American Freedom

A Conversation with America

For Change in the UNITED STATES

Charles Erwin

American Freedom: A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATEShttp://www.americanfreedombooks.com

Copyright 2008 by Charles Erwin

All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this book, or portions thereof, in any form.A Truth In Publishing, LLC. BookPublished by Truth In Publishing, LLC.3109 Knox StreetSuite 733Highland Park, TX 75205-40291-888-500-1591

Truth In Publishing, LLC on the World Wide Web;http://www.truthinpublishingllc.com

Book Cover Design: Joseph M. Manes

Published in United States of America

ISBN 978-0-9841575-6-3 0-9841575-6-5

First edition: September 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Article I The Legislative BranchArticle II The Executive BranchArticle III The Judicial BranchArticle IV Relationship between the States, and the Federal GovernmentArticle V The Amending powers of CongressArticle VI General provisionsArticle VII Ratification of the Constitution

Proposed Constitution for the Newstates of America. . . . . . . . . . . 193Bill of Rights and other Articles of Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

Amendment I Freedoms, Petitions, and AssemblyAmendment II Right to Bear ArmsAmendment III Quartering of SoldiersAmendment IV Search and ArrestAmendment V Rights in Criminal CasesAmendment VI Right to a Fair TrialAmendment VII Rights in Civil CasesAmendment VIII Bail, Fines, and PunishmentAmendment IX Rights Retained by the PeopleAmendment X States RightsAmendment XIV Civil PrivilegesAmendment XVI Income TaxesAmendment XXVII Congressional Pay Raises

Contracts of Ownership and Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231Internal Revenue Service and Taxes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

Lawful Taxes and the Income TaxTaxes on Profit and GainSource of Income and Due Process of LawIdentities of IRS and the TaxpayerOther Forms of TaxesInternational Monetary Fund and Executive OrdersIRS Enforcement LawsIRS System of RecordsIRS Kickback RacketSocial Security and the Queen of England

Mainstream Media and Mind Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331War and Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

Covert and Overt TerrorismBiological WarfareAssassination of John F. Kennedy and Gun ControlCorporate Police ForcesOklahoma City BombingWorld Trade Center

Second Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415Rule of LawGun Control Lie and Martial LawGuns and PoliticsInternational Treaty LawsCorporate Army in AmericaRight to Carry LawGun Laws and the Supreme Court

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495

INTRODUCTIONFreedom, particularly our rather patriotic class of American Freedom, is the first and foremost right the majority of Americans have always felt we possessed. It took a revolutionary war against King George to win our unique brand of American Freedom. Subsequently, it required the creation of the Constitution by certain Founding Fathers to cement the specific framework of our American Freedom. After the abolition of slavery, every American was taught to view their basic freedoms in this country as being comparable to taking in a breath of fresh air. The American people have the feeling freedom in the United States is everlasting, no matter who is President or who represents us in Congress. Americans feel free regardless of laws that are passed or what those laws specifically represent by definition. Its impossible to forget we are free in the United States.

We are constantly reminded by the media and our political representatives that we are the freest country and people in the entire world. Freedom is a concept most Americans simply take for granted. Its widely viewed by the typical American Citizen as our birthright. There is an overwhelming belief in this country that freedom is ours, and it will remain ours until the end of time!

This book was written because freedom is such an important right in America. Unfortunately, in recent years, I began to notice many disturbing trends in the state of our nation regarding our freedom in America. These disturbing trends brought into question the amount of freedom the American people actually possessed within the United States. Apparentlywe are often disliked or downright hated by others around the world for all the freedoms we possess in America. Based on that disturbing revelation, it became imperative to determine which of these freedoms puts us in this rather precarious situation. Weve heard it over and over again, especially from President Bush (W the son). His speeches inform the American people how much They hate us for our freedom. I wish I had a dollar for each time, following the 9/11 attacks, President Bush declared how much They hate us for our freedom. Do you ever wonder who They really are who hate us for our freedom? This publication has the answer, and it will be revealed during our conversation as we take a hard and honest look at American Freedom in the following pages.

This book was written to motivate my readers to think, evaluate, and analyze the information contained in the publication when it comes to American Freedom. This is NOT a book where I will quote you some fact, just to have someone else come along with data supporting the opposite fact of my fact. The fact of the matter is that we live in a country and world where facts have become quite subjective. What Im looking for and attempting to reveal to my readers, is Truth. Ill be narrating this conversation from my perspective of Truth, but well be studying American Freedom from every possible point of view. That way, my readers have the opportunity to evaluate and analyze the information in order to draw their own conclusions. For instance, as previously mentioned, our governmental representatives and the Mainstream Media want us to believe we are forever free. On the one hand, the Federal Government passes laws like the Patriot Act and nonchalantly declares Americans will have to give up a lot of their freedom due to the War on Terror. Then, on the other hand, those same governmental representatives attempt to convince us that we are, in fact, still free despite the actual loss of freedoms contained in laws like the Patriot Act.

This type of conflicting message made absolutely no sense to me, so years ago, I decided to get to the bottom of it once and for all. Upon careful study of freedom in America, I reached the conclusion that we indeed had an overall perception of freedom. Unfortunately for the American people, that perception of freedom might not translate into actual freedom. Our governments oftentimes use the Mainstream Media and its News Reporters to essentially brainwash most Americans into a perception of freedom. In a country of loving and trusting people, their media brainwashing tactic is not only working well, but the governmental representatives responsible for the deception seem to be working overtime based upon its success. From my perception of freedom in America, the majority of American Freedom in the United States is GONE.

I was born prior to 1965. My Truth is Ive seen the Constitution put out to pasture, and our Judicial System has been changed from Common Law to Corporate Law by Congress. American Citizens have gone from having rights to possessing privileges, and our governments have turned away from representing We the People to the almost exclusive representation of We the Corporate Elite. There has been a steady loss of freedom in America since I began to give this issue any real attention or thought. This is only my perception of the way our country has evolved and of the current path being laid out by our political leaders in the United States. In contrast, if you were born after 1985, your perception and Truth regarding the path of our nation and status of our freedoms could be totally different from mine. If you were born after 1985, you were probably taught very little about the Constitution in our government-controlled public schools. You have also probably given very little thought to those privileges you possess now that used to be rights because you were never really taught the difference.

This is not to say the youth of America are unintelligent; nothing could be further from the Truth. Nevertheless, it is my belief that the youth and future of our nation are being intentionally misinformed, by being totally uninformed, of what freedom actually means in the United States of America. This comparison is meant to point out how perceptions may differ from one generation to the next, and in particular, how freedom can be lost over time without most people even noticing or knowing. In simple terms, all that really needs occur is for government to wait for the older Americans, who remember our now lost Constitutional freedoms, to die, and discontinue teaching the youth of the nation what those now lost Constitutional freedoms ever entailed. Lack of knowledge regarding Constitutional freedoms and rights rather effectively renders them lost. Its like the old saying goes, You dont know what you dont know. With this You dont know what you dont know formula in place, the majority of our youth may never know TRUE American Freedom. By governmental implementation of this rather simple practice, the current and future population in America might not be free at all; but they will certainly still FEEL they are free.

