First Amendment Constitutional Redress of Government

John Ashcoft & S. J. RES. 40; In the United States Senate

John Ashcroft & The Religious Morals Issue

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES - Part 3

It is therefore with an ever abiding love for the Constitution, and for the preservation of the "republican" principles of the Constitution and of the American republic, for which the Constitution was established, and with the purpose and intent of establishing constitutional equality and justice for all Americans, that We the People of these United States, must hereby and forthwith, take the following corrective and/or constitutional legal action(s), in order to protect and preserve for our posterity, the integrity, virtue, and legality of the Constitution of the United States of America. We the People, do hereby openly attest to and charge any and/or every member(s) of Congress, who has taken part and/or purposely co-conspired in the creation of H. J. RES. 78, the Religious Freedom Amendment bill, with the charge of Conspiracy to Commit Treason and/or Treason itself. H. J. RES. 78, the Religious Freedom Amendment bill, is by virtue of intent and meaning an enemy to the Constitution of the United States, and therefore those in Congress who have conspired with the enemy, by giving their support, aid and comfort to the enemy, instead of to their constitutional obligation to support the Constitution, are by virtue of their harmful, abusive, and/or intentionally created adherence to the abridgment and/or misconstruction of the Constitution, traitors to the full intent and meaning of the Constitution as it was written and as was fully intended by Thomas Jefferson and other founders that framed the Constitution of the United States. Thomas Jefferson in 1807 while President of the United States: "The framers of our constitution certainly supposed they had guarded, as well their government against destruction by treason, as their citizens against oppression under pretense of it [treason]; and if these ends are not attained, it is of importance to inquire by what means, more effectual, they may be secured."

Further, that herein said named individuals are hereby further charged with Abuse of Power, Abuse of Office, and/or any other crimes as the Constitution and the law, and/or laws of the United States may allow and/or provide for.

Whereas, further qualification in support of redress of grievance VII is hereby found in Appendix A, page 62-92, of this redress of grievances, is therefore incorporated into, and made a part of these grievances.

Whereas, the stated charge(s) within this grievance, are being brought forth against said named individual and/or individuals, for their part in supporting, adhering to, and/or aiding in a conspiracy to willfully and intentionally abridge and/or misconstruct the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Date of support and/or positive [AYE or YEA] vote for the H. J. RES. 78, the Religious Freedom Amendment bill, is shown next to their names. Names and dates have been taken from the Congressional Record of the 105th Congress.

H. J. RES. 78, the Religious Freedom Amendment bill.
Rep Istook - 05/08/97.......................Rep Aderholt - 05/08/97
Rep Armey - 05/08/97......................Rep Bishop - 05/08/97
Rep Bachus - 05/08/97.....................Rep Baker, K - 05/08/97
Rep Ballenger - 05/08/97..................Rep Barcia - 05/08/97
Rep Barr - 05/08/97.........................Rep Barrett, B - 05/08/97
Rep Bartlett - 05/08/97.....................Rep Barton - 05/08/97
Rep Bliley - 05/08/97........................Rep Blunt - 05/08/97
Rep Bonilla - 05/08/97......................Rep Bunning - 05/08/97
Rep Burton - 05/08/97......................Rep Callahan - 05/08/97
Rep Calvert - 05/08/97.....................Rep Cambell, Tom - 05/08/97
Rep Chambliss - 05/08/97................Rep Chenoweth - 05/08/97
Rep Christensen - 05/08/97..............Rep Coburn - 05/08/97
Rep Collins, M - 05/08/97................Rep Combest - 05/08/97
Rep Condit - 05/08/97.....................Rep Cook - 05/08/97
Rep Crane - 05/08/97......................Rep Crapo - 05/08/97
Rep Cubin - 05/08/97......................Rep Cunningham - 05/08/97
Rep Deal - 05/08/97 ........................Rep DeLay - 05/08/97
Rep Diaz-Balart - 05/08/97..............Rep Dickey - 05/08/97
Rep Duncan - 05/08/97....................Rep Emerson - 05/08/97
Rep Everett - 05/08/97.....................Rep Flake - 05/08/97
Rep Gingrich - 05/08/97...................Rep Goode - 05/08/97
Rep Goodling - 05/08/97..................Rep Graham - 05/08/97
Rep Hall, R - 05/08/97.....................Rep Hansen - 05/08/97
Rep Hayworth - 05/08/97.................Rep Hefley - 05/08/97
Rep Herger - 05/08/97.....................Rep Hill - 05/08/97
Rep Hilleary - 05/08/97....................Rep Hoekstra - 05/08/97
Rep Hunter - 05/08/97.....................Rep Hutchinson - 05/08/97
Rep Inglis - 05/08/97........................Rep Johnson, S - 05/08/97
Rep Jones - 05/08/97.......................Rep Kasich - 05/08/97
Rep Kim - 05/08/97.........................Rep Kingston - 05/08/97
Rep LaHood - 05/08/97...................Rep Largent - 05/08/97
Rep Lewis, R - 05/08/97..................Rep Linder - 05/08/97
Rep Lipinski - 05/08/97....................Rep Livingston - 05/08/97
Rep Lucas - 05/08/97.......................Rep McCollum - 05/08/97
Rep McCrery - 05/08/97..................Rep McHugh - 05/08/97
Rep McInnis - 05/08/97....................Rep McIntosh - 05/08/97
Rep McKeon - 05/08/97..................Rep Mica - 05/08/97
Rep Myrick - 05/08/97.....................Rep Neumann - 05/08/97
Rep Norwood - 05/08/97 .................Rep Packard - 05/08/97
Rep Pappas - 05/08/97.....................Rep Parker - 05/08/97
Rep Paul - 05/08/97..........................Rep Paxon - 05/08/97
Rep Peterson, J - 05/08/97................Rep Pickering - 05/08/97
Rep Pitts - 05/08/98..........................Rep Pombo - 05/08/97
Rep Radanovich - 05/08/97...............Rep Rahall - 05/08/97
Rep Riley - 05/08/97.........................Rep Rogers - 05/08/97
Rep Rohrabacher - 05/08/97.............Rep Royce - 05/08/97
Rep Scarborough - 05/08/97.............Rep Schaffer - 05/08/97
Rep Sessions - 05/08/97....................Rep Skeen - 05/08/97
Rep Smith, C - 05/08/97....................Rep Smith, Linda - 05/08/97
Rep Snowbarger - 05/08/97...............Rep Solomon - 05/08/97
Rep Spence - 05/08/97......................Rep Stearns - 05/08/97
Rep Stenholm - 05/08/97...................Rep Tauzin - 05/08/97
Rep Taylor, C - 05/08/97...................Rep Taylor, G - 05/08/97
Rep Thornberry - 05/08/97.................Rep Thune - 05/08/97
Rep Tiahrt - 05/08/97.........................Rep Traficant - 05/08/97
Rep Wamp - 05/08/97........................Rep Watkins - 05/08/97
Rep Watts - 05/08/97.........................Rep Weldon, D - 05/08/97
Rep Whitfield - 05/08/97.....................Rep Wicker - 05/08/97
Rep Young, D - 05/08/97....................Rep Hastert - 06/04/97
Rep Hulshof - 06/04/97.......................Rep Ehlers - 06/04/97
Rep Hefner - 06/04/97........................Rep Souder - 06/04/97
Rep Boehner - 06/04/97......................Rep Manzullo - 06/04/97
Rep Sensenbrenner - 06/12/97............Rep Ney - 06/12/97
Rep Metcalf - 06/12/97.......................Rep Nussle - 06/12/97
Rep Goss - 06/12/97...........................Rep Dunn - 07/08/97
Rep Camp - 07/08/97.........................Rep Bateman - 07/08/97
Rep McIntyre - 07/08/97....................Rep Cooksey - 07/08/97
Rep Coble - 07/08/97........................Rep Redmond - 07/08/97
Rep Christian-Green - 07/08/97.........Rep Bereuter - 07/28/97
Rep Schaefer - 07/08/97...................Rep Gekas - 10/22/97
Rep Gibbons - 10/22/97...................Rep Hastings, D - 10/22/97
Rep Riggs - 10/22/97.......................Rep Shuster - 10/22/97
Rep Brady, Kevin - 10/22/97...........Rep Cannon - 10/22/97
Rep Peterson, C - 11/13/97.............Rep John - 01/28/98
Rep Goodlatte - 01/28/98 ................Rep Gallegly - 03/04/98
Rep Rogan - 03/24/98.....................Rep Oxley - 03/24/98
Rep Archer - 06/04/98....................Rep Bachus - 06/04/98
Rep Baesler - 06/04/98...................Rep Baker - 06/04/98
Rep Bass - 06/04/98.......................Rep Berry - 06/04/98
Rep Bilbray - 06/04/98....................Rep Bilirakis - 06/04/98
Rep Bishop - 06/04/98....................Rep Bryant - 06/04/98
Rep Burr - 06/04/98 .......................Rep Buyer - 06/04/98
Rep Canady - 06/04/98...................Rep Chabot - 06/04/98
Rep Clement - 06/04/98..................Rep Coble - 06/04/98
Rep Cox - 06/04/98........................Rep Cramer - 06/04/98
Rep Danner - 06/04/98...................Rep Davis (VA) - 06/04/98
Rep Doolittle - 06/04/98..................Rep Dreier - 06/04/98
Rep English - 06/04/98....................Rep Ensign - 06/04/98
Rep Ewing - 06/04/98.....................Rep Foley - 06/04/98
Rep Forbes - 06/04/98....................Rep Ford - 06/04/98
Rep Fossella - 06/04/98...................Rep Ganske - 06/04/98
Rep Gillmor - 06/04/98....................Rep Gordon - 06/04/98
Rep Gutknecht - 06/04/98...............Rep Hobson - 06/04/98
Rep Hyde - 06/04/98.......................Rep Jenkins - 06/04/98
Rep King (NY) - 06/04/98...............Rep Klug - 06/04/98
Rep Knollenberg - 06/04/98.............Rep Kolbe - 06/04/98
Rep Latham - 06/04/98....................Rep Lazio - 06/04/98
Rep LoBiondo - 06/04/98................Rep Moran (KS) - 06/04/98
Rep Nethercutt - 06/04/98...............Rep Ortiz - 06/04/98
Rep Pease - 06/04/98......................Rep Petri - 06/04/98
Rep Portman - 06/04/98..................Rep Pryce (OH) - 06/04/98
Rep Quinn - 06/04/98......................Rep Ramstad - 06/04/98
Rep Regula - 06/04/98.....................Rep Roemer - 06/04/98
Rep Ryun - 06/04/98........................Rep Salmon - 06/04/98
Rep Sandlin - 06/04/98.....................Rep Sanford - 06/04/98
Rep Shadegg - 06/04/98..................Rep Shimkus - 06/04/98
Rep Skelton - 06/04/98....................Rep Smith (MI) - 06/04/98
Rep Smith (NJ) - 06/04/98...............Rep Smith (OR) - 06/04/98
Rep Smith (TX) - 06/04/98..............Rep Sununu - 06/04/98
Rep Talent - 06/04/98......................Rep Tanner - 06/04/98
Rep Thomas - 06/04/98...................Rep Thompson - 06/04/98
Rep Turner - 06/04/98.....................Rep Upton - 06/04/98
Rep Walsh - 06/04/98.....................Rep Weldon (PA) - 06/04/98
Rep Weldon (FL) - 06/04/98...........Rep Weller - 06/04/98
Rep Wolf - 06/04/98........................Rep Young (AK) - 06/04/98
Rep Young (FL) - 06/04/98

