Time to Wake up People

American Governance
Both systems concurrently exist today. However, the corporate system has been gaining predominance in the last 70 years. Many Sovereigns (We the people) have contracted with the corporate system unknowingly, unintentionally, and or without full disclosure given.

Once you learn the difference, you may have to make a decision for yourself, family and posterity. That decision may require changes in how you conduct yourself. You will have to undo what has been done to make your Sovereign status known. This is not taught in the corporate government's public school system, because you are not to know.

The elite of the "One World government" corporate system want
and need to have power and control over the population (masses)
they call "Human Resources."

www.usavsus.info...

Read the difference in the WORDS used. The "U.S." and the 50 states of the union united. We are NOT "U.S." citizens. We ARE Citizens of the 50 union states united. Capital "C" in the word "Citizen" is so very important that it really defies explanation. Citizen is a noun, it describes WHAT you are, citizen is just an adjective describing what you are and WHO owns YOU. You live in one of the 50 union states, NOT in the "U.S." as describe in the Consitution, which is "the capital building and the surrounding 10 miles square." D.C.

Corporate Officers

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS

District of Columbia


In the revision of the Statutes relating to the District,
the clause of the Act of 1871, declaring the District of Columbia
(Rev. Stat. D.C. p. 2, Sec. 2) to be a body corporate for
municipal purposes, with power to contract, etc. was retained.
By the Act of June 20, 1874, for the government of the District
and for other purposes. (18 Stat. 116, Chap. 337), previous
statutes providing for the District a governor, secretary,
legislative assembly, board of public works and a delegate to
Congress were repealed, and all the power and authority then
vested in the governor and board of public works, except as
limited by that Act, were vested in a commission, composed of
three persons, to be appointed by the President, with the consent
of the Senate. But by the Act of June 11, 1878 (20 Stat. chap.
180), a permanent form of government for the District was
established. It provided that "the District of Columbia shall
remain and continue a municipal corporation, as provided in
section two of the Revised Statutes relating to said District,"
and that the commissioners therein provided for should "be deemed
and taken as officers of such corporation.

[The District of Columbia v. Henry E. Woodbury, 136 U.S. 472]
[(1890)]

www.supremelaw.org...

I had a great post going and then I lost it. Clicked onto another site for more info and it over rode my posting here. It was good too. Explaining all the dimensions and information that is needed to comprehend just how far off track we have gotten. If you read the site I have posted above it is a great jumping off point. Not to jump off and into the abyss, but to inform yourself and understand the differences when using words, NOT to get yourself into trouble but to free your mind and understand and comprehend WHO we are and WHAT we are. It is amazing once you understand that the police have no authority over you, that the government has no authority over you, that YOU have the ability to set the record straight, to teach your children the power they possess and how to use it properly. RESPECT, RESPONSIBILITY. These two things are the basis for bringing about a great change in the world. I will list some good reading. Turn the television OFF and read, it is how we have become so numb and ignorant. Beer and TV is the worst things on the planet for mankind.

I wish I would not have lost my original post, and I should have done it in Word first and then pasted it here as I have done before, but I was in kind of a hurry, doesn't matter now though. Time is relevant and this is so much more important to get everyone to understand and act upon.

www.barefootsworld.net...

www.barefootsworld.net...

Books like Thomas Paines...Common Sense and Rights of Man, anything by Thomas Jefferson, Albert J. Nock and so on. Smedley D. Butler's "War is a Racket" and so many others. Read, it is a lost thing we do not do often enough, and everyone in the world suffers as a result of the ignorance.

Please read all the information you can. You are NOT an employee of the state or federal "government" and so you do NOT have "income" by which to pay a "tax" on. For those of you who will rebut that presumption, do some research. I could post hundreds of links and text here that will rebut ALL your ignorance. MAN created government, MAN has the authority over that which HE creates, what part of that do you NOT understand?

Just trying to get people to realize and ubderstand the use of words and that they DO have very specific means and ramifications. Most are negative ramifications. It is up to us all to set the record straight and to TAKE BACK what is rightfully ours, OUR liberty and posterity.

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error;
it is the function of the Citizen to keep the government from falling into error."
American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442 (1950);

"... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty ... Sovereignty is the right to govern; a nation or State sovereign is the person or persons in whom that resides. In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the Prince; here, it rests with the people; there, the sovereign actually administers the government; here, never in a single instance; our Governors are the agents of the people, and, at most, stand in the same relation to their sovereign in which regents in Europe stand to their sovereigns. Their Princes have personal powers, dignities, and preeminences; our rulers have none but official; nor do they partake in the sovereignty otherwise, or in any other capacity, than as private citizens."