2 Chapter 1 Introduction

Lets reflect for a moment on just how free we are as this book is being written. Currently in our free country: (1) The Constitution for America does not apply, (2) Due Process of Law is gone for the most part, (3) You have to give up your fingerprints like a criminal to get a Drivers License, (4) Your e-mail and phone calls can be read and listened to by Government and law enforcement without a warrant anytime they choose, (5) You cant work without a card and number issued by the Government (6) There are communities and cities where American Citizens are being videotaped 24/7 for their safety, especially at traffic lights (7) The Government can see a blemish on your buttock from satellites in space and (8) You actually need a permit to have a Garage Sale on the premises of YOUR own property in most cities. How did we reach the point in America where we cant sell our personal property from the garage or yard of our homeswhich we own, without getting some type of license or permit from a government entity giving us permission? After reading this very short list of lost rights and disturbing government powers, do you still think or feel you are FREE in todays America???!!! Your answer probably depends upon how old you are and your definition of freedom, which aids in the creation of your perception of freedom.

A lot of you reading to this point might already disagree with me, and/or not understand statements suggesting the Constitution does not apply in the United States. That is your prerogative as an American to do so. However, in spite of any early disagreements, please stay with me, and give me a chance to explain, you might at the very least expand your thoughts and opinions about America, and how you would like YOUR Nation and YOUR Government to function. You will have to decide whether you believe my perceptions to be in error and/or downright crazy, ORif Im simply aware of information youve never been exposed to, and therefore never really considered.

As we previously discussed, this book is NOT a book of facts, but it will give you examples, data, and evidence gathered over the years for your consideration. Examples, data, and evidence leading to the Truth will oftentimes override facts. It has been said that History is a lie agreed upon. Having done some research in the past, Id have to say this is often a very true statement. So, if History is a lie agreed upon, then when attempting to define Truth one could say that; Truth is the Perception of the Majority. Ive never heard this phrase before; perhaps I just made it up. For now, lets say your author coined the phrase. What it means is if the majority of Americans FEEL they are FREE, then in their minds they are FREE. It matters not if its the Real Truth, and our current governments within the United States know this all too well.

An excellent recent example of Truth is the Perception of the Majority is the reclassification of the Planet previously known as Pluto by the majority of the scientific community. Im not an astronomer, but I feel fairly certain Plutos characteristics have not changed in any way to warrant this scientific reclassification. It has not gotten bigger, smaller, or changed colors; yet the scientific community felt it necessary to give Pluto a new label. Scientists had a meeting, and after generations decided that Pluto is no longer a planet. They decided Pluto was a dwarf planet, which is not to be mistaken for a planet. A dwarf planet is not a planet, but it is a small solar system body; which Pluto has always been no matter what they choose to call it or how the majority of scientists choose to define it.

My point to all this is just because something is defined in a different way, it does not necessarily change the Truth of what it really is, or what it has always been. In a Democracy, when you define, create, or change the perception of a thing for the majority, that perception of a thing becomes the Standard, and is accepted as Reality by the masses. This perception by the majority might carry the feeling of Truth when the actual Truth is nowhere to be found. There was a time when the majority of people on the planet thought the Earth was flat. Nobody knew for sure if it was flat or not, but it was repeated so often by the media of their time it caught on as Truth, and was accepted as fact by the majority. Our Governments and Mainstream Media are doing the same thing to us with their continuous repetition of how free we are in America. In the case of our planet being flat, the facts of the time did not lead to Truth. Thats why the information within this publication seeks to reveal Truth, instead of quoting possibly meaningless facts. As the Government uses the Mainstream Media to constantly repeat the mantra of FREEDOM on the right hand, the left hand is taking away our FREEDOM at light speed. The previous statement is based upon fact that reveals the Truth, but Ill be using examples, data, and evidence throughout your book as proof, instead of relying on facts.

Laws such as the Patriot Act and the creation of Homeland Security make some of us FEEL safe and thereby willing to give up FREEDOM for something that is possibly/probably only an illusion. In my opinion, our governments have tricked usIndependent, Republican, and Democrat; into giving up our freedom for a false sense of security. I could spray you with shark repellent and throw you into a pool of sharks, but are you really safe from the sharks? You might FEEL the shark repellent is working, but if the sharks are really hungry.??? We must be ever wary because the way we feel things are, versus the way things really are, can sometimes be like night and day. These subtle yet powerful distinctions are oftentimes the difference between perception of Truth and actual Truth. If the American people are not extremely careful, our misguided feelings could lead us to the perception of freedom and away from actual freedom.

This book is based upon my thoughts regarding the issues we are about to discuss, along with many years of research by me and countless others. The information contained in this book is based on my opinions, which at this time is not a violation of any law, a Terrorist Act, or threat to Homeland Security. As your author and narrator, I will attempt to give you insight into several topics, with the emphasis that these are my opinions of American Freedom today in the United States. Hopefully we have established this book is based on research, my thoughts on the subject matter, and the opinions this simple American Citizen derived at from careful consideration of the subject matter. In short, the previous text is my LEGAL DISCLAIMER regarding the information in this book pertaining to our upcoming conversation. This book will most definitely make you aware of the lack of American Freedom you actually possess in the current United States, but at no time will I give my readers legal advice. Based upon

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES 3

my legal disclaimer, please refrain from bringing a legal lawsuit against me or the publisher if you use information in this book for some legal matter which does not work out for you.

I can assure you the conversation were involved in is based upon Truth. Ive done the research to substantiate my claims, but Truth is not always the most important issue when dealing with government. Truth can be lost to insignificant facts in the kind of ultra-free society we live in today within the United Stateswhere They hate us for our freedom. American Truth for American Citizens is too often ignored by our governmental representatives; especially once the courts and the legal systems get involved. Please give the information within this publication your full attention and thought. If it turns out that Truth is the Perception of the Majority, this book could provide the majority a new definition of the phrase American Freedom. It is imperative we begin to think more and feel less if we are to ever restore the power of We the People over what I believe to be an out of control governmental power within the United States. Otherwise, there will never be any real change in America so many of us desire.

In the writing of this book I am attempting to make it easy to read, easy to understand, humorous, and lighthearted as the subject matter allows. Depending on the date of publication and/or the time this book gets into your hands, many if not all of the current events referenced will have come to pass. If this book is in publication as long as we hope, all of the current events discussed will have become ancient history. It was necessary to use these current events as examples, historical and otherwise, of the perilous downward spiral of public and personal freedom in the United States. Unfortunately for America, the majority of these current events are recycled over and over, thereby hindering any real change from ever taking place in the United States. The names of the politicians being elected, and the congressional bills being voted into law are different, but the current formula blocking real change in America continuously remains the same.

The powers that be behind the System of government we have today would not wish the Majority of information contained within these pages to be released to the American people for mass public consumption. Therefore, I urge you to consider the evidence within these pages with an Open Mind. If the evidence makes sense to you, then please do not allow anyone to close your Open Mind with some possibly meaningless untruthful statement of fact. Meaningless untruthful statements of fact could lead to more loss of freedoms in America. With that saidit was with a heavy heart I felt the NEED to write a book addressing American Freedom. It is my hope you find these opinions and assessments an entertaining read full of valuable information. It is my sincerest wish the information in this book will cause Americans to think, evaluate, and analyze the verifiable evidence presented. After viewing the verifiable evidence presented, it will assist you with your decision of whether you are comfortable with the state of your Nation and your American Freedom, as it forced me to do.

There will be no attempt to mislead or deceive my readers with any of the information within this book. Everything, all of my original text, the reference material from other authors, and various source materials contained within these pages, was written or selected to be used as Teaching Tools regarding the past, present, and future status of our American Freedom. That is why youve been asked to consider the evidence and information found within these pages VERY CAREFULLY. A great deal of this evidence might challenge many of your beliefs regarding YOUR American Freedom and YOUR life within the United States. The realization of the need for change is often followed by challenge.

This book additionally contains multiple criticisms and comments regarding our governments, and certain representatives working within our governments. I will not apologize for those criticisms and comments, because the American people must gain access to the real Truth concerning the United States before its too late for America. It is my firm believe the only moral and intelligent method to change anyones mind, thus allowing them to see the Truth; is through the presentation of verifiable information using evidence.

