Is America a Corporation?
Myth

The United States is a corporation.

Is the United States of America a Corporation?

Despite misconceptions, the United States is not a corporation. This can be confirmed by its lack of incorporating acts, its sovereign immunity, and past court cases, among other things.

Below we explain the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, the Act which many people believe to have turned the United States of America into a global corporation at the hands of international bankers but didn’t.[1]

Well also explain U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 176 › Subchapter A › § 3002 28 U.S. Code § 3002, which has similar claims made about it (and also didn’t “turn American into a corporation”).

The important thing to get here is that regions of the United States may or may not be organized and incorporated. Cities, towns, and territories are often incorporated in the United States.

That doesn’t mean “they are corporations,” it means they are “incorporated within the United States.”

TIP: For those that don’t want to read: When 28 U.S. Code § 3002 says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States, not that the “United States” is a corporation. Likewise, the Organic Acts organize (give governance rights) to D.C. They do not create another United States. All states and organized territories can self-govern despite being beholden to the Federal Government. Simply put, there is only one United States.

TIPThe United States of America consists of 50 states, 1 federal district (D.C.), 1 incorporated territory, and 15 unincorporated territories. Entities created by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches can also be considered “a part” of the United States regarding issues like sovereign immunity and being beholden to the central government.

“We may say in passing that the argument that the United States may be treated as a corporation organized under its own laws, that is, under the Constitution as the fundamental law, seems so strained as not to merit serious consideration .” – United States Supreme Court UNITED STATES v. COOPER CORPORATION, (1941) No. 484 Argued: March 6, 1941 Decided: March 31, 1941

The U.S. Corporation Myth

The reason this page exists is that it is addressing a persistent myth.

Some say, “The United States of America” is different from the “UNITED STATES” [corporation],” and that, “The UNITED STATES was formed in 1871 and controls only the District of Columbia and the territories it purchases or acquires; Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands.” This is not correct (to the best of my knowledge, although feel free to comment below).

Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands are unincorporated and organized territories of the United States (the one and only United States). The District of Columbia is an incorporated and organized district under the direct control of Congress since the passage of its Organic Acts. It was purposefully organized this way to avoid state-level power grabs, not to ensure some banking conspiracy, as is sometimes insinuated.

The lack of statehood for the capital is to be found in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the document reads, “The Congress shall have Power To …exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States.” – Here’s Why Washington D.C. Isn’t a State [2]

TIP: Columbia is a poetically named, historically used to reference the United States that is a reference to Christopher Columbus. The de facto unofficial national anthem used to be “Hail, Columbia!”

Disambiguation: The “incorporation doctrine” refers to the idea that the states are beholden to the Bill of Rights. This is a concept used in the gun debate; it doesn’t apply here.

Organization and Incorporation in the United States

Before we get into debunking the Organic Act of 1871 myth, let’s discuss how organization and incorporation work. You can skip to the next section for the debunking part.

In business law, a corporation is that which is incorporated as a company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law. For regions within the United States, it works much the same way.

Regarding a city, town, territory, or region:

  • Being incorporated means being part of the United States proper (AKA being incorporated into the United States). A legal part of the U.S. in terms of rights, not only property of the U.S.
  • Being organized means having an organized government authorized by an Organic Act passed by the U.S. Congress. This usually consists of a territorial legislature, territorial governor, and a basic judicial system. Being organized means being able to self-govern, even in the case of an organized unincorporated territory which is owned by the U.S. but can govern itself.

A territory may be neither incorporated or organized, like American Samoa; it may be unincorporated and organized like Puerto Rico; incorporated and unorganized, like Palmyra Atoll; or incorporated and organized like the District of Columbia. D.C. is organized and operates under Article One of the United States Constitution and the District of Columbia Home Rule Act and is incorporated by its Organic Acts.[3]

Meanwhile, being admitted into the Union as a state by Congress is the only way for a region to become an official state of the United States.