--Supreme Court of the United States
2 US 419 (February 1794)
Chisholm v. Georgia
Chief Justice: Jay, John
Argued: February 5, 1793
Decided: February 18, 1793

But once again....a "person" has been changed to INCLUDE corporations. The change was made well after THIS decision was handed down, and we can see the reason WHY. Because back in 1793 a "person" ONLY meant a Human Being and NOT a corporation as it does today, so WE must change the way we look at things. This is the biggest crime ever committed against mankind. To change the language to mean something other than what it was originally meant to. Nothing will change until the people decide to make that change. I do not live under the corporate code. Obama is NOT my president, he is the head of the corporation known as the "U.S." and NOT the nation of the 50 united states of America. They will use the "UNTIED STATES OF AMERICA" because that denotes a corporate title. All capital letters is a distinct corporate description and NOT an actual thing other than a corporation. Fact.

You are NOT a resident but a transient inhabitant of earth, your residency is in heaven or wherever you believe you go when you die. They (government) can't own your soul. And that is what gives us animation, life.

Tell the government to kiss off and mind their own business as it is NONE of their business, you are not engaged in government business, you ARE engaged in PRIVATE business. You do not work for the government, you work for yourself. No license required. Abide by the regulations and you are golden. Respect your fellow man. You are NOT engaged in "traffic", you have the free right of movement WITHOUT restriction, which a license places upon you. You have the right to gather food, so you do not NEED a hunting or fishing licnese. Again ABIDE by the regulations and you are golden!! Be fair to others, RESPECT. Simple as that.

One more thing..... the ONLY thing that is going to happen on or in December of this year is the end of the "Federal Reserve Charter". The Federal Reserve will no longer have the ability to print fiat currency. THAT is it, unless that charter is renewed, which I doubt as they want to implement the "Amero", just like the Euro, nothing else is going to happen. Your paper money becomes worthless unless you accept their new offer of fiat currency.

I suggest that we all take a good look at that and DENY the government any more authority to do anything other than coin money from gold or silver. Ron Paul has it right.

Wake up America, the nightmare is going to be finally over, one way or another!!!

Philadelphia is the Capitol

The Articles of Confederation
were agreed to by the united states in Congress assembled on November 15, 1777 and were ratified March 1, 1781. From the time of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776, to the time of the Articles of Confederation there was a space of time of sixteen months and eleven days. During this period of time, the several nations, states, countries were sovereign unto themselves as relates to foreign earthly powers.

There was an outstanding debt of 17 million silver Lira from french banks over 21 separate occasions all due on December 1, 1789.

Therefore, a bankruptcy Charter had to be drafted. On September 17, 1787, twelve State delegates approved the Constitution. The States have now become Constitutors.

"Constitutor: In the civil law, one who, by simple agreement, becomes responsible for the payment of another's debt."
--Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed.

The States were now liable for the debt owed to the King, but the people of America were not. The people are not a party to the Constitution because it was never put to them for a vote.

The judge in the Padleford case stated; "But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain. If they do, they are entitled to redress. Or they may waive the right to complain."
--Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520

Just more info from the original site in case some people are too lazy to read or go to the site and research it.

www.usavsus.info...

No one will be waking up any time soon.

take this site for example. When Obama was elected I has a signature with his face on Mussolini's body and was told it was inappropriate.

Here we have the realization 4 years later when it is too late to do anything other than live with the full grown monster that is a corporate run, fascist state.

America argues about gay rights while Chinese banks are granted access to America's commerce engines via the fed.

Welcome to a lifetime of hoping the body snatchers don't realize you are not one of them.

What are you saying exactly? could you clear it up for me, do I need a license to drive? should I buy car insurance because its a law? Do I need a permit to carry a concealed weapon? What exactly do I say when questioned by authorities? I am sovereign independent? I am not a citizen of the united states? As far as I can tell, when you're kidnapped by police, telling them your not bound by the constitution isn't getting you out of jail any quicker.

America this America that...

America totally rules!

other places are so butt boring do they even exist at all... or do they need to?

I am beginning to believe this is the Americans world though, really...

Originally posted by nrd101
What are you saying exactly? could you clear it up for me, do I need a license to drive? should I buy car insurance because its a law? Do I need a permit to carry a concealed weapon? What exactly do I say when questioned by authorities? I am sovereign independent? I am not a citizen of the united states? As far as I can tell, when you're kidnapped by police, telling them your not bound by the constitution isn't getting you out of jail any quicker.

No, you don't need a license to travel, you need one to drive as driving is a paid occupation.

freedom-school.com...

www.articlesbase.com...

