John Ashcroft & S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998

John Ashcroft & The Christian Coalition

NO "ad libitum" POWERS GRANTED TO CONGRESS

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES - Part 4

APPENDIX A
This adjunct, hereinafter known as Appendix A, page 62-92, is hereby incorporated into and made a part of this redress of grievance(s).

I. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND FURTHER CHARGES

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, was introduced on September 8, 1997, and on September 7, 1998, H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, was placed on the calendar in the Senate after the measure passed the House by a 375-41 roll call vote #155, on May 14, 1998. S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 was introduced into the Senate on February 4, 1998.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, is another constitutional violation of the Separation of Church and State and Freedom of Religion, i.e., Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, are further declared and found to be unconstitutional because they seek to apply the constitutional limitations to authorities outside and/or not under the constitutional jurisdiction of the United States of America.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, further seeks to impose unconstitutional restraints onto other people who are not American citizens, and thereby not bound by the protections and/or restraints of the United States Constitution.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, has one very clear objective, and that is to give "constitutional" religious preference to the dogmas, doctrines, and/or teachings of the Christian Church, and/or those individuals, and/or groups, and/or other parties who adhere to the Christian teachings, dogmas, and/or doctrines of a monotheistic religion. The main group of individuals being targeted for protection under this act is the followers of Christianity and other monotheistic religions. The sole purpose of these bills is to make monotheistic religious beliefs, and in particular the Christian religion, a part of the laws of the United States, and therefore a part of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, whereas this would establish the one "God" worship and belief, as well as the Christian church, into the Constitution of the United States.

"I am for freedom of religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendency of one sect over another." Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, further seeks to apply those powers found in H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, to prevent the further "supposed" religious persecution of Christians in America. H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, will continue the opening of the constitutional doorway that will grant special privileges and/or immunities to Christianity, and other monotheistic religions that are presently being denied that privilege under the "absolute" neutrality of the First Amendment to the United States Bill of Rights.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, is hereby further proof and evidence that there are those in Congress, the government, and outside of government, that are purposely and intentionally constructing and creating Congressional bills that will have destructive or injurious in its effects outcomes to the United States Constitutions First Amendment "declaratory" and "restrictive" "absolute" rights, to Freedom of Religion and the "totally absolute" Separation of Church and State. It can therefore can only be construed by the actions of those individuals and/or groups involved, with the creation and support of H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, that their intentions are therefore hostile to or opposes the purposes and interests of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. By these abusive and misconstructive actions against the Constitution, the people, and therefore the government of the United States, H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, can only be construed to be a treasonable offense(s), that are (is) being created and/or otherwise attempting to be brought forth, by Congress and others.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, fully violates the "absolute" and "neutral" intent and meaning of the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights, United States Constitution. The application of the First Amendment rights to countries outside of United States jurisdiction is a blatant violation of the sovereignty of those countries and the people residing therein, as it is up to those countries and their own people to adopt acts and/or laws pertaining to Religious Liberty. It is not the constitutional right or the duty of the United States to impose "religious" beliefs onto anyone, not in the United States, and definitely not outside the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, further violates the "neutrality" of the First Amendment in respect to the specific constitutional mandate to Congress that, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, is clearly and openly an abridgment and/or misconstruction of that "restrictive" clause that Congress shall make no law…

Whereas, these abridging and misconstructive actions that have been, and are being done to the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, the people, and the government thereof, are also actions that are against the inalienable American right(s) of the people, to an individualistic self-determination, as those different and "absolute" self-determination rights are constitutionally put forth in the First Amendment. It was the self-determination of the founders of this great Nation that formed and shaped the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the government of the United States.

S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, is also a bill with the same objectives and intent as H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and is hereby offered as further proof and evidence, that there are individual(s) in both Houses of Congress, the government, and outside of government, that are purposely and intentionally constructing and creating Congressional bills that will have destructive or injurious in its effects outcomes to the United States Constitutions, First Amendment "declaratory" and "restrictive" "absolute" rights to Freedom of Religion, and the "totally-absolute" Separation of Church and State. It can therefore, only be creditably assumed by the recorded actions and/or acts of those involved, with the creation and support of S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, and H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, that these individuals intentions are hostile to or opposes the purposes and interests of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Whereas, these abusive and misconstructive actions against the Constitution, the people, and therefore the government of the United States of America, H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, can only be construed to be hostile with intent, and therefore treasonable offense(s) that have been, and are still being created for the benefit and gain of Christianity and/or other monotheistic religions.

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 has taken part and/or purposely co-conspired in the creation of H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, with the charge of Conspiracy to Commit Treason and/or Treason itself. H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, are by virtue of there 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, said 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] vote for the H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998, and S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, are shown next to their names. Names and dates have been taken from the Congressional Record of the 105th Congress.

