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 STATES
http://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. Book
Published by Truth In Publishing, LLC.
3109 Knox Street
Suite 733
Highland Park, TX 75205-4029
1-888-500-1591
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Article I The Legislative Branch
Article II The Executive Branch
Article III The Judicial Branch
Article IV Relationship between the States, and the Federal Government
Article V The Amending powers of Congress
Article VI General provisions
Article VII Ratification of the Constitution

Proposed Constitution for the Newstates of America . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Bill of Rights and other Articles of Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Amendment I Freedoms, Petitions, and Assembly
Amendment II Right to Bear Arms
Amendment III Quartering of Soldiers
Amendment IV Search and Arrest
Amendment V Rights in Criminal Cases
Amendment VI Right to a Fair Trial
Amendment VII Rights in Civil Cases
Amendment VIII Bail, Fines, and Punishment
Amendment IX Rights Retained by the People
Amendment X States Rights
Amendment XIV Civil Privileges
Amendment XVI Income Taxes
Amendment XXVII Congressional Pay Raises

Contracts of Ownership and Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

Internal Revenue Service and Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
Lawful Taxes and the Income Tax
Taxes on Profit and Gain
Source of Income and Due Process of Law
Identities of IRS and the Taxpayer
Other Forms of Taxes
International Monetary Fund and Executive Orders
IRS Enforcement Laws
IRS System of Records
IRS Kickback Racket
Social Security and the Queen of England

Mainstream Media and Mind Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

War and Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Covert and Overt Terrorism
Biological Warfare
Assassination of John F. Kennedy and Gun Control
Corporate Police Forces
Oklahoma City Bombing
World Trade Center

Second Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Rule of Law
Gun Control Lie and Martial Law
Guns and Politics
International Treaty Laws
Corporate Army in America
Right to Carry Law
Gun Laws and the Supreme Court

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

INTRODUCTION
Freedom, 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.

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 us
Independent, 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

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.

LAW
Every 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

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 W hat-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

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

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

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 CR AP, 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 SEVER AL 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 you
KEEP 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 6 th 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 Territory
and 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 Act of 1871, a series of subtle and overt deceptions were set in motion all in conjunction and
collusion with the Congress, who knowingly and deliberately sold the People down the river. Did they tell you this
in government school? Idoubt it. They were too busy drumming the fictional version of history into your brain and
mine (Mine too).
The government which was created for the District of Columbia via the Act of 1871 operates under Private
International Law, and not Common Law, which was the law of the Constitutional Republic. This is very important
to note since it impacts all Americans in concrete ways. You must recognize that private international law (legal law) is
only applicable within the District of Columbia and NOT in the other states of the Union.
I refer you to the UNITED STATES CODE (note the capitalization, indicating the corporation, not the Republic) Title
28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C). It is stated unequivocally that the UNITED STATES is a corporation. Realize, too, that
the corporation is not a separate and distinct entity from the government. It IS the government. YOUR government. This
is extremely important. Irefer to this as the corporate empire of the UNITED STATES, which operates under
Roman Civil Law (More legal law) outside of the Constitution.
Congress is fully aware of this deception. You must be made aware that the members of Congress do NOT work for
you and me. Rather, they work for the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Is this really any surprise to
you (Its not to methats why Im writing this book)? This is why we cant get them to do anything on our behalf or
to answer to us as in the case with the illegal income tax (unlawful/unconstitutional income taxin my opinion
it is legal) among many other things. Contrary to popular belief, they are NOT our civil servants. They do NOT
work for us. They are the servants of the corporate government and carry out its bidding. Period.
On the web, it states the author of the above text is a woman named Lisa Guliani. There is more to this article on the internet for
those who wish to do further research; if its still there when you look for it. The excerpts from above are very informative. In spite
of that, they give me a sick feeling in the deep recesses of my Soul. Did her words have the same affect on you? Did it make you
think that we Americans have been a bit too loving and trusting a people when it pertains to our Politicians, our Judicial
System, and the Majority of agents and representatives in our governments?
Before we move on and discuss this subject further, I have to show you another explanation of the Act of 1871 found on
WIKEPEDIA. I will be showing you both sides of most issues whenever possible in an attempt to allow my readers to make up their
own minds based on the evidence. WIKIPEDIA, the free internet encyclopedia, has the following rather different perspective
regarding the Act of 1871 of which Ms. Guliani so passionately wrote.
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, is an important federal statute in force in the
United States. (UNITED STATES Corporation? I think so.) Several of its provisions still exist today as codified statutes
(Government talk for legal law), but the most important still-existing provision is 42 U.S.C.1983. The Act was originally
enacted a few years after the American Civil War, along with the 1870 Force Act. One of the main reasons behind its passage
was to protect southern blacks from the Ku Klux Klan (A Noble Act by Congress?) by providing a civil remedy for abuses
then being committed in the South. The statute has been subjected to only minor changes since then, but has been the subject of
voluminous interpretation by courts. (Ill bet!)
Section 1983 does not create new civil rights. (Sovereign American Citizens dont need Civil Rights, they have Natural
Rights.) Instead, it allows individuals (Well learn more than you ever wanted to know about individuals later in
the book) to sue state actors in State or federal courts for civil rights violations.[1] To gain federal jurisdiction, i.e., access to a
court, the individual must point to a federal civil right that has been allegedly violated. These rights are encoded in the U.S.

16

Chapter 2 Law
Constitution and federal statutes. (The Corporate Constitution)
For most of its history, the Act had very little effect. (Bend over and grab your ankles) The legal community (Those who use
legal law as opposed to using lawful law) did not think the statute served as a check on state officials, and did not often litigate
under the statute. However, this changed in 1961 when the Supreme Court of the United States (Corporate or Constitutional
Supreme Court?) decided Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167. In that case, the Court articulated three purposes that underlay the
statute: 1) to override certain kinds of state laws; (Bend over and grab your ankles again) 2) to provide a remedy where
state law was inadequate; (Hold on tight and stop wiggling) and 3) to provide a federal remedy where the state remedy,
though adequate in theory, was not available in practice. (Dont try to straighten up; this is going to take a while) Blum
& Urbonya, Section 1983 Litigation, p. 2 (Federal Judicial Center, 1998) (quoting Monroe v. Pape). Pape opened the door
for renewed interest in Section 1983.
Now the statute stands as one of the most powerful authorities with which State and federal courts may protect
those whose rights are deprived. (If you believe this act actually protects OUR rights, these politicians might be
playing Grab Ankles with us forever)

Boy, that WIKIPEDIA definition is really different from Lisas. Providing conflicting definitions is how the multiple television,
radio, and print Media get to you in order to control by confusion. I personally find it very hard to believe the WIKIPEDIA
definition where it states that the Act had very little effect. The creation of a separate form of government for the District of
Columbia; thereby replacing the Federal Government of the United States of America with the Corporate UNITED STATES,
has had a huge effect on freedom. Both of the above writings on the Act of 1871 seem to contain some really important sounding
STUFF. However, its my opinion Lisa is attempting to tell us what is lawful, and the WIKIPEDIA version is strictly legal; which
we now know oftentimes has ABSOLUTELY no basis in the supreme law of the land in the Real United States. You are
going to have to decide for yourself which one feels right to you by doing some research on the subject, AND/OR concede that
the author might have a point about American Freedom in the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. What if you
had never seen Lisas version for comparison?
If you were paying close attention to Lisas article, you might have noted that she referenced the UNITED STATES CODE
(USC) as actually containing evidence where the Government fully admits the UNITED STATES is a corporation and NOT
a Country. I was pretty sure youd want to check this out for yourselves, so here we go. I had to surf the web to the Cornell Law
website to find the desired information. The government website made the information rather difficult to retrieve.
Here is what it says at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sec_28_00003002----000-.html in reference to United States
Code Title 28 Section 3002. Lisas reference in her article started at Part (15) (A) (B) (C), but I thought you might be interested
in Part (14) as well in order for us to discuss what State sometimes (most often) legally means. Remember, the following comes
directly from United States Code (USC), which the attorneys in Congress have made the Law of the Land in their Corporate/
Territorial artificial or legal entity known as the United States, UNITED STATES, United States of America, UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA or all of the above. As always in legal law versus lawful law, it depends on the definition.
(14) State means any of the several States, (Could mean 50 union States, but I dont think it does in this definition) the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or
possession of the United States. (These States are definitely all Territories and NOT States of the union in the United States
of America)
(15) United States means
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
Well, there you have it folks. Our governmental representatives are so sure their 100 plus year betrayal will go ignored
by the American people, with NO CONSEQUENCES for their actions; They decided to put this particular Treasonous
Act in writing. According to the United States Code (USC), one of the entities known as United States is a Federal
corporation, and is DEFINITELY NOT the United States of America that includes the 50 States of the union. These 50
States of the union can also be referred to as united States of America. Could this be the reason why somebody wanted
us to believe that United States Code (USC) and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) were the same, containing the same
laws; back in the aforementioned Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) definition we discussed? Allow me to additionally
point out that in Part (14) above, where States are being legally defined; it gives the Corporate Government the legal
yet unlawful FLEX ABILITY to refer to the District of Columbia and the Territories as States if the need should ever
arise. So, when you see District of Columbia (With or without Government in front of it); They could be defining it as a
Country or a State OUTSIDE of the Real United States of America. Regardless of the definition, you are looking at a
Corporate/Territorial Government that Congress has ACTUALLY created to govern a Federal corporation known as the
United States, which is NOT the Real United States of America. I wonder if the need has ever arisen for our Corporate
Governmental agents in Congress to legally yet unlawfully define Washington D. C. as a Country or a State. Dont get
hung up on State and United States not being in all CAPITAL LETTERS in the examples provided from United States
Code (USC) Title 28 Section 3002. In this particular case, they are specifically defining their legal definitions. They

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

17

(Treasonous governmental representatives in Congress) dont need or have to use all CAPITAL LETTERS to trick you. In this
instance, unlawful legal definitions have worked just fine.
How does all this deception affect the American people? What does it all mean? It means there is a Corporation legally defined
as the United States/UNITED STATES which is legally the Government of the District of Columbia. It also means when
our Federal/Corporate governmental leaders are legally referencing States, they could be referring to Washington D.
C. and the Territories (Territorial States) as States, in place of the lawful 50 union States where most Americans live.
It means that whenever our Treasonous, betraying, lying Government officials, and Judicial leaders legally reference the
word State or United States within their legal laws and statutes, they COULD be referencing the Nation known as the
United States of America, but MOST OFTEN are referencing their Corporate/Territorial Federal Government. Certain
Treasonous agents in Congress have traitorously moved the Citizens of the United States of America into the exclusive
legal jurisdiction of a Federal corporation and away from the lawful jurisdiction of the Constitution. Their Federal
corporation, legally defined as the United States/UNITED STATES/UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and so on and
so forth, functions as if its the Real DOMESTIC Federal Government of the United States of America. In actuality, its
the Fictitious FOREIGN Government of the District of Columbia. Maybe the United States being legally defined as
a Federal corporation is not a big deal to some American Citizens. We can be certain our Treasonous elected agents in
government will tell us that its not a big dealyoull have to decide. Be grateful you are presently in the position to make a
decision one way or the other, as the power to decide is evidence of some freedom still remaining.
How do you all feel about this series of unfortunate events the Majority of our elected officials have inf licted upon us?
If you think there should be a law against it, then you would be correct. Congress had no authority to create a separate
government, but they did it anyway with their Treasonous Act of 1871, when they passed an Act titled: An Act To Provide
A Government for the District of Columbia. Nobody cared so much back then, but now the C. R. A. P. has hit the fan and
its managed to fertilize America. Our governments are totally out of control in modern times, so we need to pay VERY
close attention to what these elected politicians and their appointed officers are REALLY up to in the UNITED STATES.
Are having two Governments lawful? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!! Are having two Governments legal? Absolutely, at least
it is according to the attorneys turned politicians in Congress, who control the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES
Government. Its very upsetting to find out your Country is really a Corporation, and the Majority of our elected
officials who make the laws have unlawfully but legally committed Treason against America. For those readers who
might still be in doubt about the United States Congress creation of the Government for the District of Columbia with
their Treasonous Corporate Congressional Act of 1871, allow me to show you a document the author got back from said
Government for the District of Columbia. Everybody uses the saying A picture is worth a thousand words; hopefully this one
will have the desired effect.

18

Chapter 2 Law

Your author got this really neat certificate from the Government of the District of Columbia (You can see it written big as
heck on the first line) after sending in paperwork to see if there were any lawful IRS Tax liens in my name. I was happy to
see that there were no lawful IRS Tax liens associated with me based on this certificate. Unfortunately, I later found there
were indeed legal IRS Tax liens filed in my home Corporate STATE against me, despite what the above document certified.
I wonder how that could have happened. It happened because there is a distinct difference between what legal is, and what is
lawful. Well be discussing this topic in much detail throughout our conversation. The document above is great evidence of
Treason by Congress and other governmental representatives. It catches them red handed using their official Corporate/
Territorial Government created with the Act of 1871, known as the act which created the Government of the District of
Columbia. As you can see by the date on the authors certificate, this Treason has continued from 1871 to the year 2000
and beyond. The above document could also be evidence of something else. It could be evidence that the Income Tax is
only legal, valid, and official in a Territorial State or Territorial Country; like sayPuerto Rico or the Government of
the District of Columbia. Since I live in one of the 50 union States, the certificate I got back from the Government of the
District of Columbia stated correctly I had NO U.S. Tax Liens pertaining to my proper name in upper/lowercase letters.
On the other hand, there were U.S. Tax Liens filed using my artificial person or legal entity corporate name in ALL
CAPITAL LETTERS in my home Corporate STATE. This phenomenon is based upon your author being perceived as a f lesh
and blood John Doe in America, requesting lawful information from the Government of the District of Columbia, versus
my being perceived as some kind of corporate artificial person or legal entity JOHN DOE in my home Corporate STATE
where the legal U.S. Tax Liens were filed. Why dont you guys file that one away in your memory banks, and well go into
more detail later; especially in our Internal Revenue Service and Taxes chapter.
Lets all sit back and fully digest the ramifications of these recent revelations for a moment. While you do that, Id like to take this
opportunity to move our discussion to the lighter side. It is now time for a couple of Special Definitions to keep in mind. These
are in no way legal definitions. However, they are every bit as lawful as most legal definitions youll find ANYWHERE in the
Corporate UNITED STATES.
Crap 1. Excrement. 2. An act of defecating. 3. Foolish, deceitful, or boastful language. 4. Cheap or shoddy material. 5.
Miscellaneous or disorganized items; clutter. 6. Insolent talk or behavior.
C. R. A. P. Abbreviation for Criminals Rule American Politics; the term was created by the author and the definition is
in the phrasewhich I hope is self-explanatory.
Soin this book, when you see crap in any upper and lowercase combination, your author is usually referencing the first definition;
specifically number 1. Excrement. When you see C. R. A. P., you are most likely watching a politician telling you lies on TV; but
within these pages, Im stating an example where Criminals Rule American Politics.
Our governmental representatives in Congress have Sovereign American Citizens living in a legal CORPORATION as United
States Citizens and/or Territorial Citizens with privileges instead of rights. The lawful United States under the Constitution is still
there; we are just not using it RIGHT NOW. They (Corporate U. S. Government) always attempt to insure there is somewhere
the American people could go in order to get the TRUTH concerning their numerous legal YET unlawful and unconstitutional
deceptions. Its usually found tucked away in a law book or as in the above case where youre being informed that your Country
is a Federal corporation; in the United States Code (USC) Title 28 Section 3002. In legal terms, Congress providing
the lawful Truth pertaining to a legal fact is called giving America Constructive notice. The definition from the Blacks Law
Dictionary is as follows:
Constructive notice Such notice as is implied or imputed by law (legal or lawful notice), as in the case of notice of documents
which have been recorded in the appropriate registry of deeds or probate. Notice with which a person is charged by reason
of the notorious nature of the thing to be noticed, as contrasted with actual notice of such a thing.
In other words, Americans were tricked by the notorious nature that elected and appointed officials used in trying to hide
the existence of a CORPORATE United States. Our governmental representatives notorious nature is most likely viewed by
them as being technically legal, but from where I stand, lying to and deceiving the American people is totally unlawful and
unconstitutional. An actual notice that there were more than one United States/UNITED STATES would have been lawful
notice. Then again, looking at it from their points of view, I can see why Congress was not forthcoming with the Truth. An actual
notice of the Truth in this case might have gotten them hung for Treason. Treasonous Governmental and Judicial officials cant
be too careful when betraying a population of armed Americansnow can they?
These examples remind me of times when a politician appears on television promising that they wont raise taxes. When elected,
they raise taxes. They later appear on television again and are recorded saying they never said they would not raise taxes.
Finally, they try to get you to believe they never said they wont raise taxes. It seems to work because a lot of Americans are
tricked into supporting them despite all their lies. A lot of you continue to support liars simply because YOU VOTED FOR the
LIAR. How weird is that when you really think about it, especially when our freedom is at stake? Allow me to give you a recent
example of this curious lying phenomenon using the words of Senator John McCain. McCain was first recorded making the
following statement. He said, I believe that Saddam Hussein presents a clear and present danger to the United States of America with
his continued pursuit to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Later, during President Bushs term in office, when no weapons of mass
destruction were found in Iraq, Senator McCain changed his story. This liar made the statement, I never said that it was a clear and

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

19

present danger because of weapons of mass destruction. Im sure that, by definition, there is probably some legal versus lawful way
for Senator McCain to justify these two conflicting statementsI sure would like to hear it. If a government official ignores, lies, or
betrays you, They should be kicked out of office, prosecuted, or worse; NOT given our continued support. Perhaps I was too harsh
when calling Senator McCain a liar. Maybe his two differing statements were merely examples of his being Politically Correct.
By this time, I hope you are thinking there just might be something to what your author, and a lot of others, is trying to
say regarding the high probability that we are NOT as free as we feel we are in America today. If youre experiencing
doubts in reference to your freedom, then lets move on with our conversation. If you still totally trust your government and
feel your freedom is secure in the UNITED STATES, then please close this book and give it to somebody else. (Just
kiddingTHIS TIME)
It appears we have evidence that Congress formed another government and Constitution for a Corporate/Territorial entity
legally and unlawfully defined as the UNITED STATESamong other names. The name of their unlawful government is
the Government for the District of Columbia, and their unlawful Constitution is called THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Evidence of this deed by Congress can be traced back to 1871 by reviewing legal law referred
to as the Act of 1871 in United States Code (USC). Im sure Congress had their reasons; after all.the Country was facing
bankruptcy. Perhaps bankruptcy is as good an excuse as any to commit Treason against the entire American population!!! In
defense of the Forty-First Congress of 1871, Im sure they thought it a very slim possibility the American people would allow things
to get this BAD. Sure, the Corporate United States/UNITED STATES/U.S. was going to steal some money or something from
America, but enslave the people with artificial person or legal entity legal mumbo jumbo???!!!
Its disheartening to know most politicians have not changed much throughout the years. If anything, They appear to be
getting worse. They continue to pass BAD and mostly unconstitutional laws in the form of legal laws that we have to live with and
pay for; SOMETIMES with our lives. Youd think it would be easy for us to identify the BAD politicians that support these BAD
laws; but so far, They seem to be alluding us. Weve only had since 1871 to develop the skills to detect the liars in government
yet government seems to remain full of a Majority of liars. I guess being presented with only two candidates and voting for
the lesser of two evils, still results in evils! Who knew? Dont get me wrong, America still possesses a few honest Patriots holding
office; but they need our support to bring about change for We the People. Upon reading the previous statement pertaining
to liars in Congress, certain Treasonous politicians might act as if they are offended. In my mind, those identified as Traitors
to America have no right to be offended. Their dramatic Academy Award winning offended acts in front of the Mainstream
Media are simply an emotional ploy to divert your attention away from their many offenses against We the People. What most
Americans dont realize is that the Majority of our politicians are hand picked by the foreign and domestic owners of the United
States Corporation to represent BOTH Parties.
There have been a lot of Political Party changes since the Act of 1871; so, if any Political Party was really better than the other,
America wouldnt be in this mess. It might be best to be an American first and let all the Republican and Democrat nonsense
go! Well discuss this more and in greater detail later. I would now like my readers to take note of the following important point.
Ill be referring to the Real United States using United States of America, America, USA, U. S. A., and sometimes United States.
When I refer to any of those other Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES entities I will use the term Corporate United States,
United States Incorporated, U. S. Inc., UNITED STATES in all CAPITAL LETTERS, or some other label to let you know we are
NOT talking about America. That way you know youre NOT in Kansas anymore, because the UNITED STATES has replaced
Kansas with KANSAS. Trust me, itll be really easy to recognize as we move forward.
Right now, you must be asking yourself the following question. How did Treasonous politicians manage to move We the People,
the Sovereigns, the rulers of our governmentaway from the United States, and into the United States Incorporated? How did the
Democrats and Republicans move everyone in America into the jurisdiction of a CORPORATION, effectively making Corporate
Slaves of us all? Well it was not an overnight process, but then certain Treasonous organizations in America have been working at
their craft since 1871. It was only a matter of time and money for them to perfect their legal Procedures. Heres how I think they
did it. They took advantage of your loving and trusting nature, and they led you to gradually enslave yourselves. Each time you
sign your name to a piece of paper, you are voluntarily entering into a legal and sometimes lawful CONTRACT of some sort.
You should think about that the next time someone just tells you to sign a document and you sign without reading the document.
There are many types of contracts; but were not going to get into all that, as legally fascinating as it may be for a few of my readers.
Im trying to keep your attention, not bore you to sleep.
Since most of us enter into contracts voluntarily, lets take a look at what Voluntary means by definition. Blacks Law Dictionary
has the following:
Voluntary Unconstrained by interference, unimpelled by anothers influence; spontaneous; acting of oneself.
My Constitutional guide has the following slightly different definition:
Voluntary Willingly; done with ones consent; negligently.
The two definitions are similar in meaning, except the lawyers in Blacks Law Dictionary left out the word negligentlyfor
whatever reason.
Blacks Law says Negligent means the following:

20

Chapter 2 Law

Negligent May mean to omit, fail, or forbear to do a thing that can be done, or that is required to be done, but it may also
import an absence of care or attention in the doing or omission of a given act. (Of Congress) And it may mean a designed
refusal or unwillingness to perform ones duty
After looking at these definitions, it appears we Americans might have been tricked into voluntarily signing some sort of contracts;
contracts that Congress negligently allowed us to enter into because of an unwillingness to perform ones duty. The duty Congress
should have performed was to inform the American people of the True purpose of the contracts we voluntarily signed. Lets take
a look at some of these contracts. Do any of you have a Birth Certificate? For most of us, the answer to that question is yes. This
is the first document that incorporates you and binds you to the UNITED STATES Corporation, most often from the day you
were born. Depending on the age of the Birth Certificate and the inconsistency of hospital staff, the names may or may not be in
all CAPITAL LETTERS. Nonetheless, it is a contract one of your parents usually voluntarily signs. Its a contract your parents
usually voluntarily signs because in my experience, hospital staff type it up and send it in to the Corporate STATE whether a parent
signs the contract or NOT. That makes those voluntarily unsigned Birth Certificates involuntary contracts done negligently,
but thats the System.
The American people have been taught to abide by the System. Everyone knows you have to have a Birth Certificateright?
The answer to that question is legally yes, but lawfully no. Keep reading and Ill prove it to you. Most Americans think the Birth
Certificate is simply a record of birth. Actually, in the legal reality of the System, you have signed your child over to the
STATE Corporation as collateral for its debts associated with the UNITED STATES bankruptcy. In the eyes of the Treasonous
governments, their legal Birth Certificate is also used as the first legal document you voluntarily sign giving up your lawful Parental
Rights. Well discuss more on Parental Rights later. The UNITED STATES bankruptcy is the one Congress created 60 or so
years after the Act of 1871 based on their unlawful yet legal authority. Hopefully, my readers recall it was the Act of 1871
which created the Government of the District of Columbia. In the lawful reality of the Constitution, the Birth Certificate
is just a piece of paper recording a birth; but for the most part, Americans dont live under lawful law in the UNITED STATES
anymore. You see, the Corporate United States has debts to repay on multiple loans, taken out by Congress without YOUR
knowledge. These Corporate United States loans were obtained from Federal and International banks and Domestic and/or
Foreign Investors. Without YOUR approval or consent, Congress decided to use Americans as collateral to pay back their loans.
They insist YOU pay unlawful Income Taxes to their U. S. Corporation to enable them to repay the debts on their multiple loans.
In this situation, the American people are paying the debts of the U.S. Corporation; NOT the debts of the United States
of America. Your LABOR, from the time you get your first job until you retire, belongs to the U.S. Corporation. They have
made each of us economic slaves based upon that seemingly harmless Birth Certificate. Congress figured theres a sucker born every
minute, so what better form of collateral could exist. Now you know why they use the term collateral damage in action movies
when referencing harming or killing American civilians. We are collateral for the U. S. Incorporated. If we are killed or injured,
Congress cannot use our LABOR to repay their corporate debts. I know it hurts to be lied to and betrayed concerning such a
basic issue as freedom, but rememberyou were tricked into voluntarily enslaving yourselves!!! This is always the preferred
method Congress and those in the legal Judicial Systems use in the event They get caught. If the truth is ever uncovered, theyll
show you some legal mumbo jumbo document (such as a Birth Certificate) explaining why they had the jurisdiction (power) to
use YOU as collateral. This is a last ditch effort to avoid being hung for Treason. Rulers, Tyrants, and would be Dictators have been
killed in the past, so a government official, caught betraying a well armed American population, has to have some legal jurisdiction
to fall back on when no lawful jurisdiction exists; that is unless they can disarm you first.
From the representatives of the UNITED STATES and Corporate STATES point of view, every single unfortunate circumstance
for America mentioned thus far is legal. Thats why, in reference to the Birth Certificate, the Corporate STATES send back a copy
of the signed contract (Certificate) to prove its legality. In terms of being lawful, the whole System created by Corporate/
Territorial Government is not only negligent; but its also fraudulent. How do you feel about that? Some of you are
probably still having problems with the information and opinions being shared. That is perfectly okay and within your rights, but
please give the verifiable evidence presented so far some serious thought anyway.
Now that I think about it, why do we need all these Certificates, Licenses, Permits, and Titles our governments voluntarily FORCE
upon us? I wonder what a Certificate is really used for in the FIRST PLACE. Lets find out.
Certificate A written assurance, or official representation, that some act has or has not been done, or some event occurred, or
some legal formality has been complied with.
I was alright with this definition until I read some legal formality has been complied with. What legal formality could your birth
have that requires the filing of a Birth Certificate with your Corporate STATE Government? Birth and life have to do with God
and Nature; not some legal formality has been complied with, right? That is correct on a human/constitutional level, but your
elected officials in Congress and our Corporate STATE Governments decided to overlook that natural Truth. Do you have any
idea how much it must have cost for the upkeep of powdered wigs back in 1871 when this betrayal officially began? They had
to commit Treason against us just to keep up with their personal hygiene.
I mentioned earlier that I was born before 1965. My Birth Certificate has a very disturbing category on it called Informant.
Under the category of Informant, there is my mothers name, which I thought was rather odd. Who is my mother informing
of my birth? I had to have the answer, so I looked up Informant in my handy Blacks Law Dictionary and it referred me

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

21

to Informer. I dont think we need a formal legal definition for this one because I already know the answer. My Birth
Certificate says that my mother was legally voluntarily informing the United States Corporation (as the parent corporation
of the child Corporate/Territorial STATES) that another people corporation (me) has been born to work all his life to pay
back their Corporate U.S. debts. This legal contract FORCES me to work all my life to repay Corporate U.S. debts in the form
of Income Taxes, and any other kinds of legal taxes the Corporate U. S. decides to DREAM UP. The Corporate/Territorial
STATES will back them up because legally, a State means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States. In case you didnt
notice, these are NOT States of the union in the United States of America. These are Corporate/Territorial States belonging
to the Government of the District of Columbia. If you look at the more recent Birth Certificates, youll find that Informant
is most likely no longer present. The information being shared is currently known to millions of Americans outside of the
mainstream, so They were forced to remove the Informant category from the newer Birth Certificates. Everybody thinks
they have to have a Birth Certificate, just like everybody knows they have to pay Income Taxes (NOT really), so it was
okay for our Corporate STATE Governments to remove Informant from the newer certificates.
Congress and the Corporate/Territorial STATES representatives saw no need to press their luck with the American People. This
goes back to what I said earlier. The Government need only wait for those who knew true freedom to die; and then seize absolute
control over the youth, who never really knew true freedom at all. Is this the legacy you wish to leave for your children? I know
I dont! Thats why Im attempting to make a difference by providing my fellow Americans with what I believe to be Truth. Our
American Freedom is in jeopardy, hence the need for this Conversation with America for change in the UNITED STATES.
By now you understand the title of the book, but Im sitting on pins and needles hoping most of my readers are starting to grasp
what is actually at stake.
Before we move on, lets take a look at another definition of Certificate from Bouviers Law Dictionary 6th edition of 1856. The
previous definition was from the relatively recent Blacks Law Dictionary 5th edition published in 1979. You can see immediately
that the definition in the older law dictionary is longer and more precise. I wonder why that would be the case. Could the change
in legal definitions coincide with Americas change from the lawful law of the past to the legal law of the present???!!! Could
the change in legal definitions be a direct result of the legal UNITED STATES Incorporated taking control of the lawful United
States of America? Where law dictionaries are concerned, please note that definitions from Bouviers Law Dictionary are almost
always in all capital letters. I use the term almost always because your author has not looked at every single definition in that
dictionary. It appears the legal tricks did not become commonplace until the more modern law dictionaries were published.
CERTIFICATE practice. A writing made in any court, and properly authenticated, to give notice to another court of anything
done therein; or it is a writing by which an officer or other person bears testimony that a fact has or has not taken place.
(Im okay with this definition)

2. There are two kinds of certificates (Really); those required by the law, and those which are merely voluntary
(Such as a Birth Certificate). Of the first kind are certificates given to an insolvent of his discharge, and those given
to aliens, that they have been naturalized. Voluntary certificates are those which are not required by law, but
which are given of the mere motion of the party (We volunteered and did it to ourselves. Howeverthere was a
CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT of betrayal and trickery by government as well). The former are evidence of the facts
therein mentioned, while the latter are not entitled to any credit, because the facts certified, may be proved in the usual
way under the solemnity of an oath or affirmation (You could have just given your word about the birth of your
child and told them to stick their certificate where the sun dont shine). 2 Com. Dig. 306; Ayl. Parerg. 157; Greenl.
Ev. Sec. 498.

I dont want to beat a dead Congressperson or President (Actually I do but a live oneif it is proven they deserve it), so lets move
on to other contracts. Some of you might still have doubts you are indeed acting as a corporation, so please allow me to prove it to
you in order to tie off this topic. Have any of you heard the terms Legal Fiction or Straw man? Lets take a look at each of their
definitions obtained from my Blacks Law Dictionary before we proceed.
Legal Fiction Assumption of fact made by court as basis for deciding a legal question. A situation contrived by the law to permit
a court to dispose of a matter, though it need not be created improperly.
Straw Man A front; a person who is put up in name only to take part in a deal. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts
as an agent for another for the purpose of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments
the principal may direst respecting the property. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real
purchaser.
Weve been discussing the possibility American Citizens just might have been set up as JOHN or JANE DOE Corporations;
possessing the privileges bestowed upon United States/Territorial Citizens by the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES
which used to be rights. This task was initially accomplished by the governments use of legal Birth Certificates. It is also
my opinion that just for good measure, Federal and State Government officials have allowed you to set yourselves up as
corporations in other jurisdictions as well (Well discuss this is great detail in our chapter concerning Contracts of Ownership
and Title). They accomplished this task with the use of a multiple array of voluntary contracts you voluntarily signed.
From the Legal Fiction definition, the U.S. Inc. setting us up as corporations to remove us from the lawful United States of

22

Chapter 2 Law

America and the Constitution is most definitely an Assumption of fact made by court as basis for deciding a legal question. Its
also A situation contrived by the law to permit a court to dispose of a matter, though it need not be created improperly. In simple
English terms, the U.S. Corporation created Legal Fiction, because in legal terms, it allowed them to control American
Citizens WITH NO REAL LAWFUL AUTHORITY.
The legal question here, is whether it is okay for Federal and State Government officials to create a legal System where
MOST American Citizens think John Doe and JOHN DOE are the same people??? Transforming every American Citizen
into Legal Fictions is a despicable Act instituted by a Treasonous Corporate Government. This despicable Act was
executed in order to take all Freedom away from the people in America, thereby making them Economic Slaves to the
Corporate/Territorial Government of the District of Columbia. How can we be so sure? One reason Im so sure is that I
found no official definition of Legal Fiction used by the law and lawyers of old. You guessed it, the definition of Legal
Fiction was absent in my copy of the REALLY OLD Bouviers Law Dictionary of 1856. This suggests Legal Fiction is
a legally recent and very convenient way of unlawfully controlling the Private Sovereign American Citizen with the
unconstitutional use of the Public Legal Fiction Corporationwithout most of us ever knowing the Truth.
Straw Man is simply what the attorneys call the Legal Fiction; its just the name. I dont know how old the term Legal
Fiction is in legalese, but it looks like one of its legal creators liked the movie or the book The Wizard of Oz. The Straw
Man in this popular movie was nailed to a cross to make it look like he was a Real person (John Doe), when he was
actually only a fictitious Front (JOHN DOE) to scare away the crows. The idea that the Straw Man in the movie had no
brain could be testament to how agents within the UNITED STATES Corporation view most Americans. Nothing would
make me happier than to show them they are dead wrong about us, BUT ONLY TIME WILL TELL.
Some of you might still believe there is no validity to parts of our conversation, so lets try a little exercise. Please go get your
wallets and purses and take out every Governmental, Banking, and/or legal document you possess. Take a look at the Drivers
License. Is your name in all CAPITAL LETTERS? A lucky guess you say. Pull out your Social Security card. All caps again,
right? Take a peek at your United States Passport. You should try to ignore the bad picture. Dont bother telling meyour
name is in all CAPITAL LETTERS there as well. All your credit cards, even the name in your checkbook is spelled with
all CAPITAL LETTERS. A friend of mine got a summons for jury duty the other day, and her name was spelled with all
CAPITAL LETTERS on the SUMMONS. Dont worry, the real John or Jane Doe still exists. You can pinch yourself if you
have any doubts.
This legal versus lawful situation is a bit like the movie titled The Matrix. In this popular movie, some evil entity created
a (legal) fictitious world in order to gain absolute control, while the majority of the Real f lesh and blood people are all
asleep and unaware that a (lawful) real world even exists. One of the characters wakes up, finds out the Truth, and wants
to go back to sleep and do nothing. This type of behavior is referred to as acting cowardly and being in denial. Im counting
on my readers having the exact opposite reaction to the Truth. The Matrix is really a great movie. If youve never seen it, I
suggest you do. In our Real world UNITED STATES nightmare, we have the Public corporation JOHN DOE running
around with his many legally fictitious corporate documents. The second he breaks one of the millions of legal corporate
statutory laws on the books, who do you think has to pay for this transgression? Why the Private citizen John Doe gets to
pay. He gets to play Grab Ankles with Corporate Government, is jailed, and then gets to play Grab Ankles again once he is
behind bars!
I can see some of you still dont believe me when I say you are a legal corporation. Lets take a look at what The Christian Law
Fellowship had to say on the subject at http://ecclesia.org/lawgiver/default.asp. Please keep the term and definition of Legal
Fiction in mind as you read the following. There is a lot more to this article, but weve discussed most of the information
already.
Use of the legal fiction JOHN SMITH in place of the proper name John Smith implies an assumed debt (Remember
those loans Congress executed without your knowledge or consent?) guarantee without any offer of proof. The
danger behind this is that if such an unproven assumption is made, then unless the assumption is proven
wrong (Say for instance, proven wrong by Rebuttal, which we will touch on later), it is considered valid. (Still
Unlawful and Unconstitutional, just valid in legal terms)
Please go no further until you understand and comprehend exactly what the above paragraphs have stated. If necessary,
re-read the above until you have a full understanding of what is involved in the meaning of a legal fiction.
An assumed debt is valid unless proven otherwise. (The U. S. Inc. assumes you are a Taxpayer) This is in accord
with the Uniform Commercial Code (Law of Commerce) valid in every State and made a part of the Statutes in each
State. A legal fiction written with full caps - resembling a proper name (YOU as a legal fiction in the Matrix Movie)
but grammatically not a proper name (You in the real world outside the Matrix as f lesh and blood) - is being held
as a debtor for an assumed debt.
What happens if the proper name, i.e. John Doe, answers for or assumes the legal fiction, i.e. JOHN DOE? They
become one and the same. (Government ALLOWED you to voluntarily apply for the Drivers License, Social
Security Card, etc., etc. without revealing the true nature of the contract) This is the crux for the use of the full caps
legal fictions by the U.S. Government and the States. It is the way that they can bring someone into their fictional

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

23

venue (just like putting you to sleep in the Matrix Movie) and jurisdiction that they have created. By implication
of definition, this also is for the purpose of some manner of assumed debt.
Why wont they use The State of Texas or John Doe in their courts or on Drivers Licenses? What stops them from doing
this? Obviously, there is a reason for using legal fictions since they are very capable of writing proper names just as their
own official style manual states. The reason behind legal fictions is found within the definitions as cited above.
At this point, this should be very clear to every reader.
How does this information sit with most of you? Many of you are probably in doubt and disbelief a government, which
PROCLAIMS to care SO MUCH about the safety of its people, would change us all into corporate legal fictions? Thats
definitely NOT the type of change America needs from our governmental representatives within the UNITED STATES.
Hopefully, it is NOW clear to every reader, that the Majority of our governmental leaders have betrayed the American
people. Those elected and appointed governmental officials of the dual and dueling entities, known as the Fictitious
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the Real United States of America, had to have some way to pay their corporate
debts to their investors. The easiest solution was to use We the People as We the Income Tax generating Corporations.
They had to take control of YOUR LABOR so it could be used to pay their corporate debts. The moment you apply for and
receive ANY of their legal licenses and certificates, you are legally volunteering to become a guarantee without any offer
of proof , thus becoming collateral for their U. S. Corporate debts. John Doe, the f lesh and blood person and JOHN DOE
the corporate legal fiction, are legally linked together FOREVER!!! JOHN DOE has a legal corporate debt with the U.S.
Inc., and just like magicJohn Doe assumes that debt as well; without any offer of proof and without any knowledge of
what the heck he just assumed .
When you voluntarily apply for and carry one of their legal government permits, like a Drivers License, the free Sovereign
American Citizen is asking a legal CORPOR ATE entity for permission to drive. This is an unfortunate situation, because
99% of the time, you are asking for permission to do something that was already lawful in America in the FIRST PLACE.
Nonetheless, by asking for permission, you are making an additional legal statement the U.S. Government and the States
WILL USE to assume you are one of their corporate legal fiction citizens. Being a corporate legal fiction citizen is NOT
the same as being an American Citizen!!! Corporate legal fiction citizens are United States Citizens, which makes them
legal Corporate/Territorial Citizens instead of lawful Sovereign American Citizensdepending on the definition of United
States Citizen. United States Citizens and Territorial Citizens have legal privileges where Sovereign American Citizens have
lawful rights! Sovereign American Citizens have Natural Rights which give parents exclusive lawful Parental Rights to their
children. As far as Treasonous governmental officials are concerned, corporate legal fiction, United States Citizens, signed
their children over to the UNITED STATES Federal corporation with the legal Birth Certificate contract. Its all legal
mumbo jumbo tricks with contracts to take away our rights. This book will expose 99% of their tricks. Our governmental
EMPLOYEES do NOT own Sovereign American Citizen Parents or Sovereign American Citizen Children, but They want
you to believe They legally own us. Asking for legal permission from Treasonous EMPLOYEES in government to do what
is already lawful, ends up further entrapping you within their legal law web of deceit. American Citizens are governed by
lawful laws instead of legal laws. American Citizens DO NOT have to get permission to have a FREAKING garage sale
from someone in governmentwho is supposed to be working for them in the FIRST PLACE. Remember our garage sale
example? Remember all the unfortunate events that could befall you while living in a legal world with millions of legal
laws FORCING you to get legal permission for almost everything you do? Do American Citizens, who are STILL lawfully
free, have to get permission FROM THE PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THEM? I dont think so! The System certain
governmental representatives created, without our knowledge or consent, requires each of us to carry our corporate legal
fiction documents in order to function in society. Thats my point; now you know why They want everyone to have a Social
Security card or Birth Certificate. They FORCE us to have them in order to legally control us by contracts we voluntarily
signed legally changing us to corporate legal fiction. We can put an end to this legal deception at any time if we all insist
on being treated lawfully instead of legally. There are those who have tried to use the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
(Commercial law) to sever the link between the corporate legal fiction JOHN DOE, and the f lesh and blood Person or
Individual John Doe. If you want to know all about UCC, you are going to have to research this subject on your own. Its
much too intricate a topic to explain in this publication. However, we will discuss it in moderate detail when we reach our
chapter pertaining to Contracts of Ownership and Title.
Hopefully, Ive been able to impress upon my readers many important issues that we need to discuss with our Federal, State,
and Local representatives. However, in the interest of being thorough and to insure you have as much evidence as possible
before you make your phone calls and write your letters. Please allow me to put the cherry on top by giving you the
definition of Person from Blacks Law Dictionary.
Person In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person), (So far so good) though by statute term (Uh oh) may include
a firm, labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, (Gentle men and womengrab your ankles)
legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. National Labor Relations Act; 2(1).
Wellthere you have it, by statute term; a Person can legally be a corporation. So, our names being in all CAPITAL
LETTERS on every legal document were probably not just a governmental typing accident. This was a deliberate act by
certain representatives within our governmental, legal, and Judicial Systems. The definition above says it was the National