The following individual and/or individuals are hereby openly charged with Treason and/or Conspiracy to Commit Treason, Abuse of Power, Abuse of Office, and/or any other crimes as the law and/or laws of the United States may allow and/or provide for. These charges are being brought forth against below named individual and/or individuals, for their part in supporting, S. J. RES. 48, a bill (resolution) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States restoring religious freedom. These charges are hereby being brought forth against the following individual(s), for their part in aiding and/or supporting an unconstitutional criminal conspiracy to willfully and intentionally abridge and/or misconstruct the First Article of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution.

Sen Inhofe - 06/04/98.....................Sen Faircloth - 06/04/98

Let the official record's of the 105th Congress of the United States, give testimony and supporting evidence to the above facts, as herein stated in this redress of grievance(s).

Appendix A, page 62-92, is hereby incorporated into and made a part of this redress of grievances.

Let is hereby be further known and entered into as evidence within this grievance, that an earlier and similar bill, H. J. RES. 184, was first introduced into the House as a Joint Resolution by Representative Armey on July 16, 1996. Mr. Armey was one of the primary co-sponsors of the Religious Freedom Amendment bill, H. J. RES. 78, that was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, on May 8, 1997, and as introduced by Representative Istook of Oklahoma.

"The declaration that religious faith shall be unpunished does not give immunity to criminal acts dictated by religious error." Thomas Jefferson, 1788

VIII. The Religious Morals Issue
"When we come to the moral principles on which the government is to be administered, we come to what is proper for all conditions of society… Liberty, truth, probity (i.e., integrity; uprightness), honor, are declared to be the four cardinal principles of society. I believe… that morality, compassion, generosity, are innate elements of the human constitution; that there exists a right independent of force." Thomas Jefferson, 1816

"Reading, reflection and time have convinced me that the interests of society require the observation of those moral precepts only in which all religions agree (for all forbid us to murder, steal, plunder, or bear false witness), and that we should not intermeddle with the particular dogmas in which all religions differ, and which are totally unconnected with morality." Thomas Jefferson, 1809

"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor… otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief… All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and… the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities… The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right… Our civil rights have no dependence upon our religious opinions more than our opinions in physics or geometry… It is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere [in the propagation of religious teachings] when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order." Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779.

The peace and good order, to which Thomas Jefferson referred, has been breached, and it is now time for all good Americans to step forward and start repairing that breach to their peace and good order.

The Christian Coalition and other Christian institutions like the Christian Broadcasting Network and its personal political puppet, the American Center for Law and Justice; continue to present, and therefore socially, politically, and religiously put forward their "smoke and mirrors" magic show of un-provable Christian doctrines and dogmas, as the only clear and correct course of religious and/or moral authority that the United States and the rest of the world should have, and/or listen to and follow.

In the Christian Broadcasting Networks own words, "At a time when there is such a belligerent assault on the constitutional freedoms of Christians, the ACLJ is taking action to hold firm to the Christian liberties believers hold dear." By their own admission, the Christian Broadcasting Network has put forth another misconstructed truth, and this one in order to manipulate and sway the American people and their Christian followers, into believing that the Christians are being purposely "persecuted" and, are therefore being singled out for persecution by the Federal government. In many parts of the world that may hold true, but in the United States of America and in other parts of the world it is the Christians that are doing the persecuting and the discriminating, just like the Christians have continued to do for the last 1,700 years.

Like always, the Christians continue to shadow their ever-forward push and progress into the control and machinery of the United States government, by playing on the sympathies, fears, and other vulnerabilities of the masses of gullible American people. Nothing seems to have changed very much in those 1,700 years since the Christians came to power, along with the Federalists who came to power at the same time. Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and many others were acutely aware of this problem with the Christians 200 years ago, and that is why that Religious Liberty was of such importance to them, and why they knew that Religious Liberty must be an "absolute" right for the American people, and why there must also be an "absolute" wall of separation erected between Church and State. The founding fathers further knew, that there again would come a time in the future, when the Christians and/or other powerful mainstream religions, would make a "political power-play" move to bring back the religious anarchy of "religious intolerance" to the United States, and that when that time came, the people must be prepared and equipped with the proper and adequate constitutional tools with which to defend the Nation, the Constitution, and themselves. The founding fathers of the United States also knew that there would always be those American people, like themselves and some of their Posterity, who would be ever vigilant for such an occurrence. In addition, the founding fathers knew that the people must have a set of legal tool's with which they could protect both themselves and the government when that time would come, and so through the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, those tools were given in perpetuity to the people.