Are Any States Corporations? Neither the United States nor its 50 States are corporations. All are incorporated into the union by an act of Congress and get their power from the federal Constitution. State Constitutions govern the individual states.

TIP: Only entities incorporated into the U.S. and its states can enjoy sovereign immunity; only official states enjoy voting rights. This why Puerto Rico and D.C. have no official voting rights in Congress. The United States [corporation] if it did exist, would have fewer rights and less sovereignty than a state. Likewise, if the U.S. were a corporation, it would not have sovereign immunity unless it was otherwise owned by the United States federal government itself.

TIP: In the absence of an organic law, a territory is classified as unorganized; in the absence of being “incorporated” into the United States, a territory is unincorporated. This is why it was vital to pass the Organic Acts including the Organic Act of 1871, which organized and incorporated D.C., “the Seat of the Government of the United States.”[4]

FACT: The United States includes 50 states, 1 federal district (D.C.), and many territories with different statuses. Those entities, as well as all executive, legislative, and judicial entities on the federal and state level are beholden to the central federal government. In some cases, this is despite them having their own charters and constitutions and having their own “powers.” There are a few exceptions, like the Federal Reserve which is an independent entity within government. Still, even when there are exceptions, all the entities are beholden to the federal government, and thus to Congress as well. Congress is comprised of state-based elected officials who represent “we the people,” and thus are beholden to “the people” to an extent. This is also true for the Treasury, and no U.S. Code › Title 12 › Chapter 3 › Subchapter XII › § 411 12 U.S. Code § 411 – Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption, doesn’t imply otherwise as insinuated here.

Is the Federal Government, states, territories, or people sovereign? The states and commonwealths of the U.S. are sovereign, as are local governments, as are our citizens, as is the Federal Government… even unincorporated territories like Puerto Rico have some degree of sovereignty, but it doesn’t mean the same thing for each entity. Firstly, every entity is beholden the federal government. Meanwhile, the federal government, state governments, and local governments all enjoy sovereignty (regarding governance) and sovereign immunity (regarding being sued) under U.S. law (although the degree of immunity differs by the entity). This may extend to entities doing contract work for the state (see Advanced Software Design v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis), but it doesn’t apply to entities that are unincorporated into the U.S. Puerto Rico does not have the same sovereignty the states do. See Political status of Puerto Rico for a discussion of why it was important for D.C. to not be an unincorporated and unorganized district. In terms of the electoral system and rights, sovereignty refers to the fact that each of our 320 million citizens is 1/320 millionth sovereign and each has human rights and voting rights as ensured by the federal constitution and state constitutions although power is delegated in the Republic. See Sovereign immunity in the United States and compare to popular sovereignty for a better understanding of how this complex philosophical concept and the legal concept is often misused in general debate.

 Why Do People Think the United States is a Corporation?

In 1871 Congress incorporated the District of Columbia, and the wording of the Act (along with a few bits of supposed evidence featured below) caused some to speculate that the United States had become a corporation controlled by the international banks.

The simplest rebuttal to this, aside from understanding how things work (as presented above), is pointing out that the Act incorporated and organized D.C., not the United States. D.C. and the “United States” are not the same entity any more than Nashville is the same as Tennessee.

Some otherwise excellent articles that seek to focus on the truth patriotically, like the following article are a misleading, “The United States Isn’t a Country — It’s a Corporation!” Articles like this complex but accurate article and this 2013 article (which I’ll cite liberally here as it proceeded ours chronologically) are correct.[5][6]

UNITED STATES is a Corporation – There are Two Constitutions – Sovereignty. <— No, there are not “two constitutions,” and no, there is no weird sovereignty loophole aside from he well-known Citizens United idea that corporations are people.

TIP: Some point to America as a type of corporatocracy (a government controlled by corporations). Certainly, cases can be made, if we are talking about the corporations of the fortune 500, or are talking about the Federal Reserve and the City of New York and D.C. This is semantics, and that aside, like the incorporation doctrine, this topic is only loosely related.