24

Chapter 2 Law

Labor Relations Act that They used to play Grab Ankles with us this time. Lets see what WIKIPEDIA has to say on this
subject.
The National Labor Relations Act (or Wagner Act) is a 1935 United States federal law that protects the rights of most
workers in the private sector to organize labor unions, to engage in collective bargaining, and to take part in strikes and
other forms of concerted activity in support of their demands. The Act does not, on the other hand, cover those workers who
are covered by the Railway Labor Act, agricultural employees, domestic employees, supervisors, independent contractors
and some close relatives of individual employers.
When you read this, it sounds like a good thing for America, as most of their legal acts APPEAR on the surface. This ACT was
signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat) back in 1935. Well be discussing him more a bit later. Just
to be sure Im correct about this huge mess; it is my obligation to provide my readers with a short excerpt from the National
Labor Relations Act found on the internet at http://www.nlrb.gov/nlrb/legal/manuals/rules/act.pdf. This appears to be a
government website for manuals. Lets see first hand what it has to say on the definition of Person.
Sec. 2. [ 152.] When used in this Act [subchapter]
(1) The term person includes one or more individuals (FYIan individual might not be who you think it is. More
on that later.), labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in
cases under title 11 of the United States Code [under title 11], or receivers.
There it is again. According to the above act of Congress, The term person can legally be defined as a corporation.
Now, I believe in simplifying things and cutting through the crap. In my opinion, there are only two explanations for our
governments putting our names in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS on all legal governmental documents. I would not presume to
tell you what to believe, so YOU must decide which of the two explanations below feels right. When I say YOU, I am not
referring to YOU as a corporation. Im simply metaphorically looking YOU in the eye and challenging YOU to fight for your
freedom. Please choose from the following two statements below.
1. Our Governments are so incompetent the proper name text in every document has to be in UPPER CASE to keep
things simple while typing. None of the evidence presented by the author has shaken my trust in government. If our
leaders changed us into Legal Fiction corporations, Im sure it was for our own good and to keep us SAFE.
2. Treasonous government representatives changed Sovereign American Citizens into Legal Fiction corporations
without our knowledge or consent. They did it to gain jurisdiction (power) over us in order to control our
LABOR, FORCE us to pay back their corporate debts, and take away our Freedom.
If you picked number (1), please close this book and give it to somebody else. If you have the eBook please delete it from
your hard drive. I was kidding the first time I made this request, but now Im dead serious. Dont feel bad, I have friends Ive
known for years who are closing and deleting along with you. This is firm proof that people pick some of their friends for
companionship and not for intelligence. Take a look at your group of friends and try to figure out which one you areone
of the intelligent ones, or one of the companions. A big clue which will aid in your decision is whether you picked the answer
behind door number (1) from the two statements above.
Before we move on, there might be some among you who did not accept the explanation above from The Christian Law
Fellowship regarding Americans being changed into corporate legal fiction Persons to pay the debts of the UNITED
STATES Incorporated as debtors. If you are one of these Persons, we need only return to United States Code (USC) Title
28 for further clarification. You remember this Title under USC dont you? Its the one Congress used to create the fictional
United States Incorporated to be RULED by the fictional Government of the District of Columbia. They made sure
They kept it legal when They created another government using the Act of 1871. They made sure They kept it legal
when They created a Federal corporation called the United States in their legal United States Code (USC). Guess
what, They also made sure They kept it legal when They defined who some of these debtors responsible for their debts
were in their Federal corporation. The following United States Code (USC) Title can be found on the Cornell Law website.
TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > 3002
3002. Definitions (Always important)
As used in this chapter:
(1) Counsel for the United States means
(A) a United States attorney, an assistant United States attorney designated to act on behalf of the United States attorney, or an
attorney with the United States Department of Justice or with a Federal agency who has litigation authority; and
(B) any private attorney authorized by contract made in accordance with section 3718 of title 31 to conduct litigation for collection
of debts on behalf of the United States.
(2) Court means any court created by the Congress of the United States, excluding the United States Tax Court.
(3) Debt means

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

25

(A) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a direct loan, or loan insured or guaranteed, by the United States;
or
(B) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a fee, duty, lease, rent, service, sale of real or personal property,
overpayment, fine, assessment, penalty, restitution, damages, interest, tax, bail bond forfeiture, reimbursement, recovery of a cost
incurred by the United States, or other source of indebtedness to the United States, but that is not owing under the terms of a
contract originally entered into by only persons other than the United States;
and includes any amount owing to the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian, but excludes any
amount to which the United States is entitled under section 3011 (a).
(4) Debtor means a person who is liable for a debt or against whom there is a claim for a debt.
As legally fantastical and legally bizarre as all this legalese appears to be, Im certain the information being shared is indeed correct.
Having our names in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS on government documents is a legal trick to make us liable for a debt. Having
our names in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS on government documents is a legal trick to make us corporate legal fiction persons.
Legal Debt in the Corporate United States is owed by only persons, because all the lawyers in Congress know that legally, a
person means Debtor as in the definition of number (4) above. On the other hand, a person legally defined as a Debtor
lawfully turns you, me, and everybody else into Slaves for the Corporate United States. Oh, by the way, when I say Corporate
United States or Territorial United States, what I mean is Corporate/Territorial United States. At this point, their Federal
corporation is being run by the Congress of the Territorial Government of the District of Columbia, so the two artificial
or legal entities are forever intertwined. American Citizens currently believe they are obligated to pay the legal Debt in the
Corporate United States as the Debtor based on the legal fact they are persons. What the Corporate/Territorial Congress
was negligent to lawfully inform the American Citizens of, is that persons are corporations in the OTHER UNITED
STATES. They failed to tell the American people that the OTHER UNITED STATES was a corporation by definition as
well. Congress put it into United States Code as Constructive notice, but whom, besides those in the Patriot movement, actually
reads the United States Code (USC)? Congress was negligent when They failed to inform American Citizens that the legal
Debt we are currently paying as the Debtor, based on the legal fact we are defined as persons, only applies to corporate legal
fiction persons. Its like the song goes, All around the mulberry bush the monkey chased the weasel. The monkey thought twas all
in fun. Pop! Goes the weasel . The term Pop, in this case, refers to the Grab Ankles game by the Corporate UNITED STATES
representatives as They have their way with the American people.
Its evident our current Congress and the UNITED STATES Government, known as the weasel , is NOT a friend to the
American Citizen monkey. Perhaps we should chase Congress and make them go Pop, until and unless They restore lawful
Constitutional law to the United States of America. They count on YOU becoming angry when you find out the Truth pertaining
to their legal facts, venting your frustrations for a short period of time and returning to business as usual. America can no longer
afford business as usual. The fact you are allowed to vent your frustration to governmental representatives, as They ignore you,
DOES NOT make you free. This chase to restore the lawful law over legal law is going to have to be one to the finish line. If
not, it will be the American Citizens, legally disguised as corporate legal fiction persons, who will be the ones finished. In the
event some of my readers are continuing to have trouble discerning lawful law from legal law, please view the following. Its a more
Real world definition of Legal from the on-line English version Merriam-Webster Dictionary found on the internet at http://
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legal.
Legal 1: of or relating to law 2 a: deriving authority from or founded on law : de jure b: having a formal status (official
yet most often unlawful) derived from law often without a basis in actual fact (or even actual Truth) : titular <a
corporation is a legal but not a real person> c: established by law ; especially : statutory 3: conforming to or permitted
by law or established rules 4: recognized or made effective by a court of law as distinguished from a court of equity 5: of,
relating to, or having the characteristics of the profession of law or of one of its members 6: created by the constructions
of the law <a legal fiction>
If youre still with me, you are probably pretty mad right now, and you have every right to be angry. It appears everything Legal
is created by the constructions of the law making it a legal fiction. If the definition in number 6: implying Legal means
legal fiction is Truth, then the millions of legal laws inflicted upon us by our governments are all based on CRAP! The whole
legal world of the UNITED STATES Incorporated is legal fiction make believe, having NOTHING to do with flesh and
blood Sovereign American Citizensuntil they volunteer or ask permission to join. JANE DOE a corporation is a legal but not
a real person like Jane Doe. Jane Doe, a real person, has rights; while JANE DOE, a corporation, is given privileges by the
Treasonous Corporate/Territorial United States Government. Many Patriotic American Citizens have wondered how Congress
and our Judicial Systems violate our rights. Well, now you know how They violate our rights!!! Governmental EMPLOYEES
violate our rights by using legal law constructions of the law in place of lawful law and the constitutional supreme law of
the land . Its all legal mumbo jumbo to rob Americans of their freedomAND IT WORKS! The legal United States must
be destroyed for the lawful United States to survive. Some of my readers might be trying to convince themselves our leaders in
government really care about us, and They are totally unaware of the grave injustice that has been laid upon the American people.
Please dont misunderstand your author and narrator. Im sure there have been a few members of Congress that honestly do not
know about these many acts of Fraud and Treason. These few members of Congress do actually care about the people, but most

26

Chapter 2 Law

of them actively committing Treason know exactly what They and their predecessors have done. Remember, in their minds, its
all legal and something you voluntarily contracted for in the FIRST PLACE. After allthey tell us this is a Democracy, so
it takes AT LEAST the Majority of the Democrats and Republicans in Congress to betray usRight?
What is it the lawyers and attorneys are always telling us about the law? You have probably heard this one as often as youve heard
you were FREE. Oh yeah, Ignorance of the Law is no excuse. With the millions of legal laws we have in the Corporate United
States, do you really believe that phrase? If you do, you shouldnt because nobody knows all the legal laws; therefore ignorance of
the law is a very good excuseespecially ignorance of unlawful legal laws. By comparison, the Constitution is pretty simple.
Certain Treasonous individuals in government like to have the media fill our heads with legal STUFF like Ignorance of the Law is
no excuse. This is done for control purposes and to make it appear their fictional legal world is lawful. They concluded long ago that
by simply repeating this STUFF over and over again, wed finally believe it, thus making it easier to play Grab Ankles with those of
you who might otherwise put up a fight. In spite of that, Im hoping after you read my opinions and see the multitude of verifiable
evidence contained in this book; Ignorance of all kinds will be lifted. Once that occurs, Im counting on most of you agreeing
with the verifiable evidence to create a coalition of free Americans willing to unite in taking back our Countrybefore its too late.
Its still mind boggling to think a SCAM of this legal fiction magnitude could have been openly carried out against the
American people, but you now have enough evidence and examples to help you decide for yourselves. There are numerous other
non-mainstream books, speakers, and documents that will give you the same data as your author. These sources will provide you
the same or similar information being conveyed in reference to the legal versus lawful issues being discussed. Numerous other
sources will be provided throughout our conversation as a show of solidarity that we are NOT alone in Patriotism. The American
people are NOT alone as long as we unite in the same way our Treasonous governmental representatives in the Democratic
and Republican Parties united. Always rememberwith enough time and money, determined Treasonous Individuals and
Persons can accomplish almost anything. Our government has certainly had the time, from the Act of 1871 to the present;
and as for the moneythat was taken care of by you in the form of YOUR Taxpayer Dollars.
There is one more definition to introduce in this chapter that makes the whole Legal means legal fiction SCAM work for our
Corporate U.S. oppressors. This concept is referred to as Tacit Law. Here is what the attorneys in Blacks Law Dictionary had to
say regarding this particular topic.
Tacit Existing, inferred, or understood without being openly expressed or stated; implied by silence or silent acquiescence, as
a tacit agreement or a tacit understanding. Done or made in silence, implied or indicated, but not actually expressed.
Manifested by the refraining from contradiction or objection; inferred from the situation and circumstances, in the absence
of express matter.
Man, Im glad thats the last definition in this chapter well probably need. Dont you just hate how most of these legal terms are
so hard to understand? Why couldnt the legal attorneys write this stuff in plain English, where all the words have a more lawful
meaning? Ohnever mind, you have an idea why its not in plain English by now; at least you should. Breaking Tacit Law down
to the simplest form, in legal terms, it means even if a law is unlawful, if YOU do not object, YOU remain silent, and YOU never
protest in any way; then by silent acquiescence YOU are saying you agree with itOVER TIME. It does NOT make the
law Constitutional or lawful; it just means YOU decided to allow government agents to impose this probable unconstitutional
legal law upon America by voluntarily agreeing to follow it in majority. These mostly unconstitutional legal laws are what our
governmental leaders in power affectionately refer to as the System. The System was legally created by certain Treasonous
Agents in government using constructions of the law to control the American peopleOVER TIME. The lawful laws in
the Republic of the United States of America must be Constitutional, but the American people allowed the legal laws of the
Corporate United States Democracy to take hold without complaint by our silent acquiescence. This allowed a Treasonous
Government to give Birth to the Demonic System and unconstitutional constructions of the law we live with today. Let us
look at a specific example of this Demonic System.
What if there was something called an Income Tax which was never meant to lawfully apply to American Citizens? What if,
over the years (OVER TIME), the government kept asking you to pay your fair share and each year more and more Americans
did just that; voluntarily filling out some form. Over decades of the Majority voluntarily filling out these forms without
objection in silent acquiescence, a tacit agreement is implied. Now most Americans believe they have to pay this
Income Tax, and the government expects the money because there is a tacit understanding that has been created over
decades (OVER TIME). There is still no constitutionally lawful law on the books forcing Americans to fill out this form
and pay their unlawful Income Tax, but everybody believes a lawful law exists. Remember my coined phraseTruth is
the Perception of the Majority. If the majority of Americans think they have to pay this Income Tax, and they have paid
it for decades; then a tacit agreement and tacit understanding is implied by Americans refraining from contradiction
or objection to the whole unlawful deception by government. Your erroneous tacit agreement and tacit understanding
allows Treasonous governmental EMPLOYEES in Congress to create unconstitutional constructions of the law known as
the legal Systemthe System for short. You might think you were being a Good Citizen by following the Majority
of the herd in their refraining from contradiction or objection, but what you have actually done is chosen to be governed
by legal law as opposed to lawful law. Now that the American people have allowed our Treasonous government to put their
Demonic System of legal laws into place, ALMOST ALL of our lawful laws have been put out to pasture for good. After all,
who in their right mind would pay Income Taxes for decades if they knew it wasnt Constitutionalunless They FORCED

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

27

you to pay using the Internal Revenue Service and LEGAL LAW constructions of the law?
Here is another old saying in regard to taxes the Mainstream Media likes to throw out at us; perhaps youve heard it? There
are only two sure things in life - death and taxes. I wonder what hearing this phrase over and over does to the average
Americans perceptions. Another example of a tacit agreement would be the creation of the Corporate UNITED STATES
for the Government of the District of Columbia. They gave America Constructive notice in writing in the United States Code
(USC) for all to see. Their Constructive notice stated that the United States is a Federal corporation, AND oh, by the way;
when government documents reference the word State, They just might be talking about a Territory like Puerto Rico instead
of one of the 50 union States. My point is that this tacit agreement and tacit understanding of C. R. A. P. (Criminals Rule
American Politics) is just another legal trick governmental representatives have up their sleeves to stop you from hanging them in
case their many betrayals come to light. Why would you be angry, They might ask? You were informed by the Corporate United
States Code (USC) in writing that the United States is a Federal corporation; CANT YOU READ!!! Here is a news flash for
you They know that they have been found out. They are nervous, but not enough of us have done anything about it YET.
So, its full steam ahead for those Treasonous and/or Ignorant EMPLOYEES in Congress at present. Im on the edge of my seat
with anticipation the information in this book will put a small hole in their boat, but only the combined efforts of the American
People can sink that Criminals Rule American Politics (C. R. A. P.) filled boat.
Tacit legal agreementsalso knows as (AKA) the System, are playing Grab Ankles with us in every aspect of our lives in
America today. This System usually has no basis in lawful law, but it sure is legal. There are many sets of Systems you have
been told over and over again you cannot fight. The largest System is the reality in which we live in America. Its simply the
System the majority of Americans have accepted as reality. The acceptance of the System by the masses, gave credence to the
phenomenon that Truth is the Perception of the Majority, which allowed their unlawful System to grow like a weed. There
are many unlawful Systems, fertilized by C. R. A. P., growing like weeds over the landscape of America today. We have the Justice
System, Legal System, Income Tax System, Public School System, etc., etc.on and on to infinity. At present, all these
Systems are an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United Stateswhich is a Federal corporation!!!
The problem America has with these Systems is they are legal, which renders them constitutionally unlawfulmost of the
time. Tacit legal agreements allow our governments to keep everything They do official, which in their minds make it
valid. Legal law and official law is what drive our current System in the Corporate United States, while lawful law and
the Constitution are parked on the curb gathering dust in the United States of America. The Supreme Laws of the Land in
the Constitution are gathering dust because our governmental representatives and the Mainstream Media tricked the American
people into refraining from contradiction or objection, as They created their unconstitutional YET official and legal System.
Speaking of the Supreme Laws of the Land, how many of you remember the following court rulings? I dont usually like referring
to a lot of court ruling in order to provide evidence of lawfulness, but these two below are exceptions.
Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.
Miranda vs Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.
An unconstitutional act 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.
Norton vs Shelby County 118 US 425 p.442
Based on the above, the evidence suggests that, even though tacit legal agreements of Corporate/Territorial legislation by the
UNITED STATES Governments might be official, they are still in VIOLATION of the lawful Constitution. The lawful courts
have made it quite clear that lawfully, Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation
which would abrogate them. That means legal and official laws passed by our Federal, State, and Local Governments, which
violate the Constitution, can lawfully be IGNORED by American Citizens. It also suggests the governmental representatives who
passed these legal and official laws probably committed Treason. Any one of the millions of legal laws currently violating our
rights at the Federal, State, and Local levels are as inoperative as though it had never been passed . Legislating unconstitutional
laws confers no right; it imposes no duties; affords no protection for Treasonous governmental representatives who used legal
contemplation as an attempt to enslave the American people.
We have been following many official Tacit laws in America for some time now. Evidence suggests that constitutionally, we
can STOP following them whenever we choose. Evidence further suggests valid, legal, and/or official laws DO NOT equal
to Constitutional laws. The millions of unconstitutional legal laws on the books are of NO CONSEQUENCE to lawful
Sovereign American Citizens, but they can do a lot of damage to legal United States Citizens and Territorial Citizens. Every
unconstitutional legal law is as inoperative as though it had never been passed . So, why the heck are we being CONTROLLED
by them???!!! The answer to that question is very simple. Its because WE ALLOW our governments to control us instead of us
controlling our governments. It doesnt make any logical or practical sense for the government EMPLOYEE to control the Free
Sovereign American Citizen EMPLOYERS, unless the Free Sovereign American Citizen EMPLOYERS are no longer Free.
Thats the whole point of the System and why the System was created in the FIRST PLACEto rob Sovereign American
Citizens of American Freedom.

