Translate

Saturday, 3 August 2013

Not only is the USA a Corporation- it's a religious corporation.... *thud*

Oh baby!!!.... this is getting sooooo good now!  Sooooo much fun!!!  More and more absolute data coming out- more and more dots are being connected.  Here is a couple  of HUGE dots that a lot of people were asking about- in black and white.   Why did the Papal decree matter in Washington?  Why are people fleeing the scene?  How about the fact that the  United States of America "Government" is listed as a non-profit Religious Corporation?   I mean, the fact that they had the balls to list themselves as "Non-profit" is laughable enough.... but the "Religious Corporation" should be shaking you to your very toes!  Do you SEE how religion is controlling your purported government?  Do you understand now how it is that the Pope is the top dog after all? All Laws- Admiralty and Common - are held under Canon Law.... just as they always have been. Follow the trail from the Vatican to the City of London (which is it's own country by the way), and from there to the fact that the USA is under British rule- through corporations.  The "Bar association?" - British. Hence the fact that the 13th amendment was hidden at all costs by the purported American Government.  Oh and all you Floridians? Your entire state is owned by England- check out Tallahassee guys..... NOT American owned.  More and more info is coming out constantly- daily, even hourly now!!  This is AWESOME.



http://americankabuki.blogspot.com/2013/08/united-states-of-america-inc-registered.html

UPDATED: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INC.
Registered in Delaware
as a Religious Non-profit Corporation


by American Kabuki
Note: minor corrections to law origins of Papal fealty in England -AK

If you've been wondering how the Pope Francis recent Apostolic Letter regarding the Roman Curia law removing legal immunity and liability from governments, attorneys and judges, might affect governments around the world, then read on. I got many inquiries asking for how a Roman law can affect an ostensibly secular government.  And that's a far enough question...and I couldn't remember the exact reason in law why that was true, so I asked a friend who I knew would know.

I got this reply from a friend well versed in law and the history of the legal systems:
It pre-dates this but in looking to John the Noble (King John) before the Magna Carta, He was trying to break away from the Vatican back in the middle ages, I can get dates later.

Pope Innocent III in 1216 stuck King John's balls to the fire with the king's nobles by threatening to excommunicate him and all of England if he did not pledge fealty to the Papal SEE (along with money and land).

The nobles threatened to wage war to dethrone him. He caved. Hence the Papal SEE took over the title to the land of England and its wealth. The Magna Carta came about as a result of John's reign pissing off the nobles with the contention with Pope Innocent III in 1216.  John's judicial reforms had a lasting impact on the English common law system.

In fundamentals of law class I learned that Roman Law is a foundation of modern law (not Natural Law -  2 different entities). Later on Church law became the overseer of that existing law. Papal Bulls took over around 1455 which is much like the current Executive Orders each succeeding tyrant signs to circumvent the constitutional; based law here.
LATE UPDATE: 8/2/2013 3:37 PM I got this URL from Lisa Harrison to an article that goes into the importance of Pope Francis Apostolic Letter to law:  http://blog.ucadia.com/2013/07/motu-proprio-of-francis-and-why-by-rule.html Its well worth a read!

LATER UPDATE 8/2/2013 4:44 PM I got another URL from Lisa Harrison, this one is a video that gives a good deal of background history on the Vatican bank (IOR) and how the Vatican came to control vast tracks of land.  http://www.presstv.com/Program/313317.html

I knew the deed for Washington DC was held at a Catholic Diocese (read thread found HERE):
....from the D&B sponsored Mantra Corp website, linked below:
If you click on the “Government of the United States HQ” link, you’ll see another website page with some fairly detailed—and possibly bewildering—information. For example, you’ll see that this “Government of the United States” has its address at:

“The U.S. Capitol

“Washington, DC 20515-0001”

Its phone number is “(202) 224-3121”. Business Hours are “24/7”.

You can click the “map” link and see a graphic indicating that this “Government” is located on “Capitol Hill” (same place as Congress) in Washington DC.

None of that seems particularly surprising (other than the idea that our “Government” might be a “company” and/or a conglomerate of “companies”). But the Manta.com report does begin to seem a little strange under the heading “About Government Of The United States” where we read:

“government, owner Archbishop Deric R. McCloud of Basilica Shrine, Michigan and 4th NE Street, Washington,DC”. 
I wasn't aware the purported "government" was registered as religious non-profit corporation in Delaware. This was sent to me today... given the above it's really not surprising I suppose....but here it is in black and white!