It has now come to a point in time and history, where those "republican" constitutional tools must be used and strictly applied, whether we as a people like it or not. What is at stake here is the real and true republic of America, the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, and all of the other liberties and freedoms that we as a people, and as individuals, hold so dear and cherish. This is about the real and true America and it's continued existence as a free and prosperous nation for the masses of the people, as well as for the lone individual. It is also about the survival of the "republican" principles that ordained and established the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and therefore the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America.

This is about the ever continuing struggle against the tyranny and oppression by the select few in power, and hopefully a final end to that tragic chapter in United States history that we have been engaged in for the last 150+ years.

Over the months and days we as a people, a Nation, and as a World, have watched the spectacle that has been "purposely" and "intentionally" unfolded and played out in Washington, DC. Some of us have watched in amazement and horror as a select force of those in power have tried, and with some success, diminished the power and authority of the Office of President of the United States. When the Federalist's and the "religious right" investigation into Clinton started failing because there was no really good evidence to be had that would ultimately discredit him personally, and therefore the Office of the President, it became necessary to create a sophisticated and manipulated Christian religious "moral attack" on Clinton's Presidency. So out of this desire to gain control of the Presidency, was born the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

The Christian religion, and no other religion in existence, has any business intermeddling in the affairs of government, by way of attaching their "religious" dogmas and/or doctrines onto any government office holder, yet that is exactly what the Christian church has done through their representatives in Congress, and elsewhere in the government and other places of power and control. The Christian Coalition and other Christian institutions have made it their "religious" duty and self appointed right to see to it, that every American becomes "dogmatized" into believing and following their set of religious morals. If this is not the intentional and willful intermeddling of religion into the affairs of government, and the failure to maintain the "absolute" constitutional right to the Separation of Church and State, then what else is it!

The United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights are founded around the simple principle of a "neutral" and strong base Natural Law morality for the masses of the people. Take one of the oldest philosophies in life, Do No Harm, and add to that the four declared cardinal principles of society, i.e., Liberty, truth, probity (i.e., integrity; uprightness), and honor, and what you get is a base Natural Law morality for society that will weather any test anything thrown at it. Attempt to base the morals of society on the different religious dogmas and/or doctrines that are out there, and what you will get is a wide variance of acceptable moral practices with no clear agreement or understanding as to why their morals are failing them as a society. Base the morals on Do No Harm and add to that the love and concern for real liberty, truth, probity, and honor, and the morals of a society will survive and flourish. The founding fathers of America saw that precept very clearly 200 years ago, and they applied that precept to both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Why is it that precept is so hard to see now, because unprovable religious dogma has clouded the real truths, and the people have been methodically and systematically turned away from the "republican" principles of Freedom and Liberty, to the principles of tyranny and slavery!

"A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sin and suffering." Thomas Jefferson, 1816

There are those individuals within Congress and the government who have found it necessary to align themselves to the morals of a specific religion, and as a result of that alliance they have placed a "religious test" on the qualification to hold an office of public trust. These individuals continued actions to use, and/or adopt the morals of a specific religion i.e., Christianity, over the "absolute" neutrality of Article VI of the main body of the Constitution, and the First Article of the Bill of Rights, clearly shows these individuals allegiance to a specific religion and use of a "religious test," as a qualification necessary to holding an office of public trust in the United States. These same individuals continued religiously imposed "moral" attack on President Clinton is a very clear testament to that fact.

Further, that there are presently various religious organizations and/or institutions like the Christian Coalition and the Christian Broadcasting Network, who use their power and authority, plus the public airwaves, to influence the "religious" and "political" conscience of members in both Houses of Congress and elsewhere in government throughout the United States, and that they do this for the specific purpose of implementing into government their religious dogmas and/or doctrines. These religious organizations and/or institutions, by virtue of these actions, are therefore directly intermeddling into the affairs of government, and are in constitutional violation of Article VI and the First Article of the Bill of Rights.

"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." Thomas Jefferson, 1800

Further, that when Thomas Jefferson used the clause, "thus building a wall of separation between Church and State," Jefferson was thereby implying that the Church is also to be held accountable and punishable for their "religious" intermeddling into the affairs of government, when they are responsible for violating Article VI of the main body of the Constitution and the First Article to the Bill of Rights. It appears very clear by the constitutional evidence that has been presented within these grievances, that this is exactly what has taken place. A religious error does not excuse either an individual or an entity from being held accountable for either a civil crime or a constitutional crime against the Constitution. Both civil and constitutional crimes should both be treated equally, especially where a crime against the Constitution of the United States has been committed. A crime against the Constitution is a crime against the people!

We the People, therefore, submit Grievance VIII to the Congress and other branches of United States government, for an immediate and complete reparation and restoration of all basic constitutional rights lost and/or being denied, by the failure of the Congress and the Federal government of the United States to obey Article VI of the main body of the Constitution and the First Amendment "absolute" constitutional restriction of the Separation of Church and State. The Congress and the government of the United States shall immediately further abolish and/or constitutionally invalidate any and all laws and/or legislation, and/or any other authority attached to any laws and/or traditional unwritten practices, written and/or unwritten, that interfere with, and/or abridge the right of the masses of American people, to have an "absolute" constitutional Separation of Church and State.

Further, that any member of Congress or the government while acting in their official capacity and/or otherwise title of office of public trust that they hold, while in their term of office, and who have put their "religious" consciousness, convictions and/or their own "religious" opinions and/or religiously based moral dogmas, above that of their constitutional "neutral" obligation and duty to not do so, have failed in their constitutional "declaratory" obligation and duty, to support the Constitution of the United States of America. Religious morals and principles have no place in the hallowed halls of the peoples "republic." The constitutional door has just been slammed shut and sealed tight to the intermeddling of religion into government affairs, and it is the people of the republic and the Constitution that just closed it shut.

Those members of Congress who have violated this most sacred American trust to the people and Constitution of the United States, will immediately publish openly and in a public manner, for all Americans throughout the Nation and the World to hear and to read, a letter of apology to the President of the United States and to the American people, for their abusive and harmful actions against the Constitution and people of the United States. Further, that every Representative, Senator, the President and Vice-president, and every Judicial officer throughout the Nation - both in high and not so high positions, and every individual who is in an office of public trust, will sign a specific Oath or Affirmation. This written Oath or Affirmation will clearly reflect a meaning and intent that will clearly impart to the office holder, that while they are in their position of public trust, they will be constitutionally bound to support, uphold, obey, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and all of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses therein, and especially those clauses in relationship to Article VI of the main body of the Constitution and the First Article to the Bill of Rights. The Oath or Affirmation is to be under strict penalty of law, up to and including treason and any other allowable crime as the Constitution may allow for. Further, that the judicial branch of the United States government will immediately initiate and pursue an active and ongoing investigation, into highly probable and therefore potential criminal constitutional abuses by members of both Houses of the Congress. Whereas, said investigation will also look into and explore the possibility of "high crime" and/or otherwise criminal constitutional violations by members of Congress. Whereas, said investigation will also explore and look into the potential and highly probable links of members of Congress, having closer than constitutionally healthy relationships and/or ties with links to group(s) and/or individuals, and/or other entities and/or organizations, and/or other institutions that may be involved in the possible and/or potential takeover, and therefore the overthrow of the United States Constitution, and therefore the government and people of the United States of America. It is hereby further stated that said investigation will last as long as the people remain concerned about the health, peace, and good order of the United States. The Executive Branch of government will develop and initiate a new and fully congressionally empowered Department for Human and Constitutional Rights, with a full cabinet position and heading of, Secretary of Human and Constitutional Rights. This department will basically be the peoples assurance that their human and constitutional rights are being adequately looked after and protected by those in the government. The Department of Human and Constitutional Rights will be responsible for reporting to the people, the President, the Judicial, and the Congress, on issues and matters as they relate to the health and welfare of human and constitutional rights, and the department will conduct investigations as is necessary to the maintenance of peace and good order of the Constitution and people of the United States, and the government therein. Said department will be both National and International in scope of power and authority, and will work closely with the President, the Judicial, the Secret Service, the Department of the Treasury, and/or other National or International agencies as the specific situation may require. The Congress of the United States shall empower the newly created department and secretary with all of the necessary powers and authority, with which to successfully maintain, operate, and conduct business. Congress in shall in no manner impede and/or intervene in any investigation being conducted by this department while they are in pursuit of their lawful constitutional authority. This full reparation and restoration of all constitutional rights and/or privileges shall be carried out immediately; this being a necessary constitutional obligation and requirement, as strictly declared by the second paragraph of Article VI of the Constitution, which fully affirms; This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. Further, that the Congress and the other branches of government of the United States, shall be given no more than 90 days after the receipt of this grievance, to start complying with, and implementing the terms of this grievance, unless otherwise negotiated.