TIP: 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 the 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?

Debunking the Myth that the United States is a Corporation

As noted by the previous correct article back in 2013, the two legal documents used to fuel the myth that the U.S. is a private corporation owned by “the Rothchilds” of which our President is CEO, misunderstand the documents they are citing.

For more on the Rothchilds, see a history lesson about the history of banking (NOTE: I am not proposing that international bankers, be than Rothchilds or Morgans for example, aren’t important parts of western and American history, or that they didn’t have a hand in aspects of the creation of our modern system… in fact, that truism seems fairly clear. I am simply proposing that they do not own a corporation named the UNITED STATES that has somehow replaced the United States of America).

With that said, let’s clarify the documents noted above.

Debunking the U.S. Code Title 28 Myth

The first bit of evidence Presented from U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 176 › Subchapter A › § 3002 28 U.S. Code § 3002 is:

28 USC § 3002 – Definitions

As used in this chapter:

(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.

This is used to justify the idea that “United States” means a Federal corporation. The problem is that this isn’t what (15) says (and even if it was, it says “As used in this chapter.”)

To paraphrase in common language the provision says: “United States” includes any federal corporation, agency, department, or instrument of the United States.

In other words, when the document says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States, not that the “United States” is a corporation.

Another way to phrase it would be:

(15) “United States” means A; B; or C —  (A) a Federal corporation of the United States; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. I.e. when we say “United States” we mean the property of the country. Get it?

Debunking the Organic Act of 1871 Myth

The other part of the claim says that the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates a new Constitution for the United States by inserting wording for “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” in the act that somehow replaced our original “The Constitution for the United States of America.”

So, the first thing to point out is that the act the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates “a Government for D.C.” as it says in the Act. It has nothing to do with creating a Government for the United States.

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.

Up to that point, D.C. had been governed as a mixture of municipalities and counties within District boundaries and not by its Government as a state. Later, in 1874, Congress repealed the territorial government to create a single municipal government for the federal district. See Origin and Government of the District of Columbia Judd & Detweiler, 1902.

Today “the name of the Seat of Government of the United States is The District of Columbia,” but that D.C. and the U.S. are not the same just as the Seat of Government of Washington State is Olympia, but Washington State is not Olympia.

TIP: It is a “federal district” because it is directly controlled by the Government. It is not a state and does not control the government.



Conclusion

As one would assume, despite the persistent myths, the United States is not a corporation.


Citations

  1. The Corporation (explains the conspiracy theory in detail)
  2. Here’s Why Washington D.C. Isn’t a State
  3. Government of the District of Columbia
  4. Is the United States of America a Country or a Corporation?
  5. United States Inc.
  6. Supreme Law – is the U.S. a corporation?
  7. Supreme Law – is the U.S. a corporation?


"The United States is a Corporation" is tagged with: Liberty, Philosophy of Law, United States of America


Vote Fact or Myth: "The United States is a Corporation"

Your Vote: {{ voteModel || 'no vote' | uppercase }}

Almodovar, Anthony on
Supports this as a Fact.

You are aware that the US industrial revolution began winding down in 1870 after it took off in 1820 right? Also during the industrial revolution the men that built America did so through fear and any means necessary to gain control over industries. What happened during that time is exactly why this country broke away from Britain. Saying these corporate leaders had no hand in the Act of 1871 is a statement lacking knowledge of the time period. You stated that it’s a conspiracy that international bankers were involved. That statement also lacks knowledge. JP Morgan organized a bailout for the US in 1895 through a civil war era loophole. JP Morgans father had ties to the Bank of England and Rothschild. I recommend the book “Lords of Creation” if you’d like a detailed understanding of what was happening during the 19th century in America. Fact- this country was built on a hatred for corporate sovereignty and centralized banking. Fact- banking practices that were perfected in Europe did infiltrate this country. You are aware of the 2 previous central bank failures from this countries early history right? Fact- An entity cannot interact with a living man in the real world without said man also having an entity to claim. That’s where the all caps name argument comes from. The UNITED STATES is an entity doing business with JOHN ADAM DOE. The UNITED STATES entity cannot in anyway do business with Doe, John Adam a living man. Taxation is an example of doing business. The UNITED STATES entity can only tax a living man if he is linked to an entity, in which case we are all linked to an entity by that lovely Social Security number. A birth certificate creates the entity and social security tracks the entity. You voluntarily accept the entity as being you. Hence why the IRS openly admits taxation as being voluntary.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Interesting claims. I’ll research what you state and give my insight below.