It was previously stated this book is based upon my opinions. In spite of that, please note my opinions are arrived at based upon verifiable information using evidence. There will always be multiple interpretations and perceptions of facts. These multiple interpretations and perceptions of facts can sometimes lead to multiple interpretations and perceptions of Truth. Im hoping this book will provide enough information to teach the Majority of Americans how to decide upon ONE interpretation and perception of Truth for America and our American Freedom. We can disagree on facts, but the Truth about America is that our nations Reality should be defined by the majority of Americans, and NOT our governmental representatives who are supposed to be working for us as our employees. Thats why Truth is the Perception of the Majority!!!

The American people should be defining their Truth regarding America to our governments, NOT the other way around. The political contests of 2007 and 2008 were all about change. Most political contests for the past 100 plus years in this country have been about change if you really give it some thought. Now that the most recent political contests are over, lets not allow Americas change to be as meaningless and superficial as the planet Plutos change. Its my belief change will ONLY come to America when the American people truly control their governments. If I do an adequate job, my readers should have the ability to use this publication as a scholarly work for educational purposes in order to spawn a Catalyst for change and a Formula for freedom. The People should not be afraid of their Governments. Governments should be afraid of their People. Which side of that statement do you feel you are on as an American Citizen in the current United States? Lets see how you feel about your answer to that same question upon completion of this book.

LAWEvery good American Citizen tries desperately to follow all the laws, rules, statutes, regulations, ordinances, Presidential Executive Orders, Presidential Proclamations, Commandments, and guidelines set forth by the powers that be in our governments at all levels. How well do you think you do on that front? I can tell you that out of the millions of laws in this country, every one of us breaks at least ten on a daily basis. Why is this? Because there are millions of laws in this country, and nobody knows all of them, especially Congress. Most members of Congress dont usually even bother to read the bills which become the laws you and I have to follow. You might wonder why there are so many laws already on the books with Federal, State, and Local Governments passing an ever increasing amount with each new legislative session. In my opinion, there are two possible reasons why we have been afflicted with this particular dilemma by our governments.

(1) We really have a need for millions of laws to guide us through the living of our everyday lives.(2) Our Federal, State, and Local Governments legislate millions of laws to control us in the living of our everyday lives.

If we are all breaking some law every single day and there is ever a need to control us, then having millions of laws from which to prosecute sounds like a winning formula for the government to accomplish its goals. You and I can easily become unwitting criminals on a daily basis without ever knowing it! They are not charging us with a crime today; but if we become a problem in the future, there is always some law which has been broken which can be conveniently used to get us under their control. Think about it for just a moment and tell me which reason for millions of laws sounds more feasible to you. Im going to go with the answer in number (2) above. Does each of us really want the millions of laws we are currently afflicted with by government? The American people need to simply return to the Constitution. We need laws which do not violate the Constitution and The Bill of Rights as most laws do today. Consider how free you truthfully are if you are breaking multiple laws on a daily basis that could be enforced upon you as an Individual at the governments pleasure.

Some may not believe we all break multiple laws on a daily basis, so allow me to give you a few examples. The following text comes from Digital Credit Unions online checking and savings application form on the internet. Please pay close attention to the bolded and/or underlined text.

By signing below, I, meaning each and all who sign this form, request the services listed above and agree that, except as indicated on this form, the information set forth in my initial membership application remain in full force and effect. I hereby agree to conform to the Digital Federal Credit Unions bylaws and the terms and conditions of the Truth-in-Savings Disclosure and Account Agreements, the Electronic Services Disclosure and Agreements, and the Schedule of Fees and Service Charges which are incorporated by reference whether applicable to products and services I am currently requesting or request in the future. By signing this application, I authorize you to gather and exchange whatever credit, checking account, and employment information you consider appropriate from time to time. If I, the Prime Owner, am under 17 years of age, I understand that I must have a parent or guardian of legal age as Joint Owner on any checking accounts I have with DCU. I certify that the information provided on this application is true, correct, and complete.

This text is pretty standard on most banking applications. If you have a bank account, you probably signed a similar document. Did you notice it says I hereby agree to conform to the Digital Federal Credit Unions bylaws and the terms and conditions of the Truth-in-Savings Disclosure and Account Agreements, the Electronic Services Disclosure and Agreements, and the Schedule of Fees and Service Charges which are incorporated by reference? If you sign this application, you just signed a contract to abide by all the rules in the Digital Federal Credit Unions Bylaws, Disclosures, and Agreements. Do you know what all the rules are in Digital Federal Credit Unions Bylaws, Disclosures, and Agreements? Will you know if you break one of their Bylaws, Disclosures, and Agreements? There are other banking applications which declare your signature binds you to all the laws of the Federal Reserve Banking System. These ever changing Federal Reserve Banking laws are usually incorporated by reference. The statement incorporated by reference adds all of laws of the Federal Reserve Banking System to a seemingly harmless Checking and Saving Account application simply because the Federal Reserve was referenced in the document. Lets take a look at another section from the same application. This example is a direct testimonial to just how free we are in the United States.

We are required, by federal law, to obtain, verify, and record information that identifies each person opening or having access to a DCU Account. We will ask for your legal name, residential address, Social Security Number (SSN) or Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), Phone Number, and Date of Birth. REQUIRED IDENTIFICATION: No individual can be named on this account in any capacity without having provided the following current identification, one of which must include a picture and one of which must reflect the individuals current residential address as given. If one of these forms of identification includes both, you need only submit that one: US Drivers License US Social Security Card Passport US Military ID US Work Visa Other Government Issued picture ID (2nd ID always required). DCU reserves the right to request additional identification.

Laws, rules, and, regulations like the ones referenced above, which require me to turn over every ounce of information about myself to open up a bank account, do NOT make me think freedom. I guess we all have to bite the bullet in light of the governments War on Terror. There might be a few more terrorists INSIDE the U. S. who did not kill themselves during the 9/11 tragedy; so lets pass the Patriot Act and force 300 Million Americans to give up more individual freedom. Is the loss of freedom for 300 Million Americans a fair trade if it allows the government to capture 20 or so terrorists? Im not saying Terrorism is a trivial

6 Chapter 2 Law

matter; there are definitely foreign terrorists who hate the United States. However, it seems illogical to allow our governmental EMPLOYEES to pass laws that restrict the freedoms of 300 Million Americans due to a War on Terror or ANYTHING ELSE. A War on Terror which realistically only includes a few thousand foreign terrorists living OUTSIDE of this country is NOT a good reason for 300 million American Citizens to lose their freedom. I want to feel safe, as most Americans do; but if the Terrorist hate us for our freedomlaws like the ones in the Patriot Act mean the Terrorist win.

Please additionally consider that to feel safe is not the same as actually being safe. Giving up your freedom for a feeling seems like a BAD idea to your author and narrator. These types of Congressional Federal laws, like the Patriot Act, seem to target, identify, and control law abiding Americans; thus impacting our freedom instead of going after the terrorists. How many of you think our government really believes that Terrorists, who could execute the 9/11 tragedy, could not manage to obtain a Drivers License and Social Security card to open up a bank account? One of the 9/11 Terrorist appears to have had a valid passport which somehow managed to survive the carnage and fire of the attacks. That says to me the Terrorists have access to all of the official identification documents needed. The level of control upon the American people today was NOT designed to find terrorists. The level of control over the American people, which was gained by the implementation of millions of laws, seems to be directed at the American people.