Whereas, further qualification in support of Redress of Grievance VIII is hereby found in Appendix A, page 62-92, of this redress of grievances, and is therefore incorporated into, and made a part of these grievances.

"[When] corruption… has prevailed in those offices [of]… government and [has] so familiarized itself as that men otherwise honest could look on it without horror,… [then we must] be alive to the suppression of this odious practice and… bring to punishment and brand with eternal disgrace every man guilty of it, whatever be his station." Thomas Jefferson, 1804

IX. The Flag "Desecration" Issue
"One of the amendments to the Constitution… expressly declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,' thereby guarding in the same sentence and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press; insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others." Thomas Jefferson, 1798

"No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority." Thomas Jefferson, 1809

"We are bound, you, I, and every one to make common cause, even with error itself, to maintain the common right of freedom of conscience." Thomas Jefferson, 1803

"The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government." Thomas Jefferson, 1823

Assaults continue to mount on the basic constitutional American human rights and "republican" principles that the people are entitled to under the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States. There appears to be a concentrated effort underway by certain members of Congress and elsewhere in United States government, and elsewhere in our society, to methodically and systematically remove and/or strip away the "absolute" basic human rights of the American people, as they are enumerated to in the First Article of the Bill of Rights. Moreover, it appears as if this concentrated effort to undermine the constitutional "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights within the First Article of the Bill of Rights, is more of a purposely contrived conspiracy to deny basic human rights to the American people, than anything else.

For year after year, since the mid to late 1980's, there has been a continual barrage of bills presented into the Congressional Record to limit and/or abridge First Amendment rights. The Congressional Record also shows that the Sponsorship, Co-Sponsorship, and/or voting record on these bills follows a very similar pattern when it comes to individuals involved. What clearly appears to be happening, is that there is a concentrated "Christian" movement underway, both inside and outside the government, to replace the "neutral" morality and authority of the First Amendment, with the dogmatic and un-provable morals and authority of Christianity.

The current S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, also known by the official title as introduced; "A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States," and hereinafter known under this grievance by its popular title, the Flag Desecration resolution, is another such piece of legislation aimed specifically at abridging First Amendment "absolute" rights.

The text of the Report filed by Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REPT. 105-298, 105th Congress, as filed by Senator Hatch of the Committee on Judiciary, on September 1, 1998, is hereby incorporated into, and made a part of this grievance. S. REPT. 105-298, will serve as lending some evidentiary proof of the peoples claim to a possible and/or probable religious conspiracy, by members of Congress and/or others, to takeover, and/or overthrow the Constitution, the people, and therefore the government of the United States of America.

From S. REPT. 105-298: C. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 40 WOULD DIMINISH THE RIGHTS WE CURRENTLY ENJOY UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT:
Senate Joint Resolution 40 unquestionably would restrict rights currently enjoyed by Americans under the First Amendment. Indeed, that is its sole purpose.

From S. REPT. 105-298: H. J. RES. 54 IS WRONG AS A MATTER OF PRECEDENT:
[Footnote] If we begin to second guess the courts' authority concerning matters of free speech, we will not only be carving an awkward exception into a document designed to last for the ages, but will be undermining the very structure created under the Constitution to protect our rights. This is why Madison warned against using the amendment process to correct every perceived constitutional defect, particularly concerning issues which inflame public passion.

[Footnote] Conservative legal scholar Bruce Fein emphasized this concern when he testified before the Subcommittee at 1995 House Judiciary hearings:

[Footnote 29: Inserting the term 'desecration' into the Constitution would in and of itself seem highly inappropriate. Webster's New World Dictionary defines 'desecrate' as 'to violate the sacredness of,' and in turn defines 'sacred' as 'consecrated to a god or God; holy; or having to do with religion.' The introduction of these terms could create a significant tension within our constitutional structure, in particular with the religion clause of the first amendment.]

From S. REPT. 105-298: D. THERE IS NO HISTORY OF Supreme Court ACCEPTANCE OF LIMITATIONS ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT FOR PEACEFUL PROTESTS INVOLVING FLAG BURNING:
The Majority Report mentions Endecott's Case, a 1634 action of the Massachusetts Bay Colony in which 'a domestic defacer of the flag' was prosecuted. In that case, John Endecott cut the cross of St. George from an English flag in apparent protest against the tyranny of Charles I and Bishop Laud. At the time, the Bay Colony offered no First Amendment rights.

Freedom of speech was denied, as were freedom of assembly and freedom from the establishment of religion. Indeed, there were no written or even customary laws at this date: punishment was imposed by then-governor Winthrop and his allies in accordion with their view of morality and Scripture ('Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.')

[Footnote] The use of such a prosecution under such circumstances as evidence of 'the 'historic core of consistency between flag protection and the First Amendment' as claimed by the Majority Report at 9, indicates a conception of the First Amendment that can only be described as bizarre. It should be inconceivable that the actions of the British colonial government repressing American patriots should be the model and precedent for what the Senate should do now. Yet that, amazingly, is the logic of the proposed amendment…

Endecott's Case is, of course, properly seen as an example of the tyranny against which the Founders rightly rebelled, and Endecott's 'desecration' as a very early step on the long movement toward independence from England. The case also is an early analog to a similar 'desecration' of the English flag by George Washington to create the first flag of the Continental Army: On taking command of the army on July 3, 1775, Washington took an English flag and, after removing both the cross of St. George and the cross of St. Andrew, sewed six white stripes onto the remaining red field. By this 'desecration,' George Washington created the 13 red and white stripes that remain to this day… We frankly are astonished that the Majority Report would cast aspersions on, in Patrick Henry's phrase, 'such gauntlets cast in the face of tyranny.'

Again, there simply is no instance in the entire history of the United States in which the Supreme Court has upheld against a First Amendment challenge a conviction for flag tampering. On the contrary, the roots of the 'Johnson' and 'Eichman' decisions lie deep in American jurisprudence.

'A regulation of speech that is motivated by nothing more than a desire to curtail expression of a particular point of view,' wrote the Supreme Court, 'is the purest example' of a law abridging the freedom of speech. Consolidated Edison C. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 530, 546 (1980)

Be it known to all parties hereinbefore mentioned in this redress of grievances, that S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, also known by the official title as introduced; "A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States," and hereinafter known under this grievance by its popular title, the Flag Desecration resolution, is in direct constitutional conflict with the express "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses, of the "absolute" rights of the First Article of the Bill of Rights, that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…

Here is what S. REPT. 105-298, has to say on the subject that FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS INDIVISIBLE: For Congress to limit expression because of its offensive content is to strike at the heart of the first amendment. As American Bar Association president Jerome Shestack advised the Committee,

Since its founding, this Nation has thrived on the vigor of free speech and robust dissent not only through the spoken or written word, but through peaceful acts of political protest. The Boston Tea Party, civil rights sit-ins, public demonstrations, and in this instance, flag burning are all examples, some laudable, some not, which have served to test the true meaning of freedom of speech and expression and to affirm that this hallowed principle is protected, not prosecuted. The spirit of the first Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech is captured in Justice Jackson's words in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, a flag salute case:

[F]reedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The text of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.

