UNITED STATES CORPORATION & The united, “States of America” . . use this to help people understand! It is very important information! ~J

Uploaded on Mar 5, 2011
Thanks, again, to D for this important info!!! 

This film explains the difference between the, “united States of America” which is a Republic, created by the people, and for the protections and freedoms of the people; and, a corporation called “THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”, which is a Corporation of the “District of Columbia”; Titled, “THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” this corporation was founded in 1871″.

The united “States of America” is a country of States, that were united under A Constitution, and founded in 1776″ almost 100 years earlier.

The difference is the Republic stands for freedom, and the corporation stands for Profit…

This entry was posted in Financial/economic information, Illuminati/Terrorism/Corruption, Political and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to UNITED STATES CORPORATION & The united, “States of America” . . use this to help people understand! It is very important information! ~J

  1. DET says:

    Jean and readers,
    I am writing from Germany.
    Recently I read the book “THE GREAT AMERICAN ADVENTURE”
    (SECRETS OF AMERICA) ,from judge Dale.
    It was an eye-opener for me, because it is the complete blue print
    for our basic law.
    Judge Dale wrote that George Washington established the
    “Virginia company” 1789 again. After this act your Gov
    was a company yet! Your constitution became a statute of this company!
    This is the same US did in Germany 1990, because due to WW II.
    (without peace-treaty, we always are war prisoner)
    Statues can be changed how whims of owners are!
    Since this time window (1789) all amendments in your constitution
    are alterations in statutes. They do not need your agreement !!!
    The corporation called “THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” is only
    a name as you know for another company.
    As judge Dale wrote, F.D. Roosevelt has transformed the name
    of “Virginia company” to “United States Inc”, registered in France,
    at 9. March 1933.
    And this seems to be your actual Gov.
    .
    I wonder, how can Germany get a peace-agreement on a level
    of law of nations when the USA really not is existent and your actual
    Gov. is working on the level of trade law ?

  2. wolf727 says:

    According to G. Edward Griffin at the site: “Freedom Force International” this is not an issue. http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=US_corporation

    IS THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT A CORPORATION?
    IF TRUE, SO WHAT?
    © 2007 by G. Edward Griffin. Revised 2007 December 17.

    A common assertion made by those who are unhappy with the declining state of freedom in America is that this can be traced to an 1871 act of Congress that established Washington DC and, at the same time, converted the United States from a constitutional republic to a corporation. Secondary claims attached to this hypothesis are that this is the reason the official wording was changed from Constitution for The United States of America to Constitution of The United States of America and also why all capital letters are used in the name instead of upper and lower case letters. They claim that this Act of 1871 abolished the original constitutional government and created a legal fiction that became financially indebted to and controlled by international bankers. A forceful example of this view can be found on the Internet at http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm.

    A CHARTER FOR CITY GOVERNMENT
    My own analysis is different. While it is true that Washington DC was created by the Act of 1871, its territory was limited to the District of Columbia and it was defined as a municipal corporation, which means it was limited to the affairs of city government. Three years later, on June 20, 1874, a new Act was passed by Congress that abolished the original city government and replaced it with a three-man commission, appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate. Its scope as a municipality did not change. A third Act of Congress, dated June 11, 1878, clarified the powers of the Commission but retained all the essential features of the previous Act, especially those that defined the nature of the District of Columbia as a municipal administrative unit. The following overview, taken from a Supreme Court decision (District of Columbia v. Camden Iron Works, 181 U.S. 453 (1901) 181 U.S. 453) describes this evolution:

    The 1st section of the act ‘to provide a government for the District of Columbia,’ approved February 21, 1871 (16 Stat. at L. [181 U.S. 453, 458] 419, chap. 62), provided: ‘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.’

    A governor and legislature were created; also a board of public works, to which was given the control and repair of the streets, avenues, alleys, and sewers of the city of Washington, and all other works which might be intrusted to their charge by either the legislative assembly or Congress. They were empowered to disburse the moneys received for the improvement of streets, avenues, alleys, sewers, roads, and bridges, and to assess upon adjoining property specially benefited thereby a reasonable proportion of the cost, not exceeding one third.
    June 20, 1874, an act was passed entitled ‘An Act for the Government of the District of Columbia, and for Other Purposes.’ 18 Stat. at L. 116, chap. 337. By this act the government established by the act of 1871 was abolished and the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate was authorized to appoint a commission, consisting of three persons, to exercise the power and authority vested in the governor and the board of public works, except as afterwards limited by the act.