H. R. 2431, the Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1998:
Rep Wolf - 09/08/97................................Rep Abercrombie - 03/2798
Rep Ackerman - 05/14/98........................Rep Aderholt - 09/08/97
Rep Allen - 05/14/98................................Rep Andrews - 11/07/97
Rep Archer - 05/14/98.............................Rep Armey - 05/14/98
Rep Bachus - 10/08/97............................Rep Baesler - 05/14/98
Rep Baker - 10/08/97..............................Rep Baldacci - 04/22/98
Rep Ballenger - 05/14/98.........................Rep Barcia - 10/08/97
Rep Barr - 05/14/98 ................................Rep Barrett (NE) - 05/14/98
Rep Bartlett - 10/08/97............................Rep Barton - 10/08/97
Rep Bass - 05/14/98................................Rep Becerra - 05/14/98
Rep Bentsen - 05/14/98...........................Rep Bereuter - 05/14/98
Rep Berman - 05/14/98...........................Rep Berry - 05/14/98
Rep Bilbray - 05/14/98............................Rep Bilirakis - 03/05/98
Rep Bishop - 09/08/97............................Rep Blagojevich - 03/27/98
Rep Bliley - 05/14/98..............................Rep Blunt - 09/08/97
Rep Boehlert - 10/08/97..........................Rep Boehner - 05/14/98
Rep Bono - 05/14/98..............................Rep Borski - 05/14/98
Rep Boswell - 05/14/98...........................Rep Boucher - 05/14/98
Rep Boyd - 05/14/98...............................Rep Brady - 05/14/98
Rep Brown (FL) - 05/14/98.....................Rep Brown (OH) - 05/14/98
Rep Bryant - 05/14/98.............................Rep Bunning - 10/08/97
Rep Burr - 05/14/98 ................................Rep Burton - 10/08/97
Rep Buyer - 05/14/98...............................Rep Callahan - 05/14/98
Rep Calvert - 11/12/97.............................Rep Camp - 05/07/98
Rep Campbell - 05/14/98..........................Rep Canady - 10/08/97
Rep Cannon- 05/14/98.............................Rep Capps - 05/14/98
Rep Cardin - 05/14/98..............................Rep Carson - 05/14/98
Rep Castle - 05/14/98...............................Rep Chabot - 05/14/98
Rep Chambliss - 05/14/98.........................Rep Christensen - 03/17/98
Rep Clayton - 05/14/98.............................Rep Clement - 05/14/98
Rep Clyburn - 05/14/98.............................Rep Coble - 05/14/98
Rep Coburn - 10/08/97.............................Rep Collins - 05/14/98
Rep Combest - 05/14/98...........................Rep Condit - 03/05/98
Rep Cook - 05/07/98................................Rep Cooksey - 09/08/97
Rep Costello - 05/14/98............................Rep Cox - 10/08/97
Rep Coyne - 05/14/98..............................Rep Cramer - 05/14/98
Rep Cubin - 05/14/98...............................Rep Cummings - 02/12/98
Rep Cunningham - 05/14/98......................Rep Danner - 05/14/98
Rep Davis (FL) - 05/14/98........................Rep Davis (IL) - 05/14/98
Rep Davis (VA) - 05/14/98.......................Rep Deal - 05/14/98
Rep DeFazio - 10/30/97...........................Rep Delahunt - 05/14/98
Rep DeLauro - 05/14/98..........................Rep DeLay - 05/14/98
Rep Deutsch - 05/14/98...........................Rep Diaz-Balart - 10/08/97
Rep Dixon - 05/14/98..............................Rep Doggett - 05/14/98
Rep Doolittle - 10/08/97...........................Rep Doyle - 05/14/98
Rep Dreier - 05/14/98..............................Rep Duncan - 09/08/97
Rep Dunn - 05/14/98................................Rep Edwards - 05/14/98
Rep Ehlers - 09/08/97..............................Rep Ehrlich - 05/14/98
Rep Emerson - 10/08/97..........................Rep Engel - 05/14/98
Rep Ensign - 05/14/98..............................Rep Eshoo - 05/14/98
Rep Etheridge - 10/08/97.........................Rep Evans - 10/08/97
Rep Everett - 05/14/98............................Rep Ewing - 05/14/98
Rep Farr - 10/08/97................................Rep Fattah - 05/14/98
Rep Fawell - 05/14/98.............................Rep Filner - 05/14/98
Rep Foley - 10/08/97..............................Rep Forbes - 11/07/97
Rep Ford - 05/14/98...............................Rep Fossella - 05/14/98 Rep
Fox - 05/14/98........................................Rep Frank - 10/08/97
Rep Franks - 11/07/97............................Rep Frelinghuysen - 05/14/98
Rep Frost - 05/14/98...............................Rep Furse - 10/08/97
Rep Gallegly - 05/14/98...........................Rep Ganske - 05/14/98
Rep Gejdenson - 05/14/98......................Rep Gekas - 05/14/98
Rep Gephardt - 05/14/98........................Rep Gilchrest - 09/08/97
Rep Gillmor - 09/08/97...........................Rep Gilman - 09/08/97
Rep Goode - 10/08/97............................Rep Goodlatte - 05/14/98
Rep Goodling - 10/08/97........................Rep Gordon - 10/30/97
Rep Goss - 05/14/98..............................Rep Graham - 05/14/98
Rep Granger - 05/14/98..........................Rep Green - 04/01/98
Rep Greenwood - 05/14/98...................Rep Gutierrez - 05/14/98
Rep Gutnecht - 05/14/98.......................Rep Hall (OH) - 05/14/98
Rep Hall (TX) - 05/14/98......................Rep Hansen - 05/14/98
Rep Hastert - 05/14/98.........................Rep Hastings - 03/27/98
Rep Hayworth - 05/14/98.....................Rep Hefley - 10/08/97
Rep Herger - 05/14/98..........................Rep Hill - 11/07/97
Rep Hilleary - 05/14/98.........................Rep Hinchey - 05/14/98
Rep Hinojosa - 05/14/98.......................Rep Hobson - 05/14/98
Rep Hoekstra - 10/08/97......................Rep Holden - 05/14/98
Rep Hooley - 05/14/98.........................Rep Horn - 10/08/97
Rep Hoestettler - 05/14/98...................Rep Hoyer - 05/14/98
Rep Hulshof - 05/14/98........................Rep Hunter - 10/08/97
Rep Hutchinson - 09/08/97...................Rep Hyde - 05/14/98
Rep Inglis - 10/08/97...........................Rep Istook - 05/14/98
Rep Jackson - 05/14/98.......................Rep Jackson-Lee - 05/14/98
Rep Jenkins - 05/14/98........................Rep John - 05/14/98
Rep Johnson (WI) - 05/14/98..............Rep Johnson, E. B. - 05/14/98
Rep Johnson, S - 05/14/98..................Rep Jones - 05/14/98
Rep Kanjorski - 05/14/98...................Rep Kaptur - 02/12/98
Rep Kasich - 05/14/98........................Rep Kelly - 09/08/97
Rep Kennedy-MA-05/14/98...............Rep Kennedy-RI-05/14/98
Rep Kennelly - 05/14/98.....................Rep Kildee - 05/14/98
Rep Kilpatrick - 05/14/98...................Rep Kim - 05/14/98
Rep Kind (WI)- 04/22/98...................Rep King (NY) - 09/08/97
Rep Kingston - 05/14/98.....................Rep Kleczka - 05/14/98
Rep Klink - 04/01/98..........................Rep Klug - 05/14/98
Rep Knollenberg - 05/14/98................Rep Kucinich - 05/14/98
Rep LaFalce - 05/14/98......................Rep LaHood - 10/30/97
Rep Lampson - 05/14/98....................Rep Lantos - 05/14/98
Rep Largent - 05/14/98......................Rep Latham - 05/14/98
Rep LaTourette - 10/08/97.................Rep Lazio - 05/14/98
Rep Leach - 05/14/98........................Rep Lee - 05/14/98
Rep Levin - 05/14/98.........................Rep Lewis (GA) - 05/14/98
Rep Lewis (KY) - 05/14/98...............Rep Linder - 05/14/98
Rep Lipinski - 09/08/97.....................Rep Livingston - 05/14/98
Rep LoBiondo - 05/14/98..................Rep Lofgren - 10/08/97
Rep Lowey - 05/14/98......................Rep Lucas - 10/08/97
Rep Luther - 05/14/98.......................Rep Maloney (CT) - 05/14/98
Rep Maloney-NY-05/14/98..............Rep Manton - 09/08/97
Rep Manzullo - 05/14/98...................Rep Markey - 10/08/97
Rep Martinez - 05/14/98....................Rep Mascara - 05/14/98
Rep McCarthy -MO-5/14/98.............Rep McCarthy -NY-05/14/98
Rep McCollum - 05/14/98..................Rep McCrery - 05/14/98
Rep McDade - 05/14/98....................Rep McGovern - 05/14/98
Rep McHale - 10/30/97.....................Rep McHugh - 05/14/98
Rep McInnis - 05/14/98.....................Rep McIntosh - 10/08/97
Rep McIntyre - 05/14/98....................Rep McKeon - 10/30/97
Rep McKinney - 05/14/98..................Rep McNulty - 05/14/98
Rep Meehan - 05/14/98......................Rep Meek - 05/14/98
Rep Meeks - 05/14/98........................Rep Menendez - 05/14/98
Rep Metcalf - 05/14/98.......................Rep Mica - 05/14/98
Rep Millender-McDonald - 05/14/98...Rep Miller (CA) - 10/08/97
Rep Miller (FL) - 05/14/98..................Rep Minge - 05/14/98
Rep Moakley - 05/14/98.....................Rep Moran (KS) - 05/14/98
Rep Morella - 03/27/98.......................Rep Murtha - 05/14/98
Rep Myrick - 03/05/98........................Rep Nadler - 05/14/98
Rep Neal - 05/14/98...........................Rep Nethercutt - 05/14/98
Rep Neumann - 02/12/98....................Rep Ney - 05/14/98
Rep Northup - 05/14/98......................Rep Norwood - 03/27/98
Rep Nussle - 05/14/98.........................Rep Olver - 09/08/97
Rep Ortiz - 05/14/98............................Rep Owens - 05/14/98
Rep Oxley - 05/14/98..........................Rep Packard - 05/14/98
Rep Pallone - 05/14/98........................Rep Pappas - 10/08/97
Rep Parker - 05/14/98.........................Rep Pascrell - 05/14/98
Rep Pastor - 05/14/98..........................Rep Paxon - 05/14/98
Rep Payne - 05/14/98..........................Rep Pease - 05/14/98
Rep Pelosi - 09/08/97...........................Rep Peterson-MN-05/14/98
Rep Peterson-PA-05/14/98.................Rep Petri - 05/14/98
Rep Pickering - 05/14/98.....................Rep Pitts - 05/14/98
Rep Pomeroy - 05/14/98.....................Rep Porter - 09/08/97
Rep Portman - 05/14/98......................Rep Poshard - 11/13/97
Rep Price (NC) - 05/14/98..................Rep Pryce (OH) - 05/14/98
Rep Radanovich - 05/14/98.................Rep Rahall - 05/14/98
Rep Ramstad - 03/27/98.....................Rep Redmond - 10/08/97
Rep Regula - 05/14/98........................Rep Reyes - 05/14/98
Rep Riley - 10/30/97..........................Rep Rivers - 05/14/98
Rep Rodriguez - 05/14/98..................Rep Roemer - 05/14/98
Rep Rogan - 05/14/98........................Rep Rogers - 03/27/98
Rep Rohrabacher - 09/08/97..............Rep Ros-Lehtinen-05/14/98
Rep Rothman - 05/14/98....................Rep Roukema - 04/01/98
Rep Roybal-Allard-5/14/98................Rep Royce - 05/14/98
Rep Rush - 10/08/97..........................Rep Ryun - 05/14/98
Rep Sanchez - 10/08/97.....................Rep Sandlin - 05/14/98
Rep Sawyer - 05/14/98......................Rep Saxton - 03/27/98
Rep Scarborough - 10/08/97..............Rep Schaefer, D - 05/14/98
Rep Schaffer, Bob - 09/08/97............Rep Schumer - 04/01/98
Rep Scott - 05/14/98.........................Rep Sensenbrenner - 10/08/97
Rep Serrano - 05/14/98.....................Rep Sessions - 02/12/98
Rep Shadegg - 05/14/98....................Rep Shaw - 05/14/98
Rep Shays - 05/14/98........................Rep Sherman - 05/14/98
Rep Shimkus - 05/14/98....................Rep Shuster - 05/14/98
Rep Sisisky - 05/14/98......................Rep Skeen - 05/14/98
Rep Skelton - 05/14/98.....................Rep Slaughter - 05/14/98
Rep Smith-MI-05/14/98....................Rep Smith-NJ- 05/14/98
Rep Smith-OR-05/14/98...................Rep Smith-TX-05/14/98
Rep Smith, Linda-05/14/98................Rep Snowbarger - 05/14/98
Rep Solomon - 10/08/97...................Rep Souder - 10/08/97
Rep Spence - 10/08/97.....................Rep Spratt - 05/14/98
Rep Stabenow - 05/14/98.................Rep Stark - 10/08/97
Rep Stearns - 05/14/98.....................Rep Stenholm - 04/22/98
Rep Strickland - 10/08/97.................Rep Stupak - 02/12/98
Rep Sununu - 05/14/9.......................Rep Talent - 10/08/97
Rep Tanner - 05/14/98.....................Rep Tauzin - 05/14/98
Rep Taylor (MS) - 05/14/98.............Rep Taylor (NC) - 10/30/97
Rep Thomas - 05/14/98...................Rep Thompson - 05/14/98
Rep Thornberry - 05/14/98..............Rep Thune - 05/14/98
Rep Thurman - 05/14/98..................Rep Tiahrt - 05/14/98
Rep Tierney - 05/14/98....................Rep Towns - 09/08/97
Rep Turner - 10/08/97.....................Rep Upton - 10/08/97
Rep Velazquez - 10/30/97...............Rep Vento - 05/14/98
Rep Visclosky - 04/01/98................Rep Walsh - 03/05/98
Rep Wamp - 09/08/97....................Rep Watkins - 05/14/98
Rep Watts (OK) - 09/08/97............Rep Waxman - 05/14/98
Rep Weldon-FL-05/14/98..............Rep Weldon (PA) - 05/14/98
Rep Weller - 05/14/98....................Rep Wexler - 05/14/98
Rep Weygand - 05/14/98...............Rep White - 05/14/98
Rep Whitfield - 05/14/98................Rep Wicker - 10/08/97
Rep Wise - 05/14/98......................Rep Woolsey - 05/14/98
Rep Wynn - 05/14/98....................Rep Yates - 05/14/98
Rep Young-AK-05/14/98..............Rep Young (FL) - 05/14/98
Rep Dickey - 09/08/97..................Rep Torres - 10/08/97
Rep Sanders - 04/01/98.................Rep Filner - 04/22/98