Lets take a look at another law many Americans break quite often. How many of you are familiar with the term Money Laundering? This law states the following:

(1) Whoever, knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, conducts or attempts to conduct such a financial transaction which in fact involves the proceeds of specified unlawful activity

(A)

(i) with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity; or

(ii) with intent to engage in conduct constituting a violation of section 7201 or 7206 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or

(B) knowing that the transaction is designed in whole or in part

(i) to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, or the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity; or

(ii) to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under State or Federal law,

shall be sentenced to a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the transaction, whichever is greater, or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.

These Money Laundering laws seem purposefully vague. It appears all any American has to do is be involved in some unlawful activity, which in my mind could be breaking any of the millions of laws at the Federal, State, or Local levels of government. Nobody knows all the laws, which makes it impossible to determine when one of us has unwittingly become involved in an unlawful activity. Lets take a moment and play the What-If game using the possible penalties one could incur under the Money Laundering laws. Remember in the introduction when we discussed American Citizens being required to get Permits in order to have a Garage Sale? Lets use the Garage Sale as an example of the hard core criminal and unlawful activity in our game.

What if you had a Garage Sale and you did not get a Government Permit?

What if somebody in government found out about your Garage Sale, and decided since you had no Government Permit, it was indeed an unlawful activity in which you were involved?

What if you were sentenced to imprisonment for not more than twenty years for having a Garage Sale without a Government Permit based on Money Laundering laws?

This scenario might sound ridiculous to some; but if you made money from the sale of your possessions at the Garage Sale and you did not get a Permit from City Government, then technically you did commit an unlawful activity. Thus, you could be technically subjected to the penalties associated with committing this unlawful activity without your governmental EMPLOYEES permission. If the laws are active and on the governments books, then they could always be used against you at the governments discretion. Lets take this a bit further using our Money Laundering example with the continuation of our What-If game.

What if you got a Government Permit to have your Garage Sale?

What if you made $1000 from the sale of your possessions at your Garage Sale?

What if you intentionally or unintentionally neglected to mention the profit and gain of $1000 from your Garage Sale on your 1040 Internal Revenue statement?

What if someone at the IRS found out and decided this was an unlawful activity since you did not report the money?

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES 7

What if the IRS decided you were also trying to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under State or Federal law when you failed to report that gain of $1000 you made at your Garage Sale?

What if the IRS decided you committed this unlawful activity with intent to engage in conduct constituting a violation of section 7201 or 7206 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and you were sentenced to a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the transaction, whichever is greater, or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both?

What if all the millions of laws created by government were actually meant to control the American people?

Im sure misunderstandings like the ones above could never happen with the IRS or other elements within our current governments and legal Systemcould they??? Do you still think having millions of laws is really for your safety and in your best interest? Do you feel it wise to trust our current brand of governmental representatives with this type of potential control over each and every American Citizen? As you can see, its very easy to break the law, even when it involves seemingly harmless activities like filling out a Checking Account application or having a Garage Sale!!! Do free people really live under millions of laws restricting their freedom? I know our Grandparents and Great Grandparents did not have to get a Government Permit from their EMPLOYEES giving them permission to have a Garage Sale in the privacy of their own homes. Something has definitely changed over time in the United States!

What would you do if the government passed a curfew law mandating that you could not leave your home past midnight without a government Permit? Its been done before in relation to our youth, so its not too far fetched for some government official to attempt such a thing for the general populations SAFETY. Would you abide by the law and apply for government permission to leave your home past midnight, or would you stand up and fight for your Freedom? We have all let our governments and the Mainstream Media dictate to us what Freedom means, but do we really know the definition? Well todays your lucky day because I happen to have it right here.

Freedom Liberty; the right to do what is not forbidden by law.

Wellif this definition is true, then having millions of laws would serve to put a serious damper on Freedom. With millions of laws on the governments books, existing within all levels of government, there cant be a whole lot left Americans can do which is not forbidden by law. We already see we cannot have a simple garage sale without government permission, so Id say we might have allowed ourselves to be painted into a corner of Government control disguised as Freedom. Could Government control disguised as Freedom be the primary reason we have been purposefully inflicted with millions of laws, with more being passed every time Congress is in session? There seems to be a law regulating everything except breathing!!! Id like to ask my readers a very simple question. Why do the American people have to ask governmental representatives, who we put into office, for their PERMISSION to do ANYTHING? Our governmental representatives are supposed to be working for us; but with millions of laws in force, where almost EVERYTHING is forbidden by law, the EMPLOYERS are asking the EMPLOYEES for PERMISSION. I dont know about most of you, but in my mind, there is something dangerously alarming regarding this situation. I dont believe that Freedom can exist when the people are no longer in control of their governments. Is the Constitution really an outdated document which does not apply in modern times, or is it the one document which assures we are never controlled by a Tyrannical Government and lose our freedoms so many have fought and died to keep?

Lets step back for a moment and review some of the laws we are supposed to live and die by in the United States. We all know about the Constitution and the Bill of Rightsat least we all should; so lets turn our attention to the Statutes at Large. What is the Statutes at Large, some of you might ask? Statutes at Large are a list of some of the millions of laws at the Federal level we have to live under every day in America. Lets look at the definition of these statutes. At the time of this writing, if you went to the government web site http://www.gpoaccess.gov/, you would find the following:

The United States Statutes at Large, typically referred to as the Statutes at Large, is the permanent collection of all laws and resolutions enacted during each session of Congress. The Statutes at Large is prepared and published by the Office of the Federal Register (OFR), National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Every public and private law passed by Congress is published in the Statutes at Large, in order of the date it was enacted into law.

At face value, the definition seems like a fairly decent one; but lets dig a little deeper and take a look at the definition from the Law Library of Congress website at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwsl.html.

The United States Statutes at Large, commonly referred to as the Statutes at Large, is the official source for the laws and resolutions passed by Congress. Publication began in 1845 by the private firm of Little, Brown And Company under authority granted by a joint resolution of Congress. In 1874, Congress transferred the authority to publish the Statutes at Large to the Government Printing Office, which has been responsible for producing the set since that time. Every law, public and private, ever enacted by the Congress is published in the Statutes at Large in order of the date of its passage. Until 1948, all treaties and international agreements approved by the Senate were also published in the set. In addition, the Statutes at Large includes the text of the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, amendments to the Constitution, treaties with Indians and foreign nations, and presidential proclamations.

Do you see any obvious differences between the definitions from the two assumed governmental websites? What jumps out at me, and is cause for great concern, is the first definition from the government website would have you believe the Declaration of

8 Chapter 2 Law

Independence, Articles of Confederation and the Constitution are no longer included in the United States Statutes at Large. If that was the case, this particular definition would omit the Founding Documents of the Founding Fathers from being a part of the Supreme Laws of the Land in America. Do you wonder why there are two different definitions in these examples with the first being so incomplete? It could be as simple as your author pulling information from different websites. It could also be a bit more ominous. It could be that whoever wrote the first definition forgot about the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, and the Amendments to the Constitution, OR they wanted YOU to forget about them? Take a moment, give this some thought, and let me know what you come up with. Are you still comfortable with your feeling of freedom in this country at present? Remember, Truth is the Perception of the Majority. Im not a lawyer or an attorney; but in my personal opinion, the first definition of the Statutes at Large above is a legal one, and the second definition is more of a lawful one. I bet you thought legal and lawful were the same didnt you? Well talk more on that subject throughout our conversation, but right now we must continue our discussion of more systems of Federal law.

Have you ever heard of United States Code and the Code of Federal Regulations? Many of our governmental leaders would have you believe they are the exact same documents of law. However, if that were true, would the brilliant minds who run our governments have given them different names?