To restrict speech and political expression to only those areas that Congress approves is to limit, as China now does, the freedom of worship to only those churches of which that government approves. That is not freedom at all. As Charles Fried, Solicitor General under President Reagan, testified in 1990:

Principles are not things you can safely violate 'just this once.' Can we not just this once do an injustice, just this once betray the spirit of liberty, just this once break faith with the traditions of free expression that have been the glory of this Nation? Not safely; not without endangering our immortal soul as a nation. The man who says you can make an exception to a principle, does not know what a principle is; just as the man who says that only this once lets make 2+2=5 does not know what it is to count.

Measures to Protect the American Flag, Hearing before the Senate Comm. On the Judiciary, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (June 21, 1990) (statement of Charles Fried at 113).

The Washington Post observed in a July 5, 1998 editorial,

It would, in effect, turn the 'no' in the hallowed phrase 'Congress shall make no law' into an 'almost no'--which is a singular erosion of the principle for which the first Amendment stands. This principle has survived and enriched this country through periods in which unfettered expression caused great political stresses. Why should it be compromised now to prevent Americans from burning flags that they weren't planning to ignite in the first place?

"Whenever… preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put [their congregation] off with a discourse on the Copernican system, on chemical affinities, on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract, depriving their audience of the kind of service for which they are salaried, and giving them, instead of it, what they did not want, or, if wanted, would rather seek from better sources in that particular art of science." Thomas Jefferson, 1815

Be it further known to all parties hereinbefore mentioned in this redress of grievances, that S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, is a direct and unconstitutional abridgment of the constitutional "absolute" right of Freedom of Speech, as was intended by Thomas Jefferson and other framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is in direct disagreement with the First Article in the Bill of Rights, which clearly affirms, that Congress shall make no law… abridging the Freedom of Speech.

It is hereby further affirmed and attested to, that under the "restrictive" and "declaratory" first clause, of the First Article of the Bill of Rights, that Congress shall make no law…, is a constitutional legal demand to "all" the members of Congress, in both Houses, that they are in no way to interfere with, abridge, misconstruct, and or abuse the basic American human rights that are enumerated to in the First Article of the Bill of Rights. The term to make no law means just what it affirms, and it includes the making of any Bills and/or Legislation that would in fact create a law.

Therefore, S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, was and/or is, in full constitutional violation, of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" intent and purpose, and/or authority of the opening clause and/or statement of the First Article to the Bill of Rights, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Whereby this further affirms the constitutional, and therefore mandatory "declaratory" and "restrictive" mandate to Congress, under Article VI of the Constitution, that declares to those in Congress, and others under authority of the Constitution, that they are to "support," and therefore obey the Constitution, and be ready to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, from its enemies.

The following terms and/or definitions are hereby incorporated into this redress of grievances:
It is hereby affirmed by the official and indisputable testimony and authority of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition 1998, that the definition for the term support is; To aid the cause, policy, or interests of; To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities; To endure; tolerate; To furnish corroborating evidence for; To keep from weakening or failing; strengthen; a. The act of supporting. b. The state of being supported; One that supports; Synonyms: support, uphold, back, advocate, champion. These verbs are compared as they mean to give aid or encouragement to a person or cause. Support is the most general; To uphold is to maintain or affirm in the face of a challenge or strong opposition; Back suggests material or moral support intended to contribute to or assure success; Advocate implies verbal support, often in the form of pleading or arguing; To champion is to fight for one that is under attack or lacks the strength or ability to act in its own behalf.

It is hereby affirmed by the official and indisputable testimony and authority of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition 1998, that the definition for an enemy is; Something destructive or injurious in its effects; one who is hostile to or opposes the purposes or interests of another; a hostile power or force; a group of foes or hostile forces.

It is hereby affirmed by the official and indisputable testimony and authority of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition 1998, and The Original Roget's Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases (Americanized Version) 1994, that the definition for the term law also includes, but is not limited to; constitutional law; written law; legal necessity; unwritten law; prescript; precept; legal restraint; authority; form of law; bill; legislation; order; decree; legality; body of law; code of principles based on morality, conscience; rule; dictum; precedent; regulation; legal process, etc., etc…

We the People of these United States of America, do hereby affirm and attest to the fact, and/or facts, as witnessed to by the written and proposed Congressional Bill, known as S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, that said Congressional Bill(s) are an intentional and willfully written Congressional Bill(s) meant to intentionally misconstruct, and/or abridge the "declaratory" and therefore "absolute" right to Freedom of Speech, as provided for in the First Article of the Bill of Rights, United States Constitution. Therefore S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, is Something destructive or injurious in its effects to the "declaratory" and "absolute" basic American human rights, as "currently" enumerated to in United States Constitution, First Article of the Bill of Rights. S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, is therefore an enemy to the Constitution of the United States of America, the Republican Form of Government thereof, and to the American people that the Constitution is to protect. In effect these bills and those who support them, are in adherence to a set of principles and/or an ideology, that is attempting to overthrow the United States Constitution and the Republican Form of Government, of the United States of America.

Members of both Houses of Congress are under strict constitutional Oath or Affirmation to support and therefore obey, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, is a failure of that constitutional Oath or Affirmation to support, obey, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, by members of Congress, due to the legal nature of S. J. RES. 40 and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, being an enemy to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Thomas Jefferson, in 1799, spoke of those that were the enemies of the Constitution and Bill of Rights; "I do then, with sincere zeal, wish an inviolable preservation of our present federal Constitution, according to the true sense in which it was adopted by the States, that in which it was advocated by its friends, and not that which its enemies apprehended, who therefore became its enemies."

It makes no matter that the bill remains in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. All that matters is that S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, was even created [make] in the first place, and it is therein, and at that first point and moment that those bill's were officially created, that the Constitution was violated by its enemies. Anything that is not in agreement and support with the inalienable "republican" principles and rights enumerated to in the Constitution, and works to abridge, misconstruct, and/or abuse those "republican" principles, is therefore hostile and an enemy to those "republican" principles and rights in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Those individuals and/or group(s), therefore, who go against those ordained and established "republican" principles and rights enumerated to in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, are aiding and giving comfort to the enemy, by virtue of their failure to fully support the Constitution and therefore the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America.

A crime starts at the first offense or moment that the conspiracy to commit the violation is put into motion, and a crime is a crime no matter how you try to present it, and it makes no matter who or what is in violation. If a law has been broken then a crime has taken place, and it is not at the desecration of those in authority to arbitrarily decide for their own benefit and/or gain, what is and is not a crime. Crimes and restrictions as to what we as people can and can not do, are spelled out both in the Constitution of the United States, and in the civil codes. The civil and criminal laws, and/or lawful constitutional restrictions, are to apply to either all of us, or none of us at all, and there is no acceptable in-between as far as the masses of American people and the United States Constitution are concerned. We are either living by the Constitution or we are not, and there is no in-between to that.

Whereas, these abusive and misconstructive actions against the Constitution, the people, and therefore the government of the United States of America, S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, can only be construed to be hostile with intent, and therefore a treasonable offense(s) that has been, and is still being created for the benefit and gain of Christianity and/or other monotheistic religions, and/or other concerns that are hostile to the United States Constitution.

Further, that any member of Congress or the government while acting in their official capacity and/or otherwise title of office of public trust that they hold, while in their term of office, and who have put their "religious" consciousness, convictions and/or their own "religious" opinions and/or religiously based moral dogmas above that of their constitutional "neutral" obligation and duty to not do so, have failed in their constitutional "declaratory" obligation and "restrictive" duty, to support the Constitution of the United States of America. The dogmatic doctrines and principles of religiously imposed morals and religious beliefs have no place in the hallowed halls of the peoples "republic" of the United States of America.

