UPDATED: January 15, 2001

First Amendment Right's
Freedom of Speech

There are only two sides to the question here, you either support what the founding intentions and meanings of the original Constitution and Bill of Rights are, state, and mean; and in turn support the "real" founding principal's of our nation as stated by one of the Author's of the Bill of Rights, Thomas Jefferson, or you do not - it is just that plain and simple. This is the formula that distinguishes the real American's and patriots, from those that would seek to destroy the real and true meanings of what our great Nation stands for. Those in Congress, who continue to abuse and misconstruct the United States Constitution, and who refuse to support and defend, the principles and rights therein enumerated, are nothing more than Roundheads, traitors, and usurpers of the rightful and just government of this Nation. Others in Congress who refuse to stand up and admit what there fellow members are, and what they are doing to the Constitution and to this Nation, are no better.

Supporting the Constitution properly is very simple. For those in Congress, their first, and therefore primary duty in supporting the United States Constitution, is to strictly adhere to the restrictive and declaratory clauses placed on them and their power by the Constitution. Everything that members of Congress do, while in their official title and/or color, must be by the Supreme "Rule of Law" of the United States, and that is the United States Constitution. No other Rule of Law, by virtue and authority of the United States Constitution itself, stands above the Supreme Law of the United States Constitution. Any member of Congress or others outside of Congress, who would other wise challenge that fact, should rethink their position in terms of what being "hostile" to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution really means.

For those outside of Congress and government, their first and primary duty in supporting the United States Constitution, is to read it and become familiar with it. Voting and becoming more familiar with the process of how this Nation works and operates, is a vital and essential element to the maintenance of a healthy and free society, and absolutely necessary to the viability and maintenance of the United States Constitution.

The ABC's of Supporting the Constitution are simple. It is every individuals duty; To preserve, to protect, and to defend the Constitution. Could it be any easier or simpler. Apparently there are those in Congress and elsewhere in United States government that find this a difficult, if not impossible task to follow.

I. Republicans and others that favor a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning and other types of flag desecration.

Representatives Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) and John Murtha (D-PA) have announced that they are introducing a bill proposing a constitutional amendment which would prohibit flag desecration. No doubt, this new bill will probably be a near duplicate of S.J.Res 40, which failed to pass the Senate of the 105th Congress. In fact, that bill never made it out of Senate Committee.

The conservative and knee-jerking radical right's in Congress will not be happy until they have completely and utterly destroyed the constitutional rights of the American people.

Why another attempt to pass a flag burning amendment? [Other than the excuse that the conservative radical right continues to be stupid and traitorous.]

The action was prompted by the Supreme Court's ruling (opinion), in a case that had been presented to them, Texas v. Johnson. The ruling by the Supreme Court, according to Senator Hatch (UT), Senator Domenici, and other conservative radicals like Representatives Cunningham (R-CA) and Murtha (D-PA), made flag burning a legitimate exercise of free speech.

Following is the content of a letter mailed to Sherwood C. Ensey from United States Senator Pete Domenici - New Mexico, dated July 8, 1998, and received on July 24, 1998.

Thank you for contacting me about the issue of flag burning. I appreciate knowing your views. Although I am sure we have similar views on many issues, we may have to agree to have a difference of opinion on this issue.

The Supreme Court has overturned a law which prohibited flag burning. This law was passed by the Congress in response to the Supreme Court's opinion in Texas vs. Johnson. The ruling made the burning of the American flag a legitimate exercise of free speech.

Like you, I believe that the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech, is one of the fundamental freedoms the Founding Fathers sought to protect since it is the basis for every other freedom we enjoy. However, in the past the Supreme Court has ruled that freedom of speech is not an absolute freedom. For example, it is unlawful to yell "fire" in a crowded auditorium, and it is also illegal to threaten to harm the President of the United States.

As you know, on February 4, 1998, Senator Hatch introduced S.J.Res. 40, a resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States. It has been referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary for consideration.

While I believe we must protect the right of every American citizen to speak freely, there is a difference between speaking freely and desecrating the American flag. In my opinion the act of desecrating the American flag goes beyond the mere expression of a point of view; it is a violent act against the symbol of our Nation.

I have the deepest reverence for the United States Constitution, and I do not believe it should be amended casually.

In this case, I believe the American flag and all it represents deserves the protection of our laws. Therefore, I have decided to support this particular resolution.

Disagreement and debate is critical to ensuring that our democracy remains vibrant and represents the views of the American people. Although we disagree on the issue of flag burning, I hope you will continue to keep me apprised of your views on other issues. Again, thank you for contacting me.