28

Chapter 2 Law

This is a good time to take a break, and call your Federal, State, and Local representatives in an attempt to get to the bottom
of all this Treason. They will probably pretend NOT to know what youre talking about. To be fair and honest, many of
them are probably IGNORANT of the law. I think weve established that ignorance of millions of legal laws is definitely an
excuse. On the other hand, for our governmental representatives, many of whom are attorneys, ignorance of the Constitution is
UNACCEPTABLE!!!
Hopefully, my readers know all their Systems may be legal, lawful, or neither; but we have agreed to be governed by them
because You cant Fight the Systemright? Ill go into greater detail regarding some of their Corporate U. S. and Corporate
STATE Systems later in the book, but for right now, let us turn our attention to the Justice and Legal System.
Did you know there is both a Supreme Court and a SUPREME COURT? Could we be looking at examples of lawful
versus legal again here based on capital letters pertaining to our courts as well? I think the Supreme Court just might live
in the United States of America under Common Law and Organic Constitution. Alternatively, the evidence points toward the
SUPREME COURT residing in the UNITED STATES Corporation, and operating under Corporate Law, Territorial Law,
Private International Law, and Roman Civil Law (Legal forms of law or legal law). Come to think of itwhat are all these courts,
attorneys and lawyers really for anyway? What is this law license, and passing the BAR STUFFS all about? Im glad you asked,
so I could give you my opinion on the subjects.
A lawyer was meant to be someone who practices law adhering to Common Law and the Constitution. These men and women have
been with us since before the Founding Fathers created the Constitution. Some of Americas Founding Fathers were even lawyers
by profession. Now, looking at that attorney personI think he or she might be working under Corporate legal constructions of
the law with their BAR card jurisdictions only being valid in the Corporate U.S./u.s./UNITED STATES. That would explain
why every time I ask a lawyer/attorney about United States Code (USC) versus Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), they say
USC is the law of the land (Which my readers all know is a crock of you know what). With United States Code (USC) being
Corporate and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) being somewhat constitutional, or at least for the most part official; this
gave me a clue as to who these attorneys really represent. I remember reading somewhere the word attorney was based on the verb
attorn, which means to acknowledge a new land owner as ones landlord. In clearer terms, in the olden days, attorn was someone
who turned over the property of the peasants to the KING (Government), thereby taking away the peasants land and severely
hindering his/her freedom. Does this resemble something that might be happening to all of YOU right now, living as corporate
legal fictions in the U. S. Incorporated? In order to explain the BAR association, we need to discuss a few more definitions, even
though I told you Tacit Law was the last one in this chapter. In this case, depending on ones definition of lie, I lied to you.
However, you need information like this in your arsenal. It will enable you to stop playing Grab Ankles with government and
regain your freedom. Here is what the lawyers/attorneys have to say about all things BAR from my Blacks Law Dictionary.
Bar association An association of members of the legal profession. (Legal but not necessarily lawful) Such associations have
been organized in most states and also on the national level (American Bar Association; Federal Bar Association), and
even on the city level (e.g. New York City Bar Assn). (There is also an International Bar in Great Britain known as the
Lawyers Guild of Great Britain; I wonder why they left that out in this definition?)
Bar admission Act by which one is licensed to practice before courts of a particular state or jurisdiction (of what Government?)
after satisfying requirements such as bar examination, period of residency or admission on grounds of reciprocity after
period of years as member of bar of another jurisdiction. (Jurisdiction of what Government? I wish they would be
clearer on this stuff.)
Do you think you are ready for the definition of BAR? Youre going to love this! BAR stands for British Accredited Registry.
Why does it appear our current legal system in the Corporate UNITED STATES might be controlled by British Royalty? That is
a very good question. As a side bar (excuse the pun), another disturbing thing to take note of is located on page 1511 in the Blacks
Law Dictionary 5th edition. It is titled TABLE OF BRITISH REGNAL YEARS. It has the Kings and Queens of England under
the category of Sovereign with the date they ascended to power and the Length of reign for each one. Why does the law dictionary
our lawyers and attorneys use, pay homage to Kings and Queens of another freaking Country? Acknowledging Kings and
Queens as Sovereign and NOT the American people seems TREASONOUS to me!!!
Just in case you might be tempted to take your attorneys word over mine on all this BAR (British Accredited Registry) and attorn
stuff, lets look at some more verifiable evidence. The following comes from a DVD containing informative information from The
Christian Law Fellowship. The document is titled Hiding Behind the BAR Why Attorneys are not Lawyers. Its a bit of a
lengthy explanation, but since it is the legalese of the Judicial and Legal Systems that seems to be having the final say on our
continual march from economic slavery into physical slavery, we NEED to know who and what we are dealing with.
The legal profession in the U.S. is directly derived from the British system. (This is reasonable enough with all things being
considered. The Founding Fathers borrowed a lot from the British system.) Even the word bar is of British origin:
BAR. A particular portion of a court room. Named from the space enclosed by two bars or rails: one of which separated the
judges bench from the rest of the room; the other shut off both the bench and the area for lawyers engaged in trials from the
space allotted to suitors, witnesses, and others. Such persons as appeared as speakers (advocates, or counsel) before the court,
were said to be called to the bar, that is, privileged so to appear, speak and otherwise serve in the presence of the judges as
barristers. The corresponding phrase in the United States is admitted to the bar. - A Dictionary of Law (1893).

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES
From the definition of bar, the title and occupation of a barrister is derived:
or licentiate of other countries. Anciently, barristers were called, in England, apprentices of the law. Outer barristers are
pleaders without the bar, to distinguish them from inner BARRISTER, English law. A counsellor admitted to plead at the
bar. 2. Ouster barrister, is one who pleads ouster or without the bar. 3. Inner barrister, a sergeant or kings counsel who
pleads within the bar. 4. Vacation barrister, a counsellor newly called to the bar, who is to attend for several long vacations
the exercise of the house. 5. Barristers are called apprentices, apprentitii ad legem, being looked upon as learners, and not
qualified until they obtain the degree of sergeant. Edmund Plowden, the author of the Commentaries, a volume of elaborate
reports in the reigns of Edward VI., Mary, Philip and Mary, and Elizabeth, describes himself as an apprentice of the common
law. - A Law Dictionary by John Bouvier (Revised Sixth Edition, 1856).
BARRISTER, n. [from bar.] A counselor, learned in the laws, qualified and admitted to please at the bar, and to take upon
him the defense of clients; answering to the advocate barristers, benchers or readers, who have been sometime admitted to please
within the bar, as the kings counsel are. - Websters 1828 Dictionary.
Overall, a barrister is one who has the privilege to plead at the courtroom bar separating the judicial from the non-judicial
spectators. Currently, in U.S. courts, the inner bar between the bench (judge) and the outer bar no longer exists, and the outer
bar separates the attorneys (not lawyers) from the spectators gallery. This will be explained more as you read further.
As with the word bar, each commonly used word describing the various court officers is derived directly from root words:
1). From the word solicit is derived the name and occupation of a solicitor; one who solicits or petitions an action in a court.
SOLICIT, v.t. [Latin solicito] 1. To ask with some degree of earnestness; to make petition to; to apply to for obtaining
something. This word implies earnestness in seeking... 2. To ask for with some degree of earnestness; to seek by petition; as, to
solicit an office; to solicit a favor. - Websters 1828 Dictionary.
2). From the word attorn is derived the name and occupation of an attorney; one who transfers or assigns property,
rights, title and allegiance to the owner of the land. (In our case, the owner is the U. S. Corporation. MOST Flesh and
Blood people in America dont own ANYTHING anymore; but you still THINK you do. Well be discussing how that
happened when we get to the Contracts of Ownership and Title chapter.)
ATTORN / v. Me. [Origin French. atorner, aturner assign, appoint, f. a-torner turn v.] 1. v.t. Turn; change, transform;
deck out. 2. v.t. Turn over (goods, service, allegiance, etc.) to another; transfer, assign. 3. v.i. Transfer ones tenancy, or (arch.)
homage or allegiance, to another; formally acknowledge such transfer. Attorn tenant (to) Law formally transfer ones tenancy
(to), make legal acknowledgement of tenancy (to a new landlord). Oxford English Dictionary 1999.
ATTORN, v.i. [Latin ad and torno.] In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another. This
is the act of feudatories, vassels or tenants, upon the alienation of the estate. - Websters 1828 Dictionary.
ATTORNMENT, n. The act of a feudatory, vassal or tenant, by which he consents, upon the alienation of an estate, to receive
a new lord or superior, and transfers to him his homage and service. - Websters 1828 Dictionary.
ATTORNMENT n. the transference of bailor status, tenancy, or (arch.) allegiance, service, etc., to another; formal
acknowledgement of such transfer: lme. Oxford English Dictionary 1999.
3). From the word advocate comes the meaning of the occupation by the same name; one who pleads or defends by argument
in a court.
ADVOCATE, v.t. [Latin advocatus, from advoco, to call for, to plead for; of ad and voco, to call. See Vocal.] To plead in favor
of; to defend by argument, before a tribunal; to support or vindicate. - Websters 1828 Dictionary.
4). From the word counsel is derived the name and occupation of a counselor or lawyer; one who is learned in the law
to give advice in a court of law;
COUNSEL, v.t. [Latin. to consult; to ask, to assail.] 1. To give advice or deliberate opinion to another for the government of
his conduct; to advise. - Websters 1828 Dictionary.
LAWYER. A counselor; one learned in the law. - A Law Dictionary by John Bouvier (Revised Sixth Edition, 1856).
Although modern usage tends to group all these descriptive occupational words as the same, the fact is that they
have different and distinctive meanings when used within the context of court activities:
Solicitor - one who petitions (initiates) for another in a court
Counselor - one who advises another concerning a court matter
Lawyer - [see counselor] learned in the law to advise in a court
Barrister - one who is privileged to plead at the bar
Advocate - one who pleads within the bar for a defendant
Attorney - one who transfers or assigns, within the bar, anothers rights & property acting on behalf of the ruling crown
(government)

29

30

Chapter 2 Law
Its very clear that an attorney is not a lawyer. The lawyer is a learned counselor who advises. The ruling government
appoints an attorney as one who transfers a tenants rights, allegiance, and title to the land owner (government).

If the information above is correct, then we should be very careful to get a lawyer instead of an attorney when we need
advice in a court. Im kidding regarding the previous statement. I dont think there are any REAL lawyers left anymore in
the UNITED STATES Federal corporation. By definition, if lawyers have a British Accredited Registry (BAR) card,
they are legally and technically attorneys. Not to suggest ALL lawyers and attorneys are BAD people. Nonetheless, having
a BAR card means they ALL owe their allegiance and livelihoods to the legal law of the ruling crown (government) which
controls the British Accredited Registry. That means attorneys, lawyers, judges and their courts are bound to represent the
interests of the ruling crown (government) FIRST. Their FIRST order of business is to act as agents to facilitate and support
the bankrupt Corporate United States. The lawful law of the Constitution and the American people are NOT their top
priority, even if certain Patriotic lawyers wish us to be their top priority. Corporate legal fiction United States Citizens
and Territorial Citizens get legal Representation in a court of the ruling crown (government) because the ruling crown
(government) is a Federal corporation where a lawyer or an attorney MUST possess a British Accredited Registry
(BAR) card. Sovereign American Citizens can no longer get lawful Representation within our current System of legal law
and Corporate/Territorial Equity courts because lawful Common Law courts no longer exist.
Ive been told that even the law schools dont teach an overabundance of lawful law anymore; law schools teach Procedure
instead. What Procedure is your narrator referring to where the law is concerned? Why, the legal Procedure of legal law of
course. This legal Procedure is the one used by the Attorn (Attorney) when he or she acts as one who transfers or assigns, within
the bar, anothers rights & property acting on behalf of the ruling crown (government).This is the legal Procedure of taking all
your possessions to repay the debts accrued by Congress when they borrowed from Foreign Investors, Domestic Investors, and
other Banks in order to FINANCE their unlawful Corporate UNITED STATES and Government of the District of Columbia.
Supporting the bankruptcy of the Corporate UNITED STATES is the FIRST priority of anyone who has a British Accredited
Registry (BAR) card. It starts with the attorneys on Capital Hill, and flows downhill to infect the Nation. By the time the
legal Procedure C. R. A. P. stops flowing downhill, every lawyer in America with a BAR card has been changed to an
attorney. Let us end this topic on Procedure with the following quote to solidify my position on our Attorns in Congress and
their use of legal Procedure to circumvent and distort ALL lawful Law and lawful Procedure in America.
You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that for bureaucrats, procedure is everything and outcomes
are nothing.
Thomas Sowell
Please understand that as long as we have a legal system instead of a lawful system, it wouldnt matter if we had any lawyers
left or NOT. The Corporate UNITED STATES (KING) will most likely always win in ANY COURT using our current
legal system. Constitutionally, a Lawyer does not require a British Accredited Registry (BAR) card in order to practice
lawful law in the United States of America. Unfortunately, almost all lawyers are mandated by legal law of the UNITED
STATES Incorporated to have their British Accredited Registry (BAR) cards. The BAR card leaves lawyers legally changed
into attorneys in the Corporate United States, whether they lawfully wish it or NOT. As long as lawyers are legally forced to
accept their British Accredited Registry (BAR) cards, whether they refer to themselves as attorneys or NOT, they will always
be legally and officially defined as an attorn; one who transfers or assigns, within the bar, anothers rights & property acting
on behalf of the ruling crown (government). The BAR card represents the KING (U. S. Inc.), and the KING is only interested in
churning out attorneys to further the KINGS interests.
One of the greatest illusional and delusional tricks played upon the American people was to convince us there was INTEGRITY
in our legal and Judicial Systems. We often hear attorneys and judges spouting off about ETHICS and INTEGRITY when
many of them posses neither. Then again, that depends on the definition of ETHICS and INTEGRITY being used. Most
lawyers and counselors have lawful ETHICS and INTEGRITY, but the attorneys acting as the attorn for the KING have
a different kind. The judges and attorneys responsible for Americas unfortunate 100 plus year dilemma have legal ETHICS
and INTEGRITY, thats why were corporate legal fictions working for the Government of the District of Columbia. Im fairly
certain Im correct, though in cases like these, being correct is a bitter pill to swallow.
Certain attorneys in the Corporate UNITED STATES possessing legal ETHICS and INTEGRITY wield great power under
the System. This great power required them to be known by really catchy Titles. For instance, King and Queen are really cool
Titles. In our Corporate Cities and particular districts, an attorn is referred to as a District Attorney; and in the Corporate
United States and Corporate States, their attorns are known as Attorney Generals. In all three systems of Government, the
District Attorney and the Attorney General are the chief attorneys responsible for prosecuting any corporate legal fiction who
gets out of legal line. Sometimes the prosecution of the corporate legal fiction is just and sometimes it is unjust. The primary
goal is legal CONTROL of the American people by an attorn. They sometimes put BAD people away, but its their legal
CONTROL of everyone that has me worried. In spite of an attorn sometimes putting BAD people in jail, the American
people must never lose sight of who these Corporate U. S. Attorneys really represent. In the end, They represent the ruling
crown (government) legal positions over any and all lawful positions the American people used to have when we were free. If
there is any doubt, feast your eyes on one legal term for Attorney General found on the internet at http://www.fisicx.com/
quickreference/politics/legalterms.html.

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

31

Attorney General Head of the Bar in England.

I dont know about you, but based on evidence provided in this book and the authors astute insights into the subject matter;
there seems to be cause for alarmor at the very least the raise of a brow!!! A Treasonous Congress (Made up of mostly
attorneys) might have created a Corporate U.S. Government, owned and controlled by Foreign and Domestic investors, to
economically enslave you today and physically enslave you tomorrow. That is, if you were ever stupid enough to let them ban
you from bearing arms (owning a gun). Maybe its just me, but I dont have a good feeling about totally disarming American
Citizens and leaving the United States of America totally defenseless against the Kings and Queens in Government. The
same Kings and Queens in Government, who CURRENTLY control the Corporate UNITED STATES!!! The unlawful
legal system created by the MAJORITY of our Treasonous government officials does not seem to act in the favor of the common
American Citizen. A lot of you have been conditioned by the corporate controlled Mainstream Media to believe that guns are
BAD, but in my opinion; gun ownership in America is probably the only reason They have not physically enslaved us to
this point. Our governmental representatives do not listen to you now, so what would They do if Americans were all
totally defenseless? Why I bet they might even stop trying to convince you of how FREE you are; there would really be no
need for them to continue the deception at that point. Well discuss these issues in more detail later when we get to the Second
Amendment chapter, but please give it a bit of thought now.
You might also look into becoming a member of the National Rifle Association (NR A) at http://home.nra.org/#/home. The
NR A is the primary organization that has stood for freedom pertaining to gun owner rights. They stand for freedom as a
dam, which currently prevents Congress from stripping us of all our Natural Rights. The NR A and their lawyers defend the
Second Amendment to the Constitution against attorneys in the Federal, State, and Local Governments. Certain Founding
Fathers of our nation were correct to put the Second Amendment in the Constitution; but for obvious Treasonous reasons, our
current Corporate Governments disdain gun ownership of any kind by American Citizens. Did America win its independence
from Britain only to have it taken away by Treasonous Special Interest politicians enslaving us with their legal System? Was
the Treasonous Congressional Act of 1871 the beginning of the end for America? Are 300 million people going to be led to
the slaughter by Treasonous Special Interest politicians, who are using legal magic to change us into legal fiction collateral
to repay their Corporate United States debt? Only YOU can decide for YOU, but heres what I believe happened. I think
the United States was incorporated at some point with majority British ownership. They later had to create a System
allowing Americans to pay taxes on their LABOR and hard earned wages to satisfy the multitude of loans Congress borrowed
in order to finance their U.S. Incorporated. They accomplished this loan repayment by using you and your children as collateral
over all these years. It would not do if your 1040 tax form said Crown of Great Britain instead of U.S. Treasury. That
would defeat the brilliant System of lies and deceit our governmental agents used against America, and where is the
fun in that???!!!
I think this Incorporated U.S. would need additional agents on Americas shores to watch out for the British business
interests, which undoubtedly lead to the creation of the British Accredited Registry (BAR) in America and turning lawyers
into attorneys without their knowledge. The individual lawyer/attorney in question might claim to be a lawyer by name or
by deed, but possession of a British Accredited Registry (BAR) card license makes upholding the laws of the Constitution
difficult at best. On the other hand, CERTAIN Treasonous attorneys in Government, who NEVER wanted to be lawyers, are
still turning over your assets to the King as one who transfers or assigns, within the bar. Just as the attorn did so many
years ago; CERTAIN American attorneys with BAR cards choose to represent the King over the American people. Many of
these SPECIFIC attorneys can be found in Congress. In simpler termsattorneys might be additional agents working for the
British Crown, which is why they need to have their British Accredited Registry (BAR) card in order to practice law or what
passes for law these days. That BAR license could legally bind all attorneys to the British Crown without most of them even
knowing.
Perhaps Im way off base with my opinions, but the evidence seems to support my allegations. I asked one attorney what the
BAR stood for and this particular blonde attorney person had no clue what it meant, even though this individual possessed
a BAR card. I dont think being blonde had anything to do with it, but you never know. Heres a very personal example for
you in reference to attorneys and legal law. I recently had the opportunity to be involved in a lawsuit over ownership of a couple
of buildings which my group had a large sum of hard earned money (at least to us) invested. Justice was served by this rather
simple case taking over three years to conclude. It concluded with the absence of any real trial, and absolutely no resolution to
any of the legal issues of the lawsuit. In the end, all parties involved wound up settling the case ourselves in Bankruptcy Court
for about seventy percent of our investment. You would think the Grab Ankles would have ended there, but our lawyers bill
was for approximately 70 plus thousand dollars MORE than our original investment for the brilliant piece of lawyering his
firm did for us. That means, in the end, we would have been 70 plus thousand dollars richer if we had just walked away from
our investment and never hired attorneys in the FIRST PLACE.
Our lead lawyer and partner in the firm did not seem to care if he did us a service or not; thats the way things can go in these
Systems of legal law we have today in the Corporate United States. However, all was not lost; to this day, I still get birthday
cards and a cake or pie at Christmas from my lawyers law firm. Perhaps this is the least they feel they could do for taking
all our money for doing next to NOTHING, and playing legal Grab Ankles with us for over three years. I thought I hired a
lawyer to represent our group in the lawsuit, but he turned out to be an attorney after all. He and his Law firm faithfully

32

Chapter 2 Law

executed the duties of one who transfers or assigns, within the bar, anothers rights & property acting on behalf of the ruling crown
(government), for three solid years where our case was concerned. The Bankruptcy Trustee (another Attorney), in the ACTUAL
role of the attorn; and his legal Law firm that was holding all property and funds hostage until the matter was resolved,
took about $80,000 from both sides in the lawsuit for their SERVICES. Its difficult to determine what the Bankruptcy Court
got, but I can tell you there were a lot of court filings by the attorneys on both sides, so court fees must have been substantial.
I got enough copies of all the documents, briefs, and filings from my attorney to fill a room from floor to ceiling.
Imagine how lucrative it must be for the legal Judicial System to have every attorney and lawyer in America required to
pay court fees for all their court filingsof course its actually the client who gets the bill in the end (literally and figuratively).
Lawful Justice is dying a slow death in America at the hands of the legal System in the Corporate United States. The primary
interest and emphasis seems to be on attorneys getting paid by running us through the legal System, which allows government
to control us and take away our assets to pay back those unlawful loans for the U. S. Incorporated. The attorneys and the
Corporate Governments run by attorneys get paid handsomely, while the American people slide ever closer to Slavery. You
might not agree with me right now, but KEEP READING and allow me to EXPOSE all the legal facts and present you with
the lawful/constitutional Truth.
There are still some lawyers in America who are attempting to practice lawful law, at least in their hearts and minds; but
I fear the attorneys are about to render their lawyer cousins extinct. For the record, I did not willingly enter into the
previously mentioned lawsuit myself, but was forced into it when the lawsuit was initiated by the other group (lets call them
the jackasses). Once anyone involved with any kind of legal project or allegation voluntarily goes to the Corporate Courts
for Justice, the Corporate Court legally TAKES jurisdiction (power and control) over the matter whether the other party
(my group) wants to partake in their legal game or NOT. Courts these days seem to TAKE legal jurisdiction even when its
clear they have no lawful jurisdiction in the case. Im thinking our Corporate Courts reacting in this unlawful manner might
have something to do with America having two separate and distinct forms of Government CREATED BY Congress to
enslave us. How do you guys and gals out there in reader land see it? This is one of the ways They keep commerce f lowing
in their fictitious U. S. Incorporated. The U.S. Corporation, certain Public Corporations, Courts, and lawyers/attorneys keep
Corporate Commerce f lowing so the British Crown can get their money paid back (with interest) on all their loans and debts.
Our Congressional representatives act as corporate officers of the Corporate United States USING America and Americans
as collateral to finance the Government of the District of Columbia. Thats what I see when I look at the evidence, and Im
sticking to my opinion. Its hard to convince me that attorneys have the best lawful interest of America at heart when their
livelihood is controlled by the British Accredited Registry (BAR). Dont get me wrong, I say againI have a strong belief
the majority of lawyers/attorneys have no knowledge of this huge legal TRICK. Much like the majority of you had no idea
you had been transformed into Legal Fiction corporations. However, certain Treasonous agents in our governments decided
it prudent and legal to orchestrate and execute our Legal Fiction Slavery nonetheless.
Please remember the following logical opinion of your author and narrator concerning lawyers. In lawful versus legal terms
under the Constitution, a lawyer does NOT lawfully need a BAR card to practice lawful constitutional law. Unfortunately,
in legal terms, any lawyer who voluntarily applies for his or her British Accredited Registry (BAR) card legally becomes an
attorneywhether they want to be one or NOT. Lawyers were meant to practice lawful law in the United States of America
under the Constitution AND attorneys practice legal law of the KING under the Corporate United States. There are many law
professionals who are aware of the precarious position being licensed by the British Accredited Registry (BAR) have put them in,
but they are at a loss for a solution; because Americas Constitution is no longer in use. After all, its the System and it is not
their faultright? Our current unlawful legal System was not created by the particular lawyers/attorneys you might hire to assist
with a legal problem. However, it did take certain specific lawyers and/or attorneys to create the System in the early years.
These particular lawyers and attorneys who created the System must have come from somewhere. There seems to be no end
to the lies and deceit against the American people in order for someone or some ones, coming from somewhere; to support
their unlawful System. I have personal knowledge of two lawyers who found out about their precarious situations in regard
to the British Accredited Registry (BAR) and quit the legal profession. The Truth is hidden from most lawyers, but I do have a
STRONG suspicion that there are lawyers/attorneys in high places who are well aware of this deception. For example, dont most
members of Congress, as well as a lot of our Presidents, have a background in the Legal System, which is being passed off as
the Lawful System of the United States of America? If you checked, a lot of them had their BAR card at one time, or at the very
least; took a lot of law courses on their way to becoming career politicians. CoincidenceI think NOT. How does the System
the UNITED STATES Federal Corporation has in place really make you feel? Do you like the System we have today? Do
you still feel free in this System of government which appears to have been put in place to strip Private American Citizens
of their freedom? Only YOU can decide, but it will take the collective and united We the People to actually do something
about itbefore its too late.
It is apparent we are caught in several levels of deceit designed to take away our freedom. (1) The Birth Certificate signed by our
parents changed human beings into flesh and blood collateral from birth (2) Other contracts like Drivers Licenses, Social
Security cards, Credit cards and so forth, which we voluntarily signed; changed American Citizens into corporate legal
fictions, and (3) Treasonous agents in Congress changed the United States of America into the UNITED STATES Federal
Corporation. They created a government using legal laws instead of lawful laws and named it the Government of the District of

