That was not the question, but from your reluctance to answer let me go ahead and assume that your answer is: "NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I promise it isn't "reluctance." I am never reluctant to answer anything.

Since I don't understand the statement:

"NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I think there is something being lost (for me) in the negatives. Let me try to take them out:

All entities created at the founding of the US were corporations.

Is that what you are saying? I'm pretty sure I agree, though it is so vague a statement that I'm not sure.

There is no need to be so defensive just to state your position

I legitimately don't understand why you think I'm being defensive. What did I say that gave you that impression?

"US Corporation" they are referring to a specific type of body corporate which is a private corporation incorporated under the laws of some government, not under the common law.

OK, I'm fairly certain this statement is not true at all. In my experience, most people don't have a clue what they mean when they say "US Govt is a Corporation."

But let's break it down. A corporation who's founders are the entire people subject to the jurisdiction (i.e. We The People) would be a public corporation, in this case a governmental corporation. Any corporation whose founders are a subset of the entire people subject to the jurisdiction would be a privately created corporation. I didn't sign the Constitution. Most people didn't sign the Constitution. I didn't agree to that treaty. But I also don't have any reasonable option to leave it either. I mean, I could go to another country and be subject to their ruling body, but that' doesn't change the fundamental jurisdictional fraud and forced compliance built into the privately created corporation.

Worse, in the case of our governmental corporation, it is designed to be controlled by a specific subset of the populace. The US Constitution never applied to everyone subject to its jurisdiction, not once in the history of the country. In fact originally, only land owning males could participate, all others were "subjects" without any say in how the government determined their choices. Even after changes were made to allow at least some level of input from all men, slaves, or even indentured servants (which is really all slaves were) weren't even considered people at all. Women were little better. And that's just on the surface. In practice, it was constructed such that only specific people (members of the Aristocracy) could participate at all, at least within the Judicial, and Executive branches, and the Senate as well. I'm not sure about the House. I think some "regular people" may have slipped through the cracks there.

As for the Governmental Corporation's purpose, one of its main reasons for creation was to regulate (control) trade between sovereign entities (other legal fictions) and to define (regulate) money. Its structure is basically identical to a non-profit.

So unless you mean people believe that US Govt Corp is a for profit business, its pretty much exactly the same as your definition of "what people think."

Sometime around the mid to late 1800s, there was a change done gradually to transfer power from the people to private entities

The framework for this was put in from the very beginning, within the original Constitution. The fuckery is done primarily through false claims of jurisdiction, where the government set itself up to claim ownership of the people and all their property. This is exemplified best in the fifth amendment, though there are several other sections that commit the same jurisdictional fraud.

The reason I don't think there was ever a "new corporation" laid on top of the old is because there was no need for one. All the necessary fraud was put into the original documents.

That was not the question, but from your reluctance to answer let me go ahead and assume that your answer is: "NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I promise it isn't "reluctance." I am never reluctant to answer anything.

Since I don't understand the statement:

"NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I think there is something being lost (for me) in the negatives. Let me try to take them out:

All entities created at the founding of the US were corporations.

Is that what you are saying? I'm pretty sure I agree, though it is so vague a statement that I'm not sure.

There is no need to be so defensive just to state your position

I legitimately don't understand why you think I'm being defensive. What did I say that gave you that impression?

"US Corporation" they are referring to a specific type of body corporate which is a private corporation incorporated under the laws of some government, not under the common law.

OK, I'm fairly certain this statement is not true at all. In my experience, most people don't have a clue what they mean when they say "US Govt is a Corporation."

But let's break it down. A corporation who's founders are the entire people subject to the jurisdiction (i.e. We The People) would be a public corporation, in this case a governmental corporation. Any corporation whose founders are a subset of the entire people subject to the jurisdiction would be a privately created corporation. I didn't sign the Constitution. Most people didn't sign the Constitution. I didn't agree to that treaty. But I also don't have any reasonable option to leave it either. I mean, I could go to another country and be subject to their ruling body, but that' doesn't change the fundamental jurisdictional fraud and forced compliance built into the privately created corporation.

Worse, in the case of our governmental corporation, it is designed to be controlled by a specific subset of the populace. The US Constitution never applied to everyone subject to its jurisdiction, not once in the history of the country. In fact originally, only land owning males could participate, all others were "subjects" without any say in how the government determined their choices. Even after changes were made to allow at least some level of input from all men, slaves, or even indentured servants (which is really all slaves were) weren't even considered people at all. Women were little better. And that's just on the surface. In practice, it was constructed such that only specific people (members of the Aristocracy) could participate at all, at least within the Judicial, and Executive branches, and the Senate as well. I'm not sure about the House. I think some "regular people" may have slipped through the cracks there.