Until I can fully research this more I would say this:

1. International banks obviously have an important role in Western history.
2. I have read the Act of 1871 and 28 U.S. Code § 3002 and I really don’t see the legal wording that would turn American into a corporation (from that perspective).
3. What you say is well spoken and smart, but you buzzworded a bit. You said some things like “this country was built on a hatred for corporate sovereignty and centralized banking”… but that isn’t fully true. Some early social conservatives and Jeffersonian classical liberal were anti-bank, just like Jackson, but others like the Adams’ and Hamilton wanted a central bank. Meanwhile, those who were anti-bank were pro slavery, so let’s not go awarding them too many medals. We essentially went to war over this whole thing (the Civil War). After that war these acts were signed, later the Fed was created and the 16th was. Here you can see what I am saying, that is half the country wants an income tax, a global economy, and the world’s top bankers banking our currency, the other side wants to crush the “Secret Societies The Committee of 300, The Jesuits, 13 Illuminati Papal Bloodline Families,The Federal Reserve Bank, Operation Paperclip & MK-Ultra”… right? I mean, one side likes Rachel Maddow and TYT and the other likes Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones. So, I mean, its not like I don’t get the subtext of what you are saying, I do. Also not like I’m advocating the idea that we should offer our country up on a platter alongside our liberty to some international order. I am only suggesting that you are illustrating a somewhat narrow view.

All that aside, to the specific point on this page, I don’t see those documents as literally turning the U.S. into a corporation or creating a corporation UNITED STATES that somehow owns the sentence case republic of state “the United States.”

That said, I take your comments seriously and will read the book you suggest and think on this more in earnest.

I guess i’m just saying, “it is a mistake to think everyone who doesn’t see the world the way you do has some conspiratorial agenda.” If you put enough groups together in a big tent it isn’t a conspiracy, it is like half the human race as the left-wing and the other half as the right-wing. This sort of anti-banker conspiracy is what drove WWII. Hitler was very sure he could “crush” these entities, but one has to wonder if he had all his facts straight… after-all he didn’t succeed in more than spurring on the deaths of tens of millions.

Anyway, rant over. One this is for sure, it is a fascinating subject. Thanks for the insight and comments.

Peter on
Supports this as a Fact.

Thomas: Why did they change the “Constitution for the United States of America” to the ” Constitution of the United States of America”?

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I would have to research this. I wasn’t aware this was a thing. We can see the original Constitution here: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1667751

It clearly says “[we]…establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

It isn’t like that is the title of the document, it doesn’t have a title, it just starts with “we the people…”

Can you clarify what you are getting at so I can help research?

NGORadio on

If you say IT IS NOT A CORPORATION THEN WHY your unqualified judges help the thieves stealing people moneys and properties? People don’t trust your lies any more. Same games of enslavement.

Your top federal political players and local 50-states are coordinating the hidden scheme to steal/ collect our assets by perpetrating Wall Street Multiple Fraud in connection with your mortgage fraud. Then you appointed ignorant judges to help the corporations steal everything. This is not a land of freedom but a stole land of occupied Thieves of England.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

So again, I’ll state this more clearly 1. I am not “them,” I’m just a researcher trying to clarify the idea that the United States was turned into a corporation, and 2. Assuming some do want to continue a sort of global Britain based oligarchy, that is only one of many factions, and there are many factions in America (not to mention the world). The problems with lumping everyone into a category and deciding they are against you are too numerous to state… but at least one is that you alienate potential allies and push them toward whatever other side there is.