    By a subsequent act approved June 11, 1878 (20 Stat. at L. 102, chap. 180), it was enacted that the District of Columbia should ‘remain and continue a municipal corporation,’ as provided in 2 of the Revised Statutes relating to said District (brought forward from the act of 1871), and the appointment of commissioners was provided for, to have and to exercise similar powers given to the commissioners appointed under the act of 1874.

    Many Internet commentators claim that using all upper-case letters when printing the name United States of America or when printing names of individuals has a profound legal implication. However, I have not been able to confirm this. If anyone can show me a law or court case to the contrary, I will readily acknowledge it; but so far I only have found assertions of this claim with no authoritative documentation. In the meantime, I am satisfied with the conclusion of the Dixieland Law Journal at http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/NamesInCaps.htm that there is no legal basis for this theory.

    Now, to the bigger issue. Even if it were true that Congress in 1871 converted the United States into a corporation (a claim that I do not accept), there would be two questions that must be answered: (1) what would be the practical significance and (2) what can be done about it?
    SO WHAT?

    Let’s take the first question: what would be the practical significance of a corporate government versus a constitutional government? In one case, the charter is a corporate charter. In the other case it is a constitution. Both are written documents and both outline the purpose, function, and limitations of the entity they create. The primary difference is that a corporation always is the creation of government, which makes government a higher source with powers assumed to be derived from the people themselves. In the case of the United States, however, this distinction is blurred, because the federal constitution was created by representatives of the colonial governments. That means the United States was created by other governments just as it would have been if created as a corporation.

    The structure of government is important but not as important as the power of government. That is also true of corporations. Governments and corporations are neither good nor evil by themselves. They can serve man well or be a huge disservice depending entirely on the terms of their charters and the character of those who direct them. Private entrepreneurs, partnerships, and associations have exactly the same capacity for good or evil. Corporations become evil when they acquire political favoritism giving them unfair advantages over competitors and legal immunity from crimes – but exactly the same thing happens with politically connected individuals, partnerships, and associations.

    A similar contrast between good and evil is found within governments, whether they are corporations or not. There is little difference between corporations and governments except ownership of stock. Too much is made over the structure of government and too little over the principles of government. Which would we choose: a corporate government with a charter that limits its powers and with functioning mechanisms to choose our leaders – or a constitutional government in which the constitution is subverted and the electoral system is in the hands of a ruling elite?

    Guns do not commit crimes but people using guns do. Likewise, organizational structures are not the problem, it’s the people who control those structures and the principles they embrace. Evil men can subvert any social structure. There are no set of rules that can prevent it if the public becomes indifferent, which is why Wendell Phillips reminded us that “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

    We should be thankful that America started off as a constitutional republic, but that was long ago. Today we live under a democratic oligarchy in which the masses are hypnotized into believing they control their political destiny because they are allowed to elect their own dictators. This conversion did not happen because of how government was chartered but because collectivists took control of political parties, media centers, educational institutions, and all other power centers of society. As long as collectivists remain in control, and as long as most people don’t even know what the word collectivism means, it makes no difference if government has a constitutional or a corporate charter. Freedom is lost either way.
    WHAT CAN BE DONE?

    The important question is what can be done? Even if it were true that the United States was secretly converted to a corporation in 1871, what can be done about it today? If we don’t have an answer to that question, we are wasting out time. The enemies of freedom must be happy to see us chasing phantom issues because, as long as we do, we are out of the battle. The solution to the loss of our constitutional republic is, not to endlessly debate the meaning of an obscure event in 1871, but to take action today to recapture our government from the collectivists who have subverted it and then set about to restore the republic! That is the mission of Freedom Force.
    ________________________________________

    IS THE GOVERNMENT AN OFFICIALLY BANKRUPT COMMERCIAL CORPORATION UNDER MARITIME LAW?

    On December 17, 2007, I received the following admonition from a strong supporter who, nevertheless, felt that I needed more information. He wrote:

    The evidence discovered is that an all CAPS account exists under our SSN. We can now fund this account and use it to discharge debt and operate in “commerce” as a creditor rather than a “debtor”. The freedom movement has wrongly assumed that we are under constitutional law, when in fact we were sold out and are under bankruptcy and international maritime commercial law.

    Based on the 1933 bankruptcy of the United States. The U.S was dissolved at that time and turned over to the international bankers and converted into a commercial Corporation operating under international maritime commerce law and bankrupcy law. Subsequently, our rights have been turned into civil rights under commerce law. We have not been a “government by the people” since 1933. We are corporate slaves owned and ruled by the international banking cartel. This the federal reserve act of 1913 and President Roosevelt’s declaration of bankruptcy did for us. This explains much about why our President and Congress can “do unconstitutional’ acts with impunity. They are lawful employees of the international banking cartel operating under commerce.

