Without Prejudice.
Quote:
|
Which you note here:Yet, your implication that the United States is some kind of franchise of the municipal corporation "Colony of Pennsylvania" is baseless and in error and Respublic doesn't support this conclusion.
|
Perhaps aksis does not comprehend the concept of *situs*. A corporation formed in "State of Colorado" for example is effectively part of the State of Colorado by virtue of situs (i.e. a State of Colorado person). Yes I figured you'd go after that point and would not touch upon the notion that those signing said Articles of Assocation were agents of a King of England and therefore created the the resulting trust or defacto body corporate "United States" on said King of England's behalf. Yes big deal whether it is a child of Colony of Pennsylvania or not--you miss the point of underlying principles of agency, their being subjects? Consider settlors acting on behalf of their King going out and cutting paths through forests in distant lands on behalf of the King just maybe makes them the King's paths as far as said King's subjects are concerned.
The significance of Respublic v. Sweers asserting that a United States existed prior to 1776 appears to refer only what may very well be a body corporate of the Kingdom of England.
Aksis what you might do well to do is study municipal law.
That said, if I were to form a trust and say specify its situs in this manner: "IV - Situs. The Trust was formed in the United States." Then such would be akin to saying that "United States" has jurisdiction over disputes or arguments concerning "the Trust". It would be regarded to be a United States person with respect to jurisdiction and for tax purposes.
The Articles of Association therefore if it was in fact done in City of Philadelphia, Colony/Province of Pennsylvania then the situs for said Articles is clear. And a statement once made by someone that--with respect to the United States of America framework--the Supreme Court of the State of Pennsylvania is higher than the Supreme Court of the United States has merit.
Also public vs. private: those terms are relative to the framework in question.
Quote:
|
I am where I have always been: In the Universe, on Earth. Where did you think you were/are? IN some imaginary bubble called "Colorado"? That kind of thinking is a mild form of psychosis.
|
#1 I never asked where you were. #2 Perhaps you really should eat more bran and stop arguing with yourself about things others never said (i.e. I never said that I was "in" Colorado). It contributes nothing to edifying the orignal poster.
And just to specially appease you: yes I have heard of a planet called Earth. I've even come across the general notion of dry land called "earth" which even Mars has...earth. Re: psychosis perhaps you should get that checked out?
Quote:
|
neither Earth, or the Universe are any kind of "corporation", formal or implied.
|
Effectively aksis you are stating your own definition (what you mean) with respect what to those 'proper nouns' are not (for you). Thanks for sharing.
Quote:
|
The idea that doppelganger private corporation have secretly taken over the United States of America is not something I have seen anyone prove... just speculate about.
|
Perhaps what some are speculating is this: that if at any point in history "United States" became debtor--it became (see treatises on Master-Servant Law) private with respect to the notion that its creditors were private and now have taken over control of prospering "the farm" maintaining all practical purposes and appearances of a regular ol' guvment.
What makes your proof proof? Perhaps what it boils down to is this: you either buy into a concept or a framework or you dont. You believe or you dont. Faith and/or agreement or neither or either.
Quote:
|
"United States" is an alias of "United States of America". It is easily proven that the United States are public corporations and that Citizen is the title of an Office.
|
What makes Bouvier's dictionary proof? What proof do you have "pig" is a four footed animal? Or is what you have mere agreement and unwavering belief? What do you have other than faith and/or agreement?
Quote:
|
Perhaps a discourse upon the topic of public vs private is in order?
|
Perhaps.
Quote:
|
The whole system is based upon a 'presumption' that something was represented to have occurred which may or may not have occurred in the manner which has been represented.
|
At least someone gets it.