United States Code (USC) The code of laws of the United States. Also known as the U.S. Code, it contains 50 titles, each of which covers a subject area such as Agriculture, Labor, and Public, Health and Welfare. As each new law is passed, the relevant sections of the code are modified and updated, both in the printed codes and in the online databases. There are three different publishers of the U.S. Code: the United States Government (U.S.C.), West (United States Code Annotated, or U.S.C.A., which is available on Westlaw), and Lawyers Coop (United States Code Service, or U.S.C.S, which is available on Lexis). Both commercial publishers update the unofficial versions of the Code more frequently than the government updates the official Code. The complete text of the U.S. Code is available on several websites, including the U.S. House of Representatives and Cornell University Law Schools Legal Information Institute.

The definition above looks great. Nonetheless, wouldnt it be even better if our government would publish the official versions of law we have to live and die by before the lawyers and attorneys publish them? Finding out that Both commercial publishers update the unofficial versions of the Code more frequently than the government updates the official Code makes me wonder who is running the country. Is it our governmental representatives or the lawyers and attorneys? Never mind, most of our governmental representatives are lawyers or attorneys. I guess updating the official Code they wish us to live by stretches the competence of the attorneys who have become our leaders in Congress. On the other hand, failing to update the official Code could have been a purposeful act. I dont know the definitive answer, but Ill be attempting to give my readers something new and interesting to think about as often as possible. Let us move on to the definition of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) so we can compare it to United States Code (USC) defined above.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) The United States Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is a compilation of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the Executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government of the United States of America. It is sometimes referred to as the United States Code, U.S. Code or USC. The U.S. Federal Register is published on each day following a government working day. It is the official daily publication for Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of Federal agencies and organizations, as well as Executive Orders and other Presidential Documents.

As you looked at the two definitions of USC and CFR, you might have noticed something really interesting. Did you notice in the CFR definition above, someone is trying to make YOU believe the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) might be the same thing as the United States Code (USC), simply because it is sometimes referred to as the United States Code, U.S. Code or USC.? You might also have noticed the CFR definition mentions the United States of America, where the USC definition seems to have left any reference of America high and dry. USC references the laws of the United States and U.S., but says nothing of the laws of America as it does in CFR. Your author and narrator believes that is because United States Code (USC) pertains to LAWS for Washington D.C. and the Territories; and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) pertains to LAWS for America, which includes the 50 union States. If a definition of our country does not specifically say the United States of America, it could be referring to the United States of Russia for all we know. It might sound crazy to some, but stick with me long enough for me to explain my thoughts in greater detail. There will be much evidence presented to back up all of my statements.

In the USC definition, it mentions the document was published by the United States Government, which some of my readers probably already know is not necessarily our original Federal Government. It also says it contains the unofficial versions from Westlaw, Lawyers Coop, and Cornell Law. Now take another look at the definition of CFR prior to moving forward. Please note that it is published each day following a government working day in the official U.S. Federal Register defined below.

Federal Register is the official newspaper of the U.S. government; it was authorized by Congress in 1935 after the Supreme Court complained of the lack of a complete compilation of executive and administrative orders. It contains all presidential proclamations, executive orders, and federal agency regulations and proposed rules. It informs citizens of their rights and obligations, and it includes a listing of federal benefits and funding opportunities.

Which group of laws do you think actually apply to you as an American Citizen living in one of the 50 union States? CFR, containing laws published daily in the Federal Register, or USC which is published every six years? Both CFR and USC can be

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES 9

found in the United States Statutes at Large, but that doesnt necessarily mean each set of laws actually applies to an American Citizen. It is a fact that the United States Statutes at Large contains Every public and private law passed by Congress; but if they were identical laws, then whats the point of separating them? If I just had to pick one, Id go with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) over United States Code (USC) myself; but thats my own personal opinion. Youll have to decide for yourselves on this rather important issue. When you decide, please give Congress a call to inform them of your decision. This book will provide you all the evidence needed to make an informed decision as we continue our conversation.

Im striving to make your book as simple to understand as possible, but freedom is not always a simple matter. Wait a minute; I dont think Ive ever heard the phrase Freedom is not always a simple matter before either! Did I just coin another really cool quote? Somebody please look up this quote and get back to me at http://www.americanfreedombooks.com. I dont have time to research quotes because Im writing the first chapter of your book. Moving on, I have to give my readers enough background and examples to insure the information discussed is easy to understand. It was stated in the introduction that this is not a book of facts, but I know every one of us is looking for the Truth. Remember, Im not a lawyer or an attorney. Im just another American Citizen who is sharing ideas and opinions that may or may not be Truthdepending on your PERCEPTION. Hopefully, in the short time youve been reading, many of you have become concerned about the confusing nature of our laws and country. Just what are all these USC, CFR, Statues at Large, Federal Register, U.S., United States, and United States of America STUFFS? You might be a bit alarmed because it looks like someone in high places is endeavoring to mislead, deceive, or downright lie to you where our laws are concerned. Let me assure you that you are not alone!!! I was alarmed by the frequency with which this sort of gotcha using law seems to occur in our governments; hence my need for the writing of this book.

Now, let us tie all the aforementioned information together so it can be easily understood. Unfortunately, Im going to have to throw in a few more definitions to make it all work for you, but first allow me to explain my writing style.

American Freedom will be using BLUE italic text for source and reference material. Embedded in the source and reference material, as well as in the original BLACK text; youll often find cute and amazingly witty additional comments from me (as your narrator) in RED. These amazingly witty and informative additional comments in RED will sometimes take on the persona of explanations and interpretations of specific subject matter. Certain subjects of discussion will occasionally be a bit tricky to understand, so Ill be assisting every chance I get (as your narrator). I will also be using quite a bit of bold and underlined text to aid in clarification of the subjects and concepts discussed throughout this book. Im sure youve noticed the bold and underlined text already. The majority of transcript containing emphasis using bold and/or underlined text will belong to me (your author/narrator). Furthermore, I will often use the same BLUE italic text (emphasis added and all) from the source and reference material mixed in with the original BLACK text. Using words or phrases taken directly from the source and reference material is my attempt at more precise explanations. It is my hope the use of the same BLUE text from my source and reference material will aid the audience in understanding points Im attempting to make, with reference to the concepts being explained. It also works out by allowing me (author/narrator) to cut down on duplicate key strokes. I hope you dont mind, but with all the legalese you are about to encounter, it would be very easy to miss a crucial issue if its not specifically pointed out. Additionally, in my opinion, three color texts add a bit of flare to any reference book. For the writing professionals reading this publication, my writing style does NOT exactly conform to The Chicago Manual of Style, The Associated Press Stylebook, or The Elements of Style. Where American Freedom is concerned, Style had to be sacrificed for Clarity and Understanding.