I think America’s founders had it right when they agreed to disagree Democratically and created a republic. This idea that a band of nationalists can crush the globalist agenda is like a mirror image of the WW2 ideologies. I can’t imagine that is really going to lead us to peace or anything a well intentioned person would want.

In other words, be skeptical, but think critically. If a loud mouth on the internet or some specific state tv channel tells you “it’s us versus them” try flipping the channel to at least hear the other perspective. But either way, try not to crucify me personally (gotta be a bit selfish here 😀 ).

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

One last thing to think about here. Initially the anti federalist and democrats of the late 1700 early 1800s were anti bank… but then they wanted an independent bank. Meanwhile the federalist, whigs, Republicans wanted a central national bank owned by the US. Likewise in these times the federalist right was protectionist and more for taxation, for debt, pro Britain, and the anti federalist left was more pro France, anti tax, against debt, and pro free trade.

However, after the civil war, and despite the federalist win in that battle what was done was not A or B… it was C. Then, by this time the somewhat changed democrats pushed for an independent within government fed and an income tax by 1916. This is really a mix of both past positions and it led to the us becoming a superpower in many ways (that paired with the wars which we didn’t have to fight on our soil, that was big).

One can’t be the world’s team America (trying to say stabilizing force politiely) without having bankers back them. And side note, Hitler found out you can’t even be a tyrant without a good banker you know.

Now if congress controlled the bank it would make $20 trillion of debt worth less… but having some secret backers who we all kind of can guess the general identities of, that gives that debt more weight and helps stabilize.

Same for the way treasury and the fed and the private banks work to create money. Seems shady if you don’t think about why that mixed system is necessary! What, you want congress in charge? Or just the private banks? There are only so many options here!

The nation is stabilized because of the way it is run…. and that allows the nation to stabilize. That also allows the nation to provide for the general welfare with things like Medicare.

This is really a compromise position between the left and right of old. It is unfair to take this “let’s kick out the Rothschilds” conspiracy minded view toward global finance and think you’ve figured it all out.

In fact, some who don’t like the us take this very position (in ww2 and today).

The world is complex, but it is a mistake to think the founders would not have democratically agreed on the choices we made by today had they lived long enough to see our options.

I didn’t even say half of what I have to say here, but simply put, the world is complex and doesn’t conform to one view that involves evil banks and some dream of agrarian democracy that involves winning some war against “the globalists”. That is to me just a front for those with bad intentions they use to mobilize the far left and right against American interests. The story works because it has merit, but it at the end of the day risks starting global conflict over an oversimplification of a longstanding issue.

Now again, that is my input from a researcher standpoint, not me trying to defend or dismiss and not me reading a script of some organization a conspiratorial person might assume I’m a part of because I disagree or put forth difficult propositions.

Just like, the subtext of the claim I’m debunking is I know rather heavy, so want to address it and qualify my addressing of it so we can all see this from the same frame for discussion (not accusation from high minded places).

Maggie on

I would ask what this Delaware corporation for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. Is? https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/ernestrauthschild/united-states-of-america-inc-delawarecorporation.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Great question. There is 100% a United States of America, Inc. file number: 2193946.

https://icis.corp.delaware.gov/Ecorp/EntitySearch/NameSearch.aspx

The problem with this is that it is only one of many things called United States of America registered in the Delaware (and everyone registers everything in Delaware). This however does not imply that we don’t own our country or anything like that. I admit, it is bizarre. Certainly a call for more research. But this finding actually doesn’t even line up with the conspiracy theories….

It for example isn’t founded in 1871. I will research and let you know though.