Sincerely,
Pete

Pete V. Domenici
United States Senator

PVD: ver

END OF LETTER

II. Opposition to a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning and other types of flag desecration.

Here is a public and open response to the letter sent by United States Senator Pete Domenici - New Mexico, and to all others who would agree that "We the People" need another arbitrary and binding law to further strengthen the peoples bonds to unwanted conservative radical right imposed slavery.

Yes, Senator Domenici, Representatives Cunningham and Murtha, we do have to agree that on the point of flag burning vs. constitutional freedoms and liberties, we in fact do disagree on this issue.

The ruling (opinion) that the Supreme Court handed down in Texas v. Johnson according to flag burning opponents was a ruling legitimizing flag burning. While it may outwardly appear that was the intent of the ruling, according to Senator Hatch, Senator Domenici, the majority of the Republican Party and others, that is clearly not what the Supreme Court implied. What the court and a majority of the justices did imply, is that in the case of Texas v. Johnson, the need to uphold and protect the Second Clause of the First Article of the Bill of Rights, ie; freedom of speech, and the Constitution, far outweighed the need to protect one of our National Symbols, the flag of the United States of America.

So far the only countries on this planet that have had a need to protect their national flags against desecration, as it turns out, are those countries that turn out to be the most repressive and abusive towards the Natural Rights and Laws of the masses of people. Is this really the type of company that the United States wants to be in leagues with - or is it an early indicator of what the conservative radicals of Congress have planned for the American people? Congresses already lousy record towards the masses of American people, would tell the smart man, that it is clearly an indicator of what Congress has in store for us as a supposedly free people.

The decision that the Supreme Court handed down in Texas v. Johnson was the correct and only proper course of action that the court could make, and here is the answer to why; the First Clause of the First Article of the Bill of Rights states that Congress shall make no law respecting.... The courts know what the intentions of the wording are here, and of the mind of the Author of the Bill of Rights, Thomas Jefferson, to know that this clause means what it says: that Congress is prohibited by the provisions of the wording, Congress shall make no law respecting..., to make (create or propose), any law that would damage or reduce the mass of the peoples rights, to the basic human rights contained in the First Article of the Bill of Rights. No law, also means the creation and passage of legislation to propose a constitutional amendment to make such a law, because in effect Congress is creating the law. Are you listening to this Senator Hatch and Domenici, and all others in Congress who are supporting this unlawful and highly un-American piece of legislation that is motivated by nothing more than the selfish desire to reduce more precious basic human rights in the name of tyranny and greed.

So in reality the courts have told Congress, by ruling to uphold freedom of speech, and the First Article of the Bill of Rights, is that Congress is bound by the strict constitutional obligation to make no law which would impair, alter, or harm in any manner the provisions of the First Article of the Bill of Rights.

Thomas Jefferson was fond of all or nothing, and the wording that Congress shall make no law respecting..., is a clear example of that thinking. All of the Clauses in the First Article of the Bill of Rights are all or nothing! The American people have the basic human rights contained in the First Article of the Bill of Rights or they don't, and Congress has no right to infringe on those most basic of human rights that belong to the masses of the people. Thomas Jefferson was clear in this when he authored the Bill of Rights, especially the Preamble to it. Take a moment to pause and reflect on the words that make up the Preamble to the Bill of Rights. [Note: Contrary to the disinformation specialists with the conservative radical right, there is indeed a Preamble to the Bill of Rights, and it was and still is a necessary ingredient to properly interpreting the intentions and meanings of those who authored the United States Constitution. It is doubtful if any of the Bill of Rights would have passed ratification if it were not for the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, because it is the Preamble that gives the Bill of Rights it's true intent and meaning; That Congress is not to misconstruct or abuse the powers of either the main body of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. To bad that the conservative radical right does not know the real moral difference between right and wrong, when it comes to their abusing, tampering with, and misconstructing the Constitution!]

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their ADOPTING the CONSTITUTION expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the SENATE and HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of the United States of America in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, That the following articles be proposed to the legislatures of the several states, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution, viz.

The First Clause to the First Article of the Bill of Rights is such a declaratory and restrictive clause, and it is aimed at Congress in order to prevent them from misconstructing or abusing their constitutional power and authority to circumvent or harm in any manner the basic human rights of the people, as enumerated to in the Bill of Rights, Constitution, viz.

Senator Domenici, the freedoms in the First Article are more than just fundamental, they are natural and basic American human rights that have been guaranteed to the masses of the people by such great men as Thomas Jefferson and Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black.