In reference to the legal aspects in this chapter pertaining to Law, I ask that you bite the bullet, and make sure you have a general understanding of the legal principles discussed prior to continuing our conversation. You will need to be familiar with them throughout this book, but fear notyou will be more than familiar when were done. The subject of legalese might be boring to some; but laws, or the lack thereof, are very critical to the freedom of any nation. You DO NOT need to memorize the legal principles discussed because most of the more important ones will be repeated many times throughout your book. However, it is crucial you leave this chapter with a workable understanding of the principles of law in the United States. Dont get nervous; the ability to understand the principles of law will be easier than you think. I promise that once we move onto other chapters our conversation will be even MORE informative, lively and robust; but I imagine youll enjoy learning about the laws of our nation as well in this chapter. My writing style and word structure is very informal; after all, this is a relaxed heart to heart conversation with my fellow American Citizens. Im not attempting to impress any of you with my vocabulary. Nonetheless, the information in this book will build upon itself, so please dont get discouraged, and stay with me to the very end. Youll be glad you did! Since this book is fully titled American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES, I felt the need to address everyone in America. Thats why youll find that I might occasionally invoke my authors poetic license where writing styles are concerned. I gave myself the right to use text in first person, second person, and third person if the need should arise. American Freedom involves everybody in Americame, you, and them, so I wanted to include every Individual and Person in what most would consider a very important conversation. Youll probably catch me discussing the same or similar information and points from time to time. It is necessary to insure you understand certain critical data, as well as to imprint the most important issues into your brains neural networks; especially certain concepts of law. Ill make every attempt to keep it clean and avoid cursing. Nevertheless, you will see the use of words like CRAP, BULL, and STUFF. Ill let you do the cursing as you view the evidence presented pertaining to the status of YOUR American Freedom. Some of this evidence might seem pretty far out to many of you AT FIRST, but you and I both know that Truth is sometimes stranger than Fiction. Youll have to view the verifiable evidence and decide which side of the fence you believe certain information falls upon; the Truth side or the Fiction side.

10 Chapter 2 Law

We will also be discussing many of our more popular political leaders in detail, and revealing some very important information about them of which you should be aware. Some of the information discussed pertaining to certain leaders in American Government might definitely cause you to view these individuals in a negative light. I dont mean to destroy anyones image as a great leader in your eyes, and I apologize if that happens. In spite of that, this conversational journey is a trek for Truth to bring about change, so were going to have to let the politicians and government officials reputations fall where they may. That being saidlets move on, and let the good times roll. The American Freedom train is leaving the station.

I hinted earlier that United States might not mean the same thing as America depending on ones definition of United States. Lets go to Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Edition (one of the lawyers bibles) for a more clear understanding of the legal definition of United States. Blacks Law Dictionary, right out of the gate, contains the following rather vague explanation.

United States This term has several meanings. (Holy Crap I was afraid of that!!!) It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in family of nations, (This means we could be talking about the United States of Russia if we just say United States without of America.) it may designate territory over which sovereignty of United States extends, (Such as Washington D.C. and the Territories being the seat of government and territorial property of the U.S.) or it may be collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. (United States of America or good old USA)

Based on the above definition, there does indeed appear to be MULTIPLE MEANINGS for the term United States. Now you dont have to just take my word for it; its published for all to see in one of the lawyer and attorney bibles of definitions known as Blacks Law Dictionary. Of course these definitions seem to change with each new edition of the law dictionary to keep up with the passing of older American Citizens and the government indoctrination and education of our younger American Citizens. If youre in the market to purchase law books, be sure to get copies of the oldest ones you can find. That way, you have the Truest definitions available. So, it looks to me like there might be SEVERAL DIFFERENT United States, depending on WHOSE definition is being used. What concerns the American people at this point is, which definition of United States our government is using, and when are they using it. You have just been introduced to a concept in the legal profession called Word of Art.

Word of Art is a conversational word whose meaning is legally redefined within the legislative environment for a specific purpose.

In this case, United States, U.S., U.S.A., and United States of America can all have a specific legal meaning to the legislative environment consisting of the President, Commander-in-Chief, Congress, government officials, and the Judicial System. On the other hand, American Citizens have been led to believe a specific word has the same meaning regardless of how its legally redefined . The lawyers and attorneys in our Judicial System are using Word of Art and definitions from legal law dictionaries, while most American Citizens are using the definitions from Websters Dictionary. You will be shocked to find most of the definitions contained in these two very different types of dictionaries have a TOTALLY DIFFERENT MEANING. Please REMEMBER Word of Art as we move forward. It will help you understand how important definition is in the legal profession. I know what many of you are thinking now. Youre wondering why our leaders would do such a thing as deceive us with different definitions of United States. Allow me to present you with my opinion on this matter. I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights lives under that entity defined as the United States of America. If you voluntarily refer to yourself or allow yourself to be legally defined as a United States Citizen, U.S. citizen, u.s. citizen; or any other citizen without America or American anywhere in the definitionYOUR government just might be able to throw out that pesky Constitution and deal with you in any manner they chose. Please consider this matter carefully. At this point, I hope you are beginning to grasp the significance of definition in the legal profession so I have not written this far in vain. Some of you might think Im crazy, but please remember, even if I am crazy; that does not mean I dont know what Im talking about in this instance. Im not saying any of us agreed to become possible Territorial Citizens (U. S. Citizens of the Territorial possessions of the United States) living outside the Constitution. American Citizens would never knowingly volunteer to become Territorial Citizens with privileges instead of rights, as implied by one of the above definitions of United States. However, our Congressional leaders might have laid this burden upon us anywayby DEFINITION. Here is a real shocker you were probably not expecting. In my opinion, it has been done and we are about to discuss the evidence. Congress has allowed every American Citizen to be defined as a Territorial Citizen, and its all very legal ! The Constitution is still there; but the government has managed to move the American people away from it, thus taking away our rights and replacing them with privileges. Its a neat trick, it took certain elements within our governments 100 plus years to do it; but we never complained or paid attention so now its done. If you are pissed off you should be VERY pissed off. I know I am!!! If you are not pissed off at this point, there is only one thing I have to say to youKEEP READING. For those who are a bit upset, please dont despair too much at present. If enough of us become aware, and firmly insist our governments stop using legal tricks on us with definitions, we can restore our rights and move back under the reasonable protection of the Constitution in fairly short order. Now is as good a time as any to reveal to my readers the difference between Legal and Lawful. I know many of you believe these two words to be synonymous; if you do, youd be wrong. Were going to trust the attorneys and use the definitions from their Blacks Law Dictionary.

Legal 1. Conforming to the law; according to law; required or permitted by law; not forbidden or discountenanced by law; good and effectual in law. 2. Proper or sufficient to be recognized by the law; cognizable in the courts; competent or adequate to fulfill the requirements of the law.

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES 11

I dont know about you, but Im NOT confident that either of these two definitions of Legal guarantees my being FREE in America. Each of these definitions are using Word of Art and is really saying Legal means Conforming to, permitted by, and not forbidden by SOME form of law. That does not make Legal the law! If Legal is not the law, then laws of a Legal nature might not be the same as laws of a Lawful naturenow would they? If we have to live and die by the millions of legal laws on the governments books, we want them to at least be REAL LAWS. It might be great for the legal profession that legal laws are cognizable in the courts for ease of convictionI mean ease of use; but as an American Citizen who is supposed to have RIGHTS and FREEDOM, Im hoping for a bit more than that. Would YOU want to go into a court facing a lengthy jail sentence or execution based on something which is Proper or sufficient to be recognized by the law? Most American Citizens would rather be charged with the law alleged to have been brokenor be released if there is no Real lawful law in existence which was broken? This legal stuff might be Proper or sufficient to be recognized by the law in order for a government which is attempting to control its citizens to keep them in line, but I dont want to be charged with violating a law unless its a Real LAW!!! That being emphatically stated; let us now turn our attention to one definition of Lawful.

Lawful Legal; (This is a lieSee what I get when I try to trust SOME attorneys and their legal dictionaries. If they had the same meaning there would not be two separate words with DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS) warranted or authorized by the law; having the qualifications prescribed by law; not contrary to nor forbidden by the law. The principal distinction between the terms lawful and legal (See, there is a distinction between lawful and legal) is that the former contemplates the substance of law, the latter the form of law. To say of an act that it is lawful implies that it is authorized, sanctioned, or at any rate not forbidden, by law. To say that it is legal implies that it is done or performed in accordance with the forms and usages of law, or in a technical manner.

