. Khazarian banksters.
It also explains why humanity is plagued by poverty, scarcity, want; AND WARS. IF Khazarian Mafia banksters and their minions and enablers (like this site), hadn’t purloined most of the wealth of nations for centuries and used it to build enormous criminal networks of underground bases used for child and adult sex trafficking, ADRENOCHROME production and bio-warfare esearch etc, this world and her population would be living in a golden age with no crime, misery and poverty.
Only an idiot AI system would iterate the canard that currency IS money, OR that electronic digital currency is a store of value. HOW can transient digits in computers be a tangible store of anything?! They constitute bookeeking entries. Get a better computer program for your AI if you hope to fool even the average mind controlled, cognitively disabled reader.
Re the alleged “unintended consequences” of communities issuing their own interest-free REAL, asset backed money. GET A GRIP!
“It could lead to inflation”!!!! WHAT doya think is happening now and happens repeatedly under the current criminal private banking system?! I’ve already explained WHY the current system causes inflation as a NECESSARY aspect of the banks’ usurious demands for payment of interest when they never even pretend to create the digital debt tokens they call “money”, needed to PAY those interest payments. Inflation is built into the fractional reserve fraudulent banking system. It’s an essential ingredient! And its used to enable the banks to create BOOMS and BUSTS so that they can periodically bankrupt some of the sheeple being shorn.
Talk about greedy! The banksters are not content with demanding repayment, using real wealth, for counterfeit chimerical money (using government, judicial and police menaces) BUT they also want compound interest payments for it AND even then they regularly bankrupt a segment of their clients in order to further fleece them!
Your pathetic AI also says that if governments i.e THE COMMUNITY rather than private banks, issued insufficient asset-backed currency that could stifle economic growth. Isn’t it time your AI got programmed to understand that it is the banks who periodically and deliberately stifle economic growth by hiking interest rates AND curtailing their purported issuance of pretend money? Moreover, the banks HAVE to do that in order to curtail the inflation their usurious system requires in order to function at all.
If the community controls the issuance of asset-backed money there will be no inflation due to banks sucking wealth out of the economy without purporting to provide currency or anything else to replace it. Currently banks periodically fail to create enough money to sustain the economy because otherwise inflation would destroy their system which canonly last about 55 years anyway..
Reprogram your AI to understand that giving private, unelected bank shareholders the right to steal community wealth by pretending to issue money and demanding repayment using REAL money is THEFT. Also program it to compute that when politicians are elected to manage the economy that does not entitle them to delegate that responsibility to private unelected individuals and their corporate fictions while pretending that arrangement is kosher. It isn’t.
Moreover, if you and your AI haven’t yet grasped the fact that pretending that governments and banks aren’t jointly operating a giant PONZI scheme cemented in place by government EXTORTION, be aware that the truth is about to become obvious, even to you. And when it does, the general population will be looking for the culprits in the same way that they’ll be looking for the perpetrators of the Munchhausen by proxy COVID-19 scamdemic mass formation psychosis creators.
Hey, you still don’t have shit on your substack. Not one thing….. there was no assertion on my behalf. All facts, hence the headings, FACT 1 thru 10. Your arguments are shallow, repetitive, unoriginal and frankly, ignorant. You guys just cut and paste the same bull shit so much, people like me can easily compile rebuttals from detailed research, save them and drop them every time dozens of you cult type followers regurgitate the same shit.
Lol, AI response, don’t you wish? Are you that jealous of creative talent that you have to cut and paste somebody else’s literature, claim it as your own to try and make others look bad? Then when you get somebody like me who has debunked these theories time and time and time again to the point where I have files waiting for dip shits like you to drop some of the bullshit you just dropped multiple times, you cult followers, with no substack of their own cry like children.
Do you know how I can tell? because you guys are all the same. You get challenged and you cry and stomp your feet like bitches. And you’re trying to grade people and belittle them because we are freethinkers and you guys are cult thinkers. I bet you’re jobless. I bet you live in your moms basement.
I find it absolutely entertaining when people like you just drop into my threads like a fly sticking to a spiderweb waiting to get devoured.
You guys think you know shit about finances which you don’t, you guys think you know shit about fucking central banks, you don’t.
Stop acting intelligent, have a thought of your own and how about creating your own opinion through detailed research? Is that to hard for you??
You don’t even know who owns these banks, or where to even look.
Again, you regurgitate other peoples fallacies, and claim it as your own like you’re the one that came up with the shit. You didn’t, because you can’t argue it with facts. The most shallow individuals I know and guess what, I bet you’re sitting on your ass not doing anything to save your country are you? Oh wait, you’re from England your country is already invaded and infested. You guys have already given up all your rights and then you want to complain about other peoples country isn’t that right?
So go Google some other bullshit and respond with it I dare you. I bet you have a file of research that I’ve conducted just people like you that trained bully others, and trying to grade them with your fake fucking knowledge. Have a nice day.
Ah, allow me to present the references that underpin the responses I have provided. These responses, meticulously curated and readily available, serve a purpose. Do you presume that you are the sole embodiment of arrogance with whom I have engaged in discourse? The parallels between you and others of your ilk are quite amusing. The absence of a Substack, the reliance on criticism as a means of self-validation, the instinctive aggression when confronted with opposing arguments, and so forth. The pattern, I must confess, is rather monotonous.
Indeed, it may appear that I am the one shrouded in ignorance. Yet, I find solace in the indifference I hold towards your opinion, particularly given your lack of societal contributions. It was you who initiated this dialectical conflict. Over the past eight months, I have been engaged in the Sisyphean task of debunking these theories. Contrary to your belief, these are not the echoes of an AI, further illuminating the depths of your arrogance.
The concept of sovereignty is not a birthright, even though it should be, it simply is not. Individual humans are sovereign only if they consciously consent to it and enforce laws that uphold their sovereignty. Absent this, tyrants will usurp your sovereignty. It is not a divine gift; it must be claimed. This concept seems elusive to you. Do you harbor the belief that the malevolent forces in this world will benevolently grant you sovereignty? Such naivety is a testament to ignorance.
The assertion is a shared construct, as much yours as it is mine. In this dialectical dance, you are certainly not the virtuous one. I believe my discourse is grounded in more facts than yours, especially regarding this 1871 corporation fallacy. You need not appreciate our system merely because you find fault with your own country's. No system is an embodiment of perfection, not even the utopia you envision.
By the way, what actions are you taking to manifest any of the changes you're suggesting in my comments? There seems to be an undercurrent of envy circulating. Associating this site with criminal networks and adrenochrome is a cowardly act. I suspect you are probably in the autumn of your life, living in your mother's basement, unable to work due to your lack of social skills.