And, that was fairly easy. There is a long list of corporations called THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I would reckon none are the secret owners of the US and this is just the sort of stuff that gets added to a conspiracy theory. Again, will keep researching though.

2118611 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MEXICO CORPORATION, INC.
4525682 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.
3081058 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-CHINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC.
2057326 UNITED STATES (OF AMERICA) INTELLIGENCE MILITIA (FOUNDED 1947) INC.
2339378 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA & AZERBAIJAN FRIENDSHIP & CULTURALASSOCIATION
5011066 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – SIERRA LEONE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC.
2509028 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AUCTION CO.
2306876 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AUTO CLUB
2325736 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CITIZENSHIP SCHOOL INC. CORRESPONDENCE COURSE
2025923 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORPORATION
2712738 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CRICKET ASSOCIATION
3178004 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, INC.
4311929 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FIDUCIARY INTERNATIONAL, LLC
2537607 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOUNDATION
3732756 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MEDICAL CORPORATION
902242 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE INTERNATIONAL DAIRY FEDERATION, INC.
2302400 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA POCKET BILLIARDS ASSOCIATION, INC.
2201371 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA REALTY ASSOCIATION
849002 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RUGBY FOOTBALL UNION, LTD.
2473168 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WUSHU-KUNGFU FEDERATION, DELAWARESTATE ASSOCIATION, INC.
2193946 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.
944820 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS ASSOCIATION,

Stephanie Best on

Author’s Opinion:

TIP: 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 the 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?

My two cents:

“Which, you know, is good for the country.”

Really?

This Country? Certainly not for its citizens. The IMF, International Banks, and The Federal Reserve are fleecing this Country AND its Citizens by creating perpetual debt equaling upon slavery for this and future generations.

This opinions based upon the notion that these Banking Entities are “good for the country”.

I realize that this is not the topic, however it stands to reason there is no right answer. It is only a matter of semantics within a legal argument about the definition of a ruling body of persons – corporations or otherwise – that is presided over by itself.

When one rules over another without obeying its own rules, it is called oppression.

Stephanie Best on

Please have a look at subsections 15 and 15(A) in Title 28 U.S. Code § 3002 and you should see this sentence, ““United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation”.

W on

Thomas DeMichele Thank you for approaching this topic with an open mind. Anything controversial worth knowing takes endless hours of research to reach a somewhat firm conclusion. I am glad you have chose to take this time. I don’t have the time to form an opinion yet. I did read this article which comes to the opposite conclusion https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalelite177.htm
I did just read an article today relevant to your view on WWII that I have had a little more time to investigate, and so lean towards it being true.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/08/27/antony-sutton-skullbones-hitler-the-bush-family/
I think our concept of war is a lot different that what it actually is. You have read War Is A Racket by Major General Smedley Butler?

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Those are good links, and fully agree that anything worth knowing takes effort and research and an open mind… but on the links, while smart, they miss some of the concept of peace through world trade and enlightenment (it’s what the owl symbolizes essentially). The imagery is purposefully Greek, Egyptian, and Roman and the concept is that of enlightenment. It’s on the back of the dollar bill, and it helps explain everything that Alex jone’s version of the events would call “satanic.”

I’m not saying using the military as a stabilizing force or the international banks as such a force isn’t without its problems(smedely butler does a good job at explaining major sticking points of the military industrial complex for example), I’m only saying it is also misunderstood and likely kept from the public largely on purpose (due to its complexity).

Sure, securing economic interests isn’t always pretty or good, but if peace through trade is the idea, a dictator trying to take over private companies isn’t exactly the ideal. And if a war does occur, backing both sides is the best best bet for someone with a very long view of the future. It’s called hedging. Also, if you have a central bank, there are worse ideas than being accountable to someone other than the treasury that creates the money (third interests and independent within government makes more sense than one entity controlling monetary and fiscal policy). These things aren’t simple, but the logic is there if you look.