Basically, what this definition says to me is lawful applies to the substance of law and most likely encompasses the warranted or authorized laws of the land in America. These warranted or authorized laws of the land in America are the ones Americans should be judged by and follow. On the other handthis legal stuff seems to apply to possible forms and usages of the actual laws that someone in government, the legal profession, or BOTH, are using in SOME technical manner to legally control the American people. The American people are currently being severely hindered from freedom by their governments use of the millions of legal laws previously mentioned. If there is a principal distinction between lawful law and legal law, then it could turn out that the millions of legal laws Congress has American Citizens living under is NOT the law at allat least NOT the lawful laws of America.

Now I cant tell you how to perceive this information, but it looks to me that lawful and legal ARE NOT the same set of laws. If I were one of you (I am), Id be very concerned with the millions of legal laws in place for certain government officials to use against you in some technically legal YET unlawful manner. From now on, you might want to insist your government and Judicial System conduct any and all relations with you in a lawful manner instead of a legal manner.

Lets take a look at another definition of Law from my really old Bouviers Law Dictionary 6th Edition of 1856 in order to get an idea of what the term meant back then. This is our chapter on Law, so we need to have a true definition of what it is before we continue.

LAW In its most general and comprehensive sense, law signifies a rule of action; and this term is applied indiscriminately to all kinds of action; whether animate or inanimate, rational or irrational. 1 Bl. Com. 38. In its more confined sense, law denotes the rule, not of actions in general, but of human action or conduct. In the civil code of Louisiana, art. 1, it is defined to be a solemn expression of the legislative will. Vide Toull. Dr. Civ. Fr. tit. prel. s. 1, n. 4; 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 1-3.

2. Law is generally divided into four principle classes, namely;

Natural law, the law of nations, public law, and private or civil law. When considered in relation to its origin, it is statute law or common law (There is a humungous difference in these two origins of law). When examined as to its different systems it is divided into civil law, common law, canon law. When applied to objects, it is civil, criminal, or penal. It is also divided into natural law and positive law. Into written law, lex scripta; and unwritten law, lex non scripta. Into law merchant, martial law, municipal law, and foreign law. When considered as to their duration, laws are immutable and arbitrary or positive; when as their effect, they are prospective and retrospective. These will be separately considered.

The key point here is that all these different classes of law will be separately considered by whomever or whatever Governmental/Judicial entity has jurisdiction to consider them. If the laws you have broken are lawful laws and apply to the Constitution by being Constitutional, then you will HAVE Rights (YEA!) as these lawful laws are separately considered in America. If the laws you have broken are legal laws and DO NOT apply to the Constitution, thereby rendering them Unconstitutional; then you will be GIVEN Privileges (BOO!) as these legal laws are separately considered somewhere OUTSIDE of America. I say OUTSIDE of America because legal laws exist in one of those other places defined above in the definitions of United StatesPRETENDING to be America. The reality of two sets of laws in America (legal laws and lawful laws), and the existence of three definitions of United States DEFINED with several meanings, could imply they are not the same entities. Logically and lawfully, ONLY one of the three definitions of United States previously discussed is the real America. That would make the other two something different to be separately considered by the American people. These different United States could have different laws and different jurisdictions (different powers) with one set of laws

12 Chapter 2 Law

being Constitutional and lawful law, while the other two sets could consist of mostly Unconstitutional legal law.

Remember, according to the lawyers dictionary definition of United States, there are legally THREE possible entities in existence. United States having several definitions suggests thatThis term has several meanings. These THREE different types of United States could have laws that end up being separately considered by Congress and the Judicial System when they seek jurisdiction to punish you for breaking them. Your punishment could also be more severe depending on what class of citizen you turn out to be by definition. Multiple definitions of United States should not be an issue in America; but certain Treasonous agents in government, who are pretending to be representatives of the people in Congress, have made it so. American Citizens should be very careful which set of laws are being used against them in the current System of government in the United States. If you still dont get the distinction between Legal and Lawful, dont sweat it. There will be multiple examples throughout this book in every chapter to drive these important distinctions of law home (or even to the mall) to all my readers.

Now, in order to drive some other important points home (or to the beachwe can always go home), lets look at a publication called Citizens Rule Book. You will be interested to see what this book has to say about the true Law of the Land. By true Law of the Land is meant Constitutional law, as opposed to the millions of statutes in the United States Code (USC), the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), State laws, and Local laws. Optimistically, the following really OLD court cases and definition will aid us in determining legal versus lawful and Unconstitutional versus Constitutional.

The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. (That means legal law is not necessarily lawful law and is most likely unconstitutional.) The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, (legal/lawful law) to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law (legal law) which violates the Constitution to be valid. This is Succinctly stated as follows:

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void. (Could this be referring to the majority of legal laws currently found in United States Code (USC) and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)I think so?)

Marbury vs Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them. (Congress cannot pass unconstitutional Laws also known as legal laws)

Miranda vs Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.

An unconstitutional act (MOST legal acts using legal law) is not law; it confers no right; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. (So why do our governmental representatives and Judicial Systems have Americans following them?)

Norton vs Shelby County 118 US 425 p.442

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, (legal law) is in reality no law (SURPRISE!), but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. (So, I wonder why we have millions of legal laws with most of them violating the Constitution, yet the majority of our courts uphold the unconstitutional laws.)

16th American Jurisprudence 2d (The Lawyers Encyclopedia), Section 177 late 2nd, Section 256

We seem to have many OLD, well documented court case rulings in this free nation of ours on legal versus lawful laws. However, most Americans have never been taught what lawful really means, and our governmental leaders dont seem to care. The government and legal System got no objections from us when they devised their unconstitutional System. Therefore they moved forward with all their millions of legal laws at the expense of our rights and our freedom. When it comes to the millions of statutory legal laws being used against American Citizens, our modern government and judicial System does not seem to care that No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.

I wonder why our elected and appointed representatives would do such a thing. This type of question is one you should get used to seeing, in some form or another, throughout these pages. The information in this book is going to prompt the question being repeated among my readers millions of times. We must always beware of legal law versus lawful law, and we must always be aware of legal definitions versus lawful definitions. In my opinion, these legal definitions are quite valid in the United States Territories, but they hold no water in the United States of America and the 50 union States. My prior statement was made with lawful certainty because No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it here in the good old USA. That is why it is so important to determine which United States is being referenced, by definition. Unfortunately, its the only way to know for sure if YOU are being judged legally or lawfully. If for some reason you still dont believe what Im saying has merit, dont worry about it too much. I understand, and Im not offended

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES 13

in any way. However, please stick with our conversation in order to give me a chance to solidify my case. Lets move forward by reviewing more definitions of United States/United States of America from The Factual Guide to the Constitution for the United States of America, edited and compiled by RJ Smith in 1995. Ive actually had the pleasure of becoming acquainted with some of the individuals who assisted Mr. Smith with his Factual Guide. These little books are hard to find, but at the time of this writing, your author found some for sale by doing a web search that revealed the following internet site at http://www.rochesterlaw.org/store/index.php?main_page=product_reviews&cPath=6&products_id=5.

United States The federal entity defined by Article I Section 8, Clause 17 (An Article of the Constitution)

United States One of the fifty sovereign states. (Its obvious America is being referenced by mention of the fifty states)

United States of America The federal entity defined by Article I Section 8, Clause 17 (Article in the Constitution)

united States of America One of the fifty sovereign states.

So far so good, the definitions above are definitely referencing America and/or the fifty States within America. In spite of this great news, there still appears to be a few definitions left in the guide we need to consider.