Is this your modus operandi when someone disagrees with you? Do you label them as some kind of malevolent entity? That's a tactic often employed by liberals. Could it be that you are a Democrat? Your discourse lacks substantial evidence. It's merely a collection of fantasies and anger, reminiscent of a petulant teenager.
Before you start attributing these horrific accusations to random people out of anger, perhaps you should consider creating your own Substack. Let me check, have you? Ah, as I suspected, nothing. Do you merely wander through people's Substacks and complain? Don't you have the courage to write something that can be openly critiqued, just like you're doing? Albeit, very poorly, I might add.
But hey, I wish you the best of luck. I don't have time to squander on you. Those responses are not the echoes of an AI. They are the product of months of meticulous research.
I'm as I type, watching my township Board meeting as I am part of a handful of residents holding their local government's feet to the fire. Been involved for almost 4 years thanks to "learning how to play the game". It's slow work but we have had several good size wins AND we are from all political backgrounds. They just don't know how MAGA I am as I don't react to their small digs. Again, because I've learned to play the game. I had the opportunity to lead locally for a neighborhood win. I realized I needed to deep dive into how our local politics ran (democrat/independent) and started going to all of the meetings. Such an eye opening job! Who's making sure your local government is on the up and up?
I love hearing stories like this. I hope you can serve as an inspiration to others. This is purely fantastic.
And my personal local government? Me. I'm right there with you.
"Our education has failed us all. We are no longer educated in how are government functions."
...that seems to be a typo?
Just incredible! Wow. I havent read it all yet but enough to know yall have a plan that will work. Community involvement appears to be the key. Thank you both for all the hard work to get this out. This will help us all.
US and Western economic and societal problems stem from collective popular failure to ensure that governments issue asset backed, interest free money to facilitate adequate economic activities and social interactions.
Money is only a social lubricant, a means for facilitating the exchange of goods and services. Money doesn’t DO anything, people do. Westerners have been indoctrinated from cradle to grave in the false belief that money is needed to produce wealth and welfare whereas in truth human ingenuity and labour, acting upon available national natural resources, produces those things.
Banksters' MONOPOLISATION of the global monetary system has been a deliberately gradual process.
Western governments are gradually decimating their populations and taking control of every facet of the lives of the survivors, making them increasingly dependent and infantile. This results from governments inculcating children and adults with the idea that money is a necessary ingredient in the production process when it isn’t, it’s merely a lubricant used to facilitate human interactions.
Concomitantly Western governments have given banks the ability to steal the fruits of their populations' labour, slowly impoverishing almost everyone so that the US and Western populations are becoming totally dependent on government assistance for everything. See eg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llb58LePo1I And: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AnUYTeMAiI&t=2246s
Governments covertly 'own' and mind control their populations from cradle to grave thus enabling the covert owners of banks, who also own Western governments, to manipulate public opinion and hence populations. See eg: (https://english.pravda.ru/opinion/126430-democracy_deception_deceit/ And: https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/UCC/InvestigativeReportUCC.pdf )
The result is endless corruption and disfunctionality which enables the banks’ owners and controllers to also covertly own governments and use them to steal the wealth and welfare of nations; and to require governments and politicians to pretend that the situation is intractable and can only be improved by ever-more government control. Thus justifying constantly growing government intrusion into peoples' domestic affairs and further control of personal and social life.
In reality the solution to child, aged and healthcare, housing shortages, homelessness, poverty and all humanity's societal ills is simple. Deconstruct governmental control of community life by having government Treasuries perform their primary job, namely issuing asset backed, interest free money to pay for necessary construction of community infrastructure and performance of needed social services. Funding needed societal development using Treasury created interest-free money would prevent hoarding and increase the velocity of money circulation via spending which would automatically increase wealth and prosperity. This can be done without inflation provided that governments honestly require “value for money” when issuing contracts.
Issuance of interest free money would also eliminate the Boom/Bust economic cycle that always ends in recessions and depressions created by usurious banks in furtherance of their theft of private property. Inflation is actually a devaluation of the currency caused by the fact that banks demand interest payments on "loans" BUT never purport to issue any of their electronic debt token currency to pay loan interest. Accordingly the banks must continually issue loans for ever-greater increasing amounts of their fiat debt token currency or their monetary system will collapse. Historically fiat 'money' systems only last about 50-55 years. Our current system started in the US in 1971.
Since the creation of the US Federal Reserve System in 1913; and in Australia, since the untimely death of Sir Dennison Miller in 1923 (https://truthout.org/articles/ellen-brown-what-a-government-can-do-with-its-own-bank/), the US and Australian governments have increasingly granted private corporate banks the right to dictate what constitutes their nations' money; AND to control the quantity and distribution of that money supply. Banks now pretend that electronic digital debt tokens (created out of thin air, using key strokes on computers), constitute money.They don't. There is almost no real money in physical circulation today. All that most Western nations have is electronic book entry fiat debt note tokens circulating in 'the ether'.
To compound the problem, the US corporate government and the Australian corporate government and many other governments give a select few private corporate banks a free MONOPOLY on money creation and distribution. The result is that banks pretend to create money but DON’T. Moreover, because the US and many other governments have ceded their right to create their nation’s 'money' to private corporate banks, those banks now choose when to flood their pretend 'loan money' into the economy and when to curtail it, enabling them to create Booms and Busts (recessions and depressions)
The Fed, the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and all Rothschilds' controlled Central banks and local banks LIE to national populations by calling their fraudulent loan process “fractional reserve banking” whereunder they pretend to loan money at interest (usury) by merely typing digits into clients’ bank accounts and calling those book entries ‘money’. The banks then DEMAND that clients PAY them the sum of money represented by those digital book entries in client bank account(s) PLUS compounding interest on those chimerical loan mounts until clients pay them those amounts in full. In other words banks fraudulently pretend to loan money to clients (who are creditors NOT debtors because they promise to pay, and do pay, the loan amounts appearing in their accounts), and then demand that clients pay them the notional amount of money appearing in the client’s bank account PLUS compound interest on that book entry (debt token) monetary sum until it is fully paid to the bank. This is 'highway' or more accurately 'BANK('S) robbery.
Non-bank counterfeiters are greedy, they don’t levy an annual compound interest charge on the fraudulent currency they 'pass'.
In fact, all bank clients allegedly owing principal and interest to banks for notional loan monies appearing in their bank accounts are actually creditors i.e. they actually OWN any monies paid to their banks for principal and interest and hence such funds should be returned to them along with property deeds and quiet possession. Why? Because their Cestui Que Trust held by the Treasury under the ‘Strawman’ mechanism has reimbursed the bank for the principal price; and interest payments were paid under false pretences. In other words the fraud includes the banks using their clients’ loan documentation to seek reimbursement of the stated loan amount from the US Treasury (and other relevant Treasuries) under the “Strawman” mechanism. Barton Buhtz explains that mechanism as it operates in the US: https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/UCC/InvestigativeReportUCC.pdf
This theft of national wealth and human birthrights and the consequent enslavement of whole populations is organised and facilitated by the privately owned US Inc and similar government corporations in other nations as follows:
The US Inc and other bankster controlled corporate governments like the Commonwealth of Australia and Westminster (England Inc.), fail to perform their primary function which is to have their respective Treasury organisations issue the money needed to facilitate adequate operation of government functions and the nation’s economy.