Yes it is unlawful to yell "fire" in a crowded auditorium, and it is illegal to threaten to harm the President of the United States. It should also be just as unlawful for a Senator or Congressman to get up and run around the Capitol yelling "fire" over flag burning, especially sitting in the precarious positions that Congress has put themselves into with the masses of the people, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights over this issue and others. Look at it like this Senator Domenici, there is no doubt in anyone's mind as to the great harm done if someone yell's "fire" in a crowded area, and people are physically harmed by such actions, but when the right to express something is restricted severely when no one is physically harmed by nothing more than an insult to someone's opinion - then tell me, where has the greatest harm been done in that situation. It is easy to tell you where the greatest harm has been done, it has been done to the guaranteed basic human rights of the masses of American people, and it has been done to the "true" republican rights and principles within the United States Constitution.

Whipping people up into a frenzy in support of such legislation and laws that will in the end result in more restrictions to their basic and inherent rights as a human being in a civilized world, is nothing less than barbaric and cruel. Those in support of this amendment should be ashamed of wanting to promote more of a repressive society and turning the clocks back a thousand years. Hey guys, what happened to building the bridge to the 21st century and the future? Looks more like we found a time warp back to the dark ages and real nasty slavery.

Is there something that Congress and the Federal government is not telling us? Uh, huh, you can bet there is!

Sometimes all that may be left to a particular individual as a freedom of speech, against the unfair and abusive actions of an overly oppressive state, is flag burning or even urinating on it. While I do not condone the actions to do such an act or do I encourage such behavior, I will defend the right of another to have the right to choose such an expression as their freedom of speech. Remember, the First Article is either all or nothing. We may not always like it, we may not always agree with it, but freedom of speech is what it is, and it was established within the Bill of Rights and made a part of the Constitution to guarantee to us, We the People, that we would always have the right to express ourselves in a manner sufficient to the treatment of us by those in power.

The intentions of the First Article of the Bill of Rights are clear and the consistent tampering with by of this Article, by members of Congress, is nothing short of morally and constitutionally criminal. In fact it is treason!

The Constitution and Bill of Rights are the soul and spirit of America, and if you remove that by further tampering with basic American and natural human rights - then more than the "republic" of America will have passed on; the very soul and spirit of America itself will have died.

The conservative radical right's opinion that the desecrating of the American flag goes beyond the mere expression of a point of view, and that it is a violent act against the symbol of our Nation is an absurd act of rationality and thought brought on by unfounded tendencies and manipulation. Here, chew on this quote for awhile, by a Federalist that got fed up with conservative radical right Federalist crap, and became a devout Anti-Federalist!

Have you Senator Hatch, Senator Domenici, and others in favor of the flag burning amendment decided that the United States needs to be ranked right alongside Rome, Nazi Germany, and Communist "Stalinist" Russia? These countries all decided that they needed laws to protect their national symbols and flags. Are these really the "models" that you look up to as being good and decent examples to the rest of the world and to the masses of people? America and its people deserve more than being ranked alongside those countries, and the people of America deserve alot more than what they are getting, and have been getting from Congress.

To those in Congress that still support the flag burning amendment and that would continue to tamper with the basic human rights of the American people, this advice is offered in kindness, and with deep constitutional sincerity about the truth and intentions of the Constitution.

The most important duty to the United States of America, is the "absolute" duty to constitutional protect and defend the United States Constitution. If there are those members of Congress who continually decide that going against the declaratory and restrictive clause, of the First Clause to the First Article of the Bill of Rights is the right thing to do, in light of all the Supreme Court rulings, and all the constitutional restrictions on abusing and misconstructing the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution, then these members of Congress stand accused of failing to do their constitutional duty to support, protect, and preserve the Constitution of the United States of America. These members of Congress stand accused of conspiracy to commit treason against the very Nation that they swore an oath to defend and support.

While you may believe that you are right, Senator Domenici and Senator Hatch, according to Thomas Jefferson and Hugo Black, you and the others that support the flag burning amendment stand publicly corrected. You are the ones in the wrong.

Don't you Senator Hatch, Senator Domenici, and others in Congress, feel that you owe the public a highly televised apology, for your parts in the continued and attempted "illegal" and unconstitutional removal of more of the basic human rights that belong to the masses of American people? Or is it just the same old rhetoric of continuing to screw the American people and foul up the Constitution as usual?