UNITED STATES The term may be used in any one of several senses: 1. it may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations [i.e. Japan, England, France, Africa (or Russia) etc.] 2. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends [i.e. Washington D.C., Guam, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, etc.] (This is the seat of Government and some of its Territories; Washington D.C. is not a State at the time of this writing) or 3. It may be the collective names of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. [i.e. The 50 sovereign states of the Union.] (Please let it be this one if my freedom is at stake!!!)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff pleading in a case having the venue and jurisdiction originating in the Philippines. (Another Territory) Reference: Title 48(1441 i)

UNITED STATES Plaintiff pleading in a case having the venue and jurisdiction originating in the District of Columbia (Territorial Seat of Government) Reference: Title 48(1441 i)

Holy crap again! It looks like these last three definitions of UNITED STATES/UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, with their various spellings, have totally or partially contradicted the first four definitions. This could undermine everything we discussed on the issue of legal versus lawful and definitions being so important. Why dont you readers take a break while the author takes a moment to figure this one out? Never mindfalse alarm, I think Ive got the answer. Take a look at the UPPER and lower case letters in the first four terms. Now notice that the next three terms are in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. Im not a lawyer or attorney; but I seem to remember one definition of ALL CAPITAL LETTERS in a name means you are dead and have no standing, on account of you being dead and you can no longer stand. Ive seen a lot of head stones that look this way; every one of them had ALL CAPITAL LETTERS on the headstone. Hold on, I also seem to remember a second possible situation, where the name/entity in question being written in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS referred to it being INCORPORATED. Keeping that in mind, its possible those last three definitions could be names of a Corporation instead of our Nation. The entities spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS could lawfully have nothing to do with an American Citizeneven though it could be a bit legally confusing. Now why would somebody do such a thing? Seetheres that question again. Being an American Citizen, instead of a United States Citizen, seems to be harder and trickier than it should be!!! Before we go any further, lets take a look at a few more definitions to assist you in your thought processes.

Supreme Law of the Land The Constitution for the United States of America.

Constitutional That which is consonant to, and agrees with the constitution. Reference: Bouviers 8th 1859 (Definition from another edition of the really old Law Dictionary Im using to compare old and new meanings of words)

Sovereign A chief ruler with supreme power; one possessing sovereignty2. In the United States the sovereignty resides in the body of the people. (American People or We the People SHOULD BE Sovereign) Reference: Bouviers 8th 1859

Territory A part of the country, separated from the rest, and subject to a particular jurisdiction. (I dont like the sound of that)

District of Columbia (D.C.) The name of a district of country (uh oh), ten miles square, situate between the states of Maryland and Virginia, over which the national government has exclusive jurisdiction.(Double uh oh)

Corporation An artificial person or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state or nation. (I dont like the sound of this artificial person stuff too much either)

Okay, I think we have all the definitions we need to insure my readers understand the information being explained in this section. The only thing to add is to have you pay close attention to the concept of jurisdiction, which is basically the legal or lawful right for an entity to have power over you in some manner. We will discuss jurisdiction in greater detail in our chapter regarding the Constitution. If you look at the previous definitions of Territory and District of Columbia, you will notice they have a particular jurisdiction, as well as some type of an exclusive jurisdiction. Since jurisdiction is what gives Nations, States, Courts, or even Corporations their powers over us, Id be a bit leery of living in the District of Columbia or a Territory with their exclusive jurisdiction and particular jurisdiction. Due to the multiple definitions of UNITED STATES being distinguished by UPPER

14 Chapter 2 Law

and lower case letters, Im additionally concerned American Citizens could have been legally classified as Territorial Citizens, who are currently living and working in one of the 50 union States. In this case, Territorial Citizen would be synonymous with United States Citizen. These two Territorial UNITED STATES could have legal jurisdictions instead of lawful jurisdictions. I might also be afraid that the District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) or the territories dubious jurisdictions might allow a flesh and blood person to be changed into an artificial person or legal entity of the Territorial UNITED STATES. It would be preferable to remain a Sovereign American Citizen, protected by the Supreme Law of the Land (The Constitution), if given the choice. If those last two definitions above regarding the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and UNITED STATES have any Truth to them; it looks like they are Corporations, with some sort of jurisdiction from the District of Columbia or a Territoryand I dont live in either. DO YOU? Im afraid a UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and/or UNITED STATES Corporate Government might even pass legal laws that are NOT constitutional (unconstitutional), and use these unconstitutional BUT legal laws to violate the rights of or control American Citizens, who might have been misled to believe these unconstitutional BUT legal laws are the Supreme Laws of the Land.

If you missed the meaning of the previous paragraph with my semi amusing (at least to me) use of word play with the definitions, then allow me to spell it out to you. It appears someone or some group created and incorporated UNITED STATES, U.S., and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in God only knows how many different upper/lower case combinations or DBA (Doing Business As) configurations, in order to accomplish some specific purpose. The evidence suggests that specific purpose was to RELOCATE every American Citizen from the protection of the Constitution by moving them into some particular jurisdiction. Certain EMPLOYEES within government have used an artificial or legal entity to change the United States of America, a Nation, into the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, an artificial CORPORATION or legal Territorial entity. By default, changing a Nation into a Corporate/Territorial artificial or legal entity additionally legally changes American Citizens into United States Citizens and/or Territorial Citizens. This is NOT the kind of unlawful change America needed. The next time you sign a form declaring yourself a United States Citizen, U. S. Citizen, or u. s. citizen instead of as an American Citizen, YOU could be declaring yourself an artificial person or legal entity under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES OF AMERICAby legal definition. From the research of others, as well as your author, we know when this travesty of justice officially occurred. I could take the effort to write the details behind this travesty of justice in my own words, but the following excerpts from the internet at http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm seem to do an excellent job. Though I did take the liberty of emphasizing what I think are key points with highlighted and underlined text; as by now you should know Im prone to do.

The article below is a bit lengthy, but so are the millions of legal laws being used to control you. At the time of this writing, a web search for United States Corporation will reveal an over abundance of information pertaining to a Corporate Entity named UNITED STATES. A Corporate Entity that is pretending to be the Nation created by the Founding Fathers. I say at the time of this writing because information on the internet is sometimes like definitions in the law dictionaries; it seems to disappear with time for some particular reason. We might be better off with books where lawful Law exposing legal law is concerned.

The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the Acts of the Forty-First Congress, Section34, SessionIII, chapters61 and62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia. This is also known as the Act of 1871. What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? (See, theres that question again) To explain, lets look at the circumstances of those days. TheAct of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. (Kind of like it is now in the aftermath and continuation of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan)

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyones pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original organic version of the Constitution into a dusty corner (Put the Constitution out to pasture). With the Act of 1871, our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word for was changed to the word of in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

The Constitution for the united states of America

The altered version reads: THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.

Capitalization an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isnt. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES 15

constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment (Yesdo think about it).

Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the organic Constitution, we now have relative rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereigns right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a privilege which we must be licensed (Drivers License or Passport) to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution.

So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word Sovereign, we must think about what the word means.

According to Websters Dictionary, sovereign is defined as: 1. chief or highest; supreme. 2. Supreme in power, superior in position to all others. 3. Independent of, and unlimited by, any other, possessing or entitled to, original and independent authority or jurisdiction. (Power)

In other words, our government was created by and for sovereigns the free citizens who were deemed the highest authority. Only the People can be sovereign remember that. Government cannot be sovereign. We can also look to the Declaration of Independence, where we read: government is subject to the consent of the governed thats supposed to be us, the sovereigns. Do you feel like a sovereign nowadays? Idont. (Nor do I; how about YOU?)

With the passage of the Ac