S.1868, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998:
Sen Nickles - 03/26/98..................Sen Mack - 03/26/98
Sen Lieberman - 03/26/98..............Sen Kempthorne - 03/26/98
Sen Craig - 03/26/98.....................Sen Hutchinson - 03/26/98
Sen DeWine - 03/26/98.................Sen Enzi - 03/30/98
Sen Helms - 04/01/98....................Sen Sessions - 04/02/98
Sen Faircloth - 04/23/98................Sen Allard - 04/23/98
Sen Brownback - 05/13/98............Sen Inhofe - 05/15/98
Sen Coats - 05/20/98.....................Sen Smith, Bob - 06/01/98
Sen Collins - 06/05/98....................Sen Bond - 06/10/98
Sen Thomas - 06/18/98...................Sen Hutchison - 07/07/98
Sen Lott - 07/07/98........................Sen Coverdell - 07/24/98
Sen Akaka - 07/27/98....................Sen Burns - 07/29/98
Sen Ashcroft - 08/31/98.................Sen Santorum - 09/03/98
Sen Breaux - 09/14/98

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).

It is hereby further affirmed by evidence submitted within these grievances, that there are organizations like the Christian Coalition and others, that are very much "illegally" intermeddling into the affairs of government in order to have their Christian agenda adhered to in Congress. Christian religious organizations and/or institutions like the Christian Coalition only care about legislation and/or laws that will further benefit their Christian religion, and they don't care that what they are doing is at the expense of destroying the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Their only goal is the furtherance of their lies for the purpose of their financial manipulation and therefore financial gain over the masses of the people. The Christian Coalition regularly courts United States Senators and Representatives, like Senators John Ashcroft and Trent Lott, and Representatives like Newt Gingrich and J. C. Watts. These close relationships and ties between religious organizations and members of Congress continue to put a very heavy burden and strain on the basic constitutional human rights of the American people. It is hereby further declared by these grievances, that there is to be an immediate and complete investigation into the activities of members of Congress who regularly cooperate with the Christian Coalition and/or other religious organizations. It is hereby further declared by these grievances, that the United States government will initiate and conduct a full investigation into both Congress and religious organizations that have close ties with each other, and/or that have relationships that intermeddle into each others affairs.

