General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/its-of...h-time-no-deal
Chupacabra-322 ![]() Can any confirm the following: The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land. What ![]() The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone's pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed. In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner: "The Constitution for the united states of America". The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not. Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn't. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment. Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me — and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the "organic" Constitution, we now have "relative" rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereign's right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a "privilege" which we must be licensed to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution. So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word "Sovereign," we must think about what the word means. http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm Mon, 11/21/2011 - 17:12 | 1900348 Chupacabra-322 ![]() U.S. Citizen/Subject – A corporate fictitious entity that merely represents the real person. It acts as a “strawman.” [To call oneself a “sovereign citizen” or “sovereign subject” is an oxymoron, since “sovereign” and “citizen/subject” are mutually exclusive of each other.] When asked if you are a “U.S. Citizen” on corporate legal documents, if you check “yes,” you agree to the terms of Corporate Law and unknowingly relinquish your sovereign status and transfer all of your rights to the UNITED STATES CORPORATION since you are now under contract. From a speech in Congress in The Bankruptcy of the United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33, page H-1303, Speaker Representative James Trafficant Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House states: “…It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only. The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States… Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens of mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the Federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. Citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the Federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets, and labor of their “subjects,” the 14th Amendment U.S. Citizen to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States Corporation all of the credit “money substitute” it needed. Like any debtor, the Federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the Federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves,” the U.S. Citizens, as collateral against the federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks, forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers. Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the People have exchanged one master for another.”
http://dev.republicoftheunitedstates...ublic/history/ |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
There was slight Political resistance movement at the time,
but the TP & Gold hoarding Victorians end up winning out... The Gilded Age was an era of political ferment and conflict over the proper uses of governmental activity. The Greenback movement began as a protest against the national system of money and banking that had emerged by the mid-1870s. In particular, Greenbackers condemned the National Banking System, created by the National Banking Act of 1863, the harmonization of the silver dollar (Coinage Act of 1873 was in fact the "Crime of '73" to Greenback), and the Resumption Act of 1875, which mandated that the U.S. Treasury issue specie (coinage or "hard" currency) in exchange for greenback currency upon its presentation for redemption beginning on 1 January 1879, thus returning the nation to the gold standard. Together, these measures created an inflexible currency controlled by banks rather than the federal government. Greenbacks contended that such a system favored creditors and industry to the detriment of farmers and laborers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenback_Party |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
"The United States of America" is the style established under the Articles of Confederation.
This original government had no "District of Columbia". The next document set up territories per the Northwest Ordinance. Several months after the Northwest Ordinance to establish a municipality to attach these territories to a government styled "The United States" was formed under what is now considered to be the United States constitution. Congress wears two hats ... one is to pass laws for the original "The United States of America" and another to manage all laws within the territories. They spend all of their energy now and for the past 150 years managing only the territories. You may verify the establishment of a new government for the District of Columbia here http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwsl.html |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
I heard that the style "United States of America" (without the "the") has come back into vogue again as of 8-9 years ago.
Funny thing, TomTom has an entry for "United States of America". It will navigate you to the District. If you like go to Manta.com and enter "United States of America". Then try "The United States of America". |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
Here is what Manta reports under "Embassy of the United States of America"
Embassy Of The United States Of America in Washington, DC is a private company categorized under Embassies. Our records show it was established in 1789 and incorporated in District of Columbia. Register for free to see additional information such as annual revenue and employment figures. Companies like Embassy Of The United States Of America usually offer: Embassy, Embassy Row. Current director is Bob Orr No matter. It is still a private company. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
This is my question, if Ron Paul was allowed against all miracles to win this thing.....
It is this very issue of why I don't think Ron Paul or anyone other than a chosen insider will seat that office. I WANT to be optimistic as hell about the prospect, but I don't think it is for the US Citizen to actually decide....It's not their office, not their corporation. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|