As for the Governmental Corporation's purpose, one of its main reasons for creation was to regulate (control) trade between sovereign entities (other legal fictions) and to define (regulate) money. Its structure is basically identical to a non-profit.

So unless you mean people believe that US Govt Corp is a for profit business, it pretty much exactly the same as your definition of "what people think."

Sometime around the mid to late 1800s, there was a change done gradually to transfer power from the people to private entities

The framework for this was put in from the very beginning, within the original Constitution. The fuckery is done primarily through false claims of jurisdiction, where the government set itself up to claim ownership of the people and all their property. This is exemplified best in the fifth amendment, though there are several other sections that commit the same jurisdictional fraud.

The reason I don't think there was ever a "new corporation" laid on top of the old is because there was no need for one. All the necessary fraud was put into the original documents.

That was not the question, but from your reluctance to answer let me go ahead and assume that your answer is: "NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I promise it isn't "reluctance." I am never reluctant to answer anything.

Since I don't understand the statement:

"NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I think there is something being lost (for me) in the negatives. Let me try to take them out:

All entities created at the founding of the US were corporations.

Is that what you are saying? I'm pretty sure I agree, though it is so vague a statement that I'm not sure.

There is no need to be so defensive just to state your position

I legitimately don't understand why you think I'm being defensive. What did I say that gave you that impression?

"US Corporation" they are referring to a specific type of body corporate which is a private corporation incorporated under the laws of some government, not under the common law.

OK, I'm fairly certain this statement is not true at all. In my experience, most people don't have a clue what they mean when they say "US Govt is a Corporation."

But let's break it down. A corporation who's founders are the entire people subject to the jurisdiction (i.e. We The People) would be a public corporation, in this case a governmental corporation. Any corporation whose founders are a subset of the entire people subject to the jurisdiction would be a privately created corporation. I didn't sign the Constitution. Most people didn't sign the Constitution. I didn't agree to that treaty. But I also don't have any reasonable option to leave it either. I mean, I could go to another country and be subject to their ruling body, but that' doesn't change the fundamental jurisdictional fraud and forced compliance built into the privately created corporation.

Worse, in the case of our governmental corporation, it is designed to be controlled by a specific subset of the populace. The US Constitution never applied to everyone subject to its jurisdiction, not once in the history of the country. In fact originally, only land owning males could participate, all others were "subjects" without any say in how the government determined their choices. Even after changes were made to allow at least some level of input from all men, slaves, or even indentured servants (which is really all slaves were) weren't even considered people at all. Women were little better. And that's just on the surface. In practice, it was constructed such that only specific people (members of the Aristocracy) could participate at all, at least within the Judicial, and Executive branches, and the Senate as well. I'm not sure about the House. I think some "regular people" may have slipped through the cracks there.

As for the Governmental Corporation's purpose, one of its main reasons for creation was to regulate (control) trade between sovereign entities (other legal fictions). Its structure is basically identical to a non-profit.

So unless you mean people believe that US Govt Corp is a for profit business, it pretty much exactly the same as your definition of "what people think."

Sometime around the mid to late 1800s, there was a change done gradually to transfer power from the people to private entities

The framework for this was put in from the very beginning, within the original Constitution. The fuckery is done primarily through false claims of jurisdiction, where the government set itself up to claim ownership of the people and all their property. This is exemplified best in the fifth amendment, though there are several other sections that commit the same jurisdictional fraud.

The reason I don't think there was ever a "new corporation" laid on top of the old is because there was no need for one. All the necessary fraud was put into the original documents.

That was not the question, but from your reluctance to answer let me go ahead and assume that your answer is: "NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I promise it isn't "reluctance." I am never reluctant to answer anything.

Since I don't understand the statement:

"NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I think there is something being lost (for me) in the negatives. Let me try to take them out:

All entities created at the founding of the US were corporations.

Is that what you are saying? I'm pretty sure I agree, though it is so vague a statement that I'm not sure.

There is no need to be so defensive just to state your position

I legitimately don't understand why you think I'm being defensive. What did I say that gave you that impression?

"US Corporation" they are referring to a specific type of body corporate which is a private corporation incorporated under the laws of some government, not under the common law.

OK, I'm fairly certain this statement is not true at all. In my experience, most people don't have a clue what they mean when they say "US Govt is a Corporation."