Whereas, the following information was obtained from the Christian Coalition web site at http://www.cc.org/legislation/legvics.html on September 19,1998, and is hereby submitted into evidence supporting the statements herein made in reference to the Christian Coalition and members of Congress:
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AMENDMENT: Thursday, June 4, marked the first time in 27 years that the House of Representatives held a vote on an amendment to the Constitution to permit school prayer. The Religious Freedom Amendment (H.J. Res. 78) fell short of the necessary two-thirds majority to pass a Constitutional Amendment. The final vote was 224-203. However, the majority of the House, in a bipartisan fashion, voted for the Religious Freedom Amendment. This reflects the importance that America places on religious liberties and how the courts have been rolling back those rights for the last 36 years. It also highlights the dedicated work our members and supporters of the Christian Coalition have been doing in support of the Religious Freedom Amendment. Thank you for all your faithful efforts and prayers. The Christian Coalition article fails to mention that on July 16, 1996, 104th Congress, 2d Session, H. J. RES. 184, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to further protect religious freedom, including the right of students in public schools to pray, was Introduced in the House. The Christian Coalition also failed to mention S. J. RES. 45, that was introduced on December 22, 1995 by Senator Hatch, and the fact that bill would have allowed for Christian prayer in school, nor does the Christian Coalition mention H. J. RES. 161, that was introduced on February 28, 1996, and the fact that it also had the intention of supporting prayer in schools. The Christian Coalition also fails to inform the public of the already more than 201 bills that have been introduced into Congress during the 104th and 105th Congress with the same intent, and that is to destroy the First Amendment constitutional "declaratory" rights to an "absolute" and full wall of separation between Church and State, and the "absolute" right of the people to believe and worship as they individually see fit. The Christian Coalition further fails to inform the people that during the 102nd Congress, H. J. RES. 150. IH was introduced into the House to propose a constitutional amendment that would have had an effect of allowing prayer in school. The Christian Coalition further fails to inform the people that during the 101st Congress, H. J. RES. 159. IH was introduced into the House proposing an amendment to the Constitution that in effect would have restored prayer in school. A vote had to take place in order to forward or kill those bills, so there have been other votes in Congress within the past 27 years to establish prayer in school.

The Christian Coalition goes on to further state: The issue of religious freedom will remain a top legislative priority for the Christian Coalition. Realizing that constitutional Amendments usually do not pass the first time around, Christian Coalition will continue to work to bring the Religious Freedom Amendment back to the House floor in the future… Senator Inhofe (OK) offered a religious freedom amendment in the Senate. We are excited to see the senate respond with an effort to pass a Constitutional Amendment to ensure religious freedoms. We will keep you informed as more details are made known. The Christian Coalition has made their position well known, and that is that the Christian Coalition will not stop their relentless pursuit to abridge and/or misconstruct the "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights of the First amendment until they have succeeded in doing so. These actions by the Christian Coalition, are by there every intent and meaning, a failure to support, obey, and protect the Constitution of the United States of America, and are therefore by all intents and purposes, something that is hostile and injurious, i.e., an enemy, to the support and preservation of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, the government, and the people residing therein.

"If anything pass in a religious meeting seditiously and contrary to the public peace, let it be punished in the same manner and no otherwise than as if it had happened in a fair or market." Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776

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

"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

II. THE RELIGIOUS AGENDA OF CONGRESS

Other "religious" bills continue to be put forth in Congress that are in direct violation of the First Amendment "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights that the people are guaranteed. The First Amendment "restrictive" order to Congress that they are not to make any such bills or resolutions abridging and/or misconstructing those "absolute" First Amendment rights is not being adhered to, and Congress is proceeding ahead and doing whatever they wish, without regard for those constitutional restraints. There is evidence in the Congressional Record and elsewhere that is more than enough substantial proof to verify the "correctness" and "validity" of the allegations contained in these grievances and in this statement.

Whereas, a listing from the 101st through the current 105th Congress is hereby attached and made a part of this redress of grievances. This listing is in support of this, and/or other claims, as represented within the pages of these grievances. This further adjunct serves to represent the numerous and various bill creations by Congress and members of Congress, to create Legislation, Bills, Amendments, and/or other laws that do create, and/or will be "unconstitutional" abridgments and/or misconstructions of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

III. A "TECHNICAL" AND THEREFORE LEGAL DISSOLUTION

Congressional bills are regularly being introduced into Congress that contain serious abridgments, and/or misconstructions to the Constitution and the Bill of rights. Many of these bills in Congress are bills that are to cause to be or become laws, and that will when passed, will adversely affect the intended "absolute" "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. These bills are therefore, by there very nature and intent, treasonable acts against the United States Constitution, the people, and the government of the United States of America.

We the People, and therefore our government, are at a very dangerous threshold and point in history. The abuses, abridgments, and misconstructions of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, is leading this Nation and its government precariously close to a "technical" and therefore legal dissolution. The past, recent, current, and ongoing attack(s) on the last remaining "absolute," "declaratory," and "restrictive" constitutional rights that the people presently enjoy, is signaling a clear indication that the republic and its Constitution may very well be in the "clear and present danger," and deadly grasp of its enemies, and those that are hostile to those basic and "absolute" constitutional rights. There is nothing more injurious or harmful to the people and government of the United States, and especially to the Constitution itself, than the intentional and methodical abridgment and/or misconstruction of those "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights by those in Congress and elsewhere in government, and society.

IV. THE CONSTITUTION, ENEMIES, INTENT, AND MEANING

Thomas Jefferson believed in the Constitution and the rights that it holds for the people, and as one of its most famous framers, he was clear on the issue of intent and meaning. In 1799 he wrote on the intent of preserving the Constitution and on those that would harm it; "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." Jefferson made it clear that for the nation to remain strong it must have a strong Constitution with its "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses in tact. In that statement Thomas Jefferson makes it clear that the friends of the Constitution are those things and/or individuals that are willing to preserve, support, and protect the Constitution, and that the Constitutions enemies are those things and/or individuals, that are not in agreement with preserving, supporting, and protecting the Constitution and its "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights.

The enemies of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights of the Constitution are constantly using the argument that rights like those contained in the First Amendment are not clearly defined, and therefore those rights need congressional re-interpretation to correct the vagueness.

Those that support, obey, and defend the Constitution, and are therefore its friends, see the Constitution as a no argument against it document, that guarantees to the people a very important set of "neutral" and basic rights that all American people are entitled to. Simply put by Thomas Jefferson in 1823, "Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure." The Constitution was written with common sense and a basic understanding in mind, nothing more and nothing less, and again this is reflected by Jefferson in 1812, "Common sense [is] the foundation of all authorities, of the laws themselves, and of their construction." The Constitution was written to be understood simply, and therefore it is to be supported and obeyed in its simplest terms, with no major smoke and mirrors lawyer magic attached to it. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are very clear on both intent and meaning as to the "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights that enumerated in them, and they do not need any congressional metaphysical re-interpretations to reconstruct their true intent and meanings.

Another important first step to determining the simple clarity of the intent and meaning in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, is first establishing how the framers of those great documents felt about a societies inalienable right to self-determination, and having a government that would work towards that goal. Thomas Jefferson wrote on this in 1816; "Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its association (to its Constitution and government), and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and pseudo-citizens, on such terms." By this we know that a primary goal of the Constitution was to secure a government where American society could repair it, when those in power within government went beyond the safeguards of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses enumerated to in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights felt that the people are to be a part of the Constitution and the government formed by it, and therefore an integral and intertwined part of both, and that this was basic to the preservation of the basic Constitution and Bill of Rights, which was necessary for both good government and a good society. The closing remarks of Jefferson's statement, qualifies that those who are hostile to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution and the republic for which it stands, are not wanted in either our government or as a citizen of the United States, because these individuals principles are not in solid agreement with the Constitution, and are therefore not true American principles based on the Constitution. This is also a qualifying statement for how a traitor is generally regarded in society.

The right(s) of an individual(s) to self-determination in society, must therefore coincide equally with the people(s) right to have that same self-determination and resolve within their government, and an equal and fair ability to use it effectively, and that the total rights of a society are no more than the basic and natural rights of the single individual within United States society. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were formed to meet those needs, by the use of "declaratory," "restrictive," and "absolute" rights, as well as to administer those rights in a neutral, equal, and fair manner. That is the true intent and meaning of the Constitution and Bill of Rights as the framers saw it, no more or no less. Thomas Jefferson summed this up in 1789; "What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals."