The US Inc et al give free licences to select private corporations to issue money well knowing that those corporations do not issue any money but merely pretend to issue it while demanding that their client’s pay them the sums of money the bank records in the clients’ bank account(s) PLUS additional sums of money fraudulently called interest on the notional (phantom) fiat debt token ‘money’ recorded in clients' bank accounts.
The US Inc (and other relevant corporate governments) threatens to prosecute and do prosecute, fine and imprison anyone who tries to conduct business by bartering commercially or issuing genuine asset backed money.
To ensure that this EXTORTION racket is effective the US Inc (and relevant corporate governments in other nations) authorises affiliated private policing and judicial corporations to prosecute and punish with fines and imprisonment anyone who seeks to barter commercially or to issue asset backed money to facilitate commercial or other societal functions.
The result of this gigantic fraud is that the bulk of US (and other relevant nations' wealth) is syphoned off to private shareholders of banking corporations. Those bank owners are globalists largely domiciled in tax havens leaving USans and other affected national populations scrabbling for the scraps of the productivity and wealth created by their ingenuity and labour, exercised using their respective national natural resources.
The impoverishment of affected nations isn’t the end of this process. Because the banks totally control distribution of what the US (and other affected nations) use as money, the banks are also able to ensure that their owners and their mates get unrestricted quantities of it and can therefore buy everything so that their theft of each nation’s wealth and welfare won’t stop until they own everything at which point, as the WEF has told us, YOU’LL OWN NOTHING AND BE HAPPY!
5.
Fact 8 - Corporation:
A corporation is a legal entity, acting as a single unit distinct from its owners, with the capacity to sue, be sued, lend, and borrow. It's primarily governed by state laws, which dictate its formation, operation, and dissolution. Some aspects, like securities regulation, fall under federal law. A key advantage of a corporation is limited liability, shielding shareholders' personal assets beyond their investment in the corporation. However, traditional corporations face double-taxation, as they're taxed at the corporate level and shareholders are taxed on dividends.
According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School, a corporation is an entity that acts as a single, fictional person. It can sue, be sued, lend, and borrow. Corporations are primarily authorized and governed by state law, with many states following the Model Business Corporation Act provided by the American Bar Association (ABA). These state corporation laws typically require articles of incorporation to document the corporation's creation and to provide provisions regarding the management of internal affairs.
The first corporation in the sense we understand it today — a business entity recognized as a person under the law — was the Bank of North America, which was chartered in 1781 to fund the American Revolutionary War.
As for government corporations, the first significant one in the U.S. was the federally chartered Second Bank of the United States, established in 1816. However, the modern era of federal government corporations really began in the 20th century with entities like the Tennessee Valley Authority, created in 1933.
While primarily governed by state law, certain aspects of corporations are governed by federal law. In particular, the Securities Act of 1933 requires most corporations offering stock to file with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and to regularly disclose financial statements and other executive information.
The authority to grant corporations is typically vested in the states, and each state has its own laws governing the formation, operation, and dissolution of corporations. A corporation is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners (shareholders). It is created by filing articles of incorporation with the state's secretary of state and is governed by its bylaws, which are the rules and regulations enacted by a corporation for its own governance.
Key characteristics of a corporation include:
1. Shareholders: These are the owners of the corporation. They hold shares of the corporation's stock, and their ownership stake is proportionate to the amount of stock they own.
2. Board of Directors: The shareholders elect a board of directors, which has the responsibility of managing the corporation's business and affairs.
3. Officers: The board of directors appoints officers (such as a CEO, CFO, etc.) who manage the day-to-day operations of the corporation.
4. Limited Liability: Shareholders have limited liability for the corporation's debts and obligations. This means that shareholders are not personally responsible for the corporation's debts; their liability is limited to the amount they have invested in the corporation.
5. Articles of Incorporation: This is the document that establishes the existence of a corporation. It is filed with a state government and includes information such as the corporation's name, purpose, duration, and the number of shares it is authorized to issue.
6. Bylaws: These are the internal rules and procedures for the conduct of a corporation. They set forth the structure of the corporation and govern the relationships among the corporation, its directors, officers, and shareholders.
Fact 9 - Corporation, Government and Municipal Corporations
Understand this, a corporation, a government, and a municipal corporation are distinct entities, each with its unique characteristics and functions.
1. Corporation: A corporation is a legal entity, birthed by individuals, stockholders, or shareholders, with the mission of conducting business. It operates under its articles of incorporation and bylaws, with a defined structure that includes a board of directors and officers. Its primary objective is to generate profits for its shareholders. It's a battlefield of commerce, where victory is measured in profits
2. Government: A government is a system or group of individuals governing an organized community, often a state. In the case of our United States, the federal government is established by the Constitution, which outlines the structure of the government and the rights and responsibilities of its branches and officials. The primary purpose of the government is not to generate profits, but to provide services and protections to its citizens, maintain order, and uphold the rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution. It's the guardian of our society, ensuring order and justice!
3. Municipal Corporation: A municipal corporation is a type of public corporation created by a city, town, or other municipality. It is a legal entity separate from the citizens it serves and has the power to perform specific governmental functions at the local level, such as zoning, public transportation, and waste management. While it has a corporate status, its primary purpose is not to generate profits but to provide services to its residents. It operates under a charter granted by the state, which outlines its powers and responsibilities. It's the machinery of local governance, ensuring the smooth running of our communities!
In summary, while these entities may share some characteristics, they are fundamentally different. A corporation is primarily profit-driven, a government is service-oriented with a focus on maintaining order and protecting citizens' rights, and a municipal corporation, while having a corporate status, is a local governmental entity focused on providing specific services to its residents.
The concept of personhood, in its legal sense, is not an inherent attribute but a status conferred upon an entity by the law. It is a construct, a theoretical framework that allows us to navigate the complexities of legal relationships. However, this construct has its limitations and cannot be universally applied.
The U.S. Constitution, for instance, is not an entity that can be granted personhood. It is a document, a set of principles and guidelines that shape the structure of our federal republic. It does not have the capacity to engage in legal relationships or perform legal actions. It is a creator of law, not a subject of it.
At the same time, the federal government, while it possesses certain characteristics akin to a corporation, is not a corporation. It is an institution, a body politic established by the Constitution to govern the nation. It can create corporations, but it does not become a corporation by doing so. Its existence and functions are defined by the Constitution, not by the laws of business and commerce.