And you don't talk tot he police, they are security guards for the corporate city, remind them of that. A co-worker was pulled over the other day, he had watched Dean Clifford videos I sent him and gave him some paperwork to study like i posted here, he refused to talk to the police or take a breathelizer test, he rebutted all their claims and they let him go. I was shocked, I don't condone drinking and driving, but he stood his ground, hurt no one and made it home safely.

privateaudio.homestead.com...

reply to post by daddio


Flagged and stars for you. More thoughts on this topic tomorrow.

reply to post by daddio


While I support the goal of returning to the Constitution, in my mind that would only serve as a FIRST step in severing government’s ability to overstep their legitimate power because it was written in such a way that the only thing Citizens of the States could do to hold government in check was to “protest for redress of grievances”. Congress was given the sole power to hold themselves in check through the impeachment process.

But there were skeptics then, just as so many of us are skeptics now. And much of what the anti federalists wrote way back then was written anonymously for fear of backlashes, just as many today write anonymously for similar fears.

Anti Federalist Papers Introduction: www.wepin.com...
“Those furious zealots who are for cramming it (the constitution) down the throats of the people, without allowing them either time or opportunity to scan or weigh it in the balance of their understandings, bear the same marks in their features as those who have been long wishing to erect an aristocracy in THIS COMMONWEALTH [of Massachusetts]. Their menacing cry is for a RIGID government, it matters little to them of what kind, provided it answers THAT description. As the plan now offered comes something near their wishes, and is the most consonant to their views of any they can hope for, they come boldly forward and DEMAND its adoption. They brand with infamy every man who is not as determined and zealous in its favor as themselves. They cry aloud the whole must be swallowed or none at all, thinking thereby to preclude any amendment; they are afraid of having it abated of its present RIGID aspect. They have strived to overawe or seduce printers to stifle and obstruct a free discussion, and have endeavored to hasten it to a decision before the people can duly reflect upon its properties. In order to deceive them, they incessantly declare that none can discover any defect in the system but bankrupts who wish no government, and officers of the present government who fear to lose a part of their power. These zealous partisans may injure their own cause, and endanger the public tranquility by impeding a proper inquiry; the people may suspect the WHOLE to be a dangerous plan, from such COVERED and DESIGNING schemes to enforce it upon them. Compulsive or treacherous measures to establish any government whatever, will always excite jealousy among a free people: better remain single and alone, than blindly adopt whatever a few individuals shall demand, be they ever so wise. I had rather be a free citizen of the small republic of Massachusetts, than an oppressed subject of the great American empire. Let all act understandingly or not at all. If we can confederate upon terms that wilt secure to us our liberties, it is an object highly desirable, because of its additional security to the whole. If the proposed plan proves such an one, I hope it will be adopted, but if it will endanger our liberties as it stands, let it be amended; in order to which it must and ought to be open to inspection and free inquiry. The inundation of abuse that has been thrown out upon the heads of those who have had any doubts of its universal good qualities, have been so redundant, that it may not be improper to scan the characters of its most strenuous advocates. It will first be allowed that many undesigning citizens may wish its adoption from the best motives, but these are modest and silent, when compared to the greater number, who endeavor to suppress all attempts for investigation. These violent partisans are for having the people gulp down the gilded pill blindfolded, whole, and without any qualification whatever. These consist generally, of the NOBLE order of C[incinnatu]s, holders of public securities, men of great wealth and expectations of public office, B[an]k[er]s and L[aw]y[er]s: these with their train of dependents form the Aristocratick combination. The Lawyers in particular, keep up an incessant declamation for its adoption; like greedy gudgeons they long to satiate their voracious stomachs with the golden bait. The numerous tribunals to be erected by the new plan of consolidated empire, will find employment for ten times their present numbers; these are the LOAVES AND FISHES for which they hunger. They will probably find it suited to THEIR HABITS, if not to the HABITS OF THE PEOPLE. There may be reasons for having but few of them in the State Convention, lest THEIR '0@' INTEREST should be too strongly considered. The time draws near for the choice of Delegates. I hope my fellow-citizens will look well to the characters of their preference, and remember the Old Patriots of 75; they have never led them astray, nor need they fear to try them on this momentous occasion.” A FEDERALIST

16 Delegates to the Constitutional Convention did not sign to ratify, a few for personal reasons, but most because they objected to the language and the lack of a Bill of Rights. Some Anti-Federalists did end up voting to adopt on the promise that the BoR would be added. Four of the next five states to ratify did so with similar demands. North Carolina refused to ratify until significant steps had been made toward a Bill of Rights. James Madison wrote an interesting letter to Thomas Jefferson about this time, about the pros and cons of adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. Much of it was written in cipher, a secret code between the two parties that only they knew, so that if the letter was read by anyone else they wouldn't understand what was written. You can read the letter here.