The good and value of American society, is therefore dependent on a set of "absolute" basic rights that will preserve that good and value, and it is the basic rights that are found in the original Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States, that makes up those "declaratory," and therefore "absolute" rights. The rights in the Constitution support each other and depend on each other, and they are dependent on the person to preserve and protect them whenever a need arises that attacks those rights. Self-determination and legitimate government are dependent on this principle, and the Constitution demands it.

V. NO "ad libitum" POWERS GRANTED TO CONGRESS

Congress also continually uses the excuse of Article I, Section 8, the last clause, to shore up and bolster their position, that Congress is entitled to create and/or make any necessary and proper laws that they want in order to provide for the general welfare of the United States. What Congress has done and continues to do, is to give themselves an unrestrained ad libitum, to re-interpret, and do with the Constitution and the rights in it as Congress sees fit, and the Constitution and the peoples rights are of no concern to them. It has become for Congress; the Constitution and people be damned, we will do whatever we please with them in any manner that we see fit. This is not exactly what Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers had in mind when the Constitution and Bill of Rights was authored. In fact, it is quite the opposite of what they intended.

Article I, Section 8, the last clause in Section 8 affirms that Congress is, To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Office thereof. This clause affirms, that Congress only has the limited powers necessary to develop laws for putting into affect the provisions enumerated to in Article I, Section 8 only, nothing more nor less. Thomas Jefferson wrote on this issue several times, and each time Jefferson stressed that Congress had not been given "ad libitum for any purpose they [Congress] please," and Jefferson further affirmed that Congress is "To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, 'to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.' For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they [Congress] please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union." Thomas Jefferson, 1791.

Again in 1791, Thomas Jefferson went on to further affirm the powers of Congress in regards to the powers of Article I, Section 8: "They [Congress] are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument [the Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they [Congress] please… Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given them [Congress]. It was intended to lace them [Congress] up strictly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect."

As the Constitution applies there are no broad powers given to Congress to apply that power as Congress may see fit, and in 1798 Thomas Jefferson wrote; "The construction applied… to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power 'to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States,' and 'to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,' goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to [the General Government's] power by the Constitution… Words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers ought not to be construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument."

Thomas Jefferson further affirmed again in 1817, that there are no broad powers intended for Congress to have and/or to delegate: "Our [the framers of the Constitution] tenet ever was… that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated, and that, as it was meant that they [Congress] should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action; consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money."

So by the framers own definition of intent and meaning over the issue of Congress having the broad power of ad libitum to do whatever Congress pleases, to provide for the general welfare of the people, is not a constitutional power that has been specifically delegated to Congress, either by the Constitution or by the people. Therefore, when Jefferson made this opinion on the Constitution in 1799; "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;" can only mean that those who did not want to comprehend the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, as they were accepted and ratified by the people, upon the founding of the United States of America, because the Constitution and Bill of Rights did not suit their own personal beliefs or desires, therefore, by virtue of these actions, became enemies to the people, the Constitution, and the government of the United States of America. There is no legally viable constitutional authority granting broad based powers to Congress, that allows Congress and/or its members therein, to use any ad libitum power and authority over the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States, and therefore over the people and the government of that Constitution.

Whereas, most of the ad libitum advantage that this and many past Congresses of the United States have taken over the past 200+ years, and continue to take with the Constitution and Bill of Rights, has been and remains, "something destructive or injurious in its effects" to the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is due to the fact, that any ad libitum advantage over the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that does not support, and therefore obey and protect (preserve) the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States, is therefore, something that is hostile and "or injurious in its effects" to the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition, simply describes an enemy as "something destructive or injurious in its effects" and as "a hostile force" or "one who feels hatred toward, intends injury to, or opposes the interests of another."

We the People of the United States, the Congress and the members thereof, and all of the other members of government in the United States of America, have an "absolute" usufruct [FOOTNOTE 1] responsibility to the ordained and established United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Republican Form of Government thereof, which is; "The right to use and enjoy the profits and advantages…" of the Constitution and government, "as long as the property…" [the Constitution and Republican Form of Government] "is not damaged or altered in any way." Therefore, We the People, and the members of Congress, and other members of the government, must uphold and therefore support, preserve, and protect the "declaratory" and "restrictive" republican principles and rights enumerated to in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, as Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution legally affirms, The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.

[FOOTNOTE 1: Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition, 1996. Law. "The right to use and enjoy the profits and advantages of something belonging to another as long as the property is not damaged or altered in any way."

When corruption in Congress and its members has so freely availed itself, so as to allow for continuing hostile and/or injurious acts to be attempted and/or committed against the support, preservation, and protection of the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States of America, then it is time that those abusive and harmful practices were stopped and made an example of, so they will not be repeated again in the future. This opinion and view is expressed by Thomas Jefferson, in 1804, when he wrote; "[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 [person] guilty of it, whatever be his station."

VI. IF IT IS NOT TREASON THEN WHAT ELSE, IS IT?

Article III, Section 3 affirms; Treason against the United states, shall consist in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The following excerpt is from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition, which defines treason as, a. Violation of allegiance [support] toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies; b. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

All the reasons for treason against the aforementioned members of Congress, herein listed in these numerous grievances, are just and reasonable charges for the highcrimes that those members of Congress have, and continue to commit, against the Constitution, the people, and the government of the United States of America.

Failing to support the Constitution by abridging and/or misconstructing the Constitution, in order that the Constitution and the laws of the United States should be changed to support a particular religious and/or moral belief, based solely on un-provable religious dogmas and doctrine, are hereby deemed to be contrary to the peace and good order within our government and our society. The "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights represent who and what we are as a people, and as a government. If we injuriously harm those most basic of principles, then as a Nation we are doing even more harm to the masses of people in the process. Good and legitimate government does not harm those most basic of human rights found in the Constitution and Bill of Rights; good and legitimate government formed under an equal and just Constitution and Bill of Rights, as with the United States Constitution and Bill of rights, is only instituted to serve and protect the people, and if government is to do anything at all, then they are to further aid in the support and preservation of those most basic of constitutional rights, and a good and legitimate Congress and government does not seek to abridge and/or misconstruct those most basic of human rights due the American people.

The argument in support of treason is this, and it is as stated by 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." There is no constitutional provision allowing for censure in the case of treasonable acts committed by any member of Congress against the Constitution, and therefore against the peoples republican form of government. In the words of Thomas Szasz an American psychiatrist, "If he who breaks the law is not punished, he who obeys it is cheated. This, and this alone, is why lawbreakers ought to be punished: to authenticate as good, and to encourage as useful, law-abiding behavior. The arm of criminal law cannot be correction or deterrence; it can only be the maintenance of the legal order."

The framers of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights knew that a day would probably arise in the distant future, whereby the people would step forward and redress their government and Congress for the wrongs being done to the Constitution, the bill of rights, and the government of the United States. The framers further knew that when that day did arise and present itself that the people were to have a crime that would fit what had been abusively done to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Therefore, it was decided that there was only one acceptable title for the crime of failing to support the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States, and that crime was to be treason. This was to be especially true when the crime was the actual or attempted abridgment and/or misconstruction of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" clauses guaranteeing certain basic American human rights.

If those in authority are not willing to punish those in Congress and elsewhere in our society, for destroying the republic, the Constitution and the Bill of rights, then what type of a government is the United States being ruled by, because it most certainly is not the one that the founders of this country would be proud of, and it is most certainly is not the government that was intended and meant by those who framed the Constitution and Bill of rights.

"Follow truth as the only safe guide, and… eschew error, which bewilders us in one false consequence after another." Thomas Jefferson, 1819

VII. TIME LINE
The following time line and information is excerpted, with permission, from the book, FEDCON: Death of the American Republic, 1998, by Sherwood C. Ensey.
"The ties of government and religion go back to a time when the world was in social turmoil and war was pretty much the daily order of business. Several centuries of problems had taken its toll on the Christians and on the Roman government, and a solution to this continuing problem had to be found. Out of this cloud of uncertainty arose a self-appointed holyman; a Roman Emperor fashioned out of the Roman war machine and dripping in the blood of his enemies, and his odor stank from the evil power and corruption that consumed him. His name was Constantine the Great, Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire.

