Tag Archives: corporations

Using the ‘law merchant’ to protect ourselves from harm

By AL Whitney © copyround 2017
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and AntiCorruption Society is acknowledged.

We have been exposing the commercial nature of our government and legal system for several years. In fact we recommended using a legal notice for smart meters in the Lawfully Yours guide since it came out in 2014. So, it is exciting to see this concept advanced by others, like the InPower Movement.


Here is an article by Dr. Joseph Mercola regarding this effort: https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/inpower-a-mass-action-of-liability.pdf

The more folks begin to understand that we call government today is just an interlocking franchised network of corporations engaged in commerce – the sooner we can restore some sanity to our poor exploited planet.

We can no longer tolerate government CORPORATIONS!


May 13, 2014

by AL Whitney (C) copyright 2014
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and the AntiCorruption Society is acknowledged

Brochure for redistribution

city hallFrom Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars (1979):

“Thus, a nation becomes divided into two very distinct parts, a docile sub-nation (great silent majority) and a political sub-nation. The political sub-nation [corporate government] remains attached to the docile sub-nation [the public], tolerates it, and leaches its substance until it grows strong enough to detach itself and then devour its parent.”
(pg 40)

Most folks know that their city is incorporated. Even government employees do not deny this reality. However, most folks don’t know that their county and state governments are also corporations. In fact all government agencies are corporations as well. This is easy to verify by looking them up on Dun and Bradstreet.com.

The employees of all of these government entities gloss over this fact however, claiming they have to be a corporation to do business. The problem is that they can’t generate profit for their own corporation and be public servants at the same time. Conflicts of interest become the norm, not the exception, and the people lose representation, which is exactly what has happened. Eventually the people figure out that they are being fleeced.

The following demonstrates how government-corporations serve their own corporation first and foremost . . . at the expense of the general public. These government-corporations have essentially become parasites on the people they claim to serve.

1)    CAFR accounts
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report accounts are common with corporate-government entities. These somewhat hidden accounts are often referred to as rainy day funds. The public has no control over the size of these funds or the way they can be used. Meanwhile many corporate-governments continue to pass their own ‘rules’ (statutes) and tax levies to increase their revenue stream.

2)    Decide their own salaries
In most instances the corporate-government determines how much its employees are paid. They can also decide to create new jobs for their own institutions. As with all corporations, government corporations have adopted the “growth” paradigm.

3)    Unlimited ability to create rules, fines and fees
When cities pass statutes (rules) that levy fees and fines, the general public is coerced into paying more for services they never requested. And, most municipal corporate charters do not include a limit on the number of new rules that can be created. These new rules don’t necessarily serve the best interests of the community. This rule making power encourages corruption as well. Rules and policies are established all of the time that benefit large corporations over small locally owned businesses.

Continue reading

‘Federal regulatory agencies’ are Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing


Regulatory agencies are the corporations’ response to people’s calls for democracy and self-governance. Corporate officials who once hired Pinkerton’s goons to do their dirty work and protect them from an activist public can now rest assured that much of that burden has been assumed by regulatory agencies. They work as the barriers they were designed to be.

By Jane Anne Morris

sheeple - agenciesIf you’re having trouble getting to sleep, you can count sheep, or read a book about the history of regulatory agencies. It may turn out to be the same thing.

The nation’s first federal regulatory agency, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), was established in 1887. Concerned citizens, having failed to solve their difficulties in more traditional ways, sought the intervention and assistance of the federal government. Over the next three decades, these mavericks worked to defend the ICC’s existence and increase its powers to regulate the railroad corporations.

Who were these pioneers who dared to go where no one had gone before, to urge the formation of and expand the powers of the first federal regulatory agency?

Prominent among them were the Director and General Counsel for several of Vanderbilt’s railroad corporations, including the New York Central Railroad Company, Chauncey M. Depew; the President of the Union Pacific Railroad Company and former chairman of the Massachusetts Railroad Commission, Charles F. Adams; the President of the Minnesota and Northwestern Railroad Company, and President and Chairman of the Board of the Chicago and Great Western Railway Company, A. B. Stickney; the Vice President, General Manager, Director, and President of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company and later, President of the Burlington & Missouri River Railroad Company, Charles E. Perkins; the Vice President, General Manager, Director, and President of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Alexander J. Cassatt; Andrew Carnegie (Man of Steel); the prominent J. P. Morgan, banker, associated with the rise of the International Harvester Company and U.S. Steel Corporation; and 1912 chairman of the national executive committee of the Progressive Party, George W. Perkins.

The role of these and other railroad corporation men has been explored by historians whose research into primary materials led them to things you’ll never read on the back of a cereal box. One such historian, Gabriel Kolko, made use of letters, speeches, testimony before Congressional committees, and trade journal articles in his efforts to piece together the story of what amounts to a regulatory revolution in the U.S.