The notion of the federal government as a corporation, or as a person, is a misinterpretation of the concept of legal personhood. Legal personhood is a status that allows an entity to participate in the legal system. It does not transform the nature of the entity itself.
In essence, the Constitution is a blueprint for a federal republic, not a corporation. The federal government, while it can engage in legal activities and create corporations, is not a corporation or a person. These distinctions are not merely semantic, but fundamental to our understanding of the nature of our government and the legal system.
References:
United States Code
U.S. Constitution
Code of the District of Columbia
Governance of Washington D.C.
uscode.house.gov
https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code
https://history.com/topics/us-states/washington-dc https://law.cornell.edu/wex/municipal_corporation https://law.cornell.edu/wex/corporation
code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/titles/1/chapters/2/subchapters/IV https://archives.gov/milestone-documents/treaty-of-paris https://law.cornell.edu/wex/category/local_governmental_law https://law.cornell.edu/wex/category/government
https://usa.gov/local-governments
https://law.cornell.edu/constitution/i
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title48/pdf/USCODE-2021-title48-chap8A-subchapI-sec1421.pdf
Good Luck
4.
Fact 7 - The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871: Governance of Washington D.C.
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.”
The Organic Act of 1871 was a key maneuver in the strategic formation of Washington D.C. as a federal territory, deploying a local government structure for the city. However, it's crucial to understand that this act did not transform D.C. into a business corporation. Instead, it designated D.C. as a municipal corporation, a form of local government, distinct from a private, profit-seeking corporation. Importantly, while D.C. is a federal district, it does not equate to being the federal government itself. The federal government is a broader entity that encompasses all three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial, operating nationwide, not confined to the geographical boundaries of D.C.
Before the Act of 1871, D.C. was first established by Congress via the Residence Act on July 16, 1790. Then, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801, by Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, formally placed D.C. under control of the Congress and organized the unincorporated territories Washington County and Alexandria County within it. Then, the Organic Act of 1871, the one in question, created a territorial government for D.C.
The District of Columbia was a battlefield of governance, divided between two municipalities, Washington and Georgetown, each with their own local governments. The rest of the district was under the control of the federal government. The Act of 1871 consolidated these three entities into one, creating a single municipal government for the entire District of Columbia. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates “a Government for D.C.” as it says in the Act.
The Organic Act of 1871 did not convert D.C. or the United States into a business corporation. The act simply established a local government for D.C. under the legal framework of a municipal corporation. This is a clear distinction between a municipal corporation, which is a form of local government, and a business corporation.
The Act of 1871 did not change the status of the United States or turn it into a corporation. Instead, it changed the local government structure of the District of Columbia. The term "corporation" in this context refers to a municipal corporation, a term used to describe a local governing body, such as a city or town. It does not imply that the United States became a business corporation.
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871: This act established a local government for the District of Columbia (D.C.) under the legal classification of a "municipal corporation." This classification is one of several ways local governments can be legally organized, along with "charter," "home rule," and "general law" classifications.
A. "municipal corporation" is a city or town that has been incorporated and has a legal identity separate from its residents. In this case, D.C. was designated as a municipal corporation, a form of local government, distinct from a private, profit-seeking corporation.
B. "charter," like the one established for D.C., is a legal document that establishes a city or town.
C. "Home rule" refers to the degree of autonomy granted to a local government by the state. While D.C. is not a state and does not have home rule from a state, it does have a unique status and degree of autonomy as the nation's capital.
D. "General law" or “Local Government Law” cities or towns are those that are governed by the general laws of the state. In the case of D.C., it is governed by federal laws, as it is a federal district
Furthermore, the Act of 1871 was later replaced by the Act of 1874, which abolished the territorial government and put the District of Columbia back under direct federal control. Then, in 1973, Congress enacted the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, providing for an elected mayor and city council for the District.
The Act of 1871 was a significant piece of legislation in the history of the District of Columbia's governance, but it did not turn the United States into a corporation. The United States remains a federal republic, as established by the Constitution.
Because D.C. is a central hub, in a great country, with a beneficial corporation law, many of the world’s most powerful corporations have headquarters there. That does include the IMF and other international banks and businesses. Which, you know, is good for the country. What, would you rather their headquarters be somewhere else?
The Absence of a Second Constitution: The claim that there is a second U.S. Constitution is not supported by historical or legal evidence. There is only one U.S. Constitution, which has been amended 27 times since its ratification. The Constitution is a foundational document that has guided the development of the U.S. legal and political system for over two centuries.
3.
Fact 5 - Define the United States:
The terms "United States" and "Government" are defined with precision across different sections of the U.S. Code, their meaning often hinging on the context in which they are used. These definitions collectively establish the United States as a sovereign entity, a fortress with jurisdiction over certain territories. They illuminate the structure of the U.S. Government, including its executive, judicial, and legislative branches, the pillars that hold our nation upright. They also define the nature of government corporations and their relationship to the U.S. Government. Here's your briefing:
1. 18 U.S. Code § 5: This code marks the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, underscoring its sovereignty over all places and waters, continental or insular, under its jurisdiction. This includes all states, territories, and possessions of the United States.
2. 5 U.S. Code § 103: This code defines a "Government corporation" as a corporation owned or controlled by the U.S. Government, highlighting the government's capacity to establish entities to carry out specific functions. It also differentiates corporations owned by the government and those merely controlled by it, indicating the varying degrees of government involvement in different entities.
3. 5 U.S. Code § 5921: This code further defines the term "Government" as the Government of the United States, reinforcing the concept of the U.S. as a sovereign entity. It also provides geographical definitions of the United States, distinguishing between the continental U.S. and its territories and possessions.
4. 5 U.S. Code § 2101: This code defines the "civil service" as all appointive positions in the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the U.S. Government, excluding positions in the uniformed services. This highlights the structure and scope of the U.S. Government.
5. 36 U.S. Code § 151710: This code clarifies that the U.S. Government is not liable for any debts, defaults, acts, or omissions of a corporation, and that the full faith and credit of the Government does not extend to any obligation of the corporation. This underscores the legal distinction between the U.S. Government and the corporations it owns or controls.
These codes collectively establish the United States as a sovereign entity with its own territorial jurisdiction, government structure, and the ability to create and control corporations. They also clarify the legal distinction between the U.S. Government and the corporations it owns or controls. Now, let's march forward with this knowledge.
Fact 6 - Federal Corporations:
The federal government does have entities that are classified as "federal corporations." These are created by Congress to undertake commercial activities on behalf of the government. They are established to provide a public service and are often independent or government-owned corporations. Here are some examples of federal corporations:
1. United States Postal Service (USPS): An independent agency of the federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States.
2. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA): A federally owned corporation in the United States created by congressional charter in May 1933 to provide navigation, flood control, electricity generation, fertilizer manufacturing, and economic development in the Tennessee Valley, a region particularly affected by the Great Depression.
3. Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB): A non-profit corporation created by an act of the United States Congress and funded by the federal government to promote public broadcasting.
4. Amtrak (National Railroad Passenger Corporation): A passenger railroad service that provides medium and long-distance intercity service in the contiguous United States and to nine Canadian cities.
5. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): A United States government corporation providing deposit insurance to depositors in U.S. commercial banks and savings institutions.
6. Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks): A system of 11 U.S. government-sponsored banks that provide reliable liquidity to member financial institutions (not individuals) to support housing finance and community investment.
Misunderstanding the nature of the U.S. government and its relationship with federal corporations can lead to missed opportunities. Here are a few examples:
1. Participation in Governance: If people believe that the government is a corporation, they might feel disempowered and less likely to participate in democratic processes like voting, running for office, or engaging in public discourse. Understanding that the government is a public institution, accountable to the people, can encourage more active participation.
2. Influence over Federal Corporations: Federal corporations are created by the government to serve public interests. If people understand this, they might be more likely to advocate for their interests within the framework of these corporations. For example, they might campaign for better service from the Postal Service or for specific programming from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
3. Policy Advocacy: If people misunderstand the nature of the government, they might also misunderstand its policies, including those that regulate corporations. This could hinder effective advocacy for policy changes.
4. Legal Rights and Protections: Misunderstanding the government could lead to a lack of awareness about the legal rights and protections that the government provides to its citizens.
2.
Fact 2: Legal Context
Context is the compass guiding the interpretation of the law. Legal texts, including statutes, regulations, and court decisions, are not isolated islands. They are part of a larger legal archipelago and must be understood in relation to that system. Here's how context navigates the interpretation of the law.
1. Statutory Context: The words of a statute must be read in their context, alongside other provisions of the statute. This includes not just the immediate section or subsection, but the entire statute or act. The goal is to interpret the statute as a harmonious whole.
2. Historical Context: The history of a statute or a legal rule, including its original enactment, amendments, and how it has been interpreted over time, can provide vital context. This is often referred to as legislative history.
3. Purpose and Policy: Courts often gaze at the purpose or policy behind a law to aid in its interpretation. This can include the problem the law was intended to address, the goals it was meant to achieve, and the values it embodies.
4. Precedent: The way courts have interpreted a law in the past provides crucial context. Precedent, or prior judicial decisions, guide future interpretations of the law.
5. Legal Tradition and Principles: Laws are interpreted in the context of broader legal principles and traditions. For example, in criminal law, there is a principle that ambiguity in criminal statutes should be resolved in favor of the defendant (the rule of lenity).
6. Factual Context: The specific facts and circumstances of a case can influence how laws are interpreted and applied. This is particularly true in common law systems where the facts of a case can help shape the interpretation of the law.
Lawyers, like seasoned strategists, employ context in all these ways to argue for specific interpretations of the law. They might point to the statutory context, historical background, purpose and policy, precedent, legal principles, and the facts of the case to support their interpretation.
Courts, like wise generals, also utilize context in these ways when they interpret the law. Their aim is to interpret the law in a manner that is consistent with the text, history, purpose, precedent, and the specific facts and circumstances of the case. Now, armed with this knowledge, let's march forward!
FACT 3: The Constitution
The U.S. Constitution is not suspended or null and void. It is not just a document; it is the supreme law of the land. It towers over all other laws in the United States, including federal laws and Treaty’s. This principle is carved into the bedrock of Article VI of the Constitution, which declares:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
In the face of this, if a federal law dared to contradict the Constitution, that law would be branded unconstitutional and could be struck down by the courts. This is a cornerstone of the system of checks and balances established by the Constitution, a bulwark ensuring that no branch of government can overstep its authority.
1. U.S. Constitution, Article I: This is the foundation of the legislative branch of the federal government, the U.S. Congress, the body entrusted with crafting the nation's laws.
2. U.S. Constitution, Article II: This is the bedrock of the executive branch of the federal government, vested in the President of the United States. The President's duties span executing federal law, appointing federal executive, diplomatic, regulatory, and judicial officers, and steering foreign and domestic policy.
3. U.S. Constitution, Article III: This is the cornerstone of the judicial branch of the federal government, the Supreme Court and other federal courts, the bodies that interpret and apply the law in federal legal cases.
4. U.S. Constitution, Article IV: This article discusses the relationship between the states and the federal government and outlines the obligations of the states to each other.
5. U.S. Constitution, Article V: This article describes the process for amending the Constitution.
6. U.S. Constitution, Article VI: This article establishes the Constitution, and all federal laws and treaties of the United States made according to it, to be the supreme law of the land. It states that "the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the laws or constitutions of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."
7. U.S. Code, Title 1, Chapter 2, §106b: This discusses the process for adopting amendments to the Constitution.
8. U.S. Code, Title 4, Chapter 4, §101: This requires every member of a State legislature, and every executive and judicial officer of a State, to take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.
FACT 4: The United Nations Charter
The United Nations Charter is an international treaty that constitutes part of the "supreme Law of the Land" in the United States, as established by the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2). Consequently, U.S. courts are obligated to uphold the provisions of the Charter, subject to certain constitutional limitations.
The phrase "subject to certain constitutional limitations" indicates that the incorporation of international treaties into U.S. domestic law must be in harmony with the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution holds the status of the supreme law of the land, outlining the structure of the federal government and delineating the powers and limitations of each branch. According to the Supremacy Clause, treaties ratified by the United States possess binding force and take precedence over conflicting state laws.
However, the U.S. Constitution also imposes specific constraints on the authority of the federal government and safeguards individual rights. It assigns powers to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, thereby requiring that any governmental actions, including those related to treaties, align with these constitutional provisions.
In interpreting and resolving conflicts between treaties and constitutional provisions, the U.S. courts play a vital role. Should concerns arise regarding a potential violation of the U.S. Constitution by an action taken under a treaty, such as the United Nations Charter, the issue can be raised in the appropriate judicial forum. The courts possess the authority to determine the constitutionality of laws, treaties, and government actions.
Therefore, the statement encompasses the general principle that while the United States is bound by treaties, including the United Nations Charter, any actions carried out under these treaties must adhere to the limitations and provisions set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
It is important to consider the following points in relation to the enforcement of international treaties in U.S. domestic law:
1. Division of Powers: The U.S. Constitution divides powers between the federal government and the states. If a treaty provision requires action that falls outside the constitutional authority of the federal government, that provision may not be enforceable in U.S. law.
2. Individual Rights: The U.S. Constitution guarantees certain individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion. If a treaty provision conflicts with these rights, the constitutional rights take precedence in U.S. courts.