Constantine had become a self-appointed Christian holy man, when on a night before an important battle he beheld a flaming cross, and was told by a voice in the air, that by this sign of a flaming cross he would win the battle. His forces were victorious the next day and Constantine became a Christian. More than likely the illusion of a flaming cross was no more than Constantine holding his sword in front of an encampment fire during the usual drunken stupor's that preceded battle, but that the author will concede is a debatable point, although it was common for the time, for soldiers to get extremely drunk the night before a major battle.

Constantine the Great was a smart man in any case, and the growing pains and problems of the Roman Empire had not escaped his attention, especially the problems that kept on growing in the Western Roman Empire. The Keltic people in the Empire were so vastly different because of their structure of government and non-defined religion, that this troubled Constantine's Christian views and beliefs, and in the Kelts he saw a direct and strong threat to the Empire he was building. The Christian movement, he also noticed, was an influence that was not going to go away. What Constantine was certain of, was that the Kelts and Christians were under his sphere of influence, and the Christian organization would serve as a useful tool in the new Empire and government Constantine was building, and this new Christian tool could prove especially useful and effective in controlling the Keltic threat to his new Empire. If anything went wrong, he could simply blame it on the Christians.

From this point, a time line will be used to establish dates and facts to allow information to flow easier.

313 CE Emperor Constantine declares Christianity a legal religion, and as a result of this act, Christians ceased to stand apart from the government. Lavish gifts are bestowed on the Church by Constantine, including the gifts of the massive shrines built over the tombs of Saint Paul and Saint Peter in Rome. If you cannot take what you want then buy it!

324 CE Emperor Constantine declares himself Ruler of the whole-civilized world after winning the Battle of Chrysopolis. Constantine has his co-emperor Licinius executed to solidify his base of power. Constantine now has to start dealing with the "heresy" that some Priests of the Church are espousing, mainly that Jesus is not God, and this is in conflict about Constantines opinion and belief that Jesus was God incarnate, and this angers him very much.

325 CE The Council of Nicaea is established by edict of Emperor Constantine for the purpose of establishing the Woo! Woo! in religion, and to also establish by order of Constantine, the divinity of Jesus. One of the prevailing teachings of the day, being taught by the Priest Arius of Alexandria, was that Jesus was a mortal man like other men, and not God, and that Jesus had a great but misunderstood message to give to the people. Those teachings are in total disagreement with the wishes and desires of Constantine, especially the issue on the divinity of Jesus. The Council of Nicaea condemns the teachings of Arius and his followers, and by edict of the Emperor, the Council declares that Jesus is divine. To thwart further problems from Arius and his followers Constantine has them expelled from the Empire and replaces them with Priests that have conformed strictly with his views. Other Priests are removed and replaced throughout the Empire.
The Council also establishes the dates and ceremonies for Easter and Christmas, and both of these celebrations have strong similarities to already established Keltic traditional events.

330 CE The new capital of the world emerges at Constantinople and it has a full integration of Christians into the new government. The new Federalism/Christian style of government has started and so has the Byzantine Empire, and this new government/religion is strictly patriarchal in its authority and power base.

336 CE The priest Arius continues to spread the teachings that Jesus is not divine and is hunted down, caught, and slowly tortured to death.

380 CE Christianity officially becomes the State Religion of the Byzantine Empire and the world will never be the same. At the same time an edict is issued jointly by the government and the Church, and states that anyone found practicing heresy or paganism will be prosecuted for crimes against the Church State Government, and that punishment for these crimes can include death. The divinity of Jesus that was mandated by Constantine and proclaimed by the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE is to be obeyed without question.

381 CE The Council of Nicaea is reconvened to continue establishing what the Doctrines of the Church will be and a gathering of information from all available sources in the Empire is used. One early Doctrine developed by the Council concerns the definition for the Holy Trinity, which has been taken from information about the "triangle of manifestation," an already ancient symbol of life being used by the Keltic people. Other Keltic practices and beliefs would find there way into Church practices and Doctrines, such as the practice of Holy Communion, which is the Keltic practice of "Cakes and Ale." Even Keltic deities would be made into Saints, and an example of that is Saint Bridget, who is actually Brid the mother Goddess of Ireland.

390 CE Saint Jerome starts writing the early Latin Bible known as the Vulgate and supposedly takes material from the Hebrew Texts, but there is some evidence available that appears to indicate Jerome actually used information that had been made up by earlier scholars within the Church itself. There is also no telling how much material he made up on his own.

395 CE The Roman Empire is officially divided up, Rome becomes capital of the Western Empire, and Constantinople becomes capital of the Eastern Empire.

405 CE The Vulgate Bible is finished by Saint Jerome and is largely constructed from the writings compiled by the Council of Nicaea.

410 CE The capital of the Western Empire, Rome, is sacked and looted by the European tribes. What Constantine had envisioned more than 100 years earlier was finally happening and the Western Empire was now in full decline and falling into the possession of European cultures. It would only be a matter of time until the western part of the great Roman Empire was no more.

415 CE The Jews are driven out of the Byzantine Empire city of Alexandria by the new Bishop Cyril, who also incites a mob to murder the Neoplatonic philosopher Hypatia, by having her stripped naked in public and scraped to death with oyster shells. After she is murdered in that most brutal manner, her body is then burned. Opposition to Christianity and to the divinity of Jesus is punishable by the most horrible of deaths, and the people feed off of this like it was some sweet candy.

426 CE Bishop Augustine declares that the sole purpose for marriage is procreation.

430 CE Bishop Augustine dies in the siege of Hippo on August 28th. Augustine leaves behind the writings known as The City of God and other related works, which becomes the most authoritative source on Christianity, with one exception, and those are the writings of Paul. The writings of Augustine would later have a great influence on the construction of the King James Bible.

431 CE The Council of Nicaea meets again as there are more problems with "heresy" in the Empire.
Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, is removed from power for teaching that Jesus was a human being who was joined in perfect harmony with the universe. Nestorius and his followers are banished to the Libyan Desert.
During this time Saint Patrick and his Roman soldiers enter Ireland and proceed towards the center of Keltic power, Tara. As they proceed towards their goal, the soldiers are held responsible for driving out and slaughtering the Keltic clans in strong opposition to the church and government of the Byzantine Empire. When Saint Patrick meets with the new Keltic King in Tara to accept the surrender of Ireland, he thrusts his metal spiked religious staff through the foot of the Keltic King, pinning the foot of the King to the ground, and St. Patrick proudly and loudly exclaims for all to hear, "At Tara today in this fateful hour - I place all heaven with its power." With that unholy thrust, the fate of the Kelts was sealed and the extermination of the Keltic civilization was begun in earnest. Saint Patrick also explains the Holy Trinity to the people of Ireland at the point of a sword.
The cult of the Virgin begins to spread out of the Byzantine Empire after the Council of Ephesus declares Mary the Mother of God. This was done to settle the issue over a divine and virgin Birth of Jesus. The doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus was declared, and it was once again man that declared it so.

476 CE The Western Roman Empire comes to a bitter end and the early beginnings of a more formalized Europe are starting to emerge. The military might of the Byzantine Empire allows soldiers from that empire to move about unopposed, as they are still too strong of a power for the early Europeans to contend with.