    I think that the freedom community needs to accept the truth and facts and create a plan of action based on reality.

    I strongly encourage you to listen to at least the first 10 minutes of Sharon’s December 06 conference call recording (http://www.paralegalresearchadvocates.com/). I believe that Sharon has discovered something that will benefit us all. Please be open about this and at least investigate for yourself.
    Warm Regards,
    RS

    This was my reply:

    Hello Richard.
    I have listened to the conference call as you suggested and learned nothing new over and above what I have read from many others who follow the Strawman/Bankruptcy/Admiralty Law hypothesis. Everything said about the Federal Reserve is basically true, but it is a giant leap to accept the validity of all the rest. I previously have examined the documents Sharon mentioned and, as I recall, found nothing in any of them that confirmed the hypotheses – except by the most creative interpretation. I am afraid all of this is just a dead end that leads people into an endless loop of fighting a phantom that doesn’t exist when we have very real enemies in the form of the Federal Reserve and a corrupted government.

    You said: “the freedom community needs to accept the truth and facts and create a plan of action based on reality.” I agree totally, but what would that plan be? How would it be any different than abolishing the Federal Reserve and the IRS, returning to a sound money, and replacing corrupted government officials? If that is the solution, then why spend time in a legal wonderland that not one in ten-thousand has any chance of comprehending? Is there any better plan to turn people off of the topic and, thus, turn them away from a solution? It seems to me that crusading under the Strawman banner is well calculated to insure our defeat. Why not just stick with the easily understood and easily proven facts? That’s what Ron Paul is trying to do and, judging by the groundswell of support he is getting, it is a very wise strategy.

    Thanks again for your support and especially for your concern for the future of our Republic.

    Ed Griffin

    Later in the day, I happily recieved the following reply.

    Mr. Griffiin:
    Thank you very much for your time and consideration and sound response. I am 100% for Ron Paul, the dissoling of the Federal Reserve and the IRS and the replacement of corrupted public officials. I fully support you and all of your efforts and Freedom Force. I am thankful for people like yourself. Please accept my apology for troubling you with an issue that I did not fully understand. Thank you for your clarifications.
    Please enjoy the best during this Holiday season. Most respectfully and grateful,

    Rich Steward

    • Ri-chard says:

      I think I will look at this as a much simpler matter. I will also take the liberty of editing “So What” to a Corporate Political Legalese Q&A “What Difference Does It Make”. Why, because I will prefer to lean towards the Private Person not Corporate or Public for any personal guidance.

      Corporate: Stands only for The Corporate. Corporate are the board members. And the Corporate have control of the money and write their own rules and regulations for it use without the consent and knowledge of the private citizen. All individual Private persons and institutions owned by The Private person/s are subservient to the Corporate. They fund The Peoples political system to guide it in the Corporate favor. A self –Serving institution without consideration of The Peoples morals, and for God’s Common Laws inherited by The People. The Private Person has no to little standing fighting against the rules and regulations set by the Corporate Justice System.

      Constitution: Stands for The Private person The People. Constitution has The People as board members. The People have control of the money and their State Representatives installed by The People enforce The People’s will for how it is spent/invested. The People’s will, rules and regulations have open access to all. The people’s money can fund their representative of choice. God’s Common Law is their guide as the Bill Of Rights which no Corporate or Public sector can infringe upon or take away. The People’s Justice is administered by and for The People and all have standing. It’s the Common Law thing to do.

      A Private Persons Note: The Corporate and Public sector may require it mandatory a Private person submit to complete background investigation to apply for an employment position within Corporate America or any Federal Agency.
      The Private person cannot require and make it mandatory that their potential representative submit to a complete background investigation prior to being placed on the ballot to be hired by The People to work for them.
      Therefore, if such a background investigation were to have been performed on Senator, Barack H. Obama, II we would not know of his name today.

      Ri-chard

      • wolf727 says:

        Well said.
        I posted the comments by G. Edward Griffin because I noticed he did not seem to have any concern over this issue and I wondered if he was justified. I wanted a response. Thank you for giving that response.
        I don’t have enough understanding or expertise on this issue and so I wanted to know if what G. Edward Griffin wrote was accurate or not.
        I was puzzled as to why G. Edward Griffin was not supporting the idea that the U.S. government was not a corporation.
        I liked your explanation describing the subtle differences between “Corporation” and “Constitution – representing the Private person”.

        • wolf727 says:

          Sorry Jean, I made an error.
          Please change the above line: “I was puzzled as to why G. Edward Griffin was not supporting the idea that the U.S. government was not a corporation.”

          to

          “”I was puzzled as to why G. Edward Griffin was not supporting the idea that the U.S. government is a Corporation.”