I don’t have time to explain my theories on the history of enlightenment and liberalism and it’s relation to banking, the wars, and the modern state. But I will simply point out, the nature of the forces behind the modern state, like the United States is a corporation myth, is being misunderstood. Phew, big subject and I can’t say it all here. But consider checking out the following video where David Rockefeller tries to explain what a new world order is (essentially it’s better than old world chaos and the history of war and oppression, which is the history of the world). You can quip and say, “well isn’t that the history of the new world too!?” But to that I would say, you are asking that question into your smartphone freely, because you live in a liberal country and have money and don’t have a king telling you what you can say. 😉

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M43mEDpQcXY

Walter M Reed on
Supports this as a Fact.

You’re not a very great researcher but I’m going to educate you!,go to the Fox News where representative Allen west of Florida;where he States the president is the Chief Executive Officer of this Corporation Called the United States of America and here in Florida and you can also go to Florida sunbiz.org we’re all corporations have to register to do business in this state and its document number 1 0 0 0 0 9 (the United States Corporation company) also here is a case is 55 Supreme Court 50, 293 U.S. 84, h e l v e r i n g vs Stockholm’s enskilda bank United States District Court 1934 page 5 you can read the whole case if you like sir

Walter M Reed on

I’m Walter and if you want to know anything else?also we all havebeen living in the state of emergency for 63 years see senate report 93-549. they also Blended article 3 of The Constitution, art. 111 common law and Equity law in 1938 they blend those two with admiralty&martine in 1966 and made it a morality does call admiralty it statutory jurisdiction is only three jurisdictions in the Constitution they have the fourth one. Feel free to respond back to this message with questions.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Our team Removed some identifying information from this otherwise well intentioned comment.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Thanks for offering your insight. It will take a bit of time to go through each document listed.

In the meantime: I fully agree that entities incorporated in the United States are United States corporations. I fully disagree that the United States is a corporation owned directly by foreign banks. As summarized in the article.

Jason on

Why did your team remove information?
I feel slighted. The removal of information is more dangerous to us all than anything that could have possibly been left in. You have turned a great conversation about Liberty into a set up. Censoring a conversation on this topic can only be seen as a punch line.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I, the author of the site and editor (in many cases), removed identifying personal information from the comment. I didn’t remove anything of substance to the argument.

Does that make sense?

Speak freely. Just don’t post your personal info online 😉

John Barros on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

If it walks like a corporation, talks like a corporation, controlles a bunch of smaller corporations. Then it’s a corporation bottom line. You can justify it any way you like but that doesn’t change the facts. Blacks law dictionary says a corporation is an artificial person or LEGAL ENTITY created by or under the authority of the laws of a state or nation, composed, in some rare instances, of a single person and his successors, being the incumbents of a particular oltice, but ordinarily consisting of an association of NUMEROUS INDIVIDUALS, who subsist as a body POLITIC under a special denomination. it’s clear in the face if it, so why are you trying to convince people that the facts are not the facts? It’s like putting someone’s hand in water and saying “see, I told you it’s not wet”

Law Dictionary: What is CORPORATION? definition of CORPORATION (Black’s Law Dictionary)

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

If the argument is we meet the criteria of a corporation, I would submit that most nations do as well. I’m not rejecting that concept as much as I’m rejecting this idea that the articles that formed D.C. made the U.S. a literal corporation. I can’t find any proof that is the case, and when I read the documents it was clear to me that it was talking about incorporating D.C. and speaking to agencies being incorporated in the U.S.

In legislation definitions are not action items, they simply clarify what terms mean. From the best I can tell, the myth arises from a misreading of legal speak…

I’m helping someone work on legislation right now (as in in recent weeks), and I can tell you that definitions aren’t binding provisions themselves (and to the extent they are, as in the terms would be in the provision, that definition is still being read out of context).