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

33

Columbia. The Government of the District of Columbia is now pretending to be our Federal Government. These acts of Congress
and other governmental representatives are NOT the kind of change that supports our American Freedom.
There are many legitimate reasons for the existence of SOME legal documents like the Drivers License and Passport. There are
also legitimate reasons for SOME of the millions of legal laws passed by our Corporate/Territorial Government. We need to
have validation of who is an American and who is not in the international world we live in today. However, there is no lawful
law which would FORCE an American Citizen to need or possess a Drivers License to drive upon the Free roads in the United
States of America. That is, unless by legal law and Corporate/Territorial Government decreed jurisdiction, the Free roads are
NO LONGER Free in the UNITED STATES Federal Corporation. For strictly reasonable purposes of identification, an
American Citizens Passport or some similar non-controlling document would suffice, so why do we really need to possess a Drivers
License? Congress and STATE Governments have the authority to control corporations (to a point) and to make Public law,
as long as the laws are Constitutional. In spite of that legal/lawful reality, FORCING every American of a certain age to have
a Drivers License to travel upon the Free roads in America is evidence to me the Free roads in America might no longer be
Free. The Drivers License and other corporate legal fiction documents are an infringement by government on the rights of the
Private American using unlawful yet legal Public law. Our governments are even using these legal Public laws, like the legal
laws of Child Protective Services (CPS), to override our Private Parental Rights to OUR children. Sovereign American Citizens
own OUR children under the Natural Rights of God and Nature. The lawful law Natural Rights of God and Nature cannot
be replaced by a legal contract Birth Certificate. The lawful law Natural Rights of God and Nature are NOT even a part of the
Real Constitution, so there is no need to amend the document. Well be discussing Parental Rights more in later chapters. Their
governmental Treason using legal laws in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA must cease in the United States of America;
otherwise, Sovereign American Citizens are doomed.
Lawfully, the average Private American Citizen, who is not involved in Public commerce on our Free roads, needs no Public
Drivers License of any kind. If the American Citizen is a Taxi Driver or Truck Driver working under the Public commercial
jurisdiction of government, our STATE Governments could officially and PERHAPS even lawfully, require that Public
Driver to possess a Drivers License. American Citizens, simply driving from point A to point B, cannot be lawfully required to
possess one!!! There is no COMMERCE involved within the Public domain of government when Americans Privately drive
from point A to point B, so government has no lawful jurisdiction to FORCE Free Americans to carry a Drivers License. Of
course, They did not FORCE us to carry them, we applied for them of our own free will in somewhat of a voluntary manner.
It was somewhat of a voluntary manner because government intentionally mislead us into thinking we had to possess their
corporate documents. Now that this specific tacit agreement and tacit understanding regarding the Drivers License is
legally in place, the corporate legal fiction caught driving on the Free roads in America without a Drivers License is given a
ticket, thrown in jail, or both.
Thats the problem with being reasonable with governmental EMPLOYEES who have committed Treason against you. One
minute youre being reasonable where their legal laws are concerned, and the next minute you find their reasonable legal
laws have changed into unlawful laws that VIOLATE the Constitution. Once weve allowed government to replace lawful
Constitutional law with reasonable legal law, our freedoms are lost and will never be WILLINGLY returned. In keeping with
the driving example in this explanation, its also appropriate for our governments to determine whether we need red lights and
speed limits for the general Public good. That is, as long as the Majority of the American Public agree with the governments
proposals. After all, They are supposed to be our representatives, so that means representing OUR views over THEIR views
should be a priority. Then again, when They start pulling you over and giving you a corporate ticket because you did not fasten
your seat belt, They have definitely gone TOO FAR. It might be smart to fasten your seat belt, but when your government
can FORCE the Private citizen to Buckle Up using Public legal law, then how FREE do you think YOU really are in the
UNITED STATES? If They can FORCE you to fasten your seat belt in the car that you own and drive, then what else do those
millions of legal laws allow government to do in order to CONTROL you? Their millions of legal laws often start out as good
ideas, BUT more times than not end up taking away OUR freedoms. I can recall back in my childhood when most Americans
never wore seat belts!!! I remember when mothers and fathers held their babies in their arms while traveling upon the Free roads
in America instead of putting them into car seats.
Im not advocating these positions, we all know its safer to wear a seat belt, and its better for young children to have car seats. The
point I want all my readers to grasp in these examples is that WE USED TO HAVE A CHOICE. A truly Free people always have
A CHOICE. Having A CHOICE is one of the fundamental cornerstones of FREEDOM!!! Our Corporate/Territorial Government
is systematically taking ALL CHOICE away from the American people with the use of seemingly GOOD INTENTIONS. Is it
the Corporate/Territorial Governments goal to PROTECT every American Citizen, or is it their goal to CONTROL every
American Citizen? It appears to be the latter.
The Social Security card started out as identification in the Social Security Administration for those unfortunate Americans who
needed help from the government. Now, we are all required to have a Social Security number or we are not allowed to work.
The Patriot Act and Homeland Security started out as a way to keep us safe from Terrorists (not really). Today, a Treasonous
Government can listen in on our phone calls, view our e-mails, and enter our homes WITHOUT a search warrant anytime They
choose. So much for GOOD INTENTIONS and, in most cases where our Corporate Federal, State, and Local Governments are
involved, so much for American Freedom. If a government agent, who is supposedly working for me, can pull me over for not

34

Chapter 2 Law

wearing a seat belt, listen in on my phone calls, view my e-mail, and enter my home UNINVITED, then that says to me I am no
longer Free in America. What does it say to you???!!!
Please additionally consider the following where freedom is concerned regarding the War on Drugs. Not to advocate drugs
like cocaine and heroin are a good thing, but if you were actually Free, a government agent working as YOUR employee could
not decide whether its legal or not for you to indulge. A Free American Citizen, living in the United States of America,
has the Natural Right to put whatever substances they choose into their bodies. GOOD or BAD, Free people living under
the jurisdiction of the lawful Constitution possessing Natural Rights have A CHOICE. Alternatively, corporate legal fictions,
living under the legal jurisdiction of the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES System, no longer have A CHOICE. The
Corporate United States feels They have a legal right to RESTRICT what their corporate legal fictions put into their bodies.
On the other hand, They feel it their legal right to FORCE the corporate legal fiction to put foreign substances, like vaccines, into
their bodies at the request of their Corporate Masters. They feel they have to keep their corporate legal fictions SAFE. They keep
you SAFE because it is the corporate legal fictions responsibility to live as long as possible to repay UNITED STATES Corporate
debts. After all, you are the only collateral They have left in the UNITED STATES Federal corporation. If corporate legal
fictions refused to act as collateral to repay UNITED STATES corporate debts, the Government of the District of Columbia would
probably cease to exist. In my opinion, this would not be such a BAD thing.
You might want to consider a politicians motives the next time you hear one requesting you give up FREEDOM for SAFTEY.
Our representatives in all levels of government have the power and jurisdiction to make Public law that is agreeable to the
Majority of the people. However, please remember They have no constitutionally lawful jurisdiction allowing them to stick
their noses into the affairs and lives of any Private American Citizen, using the millions of legal Public unconstitutional laws
at their disposal. It is commendable some in Government wish to protect every single man, woman, and child in America in order
to keep us SAFE. I just wish theyd do it lawfully instead of legally.
Okay, it appears most of you finally believe me regarding flesh and blood Americans being turned into corporate legal fictions, but
some of you are still having an issue with the possibility of two governments existing. You just dont want to believe there could
be at least two United States with multiple sets of laws? I dont blame you; I didnt want to believe our leaders capable of most of
the betrayals chronicled within these pages either. However, allow me to give you further proof using United States Code (USC)
versus Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The following explanations of USC and CFR were both found on what seems to be
a Government website at http://www.gpoaccess.gov.
The United States Code is the codification by subject matter of the general and permanent laws of the United States (So
far so good). It is divided by broad subjects into 50 titles and published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the
U.S. House of Representatives. Since 1926, the United States Code has been published every six years (Whatwhy
so infrequent???!!!). In between editions, annual cumulative supplements are published in order to present the most current
information.
Hopefully you remember from previous USC and CFR examples that somebody was trying to make it appear these two
different bodies of laws were the exact same set of statutes. They both appear in the United States Statutes at Large to create the
legal illusion each set of laws are lawful, but Im NOT so sure. Especially given what we now know about the legal versus lawful
aspects of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. According to our government, the United States Statutes at Large contains
Every public and private law passed by Congress. Thats all well and good, until you consider some of the public and private law
passed by Congress is legal, and the rest of it is lawful. This legal versus lawful conundrum created by Congress could definitely
explain why the United States of America has been inflicted with USC and CFR. Lets take a look at the CFR explanation from
the same government website to see if USC and CFR are indeed identical statutes and regulations. Having common sense, Id say
since they have different names, under legal OR lawful terms they are most likely NOT the same; but thats just the way your
narrator thinks.
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal
Register by the executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government. It is divided into 50 titles that represent
broad areas subject to Federal regulation. Each volume of the CFR is updated once each calendar year and is issued
on a quarterly basis.
Please allow me to point out the evidence which will undoubtedly make you start to grab for your ankles. Please refrain from
doing so, as grabbing your ankles is not a very dignified action for a FREE American to indulge in without being forced to do so at
gunpoint. I took the liberty to emphasize the relevant text in the examples above. Please note in United States Code (USC), our
CORPORATE Government is leading YOU to believe laws listed in United States Code (USC) are the general and permanent
laws of the United States. Your author believes the laws listed in United States Code (USC) are actually the laws of the United
States CORPORATION. On the other hand, in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) example, they want YOU to think
these laws are the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register. The Word of Art legal trick here is to try and
lead you to believe CFR contains permanent rules while USC contains permanent laws. Our Corporate Governments thinking
here is everyone knows rules are less important than laws. Of course in this example, it is exactly the other way around. If
you look at this particular example from a lawful instead of a legal position, CFR being published in the Federal Register by the
Federal Government is what makes CFR the actual laws of America (as long as they are Constitutional). However, Congress

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

35

wants us to use USC because that is what good legal fiction corporations are supposed to be using in the UNITED STATES
Federal corporation. All the attorneys with their BAR cards are taught to lead you to USC as well; so what is a FREE American
Citizen to do. Is ignorance of the law really not an excuse? Is Treason and betrayal of America a good excuse? Anywaythe final
clue to CFR being somewhat lawful and USC being legal is hidden in the frequency of publication. Also, please take notice
that the USC definition above ONLY makes reference to the U.S. House of Representatives, while CFR includes the executive
departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
Frequency of publication is NOT a lot to go on, but we could say the same for most of the legal laws Congress publishes. We
can compare the frequency of publication with USC being published every six years, versus CFR where Each volume is
updated once each calendar year and is issued on a quarterly basis. Our Government likes to pretend incompetence, but
if I were a betting man; Id pick Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) over United States Code (USC) as Americas official
laws. Why do I choose CFR? Because CFR is updated once each calendar year and issued on a quarterly basis, while
USC is ONLY being published every six years. Logically, our government and its many governmental agencies would need
access to the most recent laws to run the nation. Congress would need to rely on the laws updated once each calendar year
and issued on a quarterly basis in CFR, especially since most of them didnt bother to read the bill prior to passing the
laws. The set of laws Congress SHOULD be using would be the ones found in CFR. If you still think CFR and USC are the
same laws, for additional clarification, lets take a look at the history of the two publications as viewed through the Federal
Register Act found at http://www.llsdc.org/fed-reg-cfr/.
The Federal Register Act originally provided, within six months, for a complete compilation of all existing regulations promulgated
prior to the first publication of the Federal Register. However, this was deemed inefficient, and so instead of a compilation
of existing regulations, the Federal Register Act was amended in 1937 to provide a codification of all regulations every five
years.8 A six member Codification Board was established which determined the precise structure of the new Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). A similar organization to the United States Code (USC) was followed by the Board so that a majority of
the 50 titles to the CFR (some held in reserve) have similar alphabetically arranged subject categories and title numbers to
that of the 50 titles in the USC.
So, Im forced to say again that based on the evidence, these publications of law are NOT one and the same. The Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) might have similar alphabetically arranged subject categories and title numbers to that of the 50 titles in the
USC , but that does NOT mean the laws in the 50 titles to the CFR are the same laws found in the 50 titles in the USC .
Allow me to sum up all this verifiable evidential information in a simple way my readers will understand. Please give me a moment
to wish myself good luck with this endeavor. In my opinion, the only laws that are valid lawful laws applying to American Citizens
are the Articles and Amendments (those that were PROPERLY RATIFIED) in the Constitution, and any lawful laws passed by
Congress that do not violate the Constitution. Im hoping SOME of these lawful laws passed by Congress, which are NOT a part
of the Constitution; exist in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as constitutionally legislated laws. Especially since these laws
are the laws published in the Federal Register as laws Americans are supposed to live by, but Im NOT holding my breath on that
one. During our brief conversation, weve covered many of the millions of legal and official unconstitutional laws, known as the
System. We have also discussed the laws we simply accepted OVER TIME as Tacit Laws, which are based on NOTHING. From
my research, it appears to me ALL laws in CFR SHOULD lawfully be Constitutional. However, since our more modern new and
improved types of dishonest Treasonous Presidents and Congressional members had to pass the laws in CFR, I have little faith
most are lawful or Constitutional, but I know they are likely all legal.
The United States Code (USC) is a whole other matter. If you compare it to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), they are
similar in the number of Titles they possess, but for the most part, thats where the similarities end. You could see in the examples
above that CFR is supposed to be lawful, or at the very least official; because its jurisdiction encompasses all the union States in
the entire Federal Government. United States Code (USC) is actually Corporate/Territorial law. It is Corporate/Territorial law
designed to be used by the Treasonous U. S. Incorporated, which was unlawfully created by Congress as the Government of the
District of Columbia. Thats why USC contains legal definitions like the one declaring the UNITED STATES to be a Federal
corporation. Members of Congress are smart enough to know that the Real United States is NOT a Federal corporation,
but They were counting on YOU to overlook that lawful fact. Congress misuses the Government of the District of Columbia
to FORCE its Territorial Citizens in territorial States like Puerto Rico to use United States Code (USC) as their laws, while
They trick American Citizens from union States into using USC legal laws VOLUNTARILY as United States Citizens. Congress
can FORCE the legal laws in USC upon Corporate/Territorial Citizens because those laws ONLY passed the U.S. House of
Representatives. That means those particular laws USUALLY failed to pass in the Senate. Laws that pass in the U.S. House
of Representatives which are NOT passed by the Senate, ONLY APPLY to the Territorial UNITED STATES consisting of
Washington D. C. and its Territorial possessions like Puerto Rico. You see, in the beginning of this legal deception, both Houses
of Congress would vote on bills per the lawful law of the Constitution. If the House of Representatives and the Senate BOTH
passed the bill, it was supposed to become lawful law after being signed by the Presidentas long as it was Constitutional.
Its the authors understanding that the Senate represents the 50 Union States and the American people, while the House of
Representatives has jurisdiction over the POSSESSIONS of the Federal Government in Washington D. C., which includes
its Territorial States like Puerto Rico. Unfortunately, Congress betrayed the people by changing United States to UNITED
STATES, Kansas to KANSAS, and representing territories like Puerto Rico as States. American Citizens have been trapped in

36

Chapter 2 Law

a fictitious legal UNITED STATES Federal corporation as United States Citizens, right alongside the Territorial Citizens,
while our governmental representatives destroyed America using the legal laws of the System. The Federal/National/Corporate/
Territorial Government already had official jurisdiction, and sometimes lawful jurisdiction, over Territorial Citizens. In
order to conquer America; They had to convince We the People their legal jurisdiction applied to Sovereign American Citizens
changed into United States Citizens of the UNITED STATES Federal corporation. Thats where the attorneys were so
helpful, guiding everyone to USC and making the legal System appear lawful and Constitutional.
If a particular bill passed in the House of Representatives, yet failed to pass in the Senate, it could still be used by the House
of Representatives as legal law in Washington D. C. and its Territorial possessions (States). These Territorial possessions are
NOT States of the union; but in the current System, Congress treats them as if they were States of the union. Remember,
according to United States Code Title 28 Section 3002 Part (14), a State means any of the several States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the
United States. Under legal law, by State the government means a territorial possession of the District of Columbia. Dont
be fooled by the term any of the several States in their definition of State in USC. By definition, any of the several States
is likely a Corporate State such as K ANSAS or a Territorial State like Puerto Rico. That means the above legal description
from USC, referencing any of the several States, does NOT include the 50 union States in America. This is an impressive
SCAM by Congress; it could also be interpreted as TREASON. An American Citizen changed into a United States
Citizen (JOHN DOE) of the UNITED STATES Federal corporation can be RULED by Corporate legal laws bestowing
privileges instead of rights. At the same time, an American Citizen changed into a Territorial Citizen (John Doe) can be
legally defined as a Person from any territory or possession of the United States like Puerto Rico. By legal definition, when
you sign a 1040 form, you are voluntarily stating you are a Territorial Citizen (John Doe) from any territory or possession
of the United States who just happens to be living and working in one of the union States. This SCAM allows Sovereign
American Citizens to be RULED by the Territorial legal laws of the District of Columbia as Territorial Citizens. Territorial
legal laws existing in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico could be applied to American Citizens legally, but they are in no way
lawful or constitutional. The same goes for corporate legal laws like the Patriot Act and Homeland Security which exist in
the UNITED STATES Federal corporation. Their corporate legal laws in the Patriot Act and Homeland Security apply
to legal United States Citizens NOT lawful Sovereign American Citizens. These laws further violate our Constitutional and
Natural Rights in the United States of America. As you can see, Citizenship is a very important issue of the legal, lawful, and
constitutional law. For sure, American Citizens know they are NOT Territorial Citizens; but where Corporate United States
Citizens are concerned, it depends upon the definition of United States Citizen. Until we get the Treason sorted out, it is best
to refer to yourself as an American Citizen instead of a United States Citizen. USC and CFR have both become huge SCAMS
orchestrated by Congress to violate the Constitution by using legal laws to CONTROL lawful Sovereign American Citizens
changed into United States Citizens and/or Territorial Citizens. The attorneys in Congress see nothing legally wrong with
their Treason because we voluntarily signed their licenses, permits, certificates, and forms. How do YOU feel about their legal
Treason? Our governments are using legal laws and Word of Art definition to strip Sovereign American Citizens of our
Natural and Constitutional Rights. This SCAM by Congress and our governments, at all levels, will continue until We the
People end the SCAM.
It is obvious enslaving the American people for Special Interest is what Congress had in mind when they used millions of legal
laws, licenses, permits, and certificates to CONTROL the Sovereign Citizens of America. These legal laws passed by the House
of Representatives were placed into USC as Corporate/Territorial law. These legal laws are NOT to be mistaken for the laws in
CFR, which are SUPPOSED to be the lawful laws of America and the 50 union States at the Federal level. Howeverwith the
United States Code (USC) NOW containing definitions of United States as a Federal corporation AND Washington D.
C. and the Territories sometimes being defined as the several States; it might be difficult to figure out if you are being treated
as an American Citizen under what SHOULD be the lawful law jurisdiction of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), or
as a Territorial and/or United States Citizen under the legal law jurisdiction of the United States Code (USC). We have all
been legalized into becoming legal fiction corporations and Territorial/Corporate Citizens; it was done with the legal purpose of
taking away our Constitutional lawful rights and giving us legal privileges. These privileges are also being Systematically taken
away by the Courts and the Judicial Systems, making it exceedingly difficult for Americans to remain free. Freedom is not a
Democrat versus Republican issue. Its an issue of the survival of our way of life, and the American peoples ability to maintain
our Sovereignty, which includes our American Freedom. Most of the Democrats AND the Republicans are a part of the SCAM.
Another example of the official capacity of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is its use in determining what should be
lawful at any given time in America. This example also further illustrates that the United States Code (USC) is total Corporate/
Territorial legal law, and it can be lawfully ignored by American Citizens living in the United States of America. Some of the
information in this example is repetitive, but we all know repetition works well where memory retention is concerned. Otherwise,
none of us would be bragging about how free we are in the UNITED STATES.
It is true that CFR contains permanent rules. What They failed to tell us is these particular sets of permanent rules are
actually Regulations. Thats why they call it the Code of Federal Regulations. Allow me to introduce another element to our
legal versus lawful equation. How many of you have heard of the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules? According to the
government website found at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/parallel/parallel_table.html, the following is the definition for the

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

37

Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules.