3. Non-Self-Executing Treaties: Some treaties or treaty provisions are considered "non-self-executing," meaning they do not automatically become enforceable U.S. law upon ratification. Instead, they necessitate the passage of implementing legislation by Congress. If such legislation is not enacted, the treaty provisions may not be enforceable in U.S. courts.
4. Supremacy of the Constitution: The U.S. Constitution holds the position of supreme law of the land. Any treaty that contradicts the Constitution cannot be enforced in U.S. courts.
The enforcement of the United Nations Charter in U.S. courts has been limited in practice. Many of its provisions are broadly phrased and aspirational, not intended for direct enforcement in domestic courts. Furthermore, the United States has often maintained that disputes involving its obligations under the Charter should be resolved through international, rather than domestic, processes.
While the U.S. Supreme Court has stated on numerous occasions that treaties may be rendered void if they contravene the Constitution, there is no clear instance where the Court has directly ruled a treaty unconstitutional. Cases have arisen where decisions seemed to be influenced by constitutional considerations, but the Court has not explicitly declared a treaty unconstitutional.
The article also discusses the case of Missouri v. Holland, where Justice Holmes suggested that treaties may have a distinct status from federal laws concerning the Constitution. However, this interpretation has been subject to debate, and the prevailing consensus is that treaties, like federal laws, must comply with the provisions of the Constitution.
1.
Is the United States Really a Corporation?
“Few dare to voice dissenting opinions in our current climate. Could it be that we have devolved into a democracy where the majority's whims dictate the course? Is it merely easier to follow the tide? I say, not for this man! “
Is the constitution flawed? Are we dealing with a broken Constitution? Many individuals in our community associate the Constitution with various theories that apparently have a long history. However, I must admit that I struggle to comprehend these theories because, if our goal is to safeguard the republic, it seems counterproductive to create barriers in doing so.
What do I mean by this? Considering theories that have supposedly emerged over a span of 100 years, what do we do with them now? How can we rectify potential discrepancies between multiple constitutions or address claims that our government is no longer functioning in the best interest of the American people, without a functioning court system? Should we focus on educating one another? That may be a worthy endeavor, but then the challenge lies in determining what knowledge and skills we should impart. Should we prioritize actionable steps or indulge in wishful thinking?
Perhaps my sentiments are slightly embittered due to experiences with theories that arose in the past when we started 17th SOG. And even though we thoroughly debunked them they persist to this day. I firmly believe that such distractions hinder progress. Even if these theories hold some truth, what is our course of action? Where do we turn? Many people seem inclined to give up; some already have. I yearn for meaningful action, and the only way to strip away the influence of corporations, if they indeed exist, or to clarify which constitution holds authority, or by holding justices accountable is to act within your locality. If the Supreme Court no longer serves our interests, we must regain control by actively engaging in our civic duties.
Does the Crown own the United States? The United States is a sovereign entity. The Treaty of Paris, in its first article, unambiguously states that His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the United States as free, sovereign, and independent states. This, to me, is an incontrovertible fact. The question then becomes what is "sovereignty?” Let's explore the meaning of "sovereignty" in the 17th and 18th centuries.
In the 1700 and 1800s, the term "sovereignty" generally referred to the supreme power or authority held by a monarch or ruler. It encompassed the idea of absolute and undivided control over a particular territory or domain. During this time, the concept of sovereignty was closely tied to the divine right of kings, which asserted that monarchs derived their authority directly from God.
In international relations, the principle of sovereignty emphasized the independent and autonomous nature of nation-states. It underscored the notion that each nation had the right to govern its internal affairs without interference from external powers. This understanding of sovereignty played a significant role in shaping the political landscape and the conduct of diplomacy during the 19th century.
However, there was something very special happening during the mid-17th and 18th centuries. Something that would profoundly alter the meaning of sovereignty. The concept of freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness started to bloom. This transformation began with the advent of the First Great Awakening. It was a time when individuals recognized their ability to establish a personal relationship with God, and these seeds would ignite the flames of the Revolutionary War. Thus, sovereignty, which held a particular significance for the crown, held a contrasting interpretation for the patriots.
Allow me to present some arguments that may offer alternative perspectives. The driving force behind my involvement with “We The People” was a profound sense of needing to investigate matters firsthand. I reached a point where I could no longer rely on the trustworthiness of others. Having delved into one of these theories and uncovering the truth with my teammates at 17th SOG, I find it increasingly challenging to simply accept a single theory without personally verifying its validity. This same principle applied to local governance as well. Amidst claims of stolen elections and the perceived futility of local action, I felt compelled to investigate and determine the truth for myself. Through this process, I discovered that my decision to do so was indeed the correct one. I did not discover if cheating occurred, but I did see where it could have.
I recognize that these findings may not be readily embraced or accepted by all. However, for those who hold the belief that the U.S. is a corporation, I would argue that civic participation is the key to effecting change. Most individuals, not all but most, I've encountered who subscribe to this theory refuse to partake in civic duties. This seems counterproductive, if not suspicious. Could it be that our adversaries are promoting this belief to undermine civic participation? It's a consideration worth pondering.
Are we not seekers of truth? I often hear the terms "Truther" or "Truth Seeker," yet I see only a handful who truly embody these titles. Researchers, perhaps? Again, they are few and far between. The theory that the United States is a corporation should incense every patriot! This is another term widely used, yet seldom embodied, patriot. I am going to share what I have unearthed with just a few days of research. These are what I believe are the facts that I have uncovered.
Fact 1: I The Crown does not own the United States, a claim often cited as a reason for the U.S. being a corporation. Nor does any other entity.
Fact 2: The contextual interpretation of law matters, it’s the framework to which our society revolves around. Understanding how lawyers and judges interpret laws is vital in helping put things into perspective.
Fact 3: The Constitution establishes our federal republic, and it cannot be incorporated; all laws are based upon it, and nothing supersedes it.
Fact 4: The United Nations Charter is an international treaty, “subject to certain constitutional limitations” that constitutes part of the "supreme Law of the Land" in the United States.
Fact 5: The terms "United States" and "Government" are defined with precision across different sections of the U.S. Code, their meaning often hinging on the context in which they are used.
Fact 6: The federal government does have entities that are classified as "federal corporations." These are created by Congress to undertake commercial activities on behalf of the government.
Fact 7: The Organic Act of 1871 is another topic I felt necessary to cover, as it contributes to the confusion for many people.
Fact 8: Defining what a corporation is important to understand when determining if the United States is a corporation or not.
Fact 9: Comparing a corporation to a government and a municipal corporation, I felt, was equally important to include in this discourse.
Fact 10: Bringing all these facts together in a “Bloodline” format to prove that from the beginning of the United States, there was no way possible for the United States to be a “corporation.”