John Barros on

I’m interested to know what you’re motivation is in regards to this topic. What are you attempting to accomplish by telling everyone that the government who has admitted to being a corporation somehow actually isn’t a corporation, they just look, act, and operate in a corporate fashion while literally controlling only other corporations including PEOPLE, which is why they need to print out birth cirtificates to use as collateral for unsecured debt and can only create joinder with its citizens after they have used instruments to convert them into unwitting corporations with all capital public trust names and social insurance numbers? Come on man! Wake up!

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I’m trying to figure out what the truth is.

The country may operate like a corporation in many respects, but it isn’t literally a corporation like the myth circulating around some internet articles suggests.

I feel like truth is important. We have an article on the U.S. as a corporatocracy, so it isn’t like we are being apologists here. It is just important that we don’t go making stuff up Alex Jones style when searching for the truth (where he finds truths and pairs them with pomp to sell supplements.)

Let’s find the truth, but let us not fill our bellies with internet supplements.

http://factmyth.com/is-america-an-oligarchy/

Jonnie on

Want proof the UNITED STATES is a Corporation. Just look at your official birth certificate, and back of your social security card. That red number is a bond number. Hence the reason your Certificate of life is printed on bond paper. The United States went bankrupt from the civil war and was in severe debt. They literally had nothing to offer except the citizens of this country. So they sold it to the international bankers who wanted a piece of this country to begin with. Congress as usual covers their own butts by incorporating D.C as its own entity, state, separating themselves from the rest of the states so they would not have to answer to any other country. This is where the changing of the constitition took place. The original constitution is worded and type faced completely different and that is NOT a typo. The original constitution is written: Constitution for the United States of America. The revised version that we are bound by is written as: Constitution of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. As soon as that deal was made, every living and born citizen assumed the debt of this country and our birth certificate is proof of that, its also why the same bond number is stamped on federal reserve notes. The act of 1871 was the largest bailout in history and the assets that were liquidated were you and I. We are still paying that debt today because people don’t know the truth, dont want to know, or simply don’t care.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

That is a lot to chew on. Interesting concepts.

We do all owe our share of the national debt. And we didn’t become the most powerful nation on earth without a lending relationship with banks and a trade relationship with other countries. I mean, how can one borrow $20 trillion to support their growth if not for good relationships? And, why lend $20 trillion to a country whose citizen’s won’t pay it back?

Do you demonize your bank for the money you borrowed? I mean, I get the lure of it, but I don’t get the logic of it.

This is a many faceted issue I could discuss all day long… One thing I’ll say though is that I’m really not aware of a new Constitution. We have the old one, I posted a link to it, it is still binding, it still says Constitution for the United States of America. Literally you can read it on the .Gov archives site.

Now, I haven’t researched it, but the idea that a birth certificate is a bond seems not right. And indeed, a Google search tells me over and over its a conspiracy theory. Now, that isn’t good enough, we have to do our own research. But like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redemption_movement

Kind of makes me feel like you have righteous frustration but are listening to Alex Jones (or someone like that) and not doing your due diligence to sincerely seek the facts. Let us both look a little harder to see if we can find the truth here. You just saying it isn’t good enough, and me just questioning it isn’t good enough. We need to find some proof one way or the other before we speculate further.

Dr. Wayne R. Hitchener, Ph.D. on

Individual laws, acts or statutes are created by representative assembly….over the decades, since our govt’s inception, many influential representatives have collectively thwarted constitutional restraints by the clever manipulation of court cases and reneged their personal honor and integrity by said actions. This is what has lead to our present millenial crises, not the supposed fact that the Organic Acts of 1801 or 1871 incorporated the United States as an hostile contractor of the states. Poor and deceptive leadership and the willing accomplice of wanton voters has caused our current woes. Attention to detail and scrutiny must begin with strong involvement of the body politic in the legislative process to slowly correct the abominations that we are suffering….we were presented with a Republic, now is the time to find a way to keep it and stop finger pointing.