The following table lists rulemaking authority (except 5 U.S.C. 301) for regulations codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.
(NOT United States Code (USC))
Now that we have a vague governmental definition for the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules, lets look below
at information taken from the Louisiana State University website at http://www.lib.lsu.edu/govdocs/federal/usregs.html for
clarification on how to use this table.
GOING FROM THE LAW TO THE CFR:
The Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules gives the following cross-references:

United States Code (USC) to CFR

Statutes at Large (Stat.) to CFR

Public Law (PL) to CFR

Presidential Documents to CFR

GOING FROM THE CFR TO THE LAW:

In the table of contents to the subparts of each CFR title you will find the following citations:

Authority: Gives Statutes at Large, United States Code, and Public Law citations for enabling legislation (IF and
when they exist).

Source: Federal Register volume, page and date.

Finding Guide for Regulations in Print

I dont know how you interpret the above information; but from my perspective, it looks like all roads TO THE LAW are either
GOING FROM THE LAW TO THE CFR OR GOING FROM THE CFR TO THE LAW . By definition, THE LAW in
this example is lawful law instead of legal law. There is mention of United States Code under the category of Authority, but
legal Authority is not necessarily THE LAW of the land in Americanow is it??? When CFR is used in conjunction with the
Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules, it lists the sources of Federal law under which current Regulations have been issued.
In simpler terms, CFR and the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules will indicate which government agency has authority
(jurisdiction, power) under a particular Federal Regulation, as opposed to a particular Corporate/Territorial Regulation ONLY
found in USC. If there is a Regulation (lawful or official law) in the Code of Federal Regulations, the Parallel Table of
Authorities and Rules points to what SHOULD BE the lawful governmental agency within the real Federal Government
which is responsible to ENFORCE the Regulation. If no Regulation (lawful or official law) exists within CFR, then there will
NOT be a pointer in the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules to the Federal Governmental agency created to ENFORCE
what SHOULD BE that particular law. If there is no Federal Governmental agency to ENFORCE a particular law, then that
law does NOT apply to the American people. How could it? There is no Federal Governmental agency or people working for the
Federal Governmental agency to ENFORCE the law. That means the particular law in question, which ONLY exists in USC
without making what SHOULD BE a lawful appearance in CFR, is NOT lawful law in the Real United States of America.
Unfortunately for us, it certainly qualifies as legal law in the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES.
Laws existing in USC and not in CFR is quite often the case with the legal laws (NOT Regulations) found within USC, because
many of them are Corporate/Territorial legal laws that were NEVER passed by BOTH Houses of Congress. Please remember,
the 50 titles to the CFR are NOT the same laws found in the 50 titles in the USC , but the attorneys in Congress want you to
believe they are the same laws. Thats why the attorneys in Congress refer to CFR as containing permanent rules, while They
attempt to convince everyone USC contains permanent laws. In order to become a Federal law, a bill must be passed by the
House of Representatives AND the Senate then signed by the President. A LOT of the legal laws in USC ONLY passed the House
of Representatives, so they do NOT appear in CFR. If a Corporate/Territorial law in USC is NOT also in CFR, there will NOT
be a pointer in the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules to the appropriate Federal Governmental agency to enforce the law.
That means if a law in USC has no Implementing Regulation in CFR (because the law does not appear in BOTH USC and
CFR within one of their Titles), then it SHOULD NOT be lawful law within the United States of America RESTRICTING the
rights of American Citizens. As legally bizarre as it sounds, permanent rules in CFR outrank permanent laws under USC in
this particular situation. The permanent rules in CFR outrank the permanent laws in USC because the permanent rules in
CFR are Federal laws which SHOULD BE Constitutional, and the permanent laws in USC are ONLY Corporate/Territorial
legal laws. The permanent rules in CFR pertain to lawful Federal Governmental agencies and Implementing Regulation,
while the permanent laws in USC pertain to the Corporate/Territorial Governmental agencies ONLY, with jurisdiction in
the Government of the District of Columbia/U. S. Incorporated and/or their U. S. Territorial possessions.
For example, we all know the powers of the Internal Revenue Service reside under United States Code Title 26. If the Internal
Revenue Service is actually a Federal agency (its NOT), with authority in the United States of America under United States code
Title 26, then there SHOULD BE a similar Title in the Code of Federal Regulations as an Implementing Regulation. This
Implementing Regulation would give the Internal Revenue Service its authority to ENFORCE the Income Tax laws in the
United States of America. We should be able to use the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules to find the jurisdiction for

38

Chapter 2 Law

the Internal Revenue Service within the Code of Federal Regulations under one of its Titles. A surprising thing happens when
you attempt to cross-reference USC and CFR using the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules pertaining to Income Taxes.
You find that many sections of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) ONLY apply to Title 27, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.
Many of the Internal Revenue laws from USC in Title 26 do appear in CFR, but NOT the ones that really count when it comes
to Internal Revenue laws and Income Tax ENFORCEMENT. Thats the brilliant legal trick to the Income Tax SCAM. The lawful
taxes owed within Title 27, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms are excise taxes, which are NOT the same legal taxes owed in the
Internal Revenue Code (IRC) under Title 26 as Income Taxes. This is a very serious lawful Constitutional issue, because in order for
the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) laws to apply to most American Citizens, there MUST BE some Implementing Regulation
giving a Federal agency authority under THE LAW in CFR. Im shocked that most of the time, there is no such lawful authority
or lawful jurisdiction to be found under THE LAW when it comes to the IRS ENFORCEMENT powers in Title 26. The
Pennsylvania Lawmen Committee, found at http://www.palawmen.info/parallel_table_of_authorities.html on the internet, had
the following to say when they went through this exercise.
If we look at the Parallel Table for the sections in Subtitle F (of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Title 26), we discover
that many of the regulations only apply to Title 27 taxes (Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms excise taxes), and NOT to Title
26 taxes. (Income Taxes)
Lets look at the most commonly abused and fraudulently misapplied sections of Subtitle F.
Sec. 6020. Returns prepared for or executed by Secretary. The Parallel Table indicates that this Code section ONLY
provides rulemaking authority to Title 27, Parts 53 and 70. There are NO applicable regulations (In CFR) for this section
in Title 26. (In USC)
Sec. 6201. Assessment authority. The Parallel Table indicates that this Code section ONLY provides rulemaking authority
to Title 27, Part 70. There are NO applicable regulations (In CFR) for this section in Title 26. (In USC)
Sec. 6321. Lien for taxes. The Parallel Table indicates that this Code section ONLY provides rulemaking authority to
Title 27, Part 70. There are NO applicable regulations (In CFR) for this section in Title 26. (In USC)
Sec. 6322. Period of lien. The Parallel Table indicates that there are NO applicable regulations (In CFR) for this
section in Title 26 or Title 27. (In USC)
Sec. 6323. Validity and priority against certain persons. The Parallel Table indicates that this Code section ONLY
provides rulemaking authority to Title 27, Parts 70 and 301. There are NO applicable regulations (In CFR) for this
section in Title 26. (In USC)
Sec. 6331. Levy and distraint. The Parallel Table indicates that this Code section ONLY provides rulemaking authority
to Title 27, Part 70. There are NO applicable regulations (In CFR) for this section in Title 26. (In USC)
Based on this information, it is easy to see that there is NO WAY that these Code sections can be applied to Title 26 taxes, but
they are! Your corrupt CONgress (I like the way they emphasized CON) and their lapdog Article I administrative (as
opposed to constitutional Article III courts) federal courts have permitted this trampling of our constitutionally protected
rights, the taking of our property, and the incarceration of many innocent Americans. (I believe the latest high
profile legal yet unlawful Income Tax incarceration was that of the actor Wesley Snipes in 2008)
Please read and understand the information presented on this website so we can stop this unlawful behavior by our servant
government. Only WE THE PEOPLE can stop them; CONgressmen and judges will not do it voluntarily.
I know what the attorneys say regarding USC; but examples like the one above further suggest United States Code (USC) is
legal and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) SHOULD be lawful and Constitutional. At least CFR is official. What
else could we possibly expect from a mostly Treasonous Government filled with Democrats and Republicans? If its a lawful
law in the Code of Federal Regulations, it should ONLY apply to Americans living in the United States of America. If its a
legal law under United States Code and the law DOES NOT EXIST in the Code of Federal Regulations, it should ONLY
apply to Corporate/Territorial Citizens of the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES Federal corporation. If there is
NO applicable regulation (NO Implementing Regulation) in CFR, then there also exists NO lawful Governmental
agency to ENFORCE this nonexistent regulation and nonexistent lawful law. Thats why, even though the Income Tax
is legal in the UNITED STATES Federal corporation and any territory or possession of the United States, it cannot be
lawfully ENFORCED in the Real United States of America. Unfortunately, They legally ENFORCE an Income Tax on
American Citizens every dayunlawfully. At the highest level of the SCAM, their enforcement power exists because Congress
changed United States to UNITED STATES without notifying the American people. There is NO lawful Governmental
agency to ENFORCE unconstitutional laws, such as the Income Tax, currently in existence in the United States of America.
Lawfully and constitutionally, the Income Tax does NOT pertain to an American Citizen. Those American Citizens who
have no business dealings in the Territorial STATES are under NO OBLIGATION to follow Corporate/Territorial legal laws.
However, its the American Citizens lawful right to volunteer to follow legal laws or NOT to volunteer to follow them based
upon signing contracts. What makes the System work is when Americans lawfully and constitutionally volunteer to sign legal
contracts.

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

39

It appears the Internal Revenue Service has been getting its ENFORCEMENT authority from Title 27 Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms, yet their Corporate/Territorial laws exist under Title 26 , so NO lawful or constitutional ENFORCEMENT authority
actually exists upon American soil for the IRS. The whole IRS Income Tax deception is done with smoke, mirrors, deception, and
multiple acts of Treason by Congress. If this is confusing, its because the attorneys in Congress meant for it to be confusing. Well
be delving deeper into this HUGE Income Tax SCAM later in your book. I have an entire chapter devoted to it where well be
discussing Internal Revenue Service and Taxes. Corporate/Territorial legal laws being applied to flesh and blood Americans
had to be confusing, or They would not have been successful. If you understand my points at this time, then great. If you dont
understand, all will be revealed in later chapters of your book. Our chapter on Law lays the foundation. All the other chapters
explain specific details and contain information which will assist my readers in regaining their American Freedom from our
Treasonous governments. You must FIRST understand youre in a hole to climb out of the hole.
The example above, showing the lack of a lawful Implementing Regulation or NO applicable regulation where the Income
Tax is concerned, STRONGLY suggests the Internal Revenue Code, which contains our Income Tax legal laws under USC Title
26 , probably have no lawful authority in the United States of America. Those Internal Revenue laws that apply to Corporate/
Territorial Individuals and Persons might NOT apply to flesh and blood American Citizens AT ALL. Perhaps thats why
the Government of the District of Columbia sent me that neat certificate stating I had no U. S. Tax Liens. I think I mentioned
this earlier, but the funny thing to me (If any of this could be funny) about all the CFR versus USC C. R. A. P. (Criminals Rule
American Politics), is each time Ive asked an attorney/lawyer which one contains the REAL laws, they say USC. This is what
they are taught in legal law schoolalong with their legal Procedures to rob you of all YOUR STUFF; so please dont think Ive
got a vendetta going against lawyers. Although, I must admit that I am NOT fond of attorneys. Ive got a few very good
friends who practice the profession of law, and I know first hand they are loyal Patriots. Its their British Accredited Registry
(BAR) card licenses that make the lawyer the same thing as the attorney in any court of legal law. Its still very advantageous to
the U.S. Corporation to have ALL lawyers think USC is the law of the land as opposed to the Constitution and the Regulations
within CFR. Its advantageous to the attorneys in Congress because USC more firmly legally binds the changed corporate
legal fiction American people to the U.S. Corporation. In reality, United States Code only applies to Washington D.C. and the
TerritoriesAT BEST. Legal laws in United States Code (USC) are ONLY lawful laws when they pass both houses of Congress
and are signed by the President. Even then, these laws in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) must be constitutional; otherwise,
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. If the people we get our legal advice
from are leading everyone to the wrong set of legal laws, then Congress, both Democrat and Republican, could have a heck of a
Party at our expense.
The status of Territorial/Corporate Citizenship is very important, so allow me to ramble on a bit more about how I come to the
conclusion that the laws in USC only apply to Washington D.C. and the Territories. I believe Ive proven it to most of my readers,
but it never hurts to beat a dead horse when that dead horse has the power to enslave you. Its really fairly simple. You seein my
humble, yet INFORMED opinion, the seat of Federal or National Government (Not Corporate Government) in Washington D.
C. has the right to govern itself along with the Territories its Constitutionally charged to oversee. Ive mentioned this information
before, but it never hurts to mention their legal tricks again, just like it never hurts to make sure a Treasonous dead horse is
actually dead. They manage this governing over the Territorial possessions using legal laws that ONLY pertain to Territorial
Citizens living in Washington D. C. and the Territories, because they are NOT members of the 50 union States protected by
the Constitution. Even though Territorial Citizens get to vote in our elections, the several States, known as Territorial States in
the UNITED STATES Federal corporation, are NOT among the 50 union States in the Real United States of America
now are they? Allow me to show you what the internet site at http://www.answers.com/topic/district-of-columbia had to say about
the District of Columbia.
The Constitution (Article I, Section 8) gives Congress authority to make laws for the District of Columbia, the seat of the
federal government. This power has its origins in events that took place in 1783, when soldiers angry about not being paid
surrounded the Congress under the Articles of Confederation in Philadelphia, where local officials offered no protection. To
ensure that the new federal government would never be as helpless, the framers of the Constitution called for a district, not
exceeding 10 square miles, to serve as the seat of government.
As a result of a deal in which Southern members of Congress agreed to support the repayment of American revolutionary
war debts, Northerners agreed to locate the new capital in the South. Congress approved a location for the district on the
Potomac River, on a 10-square-mile site that included the existing cities of Georgetown, Maryland, and Alexandria, Virginia.
Commissioners in charge of the project named the district in honor of Christopher Columbus, and the new capital city within
the district in honor of President George Washington, whose home, Mount Vernon, lay just 20 miles south of the new district.
In 1800, the federal government moved to the district.
In 1846, the citizens of the Virginia side of the district voted to return their area to Virginia, so that the current District of
Columbia occupies only the land that Maryland ceded. Congress has established several different kinds of government
in the district.
Congress had every Constitutional right to establish the seat of the federal government to govern Territorial Citizens living
in Washington D. C. and its Territorial possessions. What They didnt have was the Constitutional authority to create the
Government of the District of Columbia, but They did it anyway. Lawful law allows Congress authority to make laws for the

40

Chapter 2 Law

District of Columbia and the Territorial States like Puerto Rico and Guam, so there was no problem with them doing so. However,
their legal laws, which pertain to the Territorial Citizens of Washington D. C. and the Territories, were never meant to apply to the
50 States of the Union or the American Citizens living in the United States of America. To solidify my point on Congressional
power over Territories, allow me to skip to Article I Section 8 Clause 17 of the Constitution for evidence.
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may,
by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and
to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same
shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all
other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Optimistically, after reading the above text, we all see the Constitution lawfully gave Congress the power To exercise exclusive
Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square). The problem Congress had was that
their Constitutional power over Territory, used to create the Seat of the Government of the United States, had some severe
limitations. The primary limitation being, that the Governmental District of foregoing Powers could not be lawfully and
constitutionally caught making legal laws outside of the jurisdiction (place of authority or power) of one of its Territories or
exceeding ten Miles square where Washington D. C. was concerned. Their Seat of the Government of the United States also
had the power to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State. This means
Congress had the same power (jurisdiction) over the Territorial possessions of the United States as they did over such District (not
exceeding ten Miles square) in Washington D. C., the Seat of the Government of the United States.
For instance, such Territorial possessions (Territorial States NOT Constitutional union States) would include the Territorial State of
Puerto Rico and the Territorial State of Guam. These Territorial possessions are examples of all Places purchased OR conquered
by the United States making them possessions. Congress had to find a way to manipulate American Citizens living in the 50 union
States, so they changed the United States of America into the United States/United States of America Incorporated. This unlawful
metamorphosis of Nations allowed government to play Grab Ankles with the United States Citizens living in the United States
of America in the same manner as they did their Territorial Citizen cousins living in Puerto Rico or Guam. Im aware that Im
repeating myself again, but I have to make sure my readers FULLY understand the workings of the many legal tricks being played
upon the lawful Sovereign American Citizen.
After creating a new Corporate Nation, it was a simple task to activate their Government of the District of Columbia.
Congress then used the legal laws under United States Code (USC) which pertain to Washington D. C. and all its Territorial
possessions and used them to make YOU think they applied to YOU as a United States Citizen living in one of the 50
union States. The Treasonous EMPLOYEES of the UNITED STATES Federal corporation had to insure their economic
enslavement of Sovereign American Citizens was complete. They accomplished this task by getting Treasonous EMPLOYEES
of the 50 union States to change the 50 union States into the 50 corporate STATES. Thats how Kansas became K ANSAS,
making K ANSAS and the other 49 States CORPOR ATE instrumentality of the United States. I now find it necessary to ask
the following question of my readers. Do you still think legal laws of the Corporate/Territorial UNITED STATES apply to
YOU as a f lesh and blood American Citizen? If you dont, call Congress and voice your displeasure with all the Treason. If
you still believe legal laws apply to a f lesh and blood American CitizenREAD ON. When you hear a politician speak of
the Democracy we have in the UNITED STATES, he or she is referring to the Corporate/Territorial Government created by
Congress; a Government They created by abusing the Constitutional powers found in Article I Section 8 Clause 17 of the
Real Constitution. Our Treasonous Politicians Democracy They legally speak of ONLY exists in Washington D. C. and
its Territorial possessions. The United States of America, under the lawful laws of the Constitution, is still a Republic. Just to
be sure you understand what Congress has allowed (created) to occur in America, lets take a look at the following definitions.
A couple of these you have previously seen, but I dont want you to forget them.
District A certain portion of the country, separated from the rest for some special purposes. The United States are divided
into judicial districts, in each of which is established a district court; they are also divided into election districts;
collection districts, (AND legal versus lawful districts as well) &c.
United States Code Title 28 Section 3002 (14) State means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United
States.

(15) United States means

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

State This word is used in various senses. In its most enlarged sense, it signifies a self-sufficient body of persons united together
in one community (As in the United States of America) for the defence of their rights, and to do right and justice to

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

41

foreigners. In this sense, the state means the whole people united into one body politic (We the People); (q.v.) and the
state, and the people of the state, are equivalent expressions (Meaning the power of the state resides in the people).
1 Pet. Cond. Rep. 37 to 39; 3 Dall. 93; 2 Dall. 425; 2 Wilsons Lect. 120; Danes Appx. Sec. 50, p. 63 1 Story, Const.
Sec. 361.

In a more limited sense, the word state expresses merely the positive or actual organization of the legislative, or judicial
powers; thus the actual government of the state is designated by the name of the state; hence the expression, the state has
passed such a law, or prohibited such an act.

State also means the section of territory occupied by a state (The physical land), as the state of Pennsylvania.