The Author of this article has an American lineage and heritage that goes back in America for 364 years, and includes three ancestors killed in the American Revolution. In that time the author's family has learned very well what it takes to be a real American and patriot. Supporting any legislation that would further remove or erode the basic human rights of the masses of American people, to benefit an unconstitutional flag burning amendment proposed by a "select few" seriously misguided Americans, is not what being a "true" patriot and an American is all about. Being a "true" American and patriot requires that we defend and support the Constitution, and not diminish it in any manner.

Don't let the elements of the conservative Radical Religious Right in Congress and elsewhere, unconstitutionally dictate to the masses of people in America what their basic American human rights will, or will not be. Don't be fooled by the intentions of those in Congress, for the most part they are all nothing but wolves in sheeps clothing - and only care about the financial results that they can gain from you the people, their ever obedient slaves. Finally, stop and think about who in the long run will gain the most, and who will lose from the severe harm that will be done to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by an attack on the constitutional First Amendment, "absolute" right of Free Speech.

It will be the masses of people that will lose the most, because once Congress and the federalists have taken one part of your free speech away from you, they are then ENTITLED to take away the remainder of your free speech, because you allowed those "select few" in power to do so the first time.

Here are two examples of federalist erosion's of basic American human right's, under the First Article of the Bill of Rights. First, look at what has happened to freedom of religion and the Federal governments direct involvement with supporting Christianity and the monotheistic belief. As a result of Federal interference with freedom of religion, the separation of church and state does not exist, as called for by the full intent of the First Article, and as a result their is a state sanctioned religion in place. Secondly, the 11th Amendment to the Bill of Rights and other highly questionable acts of past Congresses, has effectively removed the mass of the people's rights under the First Amendment to petition their government for any type of effective redress of grievances. [Note: As of March 21, 1999, no one in the United States Government has responded in any type of satisfactory manner, to, "The serving of Case No.: No. 18-9-456372-9 upon the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches of United States government," which is an Official Constitutional Redress of Grievances filed by the Petitioner(s) mentioned in the case.]

It would be well for the masses of people to also remember that Congress itself is directly, and currently disregarding the instructions of the First Clause of the First Article to the Bill of Rights, by disregarding the instructions that, Congress shall make no law respecting...., or prohibiting...., or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;.... The instructions could not be any clearer, and it should have been clear to Congress when the Supreme Court handed down their ruling on Texas v. Johnson, but in case it is not; Congress can not constitutionally, and therefore legally, make any law (that includes Legislation to create an amendment that would create a law) that would violate the rights of the masses of people under the First Article of the Bill of Rights.

As long as those Republicans and others in Congress keep on with the issue of creating a law to respect the American flag and prohibit flag burning, they remain in utter disregard of supporting the Constitution and Bill of Rights instructions not to create such a law, and the Supreme Court's instructions that such a law is unconstitutional. To keep up the pursuit in light of what has been presented here, would in the very least appear to be a highly "impeachable" offense, since what those Republicans and others in Congress are doing is not to protect and defend the Constitution, but to destroy and abuse the Constitution by withdrawing their protection and defense of the Constitution. How much more TREASON and ABUSE are the masses of people in the United States expected to deal with from their elected members of Congress before enough is enough?

Freedom of Speech
The Backbone of Basic American Human Rights

United States Bill of Rights - Read the original Bill of Rights as it was presented to the several states and then ratified by them. This is the "unrevised version" and shows the Preamble and other important wording that was intentionally left out of the federalist revised version of the Bill of Rights. Also includes the two Articles that were not ratified by the States. This is the correct and proper version of the Bill of Rights, that was ratified by the several states. This is not the federalist revised version that is generally found in most government sources and almost all textbooks available.
Bill of Rights

Want to know more about what has already been said, and about the "silent conspiracy" that has been destroying the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and the American people themselves? Then click the flag to go to FEDCON: Death of the American Republic, book section. This is the book that exposes the great, but no longer silent conspiracy that the people have been hearing about for generations. Find out for yourself who and what is destroying America. Discover that there are positive solution's to today's problems and that these solution's are within reach of the masses of the people. Over twenty years of research went into the making of this book. Make a FREE copy for yourself or a friend, some restrictions apply, see book section for more details.

Read the poem written especially for the flag of our Nation and begin to understand the real meaning of what the flag represents. Old Glory!

Back to the F.A.C.T.S. Directory page

Want to know more about Freedom of Speech and your other constitutional rights. Then we encourage you to visit the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) at http://www.aclu.org

View the Congressional Bill's Pertaining to Flag Desecration

E-Mail