622 CE The Arabic world is reeling from years of hostile conflicts due to the many Gods that Arabs worship and these differences are keeping the Arab world from having any strength as a whole. From the ashes of these many conflicts arises a man, not even a prophet, so Mohammed steps forward with a plan after studying religion with the Jews and Christians in the religious center of Mecca. Recognizing the need of unity for the Arab people, and seeing that this one God idea is working well for the Jews and the Christians, Mohammed proclaims that he has had a holy vision from Gabriel, and that he, Mohammed, is the anointed one, the holy prophet from God, the God of Islam. Once again, another self-appointed prophet steps forward. Mohammed immediately declares "Holy War" on the infidels and others that do not follow his way of thinking, and he is especially violent to those that do not bend to his will. Mohammed like the Emperor Constantine the Great, has become a self-appointed holy man, or should we say a madman on the fringe of lunacy like his Christian predecessor Constantine.

628 CE Mohammed pushes his "Holy War" onto the fringes of the Byzantine Empire and is eventually driven out by the overwhelming military might of the Empire he has invaded.

631 CE Mohammed continues his "Holy War" on those that do not want to follow his Islam, and lays siege to the religious center of Mecca, and gives the people four months to convert to Islam or face extermination. A thought to ponder; what type of monotheistic God would ever allow a man like Mohammed to spread a religion by force and violence? Hint: The same type of monotheistic god that allowed the Christians to spread their religion by force and violence.

800 CE On Christmas day, Charlemagne, King of the Franks, the greatest political leader in Europe, is crowned Holy Roman Emperor by Pope Leo III. The framework for Federalism/Christianity is introduced into Europe in one its earliest forms.

999 CE On December 31st of that year Church bells ring and throngs of people flock to the Churches and fall down on their knees in full assurances that the world is going to end, as proclaimed in the Bible and by the religious leaders of that time. The masses of people are astonished and somewhat stunned when the world does not end as predicted. December 31st 1999 should prove to be just as interesting!

1012 CE "Heretics" are hunted down in the Germanic states and persecuted for failing to believe in the divinity of Jesus as God.

1022 CE Celibacy is ordered among the higher clergy of the Church by the Synod of Pavia.

1054 CE The Church splits and many of the powerful in the Byzantine Empire move to Rome as a result of this split.

1067 CE The Anglicized feudal system is reshaped into the Anglicized Roman Catholic rituals and they are created from a combination of Keltic culture and Columban religious rites, and is also referred to as the Black Rood.

1092 CE The Christian Holy Crusades begin.

1204 CE Constantinople is invaded and pillaged by the Christian Holy Crusaders.

1215 CE Pope Innocent III compels Jewish people to wear special clothes or a special badge to set them apart from the rest of the people. Persecutions of all those that are not Christians increases on a larger scale.

1232 CE The Inquisitions begin, which is nothing more than a Church sanctioned and established persecution and extermination of all those who do not believe in the divinity of Jesus. If you want a lie to become the truth and you want to maintain the lie you have to get rid of those that know the real truths.

1239 CE Pope Gregory IX attacks the teachings of the Jewish Talmud and claims that the teachings have directly insulted Jesus and the Doctrines of Christianity. Pope Gregory IX also orders all sets of the Talmud to be seized and burned along with other important writings, and this practice continued for many decades. The wholesale destruction and burning of all Jewish writings and other writings that conflict with Christianity was carried out at the order of the Christian Church.

1261 CE The conquest and occupation of Constantinople by the Christian Holy Crusaders comes to an end and the final years of the Byzantine Empire also begins.

1290 CE England orders all Jewish people expelled from their country.

1291 CE The Muslims recapture all of their lands from the Byzantine Empire.

1306 CE France starts expelling all of the Jewish people in their domain.

1322 CE France continues expelling the Jewish people and they push up their efforts by persecuting those who try and stay.

1391 CE Christian armies invade and re-capture Spain from Muslim and Jewish forces. The result is the mass torture, confiscation of property, and death by fire in public places of tens of thousands of people that are Jewish and Muslim.

1394 CE France again steps up its efforts to expel all Jewish people from their country, and they double their effort by handing down stiffer sentences to those that are inclined to try and stay in France.

1453 CE Constantinople falls to the Turks and the Byzantine Empire comes to a violent end after more than 1,000 years of rule.

1483 CE Torquemada is appointed Chief Inquisitor of the Inquisition and he is immediately charged with the responsibility of Christian purity in Spain.

1492 CE Hundreds of thousands of people that are not Christians are expelled from Spain with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. The Church and the State confiscate all property belonging to those that are not Christians, and even the simplest of personal possessions are not safe from seizure. The graves of those that are not Christians are dug up and looted of their contents by those in power.

1600 CE The inquisitions come to an end after 368 years. There are no exact estimates on the number of people that were exterminated as a result of this nearly four century long persecution of Keltic and Jewish people and others that did not believe in the divinity of Jesus, and the actual totals of people murdered may well range into the ten's of millions. Other persecutions and murders based on Christian control and dominance would continue throughout this century and well into the next century.

1611 CE The King James version of the Bible is released. This new version of the Bible contains less than 40% of the original Bishop's Bible it that it was to be taken from. Much of this new Bible is made up of information compiled from the Byzantine Empire and from sources like St. Jerome, and as a result almost all of the information contained in the new Bible is even less than creditable in its origin than the first Bible. This new version of the Bible would be revised several times over in the following centuries. King James, who commissioned this new Bible, is a virtual religious dictator who imposes his will onto those composing this new Bible and as a result of his power and control, King James puts what he wants into this new Bible. Like the other Christian Bibles before this one, the new King James version is nothing more than the words and will of men, and they are not the words of a monotheistic God that is good and just. The Bible remains simply a tool of those in power and control, to be used for the sole purpose of maintaining control over the masses of the people, to benefit the select few in power and control.

1620 CE Date approximate; Charles I of England, son of King James, comes to power and believes that he, and only he, has the divine right to rule England and also declares sole right over all religious matters. His controlling and manipulative attitude is the same as his fathers.

1628 CE Oliver Cromwell becomes a member of the English Parliament and starts exerting his power. Repression of the people continues to grow worse with the addition of Cromwell to the government. The common people now have two strong and oppressive powers in government to contend with, both Charles I and the Puritans under the leadership of Cromwell.

1630 CE The social situation continues to deteriorate in England. Puritans and others are starting to hear about new settlements springing up across the ocean and about opportunities in the new land. Some people have already left for this new land and soon others will follow. The Puritans and Charles I continue to argue and eventually the arguments lead to civil strife in England, and by 1649 England is plunged into a bloody civil war.

Charles I of England is beheaded in a revolt led by the Puritan, Oliver Cromwell in 1649, and as a result of the revolt Cromwell is made Lord Protector of England. Recent historical evidence has suggested that Oliver Cromwell used violence and murder to control the religious differences that divided England, and that he especially liked using it against the Keltic people, many of whom still opposed the mandated Christian beliefs of the time. There is evidence suggesting that Cromwell's orders and directives concerning the Keltic people, may in the end, have been the one set of orders are directives that doomed those people to near extinction. Final and actual estimates for the number of Kelts that were exterminated under the authority of Cromwell may well soar into the millions, and may very well have passed the number of people murdered by the Nazi regime of World War II. If this number is correct, then Adolph Hitler would pale in comparison to the atrocities that were carried out by Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans in the name of God.

Many unsavory exploits of Christian religious leaders has graced the news in recent times, and the records of newspapers dotted across the United States, from this century, are filled with the countless exploits of religious people and religious leaders that were involved in illegal and/or immoral incidents. When you put yourself above the rest of the people by way of organized religious virtue and doctrines, than you should learn to live the part and not take advantage of others by overwhelming them with flim flam that cannot even be proven to be fact. None of us are perfect, but when religious leaders and their followers put themselves continually into positions that mimic just how perfect they think that they are, then they should at least act the part. Nevertheless, maybe that is the problem with those kinds of people; they are play acting life instead of being responsible to life.