It is therefore with an ever abiding love for the Constitution, and for the preservation of the Constitution and of the American republic, for which the Constitution was established, and with the purpose and intent of establishing constitutional equality and justice for all Americans, that We the People of these United States, must hereby and forthwith, take the following corrective and/or constitutional legal action(s), in order to protect and preserve for our posterity, the integrity, virtue, and legality of the Constitution of the United States of America. We the People, do hereby openly attest to and charge any and/or every member(s) of Congress, who have taken part and/or purposely co-conspired in the creation of S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, with the charge of Conspiracy to Commit Treason and/or Treason itself. S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, are by virtue of intent and meaning an enemy to the Constitution of the United States, and therefore those in Congress who have conspired with the enemy, by giving their support, aid and comfort to the enemy, instead of to their constitutional obligation to support the Constitution, are by virtue of their harmful, abusive, and/or intentionally created adherence to the abridgment and/or misconstruction of the Constitution, traitors to the full intent and meaning of the Constitution as it was written and as was fully intended by Thomas Jefferson and other founders that framed the Constitution of the United States. Thomas Jefferson in 1807 while President of the United States: "The framers of our constitution certainly supposed they had guarded, as well their government against destruction by treason, as their citizens against oppression under pretense of it [treason]; and if these ends are not attained, it is of importance to inquire by what means, more effectual, they may be secured."

Whereas, further qualification in support of redress of grievance IX is hereby found in Appendix A, page 62-92, of these redress of grievances, and is therefore incorporated into, and made a part of these grievances.

Whereas, herein stated charges are being brought forth against said named individual and/or individuals, for their part in supporting, adhering to, and/or aiding in a conspiracy to willfully and intentionally abridge and/or misconstruct the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Date of support and/or positive [YEA and/or AYE] vote for the S. J. RES. 40, a joint 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, and H. J. RES. 54, the Flag Desecration resolution, is shown next to their names. Names and dates have been taken from the Congressional Record of the 105th Congress.