The author of this blog took AK's info even further HERE 

....
As I’d anticipated, the Manta.com website has since been modified and some information found two years ago has been changed or “disappeared”.
For example, where Manta.com used to report that the “Government” began in “1787,” it now reports that it’s been in business for “223” years.  That’s not a big change.  It’s still possible that the numbers “223” and “1787” simply reflect some persistent data entry calculation error.  But given the differences between “1787” and “223,” the probability of a mere data entry error is reduced.  It therefore seems increasingly possible that the current D&B report on “Government of the United States” may correctly declare that that “Government” started the year before the Constitution was ratified by the People.
If so, as crazy as it sounds, it is therefore conceivable that there might be two editions of our “Constitution”:  1) one approved by the Confederation Congress in A.D. 1787; and 2) another, ratified by We the People in A.D. 1788.  The text of both of these “editions” of the Constitution would be identical, but the underlying authority would be completely different.
Under the Constitution ratified by People in A.D. 1788, the enacting authority and national sovereigns would (consistent with the principles of the “Declaration of Independence”) be We the People. As individual sovereigns, We the People would enjoy the “republican form of government” guaranteed at Article 4 Section 4 of the federal Constitution.
However, under the possible Constitution “approved” by Congress in A.D. 1787, the enacting authority and national sovereigns would be the Congress.  If Congress were the constitutional sovereign, our form of government would be an aristocracy of 535 men and women.  Worse, under such aristocracy, you and I would be presumed to be subjects or even slaves.  If the Constitution “approved” by Congress in A.D. 1787 were in effect today (rather than the Constitution ratified by the People in A.D. 1788), you and I can’t be free.
Yes, this conjecture sounds like another howling conspiracy theory.  But even so, since the Constitution wasn’t ratified until A.D. 1788 and the resulting government didn’t become operational until A.D. 1789, D&B’s report that the government began “223” years ago and/or began in “1787” can’t be accurate.  So, it seems at least “odd” that an entity as professional a D&B would make such a peculiar error.
It’s also curious that D&B describes the “Government of the United States” as a company and “HQ” over a number of other “branches” (like the Army, Navy, Air Force and courts) that are also deemed to be “companies”.
Somethin’ funny’s goin’ on here.
•  If you’re up for even more funny stuff, enter “Nancy Pelosi” into the Manta.com search engine.  You’ll be taken to a list of “2 matching U.S. companies”:
1) “United States House of Representatives (Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi) BRANCH” at her San Francisco address; and
2) “Representative Nancy Pelosi (Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi) BRANCH” at her Washington DC address.
Click the #1 link, look for the heading “About United States House of Representatives,” and you’ll read:
“United States House Of Representatives is a private company categorized under Legislative Bodies, National and located in San Francisco, CA . . . .”
Whut th’ . . . ?!
The US House of Representative is “a private company”?!  And it’s “located in San Francisco, CA” (the home of the Speaker of the House)?
More?
Look under the heading “United States House of Representatives Business Information” and you’ll read:
“United States House Of Representatives also does business as Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.”

The House of Representatives not only “does business” but does so “as Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi”?  Is “Nancy Pelosi” something like a trademark, alter ego or registered agent for the “private company” we call the “House of Representatives”?  Is she the CEO and/or D/B/A for the House of Representatives, Inc.?
Incidentally, the 2009 edition of Manta.com’s report on Nancy Pelosi (that I recorded and saved) declared that the US House of Representatives was “also traded as Nancy Pelosi”.
Also traded as?! What does that mean?  Are we talking about packages of bubble gum that include government “trading cards” featuring photos of the House of Representatives and Nancy Pelosi?  Or is the House of Representatives and/or Nancy Pelosi some sort of stock?  If so, who’s buying, who’s selling?  Who owns that “company”?
Enter “US Social Security Admin” into the search engine.  Scroll down a bit and you’ll read:
US Social Security Admin is a private company categorized under Federal Government-Social and Human Resources and located in West Branch, MI.”
So-So Security is a “private company” . . . ?  That’s not located in Washington DC, but rather in “West Branch, MI” . . . ?  I don’t know what that means, but I can’t help but laugh.  Somethin’ funny is goin’ on here.
•  Try “Internal Revenue Service”.  Manta.com will produce “41,632 matching U.S. companies”.  Some of these are clearly private entities that have no governmental pretense, but many or most are “governmental”.
If you click the link to “Internal Revenue Service, Internal Revenue Dst Council,” you’ll read “Internal Revenue Service is a private company categorized under Federal Goverenment-Finance and Taxation and located in Portland, OR.”
Click the “Internal Revenue Service, Andover Service Center . . . . Andover MA” link and you’ll read that Internal Revenue Service is a private company categorized under Federal Government-Finance and Taxation and located in Andover, MA.”
Two different locations indicate two different “private companies”.
These reports (and scores more) suggest that each individual IRS office may be a separate “private company”.  Therefore, if you’re contacted by an IRS office in Austin, Texas, you may be dealing with one “private company”.  If you’re subsequently contacted by another IRS office from, say, Provo, Utah—you might be dealing with a completely different “private company”.
What’s your obligation to talk to several different “private companies” about your income taxes?  Are there privacy concerns in sharing your tax information with several private companies?
And given that there are at least several score (and perhaps several thousand) “private companies,” operating as an “Internal Revenue Service,” who are you really paying your income taxes to?  H&R Block?

•  There are a host of additional “private companies” that you might want to research.  I collected website pages for about two dozen in 2008 and 2009.  I’m not sure how many of those can still be found, but if you can find ‘em and if you read closely, you may be fascinated.  Search for: “United States Court of Appeals,” “District of Columbia,” “George W Bush,” and “Supreme Court of the United States”.  All were listed by D&B as “private companies”.
You may find other D&B reports that are similarly fascinating or bewildering.  What does D&B have to say about the CIA or Homeland Security?  Inquiring minds wanna know.
•  What’s it all mean?  I’m not sure.  Perhaps D&B is merely guilty of gross negligence when it comes to entering data on governmental entities.
Or, maybe the entire structure of what currently passes for “government” is actually a conglomerate of “private companies” run by an aristocratic Congress that’s owned by . . . who?  The world’s bankers?
If so, the true nature of the “Government of the United States” might not be that of a “republic” or even a “democracy,” but rather a combination of governmental and corporate interests (“private companies”) that’s usually described as “fascism”.  If so, we no longer have “government of the People, by the People and for the People” but instead have “government of the people, by the Congress, and for the Corporations.”
Whatever the explanation, somethin’ funny is goin’ on here.
Today, when it comes to government, an appearance of reality appears to have been substituted for reality.  Our government is not what it appears to be; not what it professes to be—and that’s not funny at all, is it?
Written at arm’s length and at my political choice of venue within The United States of America,
Alfred Adask
 



No comments:

Post a comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.