The second is that he hopes that others will be induced to read what is law and will start supporting the cessation of forced obedience to what is not law. The laws governing our behaviors are found in the Constitution, by the writings of the founders, dozens of philosophers, and Man�s understanding of the valid principles underlying liberty (and given by God or whatever the Creator of all life is called) and the rights of Man existing prior even to the framing of the Constitution.

The third is that the Constitution for the United States of America is not dead, nor is it a �living document� meant to be interpreted as times dictate (usually means some lawmaker and/or court is justifying violating the rights of the People). In every case of a similar claim investigated by the writer, the basic premise relies on forgetting the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble, the purpose of the founders, and the meaning of Liberty. Furthermore, as indicated above, such comments appear to be used in supporting the infringement of rights, whether intentional or not. What might be dead, though, is the desire of the people to defend their God-given unalienable, self-evident rights.

Consider this. If the Constitution never applied to the citizens of the United States of America from the get-go as some contend (including a judge), then, of course, each state is a Republic not in union with the others. It can�t be both ways. Either the Constitution did create a union of Republics known as the United States of America securing the rights of people or it did not. If it did not, then no citizen of any state has to obey any law created by Congress nor respond to any dictate including Executive Orders. Unless we are, of course, conquered states without any rights whatsoever. But, why then the Constitution and making it well known? After all, there are great risks associated with giving and convincing people a document securing their rights exists, including that many might believe strongly enough to fight to the death in order to protect the document/rights.

If it did create a union of Republics securing the rights of Man, then no citizen of any State has to obey any law made by Congress since Congress�s power extends only to making laws concerning citizens in defense of constitutionally-secured rights except when the citizen is involved in bona fide interstate commerce, importing goods that have an excise tax placed on them, or legislation applying to the US Postal Service which might affect a citizen.

The fourth is that the only laws citizens have to respond to are the laws of our Creator. We must not infringe upon those rights that define us as people living in Liberty. This is the common law secured by the Constitution and is also clearly delineated in the Declaration of Independence. Any who believe we must respond to man-made laws should be held in contempt of our Creator and the principles that bind us as the People of the United States of America.

The main problem we have had in the last 150 years is that the People did not stand up to unlawful acts by the then president of the United States, A. (Honest my butt) Lincoln, and allowed unconstitutional acts to take place, including the attack on the states that seceded from the Union. Those who were in office and under oath at any level of government should have supported the actions of the secessionist states based on their constitutional right to do so. Had this been done across the width and breadth of the United States and the United States of America, self-evident unalienable rights would have been more firmly ingrained in the minds of all American citizens with the will of major industrialists and bankers under enemy control bowing in defeat to the will of the People rather than the converse. So, maybe a lot of people like being told what they can do, when to do it, and want to be in servitude. Different strokes for different folks � and it does save decision-making.

Fifth, because The People did not take action against unconstitutional actions, including up to the present, we are now not any better off than our forefathers were. We are under the plenary control of government, whether it be federal, state, or local. Somehow, during the process of the governments circumventing the Constitution, the People responded as if government is sovereign, a monarch. I.e., if some government official says something is law, the People respond as if it is law when it may be nothing more than a practice or public policy � a fictitious law, if you will.

Courts supported repugnant null and void laws and these �policies of oppression� which makes sense since they are part of government and stand to profit in some way or another, whether it be in money or perks or just keeping a cushy high-paying job in which the controllers of courts, the judges, act as gods.

Of course, the courts are not the judges� kingdoms � they are owned and paid for by the citizens of this nation. The purpose of the courts is to settle disputes between citizens and/or citizens and government on a common law (Constitutional) basis. But, now we have judges who will not permit constitutional defenses and, indeed, try to prevent juries from even being in a court, and, if in court, prevent them thinking for themselves in terms of proper jury processes directed to justice.

There are hundreds of thousands of �laws� and other determinations based solely on �court rulings� contradicting the Constitution. If not in compliance with the Constitution, how can the decisions be valid and how can any law that is repugnant to the Constitution stand as a law? They can�t � except for the fact that the People allow it.

Courts interpret law that they are not constitutionally permitted to do. Self-evident rights are self-evident and need no interpretation. If they did, they would not be self-evident. So, what is being interpreted? Why, the laws written by mere mortals. And, most, if not all, do not constitutionally exist due to vagueness or being repugnant to the Constitution (16 Am Jur 2d Ed., Sec. 256, p. 177). The only exception would be a law that does not interfere with the rights of even one citizen, a legislative undertaking that has not succeeded to date or is well-hidden by corrupt lawmakers.

Courts of the United States with jurisdiction established in Article I may interpret laws applicable to the United States to their little hearts� (if they have one) content since these courts may operate only in the District of Columbia, the States of the United States (but not the 50 Republics), in US territories, and federal enclaves or, in other words, within the jurisdiction of the United States. In this jurisdiction, the government has plenary control (not over citizens of the 50 States, however).

The Supreme Court of the United States may settle specified disputes such as between citizens of a Republic (state of the United States of America) and the governing body as to the constitutionality of a law but may not interpret the law to do so. If there is a question of whether the law is constitutional or not, then the court is bound to rule with the citizen. Why? Because the fact the question even exists evidences the law must NOT be saying what it means and is void for vagueness. Furthermore, the laws of the Creator, the common law secured by the Constitution, are not subject to the laws made by men nor are men bound by these laws of evil men striving to affect rights.

So, there is federal jurisdiction and state jurisdiction. The supreme Law of the Land - the Constitution for the United States of America, however, binds both. Each state in becoming a state agreed to this. Every official in every level of government agrees and subscribes to this. All courts and officials agree and subscribe to it. All law enforcement and other assistants to the people�s government, agree to it.

So, just why the devil are all these government officials and other entities ignoring the Constitution, the rights of Man, and doing as they will? There is only one reason, a reason that has made it extremely difficult for any sovereign to defend his rights � The People have allowed it to happen.

The People have allowed agents of foreign powers (including the US Government and BAR attorneys � more on this in another part) to control the making of laws clearly repugnant to the Constitution, law enforcement to enforce these laws, and rulings based not on common law established by the law of the supreme Law of the Land but, instead, on false laws created by the evil of those who would circumvent all rights of Man (excepting their own, of course).

Finally, others may disagree with the above and that is fine but the writer will not debate it because there is, you see, nothing to debate. Liberty is simple to define. It means doing as one wishes as long as one doesn�t interfere with the rights of others.

However, governments in the past century and a half have interfered with this very simple principle in order to satisfy their own greed for wealth and power. In doing so, those in government and those who support these corrupted officials have committed treason. Remember that keeping one�s mouth shut when knowledgeable of an unconstitutional law is just as treasonous as are those who write and enforce such a law.

Try this on for size. The People created and own the US Government. The People created and own State governments (including lowly city governments). The People own and control every court and official. In other words, all government is subservient to the People. The People, each and every one, are sovereign to every level of government and, therefore, no government may make laws concerning the sovereign. Establish this as it once was and freedom will, indeed, ring once more across the once great land.

Remain silent � and assure servitude for generations to come.