Having laid out these ten critical facts, we are now better equipped to delve into the heart of the matter. These facts serve as the foundation for our discussion, providing us with the necessary context and understanding to dissect the complex question of whether the United States is a corporation. From exploring the theory of the Crown's ownership of the U.S., to understanding the nature of our Constitution and the interpretation of laws, to examining the role of federal corporations and the implications of the Organic Act of 1871, we have a comprehensive roadmap to guide our exploration. Let us now transition into a deeper analysis of these facts and unravel the intricate tapestry of this discourse.
FACT 1: The Crown Owning the United States
The Treaty of Paris, which marked the conclusion of the American Revolutionary War, does not contain any provision or language suggesting that Britain retained any sovereignty or ownership over the United States.
In fact, Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris unambiguously states: "His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof."
This declaration signifies that the British King recognized the United States as free, sovereign, and independent states. Furthermore, he and his successors renounced all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the United States and every part of it. This is a clear and unequivocal affirmation of the United States' sovereignty.
Corporation!? How can the Constitution be incorporated? And by whom? Those who embrace this fallacy have truly lost their way and perhaps forgotten the core values and principles of this great nation. This is the unfortunate product of replacing civics with social studies in our schools.
Fact 2: Legal Context
Context is the compass guiding the interpretation of the law. Legal texts, including statutes, regulations, and court decisions, are not isolated islands. They are part of a larger legal archipelago and must be understood in relation to that system. Here's how context navigates the interpretation of the law.
I know you would want the crown to own the U.S but it does not. It never will. Nice try. Your points are baseless and very ignorant. I know that you want to be smart but this post did not do you justice. And your hatred towards us must be exhausting. Let go of the hatred bro. I have many factual rebuttals.
Monopolization of Money: While it's true that private banks play a significant role in the creation and distribution of money, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Banks are regulated by government agencies to ensure they operate in a safe and sound manner. Moreover, the central bank (like the Federal Reserve in the U.S. or the Reserve Bank of Australia) has the power to influence the money supply through monetary policy.
Money as a Social Lubricant: While it's true that money is a medium of exchange, it also serves as a unit of account and a store of value. These functions of money are crucial for a modern economy to function efficiently. Without money, it would be incredibly difficult to measure the value of goods and services or to save for the future. You also have this in the U.K.
Critique of Fractional Reserve Banking: Fractional reserve banking is a system that has been used successfully in many countries for centuries. It allows banks to lend out money and stimulate economic activity. The risk of bank runs (where a large number of customers withdraw their deposits due to fears that the bank might fail) is mitigated by deposit insurance schemes and central banks acting as lenders of last resort. The UK does this too.
Government Control and Influence: While it's true that governments and central banks have a significant influence over the economy, this is not necessarily a negative thing. Monetary and fiscal policies are tools that can be used to stabilize the economy, control inflation, and promote growth. The independence of central banks from political influence is generally seen as a positive thing, as it allows them to make decisions based on economic indicators rather than political pressures. It is also a matter of national security, and again, your island of a country has this too. you should clean your own house first before poorly critiquing others.
Solution: Your solution for governments to issue asset-backed, interest-free money could have unintended consequences. For example, it could lead to inflation if too much money is created, or it could stifle economic growth if not enough money is created. Moreover, it's not clear how an asset-backed currency would work in a modern economy, where the value of assets can fluctuate significantly.
Critique of Government and Banks: Your claim that governments and banks are working together to control and manipulate the population has been done since currency existed. Its the same in your country too. We will change that in my country, not sure if you will in yours. We at least still have our 2A rights, you however, have knives and forks. good luck. While it's true that governments and banks have a significant influence over the economy, this is not the same as controlling or manipulating the population. There are checks and balances in place to prevent abuses of power, including regulatory agencies, the judicial system, and democratic elections.
As for the US being a corporation is a gross misunderstanding of how local governments are formed in the US. You being from the UK, I wouldn't expect you to know how it works due to your theories you buy into. That easy to do right? Just take someone else's word without conducting proper research? . Simple research would show you the what ill post in a different reply.
I suspected that https://17sog.substack.com/ was a limited hang out to suck in the ignorant but I didn’t expect you to reveal that fact so promptly.
No doubt the reams of bullshit on your site are meant to impress the sheeple but you really need to upgrade your AI responses to be a bit more subtle. Its a rehash of all the Reuters talking points and doesn’t convey a genuine sense of concern for, let alone consideration of, the facts. At least give correspondents the courtesy of having a living human being regurgitate the “party line”.
The facts are:
Individual humans are SOVEREIGN, their inanimate corporate constructs like governments, courts, banks etc, are NOT.
ASSERTION is NOT evidence or rebuttal.
Having AI regurgitate and repeat a blizzard of lying rhetorical verbiage just adds to the enormous volume of gaslighting we get every day from governments, the MSM, useful idiots and sayanim. A smartarse AI stream of consciousness from a half-arse programmer isn’t convincing.
Re the risible “fractional reserve system” scam, GIVE ME A BREAK!
Electronic digits placed in bank accounts are NOT money, they are not even a “thing” at all, they are figments of the imagination of typists OR, if done by AI and programmed computers they are not even figments of imagination. They are ZOMBIFIED constructs.
The fact that fractional reserve banking has been used for centuries isn’t an argument let alone a justification. The longevity of the LIE illustrates the enormity of the CRIME perpetrated for centuries upon humanity by Ashkenazis, i.e. Khazarian banksters.
It also explains why humanity is plagued by poverty, scarcity, want; AND WARS. IF Khazarian Mafia banksters and their minions and enablers (like this site), hadn’t purloined most of the wealth of nations for centuries and used it to build enormous criminal networks of underground bases used for child and adult sex trafficking, ADRENOCHROME production and bio-warfare esearch etc, this world and her population would be living in a golden age with no crime, misery and poverty.
Only an idiot AI system would iterate the canard that currency IS money, OR that electronic digital currency is a store of value. HOW can transient digits in computers be a tangible store of anything?! They constitute bookeeking entries. Get a better computer program for your AI if you hope to fool even the average mind controlled, cognitively disabled reader.
Re the alleged “unintended consequences” of communities issuing their own interest-free REAL, asset backed money. GET A GRIP!
“It could lead to inflation”!!!! WHAT doya think is happening now and happens repeatedly under the current criminal private banking system?! I’ve already explained WHY the current system causes inflation as a NECESSARY aspect of the banks’ usurious demands for payment of interest when they never even pretend to create the digital debt tokens they call “money”, needed to PAY those interest payments. Inflation is built into the fractional reserve fraudulent banking system. It’s an essential ingredient! And its used to enable the banks to create BOOMS and BUSTS so that they can periodically bankrupt some of the sheeple being shorn.
Talk about greedy! The banksters are not content with demanding repayment, using real wealth, for counterfeit chimerical money (using government, judicial and police menaces) BUT they also want compound interest payments for it AND even then they regularly bankrupt a segment of their clients in order to further fleece them!