2. By the word state is also meant, more particularly, one of the commonwealths which form the United States of
America.

We can see by the definitions above that a State can be defined as one of the commonwealths which form the United States of
America, or it could be a self-sufficient body of persons united together in one community for the defence of their rights. A
Lawful State could also be defined as the whole people united into one body politic under the lawful laws of the Constitution.
The one definition we know a Lawful State has never been lawfully defined as, is one where A certain portion of the country,
separated from the rest for some special purposeof deceit and legal Treason by Congress using legal law. When Government
uses the term District, they COULD BE referring to land sectioned off within the United States of America, OR they COULD
BE referring to A certain portion of the country, separated from the rest for some special purposes to make you think their legal
laws apply within the borders of the United States of America. United States Code (USC) (Corporate/Territorial legal law) shows
us that by State, most of the time our Corporate Government legally means any of the several States, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.
YOU now know these TERRITORIES have nothing to do with America. United States Code (USC) has also given us STRONG
verifiable evidence that by definition United States means a Federal corporation, which is also separate from America.
Sobased on the evidence, United States Code (USC) applies to Territorial Districts as A certain portion of the country,
separated from the rest for some special purposes of Congress, but has NO LAWFUL JURISDICTION in America. We also see
that in United States Code (USC), its States are Territorial States, and places like the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States are NOT a part of
America. Our Treasonous Government, controlled by a Majority of traitors, might want us to believe Territorial Districts and
Territorial States are the same entities as American union State Districts and American union States, but Im here to attempt
to set the record straight. Dont get hung up on the word Commonwealth here either. Like everything else in law, it depends
on the definition. A lawful State is one of the commonwealths which form the United States of America like Texas, Arizona,
Hawaii, and Alaska, NOT the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or
possession of the United States. This Commonwealth issue might have been a bit confusing to the attorneys in Congress because
Hawaii and Alaska used to be Territorial commonwealths; but now each is one of the commonwealths which form the United
States of America. Yes my friends, according to the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), which was approved February 10, 1939,
Hawaii and Alaska used to be Territories. Youd think with all that education, the attorneys in Congress would have been able
to figure this definitional distinction of commonwealths out in regard to Hawaii and Alaska NOW being States of the union.
Perhaps our leaders in Congress dont care for us to know of such definitional distinctions. In the definitions section of the
Internal Revenue Code of old, it contained the following legal definitions for United States and State. You know Ive got the
definitions, so here you go.
United States The term United States when used in a geographical sense includes only the States, the Territories of Alaska
and Hawaii, and the District of Columbia.
State The word State shall be construed to include the Territories (back then, the Territories contained Alaska and
Hawaii) and the District of Columbia, where such construction (legal law construction) is necessary to carry out
provisions of this title (to enslave America).
You can see in the two definitions above, Congress had allowed the IRS to define the United States and State as Corporate/
Territorial entities ONCE AGAIN. Thats why all this legal law C. R. A. P. is Corporate/Territorial, which is the preferred
method used as the Criminals Rule American Politics in their UNITED STATES Federal corporation. The lawful laws of
the Constitution are conveniently absent from both the legal entities United States and State listed above. Our younger
American Citizens might have no idea Alaska and Hawaii used to be Territories. It depends on whether or not it
was taught in Corporate Government public schools, which are currently being financed by stealing YOUR Property Taxes.
How many of you readers were aware Alaska and Hawaii used to be Territories? How many of you think the Internal
Revenue Service might be using this old outdated Internal Revenue Code legal law, approved February 10, 1939, to trick
the American people? How many of you think the Internal Revenue Service might be using that old outdated Internal
Revenue Code when Alaska and Hawaii used to be Territories to deceive the American people into believing the
Internal Revenue Service has jurisdiction in union States like Texas and Arizona? Well be discussing tricks like this in
GREAT DETAIL in our chapter on Internal Revenue Service and Taxes. For right now, lets gets back to the topic of
our Treasonous government. There are those who define the System of government in America today as National, Federal,

42

Chapter 2 Law

Territorial, OR Corporate, but regardless of definition, I smell Treason where Congress is concerned.
Congress used their unlawful Corporate/Territorial Government and legal tricks in order to make us think these Corporate/
Territorial legal laws actually applied to Sovereign American Citizens living in a union State, like Texas or Arizonawhere
the Constitution and the American people SHOULD BE KING. Congress had the Constitutional authority to create the
District of Columbia, the seat of the federal government, but They HAD NO AUTHORITY to create the Government
of the District of Columbia and apply its legal laws to the United States of America. Congress had no lawful authority to
substitute Constitutional lawful law for their millions of Corporate/Territorial legal laws. It appears that in every example
of legal law being used by Congress on the American people, legal crap like USC and even CFR are shown to be lacking a
certain Constitutionality. ONCE AGAIN, in my opinion and based on evidence, the USC appears to consist of laws that were
never meant to apply to America. Laws in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) are official and apply to America if they
are constitutional, but United States Code (USC) laws are ONLY legal. Please note ONCE AGAIN that I said CFR is
official; I did not use the term lawful. I believe this System America is currently aff licted with is official, which places
it somewhere between legal and lawful making it awful.
Im very sorry to inform all you residents of Washington D.C. and the Territories that I think USC applies to you because
you do not actually live in a union State like Texas or Arizona. However, were just splitting hairs here, because this is
one trap that has snared all of usAmerican Citizen, United States Citizen, and Territorial Citizen. In a nutshell, legally
changing our citizenship is our Governments way of covering their legal and unlawful assets in case their many betrayals
are found out. It is also their way to avoid the much deserved hanging many deserve. Let us go over why certain members of
Congress should be hung once more for old times sake. (1) They defined United States as a Federal corporation. (2)
Then, They additionally defined Washington D. C. and the Territories as States. (3) Next, They allowed American
Citizens to voluntarily fill out contracts (certificates/permits/licenses/forms), which moved us from America into their
Corporation/Territorial jurisdictions as Citizens of their UNITED STATES Federal corporation. (4) They additionally
allowed Americans to become economic Slaves to a fictitious Corporate Nation as corporate legal fiction collateral for
an assumed debt. Allow me to show you the definition of a Slave in order for us to determine how close Congress has
INTENTIONALLY GUIDED Americans toward SLAVERY.
Slave A man who is by law (legal law in this case) deprived of his liberty for life (Natural Rights and freedoms), and
becomes the property of another (such as a corporate legal fiction).
Wellisnt that just peachy. All the elements of legal law exist to allow certain Treasonous attorneys in Congress to define
every man, woman, and child in America as Slaves. Only you can decide whether you feel a Slave at this point or not, but
it appears certain Treasonous elements in the Corporate/Territorial Government, pretending to be America, might have
decided for most of us already. In conclusion of this issue, please remember that my opinions are based on the evidence. I know
Ive beaten this issue to death, but I felt it necessary for my readers to have a thorough understanding of why our politicians
speak of our great Democracy instead of our great Republic. Basically, with the use of the System, we have all our elected
officials; the President, members of the House, and members of the Senate, who are in effect Moonlighting. When They
put on their Territorial hats, They are making Territorial legal laws under United States Code (USC) that apply to the
Seat of Government; also known as Washington D.C. (ten miles square) or the Government of the District of Columbia and
its Territorial possessions. When They put on their hats of Democracy, They are making corporate legal laws under
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) AND the United States Code (USC), as the CORPOR ATE Government. Our
Federal Government of the United States of America is currently asleep. The legal trick was to get Sovereign American
Citizens over onto the Corporate/Territorial side and under their legal jurisdiction any way They could. Once we believed
we were United States Citizens and Territorial Citizens, They could legally take away our freedoms as American Citizens.
What is it President Bush is always gleefully yelling out in regards to Iraq and many of his administrations Constitutional
attacks upon America? Oh yeah, Mission Accomplished!!!
Some of my readers might have noticed that I used the word Democracy in reference to the laws passed in Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), but ALWAYS remember this nation was founded under the Constitution as a RepublicNOT
a Democracy. These two words are NOT synonymous as most believe them to be; which is another problem currently
contributing to the horrendous legal mess in the United States. The huge difference between Republic and Democracy can
be viewed as thus. The Constitution was written and put into place as a document guaranteeing a Republic for the people
of the United States of America. Thats why the Pledge of allegiance states, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, NOT to the Democracy for which it stands. This Republic and
Republican form of Government in America was never meant to infringe on the Natural Rights (Not Civil Rights) of the
people. Democracy in America should simply refer to the method by which we elect our officials (agents) in government.
We do this by use of a democratic process, where the winner is supposed to be the one with the majority of the delegates
or Electoral College votes. This sounds pretty good on the surface, but lets see what Jordan Maxwell has to say about
Democracy in his book titled Matrix of Power and subtitled; How the World Has Been Controlled By Powerful People
without Your Knowledge.
Democracy Democracy comes from the word demos, meaning mob a mob in the street is a demos. Demos-ocracy; ocracy
meaning rule. Demos-ocracy, or democracy, means mob rule. You might say that true democracy is like thirty-five

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

43

whites hanging one black. Thats democracy. The rule of the mob. Now when we put it into more Americanized
political terms, its the rule of the people. And, while that may sound good in print, the founders of democracy in our
modern day form realized that the people could be manipulated into accepting whatever they would want the
people to accept.
Democrats AND Republicans, in all levels of our government, have led us to believe we have a Democratic form of government
and not just a democratic process for electing our representatives in a Republican form of government. If the above words
of Mr. Maxwell have any Truth to them, then they explain why a Treasonous Corporate/Territorial Government would want
Americans to believe the Real United States of America is a Democracy, instead of a Republic. If you dont believe there is
any difference between the two forms of government, please view the definition of Republic from Bouviers Law Dictionary
of 1856 written below. When you compare the definition of Republic to the above definition of Democracy, the differences
will JUMP right out at you.
REPUBLIC A commonwealth; that form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens.
In another sense, it signifies the state, (state consisting of the people) independently of its form of government.
It would be great if Mr. Maxwells statement that the people could be manipulated into accepting whatever they would want
the people to accept had NO merit, but I fear he is correct. It appears the culmination of (1) Brainwashing, lies, and half-truths
by the Mainstream Media (2) Brainwashing and misinformation in our public education systems (3) Creation of a legal system
to replace a lawful system, and (4) Politically Correct lies by our political leaders have indeed produced a System whereby,
the people could be manipulated into accepting whatever they would want the people to accept. In what other manner,
save Democracy, could a nation of Americans be herded away from Constitutional lawful Freedom and Natural Rights and
SCAMMED into asking their governmental EMPLOYEES for legal permission to do almost everything but breathe? What other
reason would we willingly accept privileges that could one day lead to the end of all Freedom in this Great Nation that used to be
OURS? Democracy sounds good in theory, but theory does not always turn out to be Truth. Since the United States of America
was founded as a Republic, Id be more comfortable if we returned to those lawful and lofty ideals over possible mob rule in
the Corporate/Territorial United States. The Constitution is a lawful document that cannot be RULED upon by anyone, NOT
even Supreme Court Judges; because these Supreme Laws of the Land are open to all the citizens. Thats why our Treasonous
governmental representatives no longer use the original Constitution. They knew their corporate controlled news media could
be used to whip the corporate legal fiction mob into a frenzy so the people could be manipulated into accepting whatever
they would want the people to accept. Then They took advantage of the corporate legal fiction mob after whipping it into
frenzy, and They legally solidified their Corporate U. S. rule and domination over the United States of America. This is an
action repeated by Treasonous governmental and judicial representatives of the U. S. Inc. many times in the past 100 plus years.
Consider this conversation an open invitation to all the citizens in our Republic to put an end to their Treasonous Corporate
Democracy once and for all. The idea that Democracy could be used to manipulate the people is in no way new. Thats why the
Founding Fathers created the United States/United States of America as a Republic. If you have any doubts regarding this issue,
just look at the following quote from the British author and historian James Anthony Froude.
A centralized democracy may be as tyrannical as an absolute monarch.
James Anthony Froude (1818-1894) British author and historian Source: Short Studies on Great Subjects, 1872
Perhaps Ive shared enough of my opinions on the subject of law. As you do your research to determine whether I am full of crap
or not, I would suggest you keep an Open Mind and not fall prey to the inner workings of the legal System. If I were you, Id
concentrate on validating all the evidence of lawful law which has been supplied. The legal System and its millions of legal laws
were created and implemented to be a near inescapable maze. Concentrate your efforts on lawful Constitutional law, and it will
save you a lot of time and headache. Once again, I am not an attorney or lawyer. My views and opinions on the subject of law are in
no way an attempt by your author and narrator to practice law without a license. Hopefully you found my insights on the subject
of law interesting and thought provoking; but you must admit, its also based on some really compelling evidence. It does appear
something is indeed Rotten in Denmark (By definition, Denmark means Americain this case). Remember in the introduction
when I claimed knowledge of who They are that hate us so much for our freedom? Its looking like the primary They, who not
only hate us for our freedom but have systematically managed to take it from us, can be found in the following list. The UNITED
STATES Corporate Government (Government of District of Columbia), its Owners (Foreign & Domestic parties), the President
(CEO of U. S. Inc.), U. S. Inc. Board of Directors and Managers (Congress & the Presidents Administration), and last but not
least; our relatively new Corporate Judicial System (SUPREME & INFERIOR Courts), legally supporting the actions of those
who will soon be identified as Treasonous government officials within these pages. What other conclusion could we reach based on
the evidence and our lack of American Freedom in the UNITED STATES? The legal law in the United States Code (USC) clearly
states that the United States is a Federal corporation. If thats the case, ALL of our elected and appointed representatives have
a choice between supporting the legal laws of the Corporate/Territorial United States OR the lawful Constitutional laws of the
United States of America. Which entity and set of laws do you think most of our governmental representatives are supporting?
Without a doubt, youll know the answer once you finish this book.
If you recall nothing else from this chapter, please remember the following concerning law. When confronted with the millions of
laws at the Federal, State, and Local levels, you must determine whether these laws are legal or lawful. I am hopeful its becoming

44

Chapter 2 Law

evident to my readers that law can be used to enslave or to free those individuals who are bound by them. I am of the opinion the
millions of legal laws we have today were developed and implemented by our Treasonous Governments as tools used to control
and enslave the American people. On the other hand, the lawful laws of the Constitution and any laws passed which do not
violate the Constitution were meant to insure freedom for every American Citizen in this unique nation of ours. Legal laws usually
apply to the UNITED STATES Corporation giving YOU privileges, and lawful laws apply to the United States of America and
the Constitution guaranteeing YOU Constitutional and Natural Rights. It was the conception of the Constitution and the lawful
laws under the Constitution which were instrumental in the creation of our Great Nation called the United States of America.
America being a Nation of laws and NOT a Nation of men, guaranteed freedom for all once slavery was lawfully abolished. It
is my fear the conception and creation of the legal Corporate/Territorial Government and its Corporate Constitution, is moving
our Great Nation ever closer to tyranny, dictatorship, and eventual slavery for all. The Corporate/Territorial Government, we have
allowed to legally exist, is a Government of men and NOT a Government of laws. Americans can no longer stand idly by while
our country is taken away from us by Treasonous politicians working for Corporate Special Interest. Treasonous Governments
should be afraid of their People whom it has betrayed!!! Let all Americans join together and make this statement Truth, because as
we all know by nowTruth is the Perception of the Majority.

INDEX
Symbols
9/11 Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402, 407
9/11 Commission Report . . . . . . . . . 402, 403, 407, 408
9/11 Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403, 409
16th Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261, 262, 276
31 CFR chapter 11, section 214.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
444 A.2d 1(D. C. App.1981) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468
700 Billion dollar Bail Out bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
850 Billion dollar Buy In bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
1040 form . . . . . . . . . . . . 260, 277, 281, 309, 330, 452

A
Acquit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Act of 1871 . . . . . . . 14, 156, 188, 220, 428, 450, 460, 486
Advocate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A Federal Corporation . . . . . . . 17, 139, 451, 475, 482, 487
AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366
AIDS virus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374
Allodial Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242, 492
Allodium estate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241, 242, 244
American Citizen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 36, 225, 475
American Citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222, 472
American Citizens Review Board . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
American Freedom Agenda Act . . . . . . . . . . 393, 432
American Taxpayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229, 284
AMEROS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438, 477
Anti-Federalists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Anti-Federalists Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Apportionment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 270
Armed Citizens Militia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Article I Section 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223, 303
Article I Section 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Article I Section 2 Clause 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 270
Article I Section 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Article I Section 3 Clause 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Article I Section 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154, 191, 210, 219
Article I Section 8 Clause 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 271
Article I Section 8 Clause 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
Article I Section 8 Clause 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Article I Section 9 Clause 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 270
Article I Section 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Article II Section 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Article III courts in reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Article III Equity courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Article III Section 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Article VI Section 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304, 443, 444
Articles of Confederation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490

Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union . . . . . 147

Assault Weapons Ban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463, 477
Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Assignment of commercial paper . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
Assumed debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 239, 244, 314
ATF Officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308, 309
Attorn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 29, 244, 260, 461
Attorney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 29, 260
Attorney General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 31, 461
Autism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

B
Bail Out . . . . . . . . . 60, 62, 379, 433, 434, 435, 446, 470
Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298, 299, 300
Bankrupt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
Bankruptcy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
BAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 473
Bar admission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Bar association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Barrister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 260
BARRISTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
BATFE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
BBC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
BBC video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
Betrayal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
Big Brother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453
Big Pharmaceutical companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
Bilderberger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52, 65
Bilderberg Group . . . . 60, 99, 235, 320, 336, 353, 382, 439
Bilderbergs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Bill Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Bill of Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 415, 482
Bird flu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374
Birth Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 277, 345
Blackwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362, 448
Blackwater USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449, 450, 451
Blackwater Worldwide . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449, 450, 451
Book sense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Branch Davidians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204, 365, 390
Branches of Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Bribes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
British Accredited Registry . . . . . . . . . 28, 416, 461, 466
British Broadcasting Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Budget accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives . . 419
Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) of Puerto Rico . 279, 281,
283, 285, 376

496

Index

Bureau of Internal Revenue, Philippines . . . . . . . . . 281

Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . 281
Bush-Clinton Crime Syndicate 360, 362, 364, 365, 378, 381,
396, 440, 445, 462, 491

Bush dictatorial power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339

C
CAFR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155, 249
CAFR accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
CAFTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
CAFTA-DR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Campaign Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Canon Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208, 276, 346
Capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Capital Gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
Capital Gains Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
Capitalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55, 86
Capitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 283
Census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 270
Center for Disease Control and Prevention . . . . . . . 487
Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) . 78, 477
Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 21
CESSIO BONORUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
CFR Title 27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
Charles Schumer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106, 212
Checks and Balances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 303
Richard (Dick) Cheney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Chief of police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
Chief of Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462
Child Protective Services . . . . . . . 174, 203, 206, 345, 384
Christian Law Fellowship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 28
Citizen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Citizens Review Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
Civil Liberties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 47, 180
Civil Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45, 47, 218
Civil War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Close Circuit Television . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Code of Federal Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 34, 301
Collateral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240, 300
Collateral Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383, 405
Collateral PROPERTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
Colonial Militia laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
Colonial Militias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
Commandments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Commercial jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Commercial paper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239, 244
Commercial transaction . . . . . . . . . . 238, 239, 242, 243
Common Law . . . 171, 174, 175, 177, 215, 239, 472, 473, 476
Common-law action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
Common Law Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . 201, 203, 220

Common Law court . . . . . . . . . . . . 207, 242, 284, 416

Common sense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176, 473, 476
Communism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Communist Manifesto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86, 394
Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 155, 249, 271, 295,
491

Congressional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Congressional martial law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
Congressional Pay Raises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Congressman Ron Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Conscientious objection affidavit . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Conspiracy . . . . . . . . . 236, 356, 366, 369, 399, 428, 450
Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
Constitutional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Constitutional Convention 182, 183, 192, 211, 218, 268, 417,
441, 457, 466, 472, 480, 483

Constitutional court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162, 172

Constitutional issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Constitutional Treaties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
Constitution for the United States . . . 143, 145, 147, 153, 473
Constitution for the United States of America . 50, 175, 183,
236, 282, 299, 364, 404, 417, 455, 462, 480, 489

Constitution of the United States 143, 145, 183, 364, 404, 473
Constitution of the United States of America . 175, 299, 417,

455, 489

Constructive notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 27, 282

Contrary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444, 445
Controlled Demolition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407, 408
Convict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
CORPORATE 50 states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
Corporate citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Corporate Constitution . . . . . . . . 156, 163, 417, 441, 489
Corporate Constitution of the United States of America 490
Corporate Democracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
Corporate legal fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 48, 221
Corporate Second Amendment . . . . . . . . 482, 483, 489
Corporate Tenth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Corporate/Territorial Constitution of the United States of
America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
Corporate/Territorial Second Amendment . . . . . . . 484
Corporate U.S. Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484
Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Council on Foreign Relations 52, 60, 65, 71, 99, 235, 320, 323,
331, 353, 364, 382, 451

Counselor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 260

Counterterrorism Act of 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 401
Counter Terrorism Bill of 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396
County Sheriff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388, 390
COURT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
Court of Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Court Of Kings Bench . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES
Court of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Court of Nisi Prius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Courts of the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
covert terrorism . . . . . . . . . 356, 357, 369, 372, 383, 400
Crap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Creditor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238, 239
Criminals Rule American Politics (C. R. A. P.) . . 18, 27, 126

D
Debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Debtor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25, 238, 239
Declaration of Independence . . . . . . . . . . 48, 145, 187
De facto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 210
De facto Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 153
Delegate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Democracy 40, 42, 153, 174, 182, 191, 221, 226, 231, 303, 328,
344, 349, 350, 435

Democratic National Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . 374

Democratic Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Democrats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 63, 431
Department of Homeland Security . . . . . . . . 447, 460
Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service . 281,
285, 376