H. J. RES. 54; In the United States House of Representatives
Rep Solomon - 02/13/97...................Rep Lipinski - 02/13/97
Rep Andrews - 02/13/97...................Rep Archer - 02/13/97
Rep Bachus - 02/13/97......................Rep Baker, R - 02/13/97
Rep Baldacci - 02/13/97....................Rep Ballenger - 02/13/97
Rep Barcia - 02/13/97.......................Rep Barr - 02/13/97
Rep Barrett, B - 02/13/97..................Rep Bartlett - 02/13/97
Rep Barton - 02/13/97......................Rep Bass - 02/13/97
Rep Bateman - 02/13/97...................Rep Bereuter - 02/13/97
Rep Bilbray - 02/13/97.....................Rep Bilirakis - 02/13/97
Rep Bishop - 02/13/97......................Rep Bliley - 02/13/97
Rep Blunt - 02/13/97........................Rep Boehlert - 02/13/97
Rep Boehner - 02/13/97...................Rep Boswell - 02/13/97
Rep Bryant, E - 02/13/97.................Rep Bunning - 02/13/97
Rep Burr - 02/13/97........................Rep Burton - 02/13/97
Rep Buyer - 02/13/97......................Rep Callahan - 02/13/97
Rep Camp - 02/13/97......................Rep Canady - 02/13/97
Rep Cannon - 02/13/97...................Rep Chabot - 02/13/97
Rep Christensen - 02/13/97.............Rep Coble - 02/13/97
Rep Coburn - 02/13/97...................Rep Collins, M - 02/13/97
Rep Combest - 02/13/97.................Rep Cox - 02/13/97
Rep Cramer - 02/13/97...................Rep Crane - 02/13/97
Rep Crapo - 02/13/97.....................Rep Cubin - 02/13/97
Rep Cunningham - 02/13/97............Rep Danner - 02/13/97
Rep Davis, T - 02/13/97..................Rep Deal - 02/13/97
Rep DeLay - 02/13/97.....................Rep Diaz-Balart - 02/13/97
Rep Dickey - 02/13/97....................Rep Dooley - 02/13/97
Rep Doyle - 02/13/97......................Rep Duncan - 02/13/97
Rep Edwards - 02/13/97.................Rep Emerson - 02/13/97
Rep English - 02/13/97....................Rep Ensign - 02/13/97
Rep Ehrlich - 02/13/97....................Rep Everett - 02/13/97
Rep Ewing - 02/13/97.....................Rep Foley - 02/13/97
Rep Forbes - 02/13/97....................Rep Fowler - 02/13/97
Rep Fox - 02/13/97.........................Rep Franks, B - 02/13/97
Rep Frelinghuysen - 02/13/97...........Rep Frost - 02/13/97
Rep Gallegly - 02/13/97...................Rep Ganske - 02/13/97
Rep Gibbons - 02/13/97..................Rep Gillmor - 02/13/97
Rep Goode - 02/13/97....................Rep Goodlatte - 02/13/97
Rep Goss - 02/13/97.......................Rep Graham - 02/13/97
Rep Granger - 02/13/97...................Rep Green - 02/13/97
Rep Gutknecht - 02/13/97................Rep Hall, R - 02/13/97
Rep Hamilton - 02/13/97..................Rep Hansen - 02/13/97
Rep Hastert - 02/13/97....................Rep Hastings, D - 02/13/97
Rep Hayworth - 02/13/97................Rep Hefley - 02/13/97
Rep Herger - 02/13/97....................Rep Hill - 02/13/97
Rep Hilleary - 02/13/97...................Rep Hinojosa - 02/13/97
Rep Holden - 02/13/97...................Rep Horn - 02/13/97
Rep Hostettler - 02/13/97................Rep Hulshof - 02/13/97
Rep Hunter - 02/13/97....................Rep Hutchinson - 02/13/97
Rep Hyde - 02/13/97......................Rep Jefferson - 02/13/97
Rep Jenkins - 02/13/97...................Rep John - 02/13/97
Rep Johnson, S - 02/13/97..............Rep Kelly - 02/13/97
Rep Kennelly - 02/13/97.................Rep Kim - 02/13/97
Rep King - 02/13/97.......................Rep Kingston - 02/13/97
Rep Knollenberg - 02/13/97............Rep LaHood - 02/13/97
Rep Largent - 02/13/97...................Rep Latham - 02/13/97
Rep LaTourette - 02/13/97..............Rep Linder - 02/13/97
Rep Livingston - 02/13/97...............Rep LoBiondo - 02/13/97
Rep Lucas - 02/13/97.....................Rep Maloney, J - 02/13/97
Rep Manton - 02/13/97...................Rep Manzullo - 02/13/97
Rep Martinez - 02/13/97..................Rep Mascara - 02/13/97
Rep McCollum - 02/13/97...............Rep McCrery - 02/13/97
Rep McDade - 02/13/97.................Rep McHugh - 02/13/97
Rep McInnis - 02/13/97..................Rep McIntosh - 02/13/97
Rep McKeon - 02/13/97.................Rep McNulty - 02/13/97
Rep Menendez - 02/13/97...............Rep Metcalf - 02/13/97
Rep Molinari - 02/13/97..................Rep Murtha - 02/13/97
Rep Myrick - 02/13/97....................Rep Nethercutt - 02/13/97
Rep Neumann - 02/13/97................Rep Ney - 02/13/97
Rep Norwood - 02/13/97................Rep Nussle - 02/13/97
Rep Ortiz - 02/13/97.......................Rep Oxley - 02/13/97
Rep Packard - 02/13/97...................Rep Pallone - 02/13/97
Rep Pappas - 02/13/97....................Rep Parker - 02/13/97
Rep Paxon - 02/13/97......................Rep Peterson, C - 02/13/97
Rep Pickering - 02/13/97.................Rep Pickett - 02/13/97
Rep Pitts - 02/13/97.........................Rep Quinn - 02/13/97
Rep Radanovich - 02/13/97..............Rep Rahall - 02/13/97
Rep Ramstad - 02/13/97..................Rep Reyes - 02/13/97
Rep Riggs - 02/13/97.......................Rep Riley - 02/13/97
Rep Roemer - 02/13/97...................Rep Rogan - 02/13/97
Rep Rogers - 02/13/97....................Rep Royce - 02/13/97
Rep Rothman - 02/13/97..................Rep Sandlin - 02/13/97
Rep Saxton - 02/13/97.....................Rep Schaefer - 02/13/97
Rep Schaffer - 02/13/97...................Rep Sensenbrenner - 02/13/97
Rep Shimkus - 02/13/97...................Rep Shuster - 02/13/97
Rep Sisisky - 02/13/97.....................Rep Skeen - 02/13/97
Rep Skelton - 02/13/97....................Rep Smith C - 02/13/97
Rep Smith, R - 02/13/97..................Rep Smith, Linda - 02/13/97
Rep Souder - 02/13/97....................Rep Spence - 02/13/97
Rep Stearns - 02/13/97....................Rep Stenholm - 02/13/97
Rep Stump - 02/13/97......................Rep Talent - 02/13/97
Rep Taylor, C - 02/13/97.................Rep Thomas - 02/13/97
Rep Thurman - 02/13/97...................Rep Tiahrt - 02/13/97
Rep Towns - 02/13/97......................Rep Traficant - 02/13/97
Rep Turner - 02/13/97......................Rep Walsh - 02/13/97
Rep Wamp - 02/13/97......................Rep Watkins - 02/13/97
Rep Watts - 02/13/97.......................Rep Weldon, D - 02/13/97
Rep Weldon, C - 02/13/97................Rep Weller - 02/13/97
Rep Whitfield - 02/13/97..................Rep Wise - 02/13/97
Rep Wolf - 02/13/97........................Rep Wynn - 02/13/97
Rep Young, D - 02/13/97.................Rep Young, C - 02/13/97
Rep Brady, Kevin - 02/25/97............Rep Clement - 02/25/97
Rep Kennedy, J - 02/25/97...............Rep Lazio - 02/25/97
Rep Miller, D - 02/25/97..................Rep Pomeroy - 02/25/97
Rep Portman - 02/25/97...................Rep Stupak - 02/25/97
Rep Sununu - 02/25/97.....................Rep Thune - 02/25/97
Rep Cooksey - 02/27/97..................Rep Johnson, N - 02/27/97
Rep Peterson, J - 02/27/97...............Rep Aderholt - 03/05/97
Rep Calvert - 03/05/97.....................Rep Cook - 03/05/97
Rep Dunn - 03/05/97........................Rep Gekas - 03/05/97
Rep Inglis - 03/05/97........................Rep Istook - 03/05/97
Rep Jones - 03/05/97.......................Rep Kildee - 03/05/97
Rep Lewis, Jerry - 03/05/97.............Rep Pascrell - 03/05/97
Rep Roukema - 03/05/97.................Rep Sessions - 03/05/97
Rep Tauzin - 03/05/97.....................Rep Taylor, G - 03/05/97
Rep Thornberry - 03/05/97..............Rep Wicker - 03/05/97
Rep Chambliss - 03/06/97................Rep Clyburn - 03/06/97
Rep Hefner - 03/06/97.....................Rep Mollohan - 03/06/97
Rep Moran, Jerry - 03/06/97............Rep Snowbarger - 03/06/97
Rep Stabenow - 03/06/97.................Rep Bonilla - 03/11/97
Rep Chenoweth - 03/11/97...............Rep Gingrich - 03/11/97
Rep Lewis, R - 03/11/97...................Rep Luther - 03/11/97
Rep Ryun - 03/11/97.........................Rep Sanford - 03/11/97
Rep Kanjorski - 03/12/97.................Rep Salmon - 03/12/97
Rep Upton - 03/12/97.......................Rep Doolittle - 03/13/97
Rep Kasich - 03/13/97......................Rep Gilman - 03/17/97
Rep McCarthy, C - 03/17/97.............Rep Northup - 03/17/97
Rep Condit - 03/17/97.......................Rep Baesler - 03/20/97
Rep Houghton - 03/20/97...................Rep Smith, Lamar - 03/20/97
Rep Clayton - 04/08/97.....................Rep Delahunt - 04/08/97
Rep Goodling - 04/08/97...................Rep Hilliard - 04/08/97
Rep Hobson - 04/08/97.....................Rep Pease - 04/08/97
Rep Shaw - 04/08/97.........................Rep Mica - 04/09/97
Rep Pombo - 04/10/97......................Rep Harman - 04/10/97
Rep Berry - 04/15/97........................Rep Klug - 04/15/97
Rep Thompson - 04/15/97.................Rep Smith, N - 04/16/97
Rep McGovern - 04/29/97.................Rep Moakley - 04/29/97
Rep Bentsen - 04/30/97.....................Rep Etheridge - 04/30/97
Rep Moran, James P - 05/01/97.........Rep Ros-Lehtinen - 05/06/97
Rep Campbell, Tom - 05/07/97..........Rep McIntyre - 05/07/97
Rep Boyd - 05/15/97.........................Rep Fawell - 06/03/97
Rep Redmond - 06/04/97..................Rep Rodriguez - 06/05/97
Rep Castle - 06/05/97.......................Rep Armey - 06/12/97
Rep Blagojevich - 06/12/97...............Rep Brown - 06/12/97
Rep Carson - 06/12/97......................Rep Carson - 06/12/97
Rep Castle - 06/12/97.......................Rep Chenoweth - 06/12/97
Rep Costello - 06/12/97....................Rep Davis (FL) - 06/12/97
Rep Deutsch - 06/12/97....................Rep Dreier - 06/12/97
Rep Ford - 06/12/97.........................Rep Gephardt - 06/12/97
Rep Johnson (CT) - 06/12/97............Rep Johnson (WI) - 06/12/97
Rep Kaptur - 06/12/97......................Rep Kucinich - 06/12/97
Rep Lampson - 06/12/97..................Rep Lantos - 06/12/97
Rep Lipinski - 06/12/97....................Rep McCarthy (MO) - 06/12/97
Rep McCarthy (NY) - 06/12/97.......Rep Morella - 06/12/97
Rep Neal - 06/12/97........................Rep Pascrell - 06/12/97
Rep Pryce (OH) - 06/12/97.............Rep Regula - 06/12/97
Rep Rohrabacher - 06/12/97...........Rep Sanchez - 06/12/97
Rep Scarborough - 06/12/97...........Rep Sherman - 06/12/97
Rep Smith, Adam - 06/12/97...........Rep Spratt - 06/12/97
Rep Strickland - 06/12/97...............Rep Torres - 06/12/97
Rep Wexler - 06/12/97...................Rep Wicker - 06/12/97

S. J. RES. 40; In the United States Senate
Sen Hatch - 02/04/98.......................Sen Cleland - 02/04/98
Sen Hagel - 02/04/98.......................Sen Stevens - 02/04/98
Sen Ford - 02/04/98 ........................Sen Lott - 02/04/98
Sen Coverdell - 02/04/98.................Sen Kempthorne - 02/04/98
Sen Allard - 02/04/98......................Sen Ashcroft - 02/04/98
Sen Bond - 02/04/98.......................Sen Brownback - 02/04/98
Sen Burns - 02/04/98.......................Sen Campbell - 02/04/98
Sen Coats - 02/04/98......................Sen Cochran - 02/04/98
Sen Collins - 02/04/98.....................Sen Craig - 02/04/98
Sen D'Amato - 02/04/98.................Sen DeWine - 02/04/98
Sen Domenici - 02/04/98.................Sen Enzi - 02/04/98
Sen Faircloth - 02/04/98..................Sen Frist - 02/04/98
Sen Gramm - 02/04/98....................Sen Grams - 02/04/98
Sen Grassley - 02/04/98..................Sen Gregg - 02/04/98
Sen Helms - 02/04/98......................Sen Hutchinson - 02/04/98
Sen Hutchison - 02/04/98.................Sen Inhofe - 02/04/98
Sen Kyl - 02/04/98..........................Sen Lugar - 02/04/98
Sen Mack - 02/04/98.......................Sen McCain - 02/04/98
Sen Murkowski - 02/04/98...............Sen Roberts - 02/04/98
Sen Roth - 02/04/98........................Sen Santorum - 02/04/98
Sen Sessions - 02/04/98...................Sen Shelby - 02/04/98
Sen Smith, Bob - 02/04/98................Sen Smith, Gordon - 02/04/98
Sen Snowe - 02/04/98.....................Sen Thompson - 02/04/98
Sen Thurmond - 02/04/98.................Sen Warner - 02/04/98
Sen Baucus - 02/04/98.....................Sen Breaux - 02/04/98
Sen Feinstein - 02/04/98..................Sen Hollings - 02/04/98
Sen Reid - 02/04/98........................Sen Rockefeller - 02/04/98
Sen Johnson - 02/04/98...................Sen Nickles - 02/12/98
Sen Thomas - 02/12/98...................Sen Abraham - 02/24/98
Sen Gorton - 02/25/98.....................Sen Specter - 02/25/98
Sen Graham - 03/19/98

Let the official record's of the 105th Congress of the United States, give testimony and supporting evidence to the above facts, as herein stated in this redress of grievance(s).