But let's break it down. A corporation who's founders are the entire people subject to the jurisdiction (i.e. We The People) would be a public corporation, in this case a governmental corporation. Any corporation whose founders are a subset of the entire people subject to the jurisdiction would be a privately created corporation. I didn't sign the Constitution. Most people didn't sign the Constitution. I didn't agree to that treaty. But I also don't have any reasonable option to leave it either. I mean, I could go to another country and be subject to their ruling body, but that' doesn't change the fundamental jurisdictional fraud and forced compliance built into the privately created corporation.

Worse, in the case of our governmental corporation, it is designed to be controlled by a specific subset of the populace. The US Constitution never applied to everyone subject to its jurisdiction, not once in the history of the country. In fact originally, only land owning males could participate, all others were "subjects" without any say in how the government determined their choices. Slaves weren't even considered people at all. Women were little better. And that's just on the surface. In practice, it was constructed such that only specific people (members of the Aristocracy) could participate at all, at least within the Judicial, and Executive branches, and the Senate as well. I'm not sure about the House. I think some "regular people" may have slipped through the cracks there.

As for the Governmental Corporation's purpose, one of its main reasons for creation was to regulate (control) trade between sovereign entities (other legal fictions). Its structure is basically identical to a non-profit.

So unless you mean people believe that US Govt Corp is a for profit business, it pretty much exactly the same as your definition of "what people think."

Sometime around the mid to late 1800s, there was a change done gradually to transfer power from the people to private entities

The framework for this was put in from the very beginning, within the original Constitution. The fuckery is done primarily through false claims of jurisdiction, where the government set itself up to claim ownership of the people and all their property. This is exemplified best in the fifth amendment, though there are several other sections that commit the same jurisdictional fraud.

The reason I don't think there was ever a "new corporation" laid on top of the old is because there was no need for one. All the necessary fraud was put into the original documents.

That was not the question, but from your reluctance to answer let me go ahead and assume that your answer is: "NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I promise it isn't "reluctance." I am never reluctant to answer anything.

Since I don't understand the statement:

"NO, no entity that was not a corporation was created at the founding of the US"

I think there is something being lost (for me) in the negatives. Let me try to take them out:

All entities created at the founding of the US were corporations.

Is that what you are saying? I'm pretty sure I agree, though it is so vague a statement that I'm not sure.

There is no need to be so defensive just to state your position

I legitimately don't understand why you think I'm being defensive. What did I say that gave you that impression?

"US Corporation" they are referring to a specific type of body corporate which is a private corporation incorporated under the laws of some government, not under the common law.

OK, I'm fairly certain this statement is not true at all. In my experience, most people don't have a clue what they mean when they say "US Govt is a Corporation."

But let's break it down. A corporation who's founders are the entire people subject to the jurisdiction (i.e. We The People) would be a public corporation, in this case a governmental corporation. Any corporation whose founders are a subset of the entire people subject to the jurisdiction would be a privately created corporation. I didn't sign the Constitution. Most people didn't sign the Constitution. I didn't agree to that treaty. But I also don't have any reasonable option to leave it either. I mean, I could go to another country and be subject to their ruling body, but that' doesn't change the fundamental jurisdictional fraud and forced compliance built into the privately created corporation.

Worse, in the case of our governmental corporation, it is designed to be controlled by a specific subset of the populace. The US Constitution never applied to everyone subject to its jurisdiction, not once in the history of the country. In fact originally, only land owning males could participate, all others were "subjects" without any say in how the government determined their choices. Slaves weren't even considered people at all. Women were little better. And that's just on the surface. In practice, it was constructed such that only specific people (members of the Aristocracy) could participate at all, at least within the Judicial, and Executive branches, and the Senate as well. I'm not sure about the House. I think some "regular people" may have slipped through the cracks there.

As for the Governmental Corporation's purpose, one of its main reasons for creation was to regulate (control) trade between sovereign entities (other legal fictions). Its structure is basically identical to a non-profit.

So unless you mean people believe that US Govt Corp is a for profit business, it pretty much applies to your definition of "what people think."

Sometime around the mid to late 1800s, there was a change done gradually to transfer power from the people to private entities

The framework for this was put in from the very beginning, within the original Constitution. The fuckery is done primarily through false claims of jurisdiction, where the government set itself up to claim ownership of the people and all their property. This is exemplified best in the fifth amendment, though there are several other sections that commit the same jurisdictional fraud.

The reason I don't think there was ever a "new corporation" laid on top of the old is because there was no need for one. All the necessary fraud was put into the original documents.