That such a revolution occurred is historical fact. After a slow start, an alphabet soup of regulatory agencies proliferated like lawyers on the national scene. But that the midwives of this revolution were railroad men and other corporate executives is a reality less widely appreciated, and at odds with current regulatory agency creation myths.

Late nineteenth century railroad companies were troubled by too much competition: waves of fierce rate cutting and rate wars, the use of discriminatory rebates (a form of discount — actually a bribe — used by rival companies to steal each other’s customers), and major bankruptcies. This is hardly the scenario that would have existed had the railroad companies succeeded in fixing prices, establishing monopolies, and controlling the market. But they tried.

Corporate mergers, trusts, pools, and trade associations were all methods through which corporations sought to eliminate competition. Each ran into glitches, however.

Until the late 1880s, many mergers were effectively illegal because most states had laws prohibiting a corporation from owning stock in other corporations. Trusts, an effort to finesse this prohibition, were made technically illegal by the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act (subject to spotty enforcement and soon rendered nearly useless by judicial monkeywrenching). Pools — sometimes illegal, sometimes not — ultimately failed to maintain price levels for their members because they lacked enforcement powers (to sanction a member that broke ranks and cut prices, for instance.) Trade associations tried to control the market by means of informal price agreements, standards, and licenses, but as with pools, such agreements lacked the force of law.

So, throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, mergers, trusts, pools, and trade associations all failed to meet the needs of large corporations eager to crush competition in order to maintain price levels.

Railroad companies wanted to fix rates among themselves, and then enforce these rates. (That is, they wanted legally enforceable price-fixing). They wanted a shield against a tide of public activism that was showing itself in the form of tough state laws, increased populism, calls for government ownership of railroads and other public utilities, and a resurgence of socialist movements.

They wanted the public to pay the costs of coordinating an industry and maintaining quality control (standards, inspection, enforcement), while guaranteeing the railroad corporations a basic (and profitable) rate of return. Despite all of this government investment, however, profits were to go to corporate coffers and stockholder wallets.

Railroad executives wanted the ICC to enforce rates. But enforcing rates did not mean capping rates in order to protect the public. Enforcing rates meant prohibiting upstart companies from offering lower rates and thus undercutting the profits of the established railroad companies. Enforcing rates was a means of protecting large corporations from what John D. Rockefeller called “ruinous competition.”

Continue reading

Judge says USA INC is just a corporate franchise network

Judge Dale, retired
Thursday, 11 April 2013

THE SOVEREIGN CITIZEN by: Judge Dale, retired

USA INC ABCs 4Our federal government has instructed our federal, state and local police agencies that everyone who purports to be a SOVEREIGN should be TREATED as a TERRORIST! They have also brainwashed the American public into believing that being a SOVEREIGN is anti-American and unpatriotic! Perhaps this is: “The POT calling the KETTLE black?”

WHAT IS SOVEREIGNTY? It is the inherent right and prerogative of a civilized people to rule itself, and to dictate all of the forms and conditions of the institutions it sets up to carry out this rule. Ironically, the U.S. SUPREME COURT agrees with those people who claim to be SOVEREIGN citizens of the American Republic!

  • Bond vs. UNITED STATES, 529 US 334 – 2000, The Supreme Court held that the American People are in fact Sovereign and not the States or the Government. The court went on to define that local, state and federal law enforcement officers were committing unlawful actions against the Sovereign People by the enforcement of the laws and are personally liable for their actions.
  • Bond v. United States, 529 US 334 – 2000 – ‎Supreme Court – Cited by 761 litigants in other cases.
  • Bond v. US, 131 S. Ct. 2355 – 2011 – ‎Supreme Court – Cited by 306 “ “
  • Bond v. US, 1 F. 3d 631 – 1993 – ‎Court of Appeals, 7th – Cited by 66 “ “

What are the implications of this 2000, U. S. Supreme Court ruling?

1] The delegates to the first Federal Convention prohibited the use of corporations by all governments representing the American Republic. Therefore, all of these corporate governments and their corporate laws are a usurpation of the organic Constitution of the United States of America. All State Governments are now sub-corporations of the Federal Government, making all Courts and all law enforcement personnel, corporate federal agencies or employees. [See: James Madison Journal of the Federal Convention, Vol. 2, P. 722] and [Pull up your State Code on your PC and search the Code for the words “District of Columbia” and “Federal Government.” You will receive about 1000 references linking your state to the federal government.]

Continue reading

The Corporation is brainwashing our children – right under our noses


The commercialization of Childhood (Trailer)


This reality was also exposed in 2003 in the documentary The Corporation (pt 11)

Basic Training

One of the most important skills children need to be taught is how to “MUTE” all commercials.