          Many thanks.🙂

          • Jean says:

            I”m simply going to release your correction, Dennis🙂 Forgive me, but I haven’t time today — and perfection is not required🙂🙂🙂 Hugs, ~Jean

  3. dswenor@comcast.net says:

    Guide to the FLAT EARTH https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8-YdgU-CF4 Published on Feb 10, 2015

    An introductory guide to the Flat Earth movement, starting with the Copernicus theory in 1514, false confirmation in 1957, and the extraordinary lengths that the world leaders have taken in order to keep their power.

    The world is FLAT, and this will help you see it.

    Description reference links:

    The USGS uses one of these maps, find it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_

    High altitude nuclear testing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High- altitude_nuclear_explosion

    The Flat Earth Society http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/

    Definition of the Firmament http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament

    Antarctic non colonization treaty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarcti

    The United Nations Flag http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_

  4. Ri-chard says:

    Please all, send this to as many Birther and Tea Party sites as possible. This should open their minds up and show them they have their issues cart well in front of the horse. Not that what they have done is not important or done in vain, but their efforts will just be valuable at a later date. First Things First, administratively the corrective actions must be set in place.

    • Jean says:

      Yes, yes! Please do! People are stuck in the lessons we learned in school that the Constitution is this perfect document, almost from God! It’s a shock to learn it is not, but the truth will set us all free🙂 Hugs, ~Jean

  5. Tina says:

    I write this comment in my efforts to completely understand this issue for the reasons of not only my own meaningful search for the truth, but to be able to share with those who are just waking up to the truth. It is my aim to be able to prevent a fairly rock solid defense of the situation, should I find myself in a debate with a grumpy sleeper.

    For all intents and purposes, I agree with this video. I actually went straight to the youtube channel to watch it (and copy it), and I noticed the comments had varying opinions, so I looked further into it. It appears that the Act of 1871 was designed to create a “municipal government” for the District of Columbia, and not so much change the constitution (of the republic) per se. What really changed all that was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. I’m inclined to believe that the U.S. was turned over to the bankers at that point.

    But even then, what bothers me the most is, where is the rock solid evidence that the ALL-CAPS name is at play here (and a lot of other places like the birth certificate, etc)? In following this path, it makes sense to me that this is the one area where we have been snookered, but what irrefutable evidence can I show the sleeping giants when they get pissed at me for ruining their dream?

    • Jean says:

      I hope someone well-versed in this will find time to answer your excellent question🙂 We all need to know this like a ‘talking point’🙂 Hugs, ~Jean

      • Tina says:

        I meant to write “present” a fairly rock solid defense of the situation…” And maybe not even “fairly” rock solid, but rock solid! I think we are at the point where there is no more room for holes! I’m over all the shock. I’m also not a fan of “gray areas” anymore. I have grown tremendously over the years with your blog, Jean, and I can honestly say the truth has freed me, although I took a big hit in the social arena (and really by choice), but so be it. “Fake” and “fear” just don’t resonate with me anymore. I think my time is better spent being prepared for shoes to drop, because now that Mars and all his buddies are hitting the shores of fire in Aries, I believe they will!

    • Jean says:

      Pete, this is really something🙂 Hugs, ~Jean🙂

      • Pete says:

        It certainly validates everything you, Bradley, Eric, Ron and many others have done and are doing. It is working. The guy with the snake was exercising his rights in a non aggressive manner and teaching others at the same time. His body language was terrific. What an example.

  6. Gary says:

    My experience has shown very few of the sheeple will see this truth, even less will believe or discuss the subject and none will act to correct this fraud. Just who is the grand master of this deception or is this the way it is supposed to be?

  7. Ilex says:

    144 years ago today, February 21, 1871. A very sad say in history.

  8. Hildegard says:

    Here it is:
    28 U.S. Code § 3002 – Definitions (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002)
    (15) “United States” means—
    (A) a Federal corporation;
    (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
    (C) an instrumentality of the United States.

  9. 1EarthUnited says:

    Reblogged this on 1EarthUnited and commented:
    I do not consent to this! I’m sure most of your readers know about the redemption movement- “citizens” are collateral for US debt:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redemption_movement
    http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap8.html
    http://www.henrymakow.com/us-citizens-property-collatera.html

  10. Tom LaMar says:

    Such threats to sovereignty need only be repudiated, then defended militarily…then print debt-free money, like Greece should be doing right now and as we should have but have been too stupid or self-absorbed to notice our losses since…Hamilton.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s