Appendix A, page 62-92, is hereby incorporated into and made a part of this redress of grievances.

"Every idea is an incitement. It offers itself and if believed is acted upon unless some other belief outweighs it or some failure of energy stifles the movement at its birth. The only difference between the expression of an opinion and an incitement in the narrowest sense is the speaker's enthusiasm for the result; eloquence may set fire to reason… The general principle of free speech, it seems to me, must be taken to be included in the Fourteenth Amendment, in view of the scope that has been given to the word liberty as there used. If, in the long run, the beliefs expressed in proletarian dictatorship are destined to be accepted by the dominant forces of the community, the only meaning of free speech is that they should be given their chance and have their way. Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from bondage of irrational fear." Dissent in Gitlow v. State of New York, 1925

"If there is any principle of the constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment more than any other, it is the principle of free thought - not for free thought for those who agrree with us, but freedom for the thought we hate." Dissent in U.S. v. Schwimmer, 1929

X. The True Republic
"I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the laws, would fly to the standard of the law and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern" Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801

United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 4, clearly affirms; The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government. The essence of that clause is that the United States Constitution shall guarantee to all the people in the United States a Republican Form of Government. That Republican Form of Government shall be based on the ordained and established inalienable "republican" principles and rights, as they are enumerated to in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and as they were ordained and established by the founders of the United States and passed on in perpetuity to their Posterity in 1787.

As enumerated to in the Preamble and Article IV, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, the Constitution ordains and establishes to the founders and their Posterity, and to We the People of the United States of America, a Republican Form of Government. In order for it to be a constitutionally correct Republican Form of Government, in good working order and maintenance, then the Republican Form of Government must have these essential and necessary elements in good working order and functioning properly.
1. Representation in the House of Representatives is to be one Representative for every 30,000 people enumerated to in the census. This is essential and necessary for the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
2. The money and financial system is to belong to the people and is to be publicly owned and operated by the people, through the peoples equal and fair Representation in Congress. Specie is to be the "only" form of legal tender "in promise" for all debts, both public and private. The financial system is to be one of debit instead of credit. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
3. Taxation is to be direct, the taxation is to be according to the enumeration and the census, and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
4. Congress in a Republican Form of Government does not have ad libitum powers and/or authority with the Constitution, the people, and the government of the United States. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
5. Members of Congress and others in offices of public trust, in a Republican Form of Government, are to maintain absolute "neutrality" with any issue involving First Amendment rights. Further, Congress is to support, and therefore preserve and defend "all" of the "republican" principles and rights enumerated to in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
6. Members of Congress and others in offices of public trust, in a Republican Form of Government, are not allowed to make any type of religious Test, a qualification for holding an office of public trust, and that includes the use of applying religious morals and/or beliefs as a qualification to hold office. Further, that in matters pertaining to the Constitution and the general running of the government, members of Congress and others in offices of public trust, are bound by constitutional Oath or Affirmation, from intermeddling their own personal religious beliefs into the affairs of the Constitution and the government of the United States of America. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
7. Senators and Representatives of the United States government and all other office holders of public trust in the United States of America, are bound by Oath or Affirmation to support the Constitution. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
8. In a Republican Form of Government, the judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under the Constitution. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
9. In a Republican Form of Government, the people have the right to an absolute, equal, and fair redress of grievances. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
10. In a Republican Form of Government, the people are allowed a First Amendment that is complete and total in its power and authority, and totally free from the continual attacks by those in power that are hostile to the basic and fundamental American human rights contained in them. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
11. In a Republican Form of Government, the people themselves have the total and first right of maintaining and preserving the Constitution. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
12. In a Republican Form of Government, the threat of treason is very real for those that abridge and/or misconstruct the Constitution, or even attempt to do so. In a Republican Form of Government, abridging and/or misconstructing the Constitution, or even attempting to do so, is treated as hostile acts that are intended to overthrow the basic rights of the people, the Constitution, and the government. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
13. In a Republican Form of Government, the people are entitled to an election system that is equal and fair, and without any preferential advantages other than the ability and willingness to acquire and hold an office on ones own merits. In a Republican Form of Government, term limits for office holders are the standard operating procedure. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
14. In a Republican Form of Government, laws created through custom and usage, and through "technical" amendments, that are contrary to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, are not allowed nor are they permitted. This includes, but is not limited to, religiously based moral laws, and other types of "select" laws that are meant to favor certain classes of individuals and groups. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
15. In a Republican Form of Government, the "republican" rights and principles enumerated to in the Constitution and Bill of Rights are the backbone of the society and the government. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
16. In a Republican Form of Government, members of the Congress, the other government branches, and elsewhere in government, are constitutionally bound to support, uphold, preserve, and defend the "republican" rights and principles in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and that Oath or Affirmation is to mean something. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
17. In a Republican Form of Government, Treason and/or Conspiracy to Commit Treason is viewed as something that can happen from within and without. Further, that in a Republican Form of Government, that abuse, abridgments, and/or misconstructions of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, by members of Congress and elsewhere in government, are just as treasonous as hostile and forceful attacks on the United States itself. This is essential and necessary to the maintenance and preservation of a Republican Form of Government in the United States.
18. In a Republican Form of Government, it is the basic American rights and the "republican" principles in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, along with the people, that have the last say in regards to the disposal and/or alteration of those rights and principles. In a true "republic," the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and the basic American rights and the "republican" principles are truly the Supreme Law of the land.

The only salvation for the government and the people of the United States of America, is the reestablishing of the true "republican" principles and rights, which shaped and founded the true republic and Constitution of the United States. Those principles and rights were ordained and established in the United States Constitution in 1787, and affirmed again in 1791 within the United States Bill of Rights.

Since the United States Constitution ordains and establishes that the government of the United States is to be a Republican Form of Government, then it therefore must have the "republican" principles and rights that it needs to maintain and preserve itself as a Republican Form of Government. Any government formed and operating outside of those strict constitutional parameters relating to "republican" principles and rights, is therefore not a Republican Form of Government. The Republican Form of Government of the United States of America, must have the "republican" rights and principles enumerated to within this redress of grievances, working and in good order, for the government to be properly considered a Republican Form of Government, and for the United States to be called a republic. It is these "republican" principles and rights, that is the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America. There is no true republic and Constitution without them.

We the People therefore ask for an immediate reparation and restoration of the full and complete rights, to all of the "republican" principles and rights that constitute a constitutionally true Republican Form of Government for the United States of America. This shall take place immediately as per Article VI, and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, of the United States Constitution.

Continue with First Amendment Constitutional Redress of Grievances, part 4.

!!! WARNING !!!

All United States and other International Copyright Laws apply to any and all material on these and all the other web pages at F.A.C.T.S. Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 Sherwood C. Ensey & F.A.C.T.S. No part of this web page or the contents in it may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or manner whatsover, or for any purpose whatsoever, without the explicit written permission of the author.

WARNING!!! By entering into this site you voluntarily agree to submit to the terms of this agreement, and hereby acknowledge your acceptance of the terms of this agreement, as herein stated.