Department of the Treasury, Puerto Rico . . . . . . 280, 281

Dianne Feinstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Dick Act of 1902 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Dick Act of 1903 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Direct and Indirect taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
Direct Taxation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 269, 274, 290
Direct Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 267, 268, 270, 283
District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 168, 169
District Attorney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
District of Columbia, et al. v. Heller . . . . . . 179, 183, 343
District of Columbia vs. Heller . . . 466, 467, 468, 470, 472
Divide and Conquer 87, 119, 353, 370, 393, 410, 427, 443, 492
Domestic Foreign Terrorist . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406, 407
Domestic Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384
Donald Rumsfeld . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Donkeys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Drivers Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149, 277
Dr. Susan Gratia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
Duties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 267, 268
Dwight Eisenhower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

E
Economic PROPERTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Economic SLAVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232, 233
Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
Efficiency of Militia Bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152, 210

497

Elephants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Eminent Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244, 416
Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334, 335
Energy crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Enforcement powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Enumerated powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
Enumerated Powers Act . . . . . . . . . . . . 187, 202, 490
Enumerated Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Enumeration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 270
Equitable ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Equitable Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242, 243, 245, 492
Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Equity court . . 173, 177, 215, 242, 261, 285, 291, 312, 416, 475
Equity, courts of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Equity Law Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201, 203, 220
Excise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 267, 293
Excise Taxable Event or Occupation . . . . . . . . . 312, 314
Excise Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Executive Branch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 190
Executive Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
Executive Order 10289 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Executive Order 11110 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380, 486
Executive Order 12803 . . . . . . . . 72, 300, 304, 306, 360
Executive Order 13037 . 72, 231, 254, 263, 306, 319, 360, 365
Executive Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223, 484
Executive Powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Executive Privileges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Exemption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Extortion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293, 294

F
Fair Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
False Flag . 78, 333, 340, 356, 357, 377, 378, 407, 454, 459, 477,

487, 488

Fascism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
FBI Crime Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420, 428
FDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Federal citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Federal Communications Commission . . . . . . . . . 350
Federal corporation . . . . 16, 27, 60, 157, 164, 234, 238, 472
Federal Emergency Management Agency . . . . . . 393, 403
Federal Government . . . . . . . . . . . . 190, 234, 468, 472
Federal Government corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Federal Government powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
Federalist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Federalist Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Federal Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Federal Register . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 301
Federal Register Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Federal Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438, 485, 486

498

Index

Federal Reserve Act of 1913 . . . . . . . . . . . . 381, 486

Federal Reserve Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
Federal Reserve Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243, 381
Federal Reserve System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
Fee Simple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242, 244
Fee Simple Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
FEMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403, 404, 424
Fiction of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417, 418, 419, 433, 436
Fiction of Law Legal Lie 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
Fiction of Law Legal Lie 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
Fiction of Law Legal Lie 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
Fiction of Law Legal Lie 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
Filing Requirement Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Financial crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 462, 485
Fire Scout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
FISA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91, 92, 214
FISA court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Flat Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
FLDS Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204, 344, 345
Flip flopping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Flu Summit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Food and Drug Administration . . . . . . . . . . 249, 253
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) . . . . . 91, 214
Founding Fathers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147, 210, 445, 460
Founding Lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Fourteenth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482, 483
Fraud . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160, 356
Free . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 181, 231
Freedom of Information Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
Freedom of Information Act Request . . . . . . . . . . 310
Free Juries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) . . . . . . . . . 73
Frontrunners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298, 299
Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
203

Fund gold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299

G
Gabi Swank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273, 274
Gardasil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250, 252, 253, 303
Gary Hart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) . . . . 73
General Alexander Karpov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
General Yevgeni Primakov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act .
487

Geneva Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73, 75, 488

George Herbert W. Bush . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

George McGovern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

George Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
GIVE Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Global Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64, 69, 96
Global Hawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
Globalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Globalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Gods Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Government license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346
Government of the District of Columbia . 278, 282, 393, 468
Government permit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346
Governor Rick Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Great Depression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Gun Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382, 383
Gun Control Lie 417, 419, 422, 424, 426, 428, 429, 432, 436,
490

H
H1N1 Swine flu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487, 488
Habeas Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
Harmony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Health crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Henry Kissinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107, 369
Herbert Hoover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Hierarchy of Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Hillary Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Hitler . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 78, 87, 395, 396, 459, 488
HIV AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366, 369, 373, 488
Holy Grail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
Homeland Security . . . 50, 84, 85, 87, 185, 208, 339, 396, 454
Hotlining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
H. R. 11654 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Human Capital 231, 232, 250, 306, 310, 317, 319, 360, 363, 365,

379, 383, 418, 453, 461

Human capital collateral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311

Human Wastage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487, 488

I
Idiot Legal Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
Illegal Tax Protestor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320
Illuminati . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 67, 78, 235, 293, 337, 355
Illuminati Elite . . . . . 357, 362, 363, 364, 369, 374, 379, 427
IMF Filing Requirement Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
Immediate incarceration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Impeachment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Implementing Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Imposts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 267, 268
INALIENABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Income Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225, 276, 283

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES
Income Tax Act of 1944 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
Income Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224, 348, 491
Indirect Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 270
Individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226, 264
Individual Master File (IMF) . . . . . . . . . . 310, 312, 313
Inferior Courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Informant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
INJUSTICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Internal Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388, 389, 391
internal revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279, 295, 309, 325
internal Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279, 309
Internal Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279, 295, 309, 325
Internal Revenue Agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Internal Revenue Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Internal Revenue Code 501 (c) (3) corporations . . . . . 276
Internal Revenue Code of 1954 . . . . . . . . 279, 282, 309
Internal Revenue Service . 213, 216, 224, 240, 243, 277, 279,
280, 309, 491

Internal Revenue Service of Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . . 290

International Association of Chiefs of Police . . . . 388, 391
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development . .
297, 299, 300, 321, 323

International courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

International Monetary Fund (IMF) 299, 300, 321, 323, 486,

491

International Treaties . . . . . . . . 192, 254, 304, 443, 444

International Treaty . . . . . . . . . . . . 79, 341, 443, 490
Interstate commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . 156, 159, 236, 276
Interstate Commerce Commission . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Involuntary Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289, 290
IRS Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
IRS systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311, 312, 313, 314
IRS Taxpayer person or individual . . . . . . . . . . . . 291

J
Judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Judicial Branch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 190
Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Juror . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
Jury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260, 285
Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409, 410

K
Kent State shootings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451
John Kerry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Kickback Racket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319, 320
King George . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324
Kings Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

L
Lady Liberty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

499

LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Lawful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Lawful allodial title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Lawful CHOICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249, 251
Lawful citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
Lawful Common Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171, 483
Lawful compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Lawful Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
Lawful Constitutional courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Lawful Constructive Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Lawful contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
Lawful decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474
Lawful direct Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
Lawful due process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
Lawful Due Process of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
Lawful fact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139, 273, 275, 418
Lawful federal law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Lawful Federal position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
Lawful information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Lawful interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Lawful Interstate commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157, 239
Lawful jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 473
Lawful justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410, 411, 418, 466
Lawful laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Lawfully constitutional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471
Lawfully ratified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
Lawful Natural parent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Lawful Natural Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Lawful opinion . . . . . . . . . 182, 474, 475, 478, 479, 484
Lawful Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467
Lawful Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Lawful Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 418, 435
Lawful right to bear arms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
Lawful Second Amendment . . . . . . . . . . 437, 483, 484
Lawful Treaties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
LAW, MARTIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
Law of Conquest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50, 58, 76, 185, 419
Law of Nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Lawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 29, 260
Legal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 25, 241
Legal allodial title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Legal and Legitimate Commandments . . . . . . . . . 258
Legal CHOICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249, 251
Legal citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
Legal commercial paper contract . . . 239, 242, 244, 245, 247
Legal commercial transactions . . . . . . . . . . . 245, 247
Legal conscientious objector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Legal contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
Legal Corporate position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
Legal decision . . . . . . . . . . 182, 474, 475, 478, 479, 484
Legal Democracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 418, 435

500

Index

Legal Due Process of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278

LEGAL ESTATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Legal fact . . . . . . . . . . 139, 273, 275, 379, 418, 419, 456
Legal federal law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Legal Federal Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
Legal Fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 236, 294
Legal Fourteenth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
Legal Fraud . . 160, 216, 239, 243, 245, 290, 294, 295, 345, 356
Legal information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Legal interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Legal Interstate commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157, 239
Legal jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473
Legal justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410, 418, 466
Legal laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Legal law unconstitutional statute . . . . . . . . . . . . 456
Legally ratified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
Legally reasonable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471
Legal martial law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
Legal martial law procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
Legal Natural rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Legal official decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474
Legal opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473, 474
Legal precedent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Legal Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 466, 484, 489
Legal Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Legal right to bear arms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
Legal Second Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437, 483
Legal sovereignty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490
Legal Statutory courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Legal Statutory Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
Legal systems of common law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Legal Title . . . . . . . . . . . . 241, 242, 243, 245, 424, 492
Legal Treason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90, 91, 92
Legal Treaties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
Legal U.S. Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
Legislative Branch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 190
Legislative court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162, 172
Legislative Powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303, 304
Legit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
Legitimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
License . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
License Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Local Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Logrolling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Lubys cafeteria massacre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212

M
Mandatory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488
Mandatory vaccination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487, 488
Manufacturer Statement of Origin . . . . . . . . . . . 244

Marriage License . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247, 345

Martial Law . . . . . . . . 303, 404, 420, 422, 423, 424, 457
Martial law procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Menactra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
Militia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151, 209
Militia Act of 1903 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Militia Statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
Miscellaneous trust funds, Department of State . . . . . 295
Money Laundering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Moonlighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Mortgage crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Motor Vehicle Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349, 403

N
NAFTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
National Emergency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
National Guard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
National Institute of Standards and Technology . . . . . 408
National Labor Relations Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
National Rifle Association (NRA) . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
National Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
National Security Action Memorandum #273 . . . . . . 380
National Security Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392, 393
National Security Memorandum #555657 . . . . . . . 381
Nation of laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Nation of men . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
NATO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
Natural Born Citizen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222, 225
Natural Right 33, 45, 47, 150, 210, 218, 222, 318, 345, 412, 419,
441, 444, 456

Natural Rights MOVEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Natural Supplements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Natural Vitamins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Nazi Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Negligent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
New Deal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 325, 488
Newton (Newt) Gingrich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
NEW WORLD ORDER 53, 64, 69, 76, 86, 91, 254, 279, 335,
362, 374, 391, 393, 419, 420, 439, 451, 467, 484, 488

NISI PRIUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Nontaxpayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284, 285, 296, 313
Non Taxpayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) . . . . 73
North Atlantic Treaty Organization . . . . . . . . 254, 468
Notice of Levy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278, 281
Notwithstanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444, 445
NRA v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483, 484, 489
NSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392

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

O
Official story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349, 350
Oklahoma City bombing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398, 399
Oleg Kalugin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
One Subject at a Time Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Open Carry Gun Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458
Organic Constitution . . . . . . 147, 163, 266, 278, 417, 441
Organic Constitution for the United States of America . 224
Organized militia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Original Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Original Constitution for the United States of America . 490
Original Second Amendment . . . . . . . . . 483, 484, 489
Original Tenth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Origin of AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366
Osama Bin Laden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
Overt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
Overt terrorism 356, 357, 363, 377, 379, 380, 383, 401, 402, 407

P
Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules . . . . 36, 92, 280, 309
Parental consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345, 346
Parental Rights . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 23, 33, 254, 318, 441
Parental Rights Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441
PASS Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Patriot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Patriot Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50, 83, 92, 396, 454, 460
Pay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Pearl Harbor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Pentagon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
Permit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452
Person . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 24, 157, 158, 226, 264, 265
Personal Convictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Pharmaceutical companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Philippine special fund (customs duties) . . . . . . . . . 295
Philippine special fund (internal revenue) . . . . . 281, 295
Philippines Trust #2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
PHYSICAL SLAVERY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
Pledge of allegiance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Politically Correct . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117, 161, 214, 471
Politically Correctly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
Politically Incorrect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161, 214, 338
Political party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Political Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Predator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
President Franklin D. Roosevelt . . . . . . . . . . . . 74, 77
President Gerald Ford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 369
President Jimmy Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 369
President Richard Nixon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 369
Presidential Action Memorandum . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
Presidential Executive Orders . . . . 300, 301, 303, 380, 422

501

Presidential Proclamations . . . . . . . . . 301, 303, 380, 484

Prima Facie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Private army . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
Private Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Proclamation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273, 274
Proper name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
Property Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . 243, 271, 276, 350, 416
Proportion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 270
Protect America Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91, 93, 214, 396
Public Demonstration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
Public Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45, 190
Public Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Puerto Rico special fund (Internal Revenue) . . . . 281, 295
Puerto Rico Trust #62 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Purpose of Government . . . . . . . . . . . . 148, 150, 153
Purse String Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

Q
Quarantine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Queen Elizabeth . . . . . . . . . 323, 325, 326, 349, 445, 491

R
Radio Frequency Identification Chips (RIFD) . . . 256, 257
Raises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Read the Bills Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Real ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Real ID Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Reasonable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471
Reasonable legal laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416
Rebut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280, 313
Rebuttal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313, 314, 322
Republic 40, 42, 43, 153, 174, 182, 191, 221, 226, 231, 303, 328,

344, 350, 374, 378, 435, 459, 460

REPUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Republican National Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . 375
Republicans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 63, 431
Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
Revenue Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308, 388
Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185, 186, 187, 364
Revolutionary War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
RFID Chips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257, 488
Right of trial by jury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Right-to-Carry permits . . . . . . . . . . 420, 452, 453, 460
Rudy Giuliani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Rule of Apportionment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268, 270
Rule of Criminal Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Rule of law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418, 419
Rule of Uniformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270, 271
Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

502

Index

Rules of Civil Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174, 177

Ruth Bader Ginsburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107, 179

S
Saddam Hussein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
Sandra Day OConnor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107, 179
Second Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . 318, 449, 484, 489
Second American Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Secretary of State . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439, 440, 442, 443
Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico . . . . . . 280, 309
Secret Biological Weapon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373, 374
Secret court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Secret East German State Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Secret Yea or Nay votes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Senator Chris Dodd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Separation of Powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167, 181, 183
Silver Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Single Issue Voter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 427
Skull and Bones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127, 401, 437
Slave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Slave Surveillance Number . . . . . . . . . 74, 155, 323, 326
Socialism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Social Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
Social Security Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
Social Security Administration Act of 1992 325, 326, 349, 445
Social Security Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323, 326
Social Security System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
Solicitor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Someone Hired Internal Terrorists (S. H. I. T.) . . . 126, 243
Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
Source of income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
Sovereign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 448, 455, 459, 460
Sovereign American Citizens 96, 182, 244, 441, 444, 462, 490
Sovereign American Juror . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Sovereign Nations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Sovereign Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Sovereign States Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Sovereignty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Soviet secret service KGB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Special Interest Hired Internal Terrorists (S. H. I. T.) 243, 252
Special trust fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
Special War Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
Split Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
Squibs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 40, 475
State Constitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
State Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
State Income Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
Statutes at Large . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Statutory Law . . . . . . 50, 171, 172, 174, 177, 217, 291, 473

Stock Market crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Straw Man . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Substitute For Return (SFR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312, 313
Super Delegate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101, 338
Superior court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162, 178
Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178, 277, 428
SUPREME COURT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179, 343
Supreme Court Justices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 480
Supreme Court Opinions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474
Supreme Law of the Land 13, 143, 234, 418, 453, 456, 457, 458,
462, 480, 482

Swine flu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374, 467, 487, 488

Syphilis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373

T
Tacit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26, 247, 467
Tacit agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Tacit Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26, 159, 248, 260, 466
Tacit legal agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Tacit understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
TAXES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
Taxes of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico . . . . 308, 309
Tax Identification Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
Taxpaid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Taxpayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283, 284, 290, 299, 313, 376
Taxpayer individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Taxpayer person . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Taxpayer person or individual . . . . . . . . . 290, 296, 297
Taxpayers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284, 296
Tax protester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284, 285
Tenth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Territorial areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Territorial Citizen . . . . . . 10, 14, 36, 96, 225, 282, 472, 475
Territorial Citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
Territorial Courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
Territorial UNITED STATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Terror . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Tetrasil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370
Texas Financial Responsibility Program . . . . . . . . . 245
Thermite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
The System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . 372
Title 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
Title 22 section 286 United States Code . . . . . . 298, 299
Title 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307, 308
Title 27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307, 308
Title 27, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms . . . . . . . . 38

American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES
Title 28 Section 3002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 391, 451
Title 31 USC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279, 281, 295
Toll checkpoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
Toll Tag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
Toll Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
Trade and Globalization Assistance Act (TAA) . . . . . . 90
Traitor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184, 186, 217
Traitorously . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Treason . . . . . . . . . 108, 146, 183, 184, 217, 283, 304, 356
Treasury Silver Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Treaty Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Tribunals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Tri-Lateral Commission . 52, 60, 65, 71, 80, 95, 235, 320, 337,
381, 382

Truth is the Perception of the Majority 2, 3, 8, 26, 27, 44, 107,

109, 119, 149, 153, 218, 231, 234, 247, 261, 303, 322, 330, 336,
341, 345, 360, 379, 403, 408, 409, 418, 435, 450, 454, 462, 476,
483, 493

U
UNALIENABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 48
Uncle Sam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80, 453
Unconstitutional law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456, 457
Unconstitutional statutes . . . . . . . 456, 459, 460, 471, 473
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child . 254, 255, 442,
443, 445

Underage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344, 345, 346

Uniform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) . . 23, 233, 234, 235, 236
Uniformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
United Nations . . . . . . . . . 52, 71, 74, 254, 335, 374, 419
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 13, 16, 40
UNITED STATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 176
United States Citizen . . . . . . . . . . 10, 13, 14, 23, 36, 96
United States Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 34, 279
United States Code Title 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
United States Code Title 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
United States Code Title 28 Section 3002 16, 36, 60, 393, 412
United States Code (USC) Title 28 . . . . . . . . . . . 24
UNITED STATES Federal corporation . 232, 235, 236, 243,
244, 246, 250, 269, 277, 281, 309, 310, 362, 363, 417, 420, 433,
435, 479, 491

United States Federal Government . . . . . . . . . . . 310

UNITED STATES Matrix . . . . . . 91, 265, 363, 391, 492
united States of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
United States of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA . . . . . . . . . 13, 177
United States Statutes at Large . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 300
United States Tax courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
United States v. Cruikshank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428
Universal Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
Unlawful commercial transaction . . . . . . . . . . 247, 250

503

Unmanned aerial system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
Unorganized militia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
USA PATRIOT Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92, 214
U. S. Federal corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
U. S. school systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250

V
Vaccinate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Vaccinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Value in controversy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Venue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Victory Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
Voluntary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 287
Voluntary compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289, 312

W
Warren vs. District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468
War tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
Whoever . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
Withholding Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269, 277, 282
Word of Art . . . 10, 34, 84, 225, 226, 364, 418, 447, 448, 471
World Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96, 337
World Health Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
World Trade Organization (WTO) . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Write the Laws Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Writ of Habeas Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

X
Y
Z

YOU HAVE REACHED THE END OF THE FREE TWO CHAPTERS OF OUR REFERENCE BOOK.

To purchase the complete book: American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change
in the UNITED STATES or to get the next chapter on the subject of Government, please go
to our website at http://www.americanfreedombooks.com/. Our Free chapters of information were
designed to inform the American people of the Truth regarding the Fictitious UNITED STATES,
and give our customers a sample of the valuable American Freedom reference guide before purchase.
Subsequent chapter titles filled with information resulting from years of research are as follows:
Government
Politics
Constitution
Proposed Constitution for the Newstates of America
Bill of Rights and other Articles of Amendment
Contracts of Ownership and Title
Internal Revenue Service and Taxes
Mainstream Media and Mind Control
War and Terrorism
Second Amendment
Conclusion
Each chapter exposes in detail the legal and unlawful laws used by the majority of our governmental
representatives to enslave the American people WITHOUT OUR KNOWLEDGE OR
CONSENT. Knowledge being Power, once the people of the Real United States know the specifics
behind the legal tactics being used by certain representatives of the Fictitious UNITED STATES,
the restoration of our Freedoms will be under OUR lawful constitutional control. American Freedom
A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED STATES is a unique publication.
The multi-colored printed Reference Book can be used as a color-coded indexed resource manual,
providing valuable information American Patriots need to restore the Sovereignty and Freedom
of the American people. In eBook format, our three color indexed resource manual is a powerful
searchable PDF (Portable Document Format) file allowing the user to find information in an instant.
The eBook format additionally supplies volumes of source and reference material from the Internet
to your computer with a mouse click. To our knowledge, American Freedom is the only publication
chronicling this massive amount of freedom information in one Reference Book.
After you have purchased the book at http://www.americanfreedombooks.com/, please tell all your
friends about American Freedom A Conversation with America For Change in the UNITED
STATES.
AMERICAN FREEDOM BOOKS and TRUTH IN PUBLISHING, LLC thank you for your
interest in our products and your desire to obtain the required knowledge needed to secure your
American Freedom from the Fictitious UNITED STATES.