Read more: www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com...

So reflect back on the anti federalist statement about the attempts to deceive the people. And reflect on how much of the BoR is acknowledged today.

And all they had to do to eliminate court challenges to the abridgement of these rights was to replace the constitutional court system with maritime courts, admiralty courts, mercantile courts and/or administrative courts where the Constitution/BoR has no standing. Does anyone think such changes in the justice system were merely an honest mistake? An oversight? Done in the interest of the people of the States? Or was it because they were then, are now and will always be zealous partisans whose only reason for being is for the protection and promotion of the aristocratic combination?

Originally posted by frazzle
16 Delegates to the Constitutional Convention did not sign to ratify, a few for personal reasons, but most because they objected to the language and the lack of a Bill of Rights. Some Anti-Federalists did end up voting to adopt on the promise that the BoR would be added. Four of the next five states to ratify did so with similar demands. North Carolina refused to ratify until significant steps had been made toward a Bill of Rights. James Madison wrote an interesting letter to Thomas Jefferson about this time, about the pros and cons of adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. Much of it was written in cipher, a secret code between the two parties that only they knew, so that if the letter was read by anyone else they wouldn't understand what was written. You can read the letter here.

Read more: www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com...

So reflect back on the anti federalist statement about the attempts to deceive the people. And reflect on how much of the BoR is acknowledged today.

And all they had to do to eliminate court challenges to the abridgement of these rights was to replace the constitutional court system with maritime courts, admiralty courts, mercantile courts and/or administrative courts where the Constitution/BoR has no standing. Does anyone think such changes in the justice system were merely an honest mistake? An oversight? Done in the interest of the people of the States? Or was it because they were then, are now and will always be zealous partisans whose only reason for being is for the protection and promotion of the aristocratic combination?

The Constitution is s corporate contract, WE were never a party to it. It is irrelevent. We have natural rights and we do not owe our existence to a document. The Decleration of Independence STATES our resolve and that we are free to choose. WE must hold congress accountalbe by hanging those who would defy our wishes or attempt to pass "legislation" that would do anything but regulate foreign or domestic commerce.

THIS is where people get it wrong, they read what is written BY the "government" and not by outsiders looking in like Thomas Paine. Most people want and need to be taken care of from cradle to grave, so they don't bother investigating anything as the do not want to rock the boat for fear of falling overboard and they can't swim...i.e. can't fend for themselves but must rely on others as they are non-intelligent and weak. We are the only species that saves the weak, and it has brought us all down. Not to sound mean or evil, but that is a fact. It is our detriment that we save the weak.

Read the Us v USA and see al the differences in what you speak of. I have read the federalist and own a copy of the anti-federaliost papers. I don't believe any of it.

Originally posted by frazzle
16 Delegates to the Constitutional Convention did not sign to ratify, a few for personal reasons, but most because they objected to the language and the lack of a Bill of Rights. Some Anti-Federalists did end up voting to adopt on the promise that the BoR would be added. Four of the next five states to ratify did so with similar demands. North Carolina refused to ratify until significant steps had been made toward a Bill of Rights. James Madison wrote an interesting letter to Thomas Jefferson about this time, about the pros and cons of adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. Much of it was written in cipher, a secret code between the two parties that only they knew, so that if the letter was read by anyone else they wouldn't understand what was written. You can read the letter here.

Read more: www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com...

So reflect back on the anti federalist statement about the attempts to deceive the people. And reflect on how much of the BoR is acknowledged today.

And all they had to do to eliminate court challenges to the abridgement of these rights was to replace the constitutional court system with maritime courts, admiralty courts, mercantile courts and/or administrative courts where the Constitution/BoR has no standing. Does anyone think such changes in the justice system were merely an honest mistake? An oversight? Done in the interest of the people of the States? Or was it because they were then, are now and will always be zealous partisans whose only reason for being is for the protection and promotion of the aristocratic combination?

Watch this documentary to go with Kymatica and Zeitgeist...

www.thrivemovement.com...

Watched it this morning with my wife, very good documentary.

Soon, more poeple will "get it" and KNOW that government does not matter, each individual matters. Do not get owned, rebut and throw off the ties of "government" which we do not need and should never have been intended to control only to regulate commerce.

And I find it so funny how so few wish to do the right thing but bitch all the time about life and it's problems but offer no solution or look into helping each other out. Sad society and members.