Your pathetic AI also says that if governments i.e THE COMMUNITY rather than private banks, issued insufficient asset-backed currency that could stifle economic growth. Isn’t it time your AI got programmed to understand that it is the banks who periodically and deliberately stifle economic growth by hiking interest rates AND curtailing their purported issuance of pretend money? Moreover, the banks HAVE to do that in order to curtail the inflation their usurious system requires in order to function at all.
If the community controls the issuance of asset-backed money there will be no inflation due to banks sucking wealth out of the economy without purporting to provide currency or anything else to replace it. Currently banks periodically fail to create enough money to sustain the economy because otherwise inflation would destroy their system which canonly last about 55 years anyway..
Reprogram your AI to understand that giving private, unelected bank shareholders the right to steal community wealth by pretending to issue money and demanding repayment using REAL money is THEFT. Also program it to compute that when politicians are elected to manage the economy that does not entitle them to delegate that responsibility to private unelected individuals and their corporate fictions while pretending that arrangement is kosher. It isn’t.
Moreover, if you and your AI haven’t yet grasped the fact that pretending that governments and banks aren’t jointly operating a giant PONZI scheme cemented in place by government EXTORTION, be aware that the truth is about to become obvious, even to you. And when it does, the general population will be looking for the culprits in the same way that they’ll be looking for the perpetrators of the Munchhausen by proxy COVID-19 scamdemic mass formation psychosis creators.
Have a nice day.
Hey, you still don’t have shit on your substack. Not one thing….. there was no assertion on my behalf. All facts, hence the headings, FACT 1 thru 10. Your arguments are shallow, repetitive, unoriginal and frankly, ignorant. You guys just cut and paste the same bull shit so much, people like me can easily compile rebuttals from detailed research, save them and drop them every time dozens of you cult type followers regurgitate the same shit.
Lol, AI response, don’t you wish? Are you that jealous of creative talent that you have to cut and paste somebody else’s literature, claim it as your own to try and make others look bad? Then when you get somebody like me who has debunked these theories time and time and time again to the point where I have files waiting for dip shits like you to drop some of the bullshit you just dropped multiple times, you cult followers, with no substack of their own cry like children.
Do you know how I can tell? because you guys are all the same. You get challenged and you cry and stomp your feet like bitches. And you’re trying to grade people and belittle them because we are freethinkers and you guys are cult thinkers. I bet you’re jobless. I bet you live in your moms basement.
I find it absolutely entertaining when people like you just drop into my threads like a fly sticking to a spiderweb waiting to get devoured.
You guys think you know shit about finances which you don’t, you guys think you know shit about fucking central banks, you don’t.
Stop acting intelligent, have a thought of your own and how about creating your own opinion through detailed research? Is that to hard for you??
You don’t even know who owns these banks, or where to even look.
Again, you regurgitate other peoples fallacies, and claim it as your own like you’re the one that came up with the shit. You didn’t, because you can’t argue it with facts. The most shallow individuals I know and guess what, I bet you’re sitting on your ass not doing anything to save your country are you? Oh wait, you’re from England your country is already invaded and infested. You guys have already given up all your rights and then you want to complain about other peoples country isn’t that right?
So go Google some other bullshit and respond with it I dare you. I bet you have a file of research that I’ve conducted just people like you that trained bully others, and trying to grade them with your fake fucking knowledge. Have a nice day.
Mic drop….
https://www.bitchute.com/video/wymsGxAZZ3lL/
And??
Ah, allow me to present the references that underpin the responses I have provided. These responses, meticulously curated and readily available, serve a purpose. Do you presume that you are the sole embodiment of arrogance with whom I have engaged in discourse? The parallels between you and others of your ilk are quite amusing. The absence of a Substack, the reliance on criticism as a means of self-validation, the instinctive aggression when confronted with opposing arguments, and so forth. The pattern, I must confess, is rather monotonous.
United States Code
U.S. Constitution
Code of the District of Columbia
Governance of Washington D.C.
uscode.house.gov
https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code
https://history.com/topics/us-states/washington-dc https://law.cornell.edu/wex/municipal_corporation https://law.cornell.edu/wex/corporation
code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/titles/1/chapters/2/subchapters/IV https://archives.gov/milestone-documents/treaty-of-paris https://law.cornell.edu/wex/category/local_governmental_law https://law.cornell.edu/wex/category/government
https://usa.gov/local-governments
https://law.cornell.edu/constitution/i
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title48/pdf/USCODE-2021-title48-chap8A-subchapI-sec1421.pdf
You have nothing on your site... Nothing at all... lol.
Wadda ya want?
A free lunch?
Nope, I have a job. I do this on the side.
Indeed, it may appear that I am the one shrouded in ignorance. Yet, I find solace in the indifference I hold towards your opinion, particularly given your lack of societal contributions. It was you who initiated this dialectical conflict. Over the past eight months, I have been engaged in the Sisyphean task of debunking these theories. Contrary to your belief, these are not the echoes of an AI, further illuminating the depths of your arrogance.
The concept of sovereignty is not a birthright, even though it should be, it simply is not. Individual humans are sovereign only if they consciously consent to it and enforce laws that uphold their sovereignty. Absent this, tyrants will usurp your sovereignty. It is not a divine gift; it must be claimed. This concept seems elusive to you. Do you harbor the belief that the malevolent forces in this world will benevolently grant you sovereignty? Such naivety is a testament to ignorance.
The assertion is a shared construct, as much yours as it is mine. In this dialectical dance, you are certainly not the virtuous one. I believe my discourse is grounded in more facts than yours, especially regarding this 1871 corporation fallacy. You need not appreciate our system merely because you find fault with your own country's. No system is an embodiment of perfection, not even the utopia you envision.
By the way, what actions are you taking to manifest any of the changes you're suggesting in my comments? There seems to be an undercurrent of envy circulating. Associating this site with criminal networks and adrenochrome is a cowardly act. I suspect you are probably in the autumn of your life, living in your mother's basement, unable to work due to your lack of social skills.
Is this your modus operandi when someone disagrees with you? Do you label them as some kind of malevolent entity? That's a tactic often employed by liberals. Could it be that you are a Democrat? Your discourse lacks substantial evidence. It's merely a collection of fantasies and anger, reminiscent of a petulant teenager.
Before you start attributing these horrific accusations to random people out of anger, perhaps you should consider creating your own Substack. Let me check, have you? Ah, as I suspected, nothing. Do you merely wander through people's Substacks and complain? Don't you have the courage to write something that can be openly critiqued, just like you're doing? Albeit, very poorly, I might add.
But hey, I wish you the best of luck. I don't have time to squander on you. Those responses are not the echoes of an AI. They are the product of months of meticulous research.
How old is your group?
17th SOG?