There are so many incidents of crimes and abuses based on monotheistic religions that they could easily fill volumes of books. These numerous and ever continuing examples serve as reference points and guidelines that one can clearly follow and observe, and the masses of people, one might think, would be getting the message and the idea by now; that organized religion's are nothing more than a tool of the select few, by which the select few gain the profits and benefits. Transgressions and violence against the people done in the name of God by those acting in a godly manner must come to a halt, and the masses of people must learn that those types of negative and unproductive actions are not the correct way to achieve a lasting world peace. What the abusive acts of Christianity and other organized religions do represent and show, is a total disregard for what God should stand for, and people that are religious continue to act as if there was not even a God at all. Knowing what good and evil represents, and observing what the supposedly righteous religious people do, like the Christian Coalition, challenges a person into believing that the god those religious people are following is not a good god, so if it is not a good god then that can only leave evil as the correct god they are worshipping and following. On one side of their religious faces, the religious people piously proclaim God as true and good, and on the other side of their faces those same religious people continue to support and associate themselves with everything that is evil and harmful to society.

If you do not believe that is the truth then read on.

The persecution of non-Christians and those that did not believe in the divinity of Jesus did not escape those that came to America early on. In 1649, the infamous Act of Toleration was issued in the Maryland Colonies by order of Lord Baltimore. This act made it a crime punishable by death to not believe in the divinity of Jesus. For the Keltic and Jewish people who had been forced to come to America as slaves this was an especially bad and harmful act to the things that they believed in, because if they didn't convert to Christianity and declare their belief in the divinity of Jesus, then they were killed, and escaping into the wilderness to avoid the Act of Toleration, was at that time, almost certainly a death sentence in and of itself.

Religious violence and murders done in the name of God continue to plague modern civilization to this very day. In 1997 a small private army in the Sudan went on a killing rampage that left hundreds of people dead, possibly even thousands. Small villages dotted across the landscape of the Sudan were strewn with the mutilated and bloated corpses of the decaying dead, and the only crime of those people was the fact that they were not Christians. The Sudanese Christian Army of God, an extremely militant and violent militia group, was held responsible for the massive killings, and some of not most of their supplies for operations were furnished by Christian organizations in America, including their newly acquired Bibles.

In February 1998, in the Islamic country of Afghanistan, a teenage girl was whipped 100 times in public for walking with a man that was not a relative of hers, and this act was carried out by the Taliban religious army of Islam. At the same time two men had their hands axed off in public for stealing money from a shop. Stray away from the venomous teachings of Mohammed and the people find themselves being butchered alive by supposedly religious and godly men."

This excerpt from the book, FEDCON: Death of the American Republic speaks for itself; already established reference, and historical books to back the information in it.

VIII. PROVE RELIGIOUS RIGHTEOUSNESS OR BE FOREVER SILENT!

If there are those in Congress and elsewhere in our society, that can absolutely prove beyond any and all reasonable doubt, that their religious dogmas, doctrines, and/or religiously based morals are totally correct for America and our Constitution and Bill of Rights, then let them stand forward now and prove their claims, or let them be forever silent on the subject. It is hereby further affirmed, that as part of the necessary and required proof of these individuals and/or groups absolute claims of religious and/or moral correctness (righteousness), that these same individuals and/or groups, are to present the actual and real physical presence of the deity and/or persona known as the one and only (monotheistic) God into the courtroom, and into the public spotlight for all to see, hear, and to question, as well as to publicly debate and test.

This mandatory stipulation is hereby required as a part of these redress of grievances, as the only acceptable proof, and therefore adequate and proper testimony for these individuals and/or groups herein named, to use effectively, in defense of their cause to establish Christianity and/or any other monotheistic religious beliefs, above that of the already established republican principles and rights contained in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Absolute proof of the claim that these individual(s) and/or groups one God, is the one and only correct God to worship, and therefore believe in and follow, is a must stipulation under these dire and therefore very necessary circumstances. Unless these same individuals and members within Congress and others in our society, are willing to back their claims with hard and real physical proof of their beliefs, then they have no real nor true claim that is either right and/or correct for the Constitution and Republican Form of Government of the United States of America. What can and will be said of the situation created by this redress of grievances, is that the excuse of religious error on the part of these individuals and/or groups, will not be allowed as an acceptable excuse and/or escape clause for the very probable criminal acts these individuals and/or groups may have, and/or may be committing against the people, the Constitution, and the Republican Form of Government, of the United States of America. About the only acceptable and allowable excuse that this redress of grievances, will reasonably and therefore legally allow for, is that these same individuals and/or groups named herein, must "absolutely" prove their actual claims and/or factual physical validity of their religious beliefs, without there being any doubt cast on those beliefs whatsoever, and/or in any manner thereof.

All religions, religious beliefs and religious believers, will further constitutionally affirm their strict adherence and "absolute" support to the constitutional "republican" principles as they are set forth in the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States of America. It is hereby further stated, that any adherence to a belief and/or practice of any type, aimed at ordaining and establishing religious beliefs and/or principles above that of the already established "republican" principles and rights, enumerated to in the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States, is an act of overthrowing the Constitution, and therefore the Republican Form of Government of the United States. In order to return the peace and good order to the Constitution and the Republican Form of Government; religion, religious beliefs and religious believers must forever agree and Affirm or take an Oath, not to intermeddle those beliefs and/or worships into the affairs of the Constitution and the Republican Form of Government, of the United States of America, and that this Oath or Affirmation is on penalty of Treason.

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

IX. BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The reasons that, We the People of the United States, in 1787, ordained and established the Constitution for the United States of America:
We the People…
1. In Order to form a more perfect Union.
2. Establish Justice.
3. Insure domestic Tranquillity.
4. Provide for the common defence.
5. Promote the general Welfare.
6. Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.

In six, the founders, the founders Posterity, and the rest of We the People of the United States of America, became the caretakers of the "declaratory" and "restrictive" republican principles and rights enumerated to in the United States Constitution and the Republican Form of Government thereof.

The founding American families in the United States have a special place in the preservation of American principles and constitutional rights, because it is to the founders of the United States of America and to their Posterity, that the Constitution of the United States of America was ordained and established in the first place. To the founders of America and to all the rest of their future descendants, was passed the ever-eternal flame of preserving and protecting the Constitution, the people, and the Republican Form of Government, of the United States of America, from its enemies. For these individuals and their families the real and true spirit of 1776 has never died, and as Thomas Jefferson stated in 1799; "The spirit of 1776 is not dead. It has only been slumbering. The body of the American people is substantially republican. But their virtuous feelings have been played on by some fact with more fiction; they have been the dupes of artful maneuvers, and made for a moment to be willing instruments in forging chains for themselves. But times and truth dissipated the delusion, and opened their eyes."

Even the framers of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights knew that the ever present hostile forces in opposition to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, would continue their assault on the people, the Constitution, and the government of the United States. In 1801, Thomas Jefferson affirmed this by stating to Gideon Granger, "I have never dreamed that all opposition was to cease. The clergy, who have missed their union with the State, the Anglomen, who have missed their union with England, and the political adventurers, who have lost the chance of swindling and plunder in the waste of public money, will never cease to bawl on the breaking up of their sanctuary."

The clergy of the Christian church and other similar monotheistic religious beliefs, the European federalist money monarchies, and the other various monarchies of tyranny and oppression, were indeed perceived by the founding fathers as a continuing and therefore a "hostile" threat to both the Blessings of Liberty in the United States, as well as the rest of the world. With the influx of new immigrants to the United States, would also come the immigration of the corruption that had seized a hold of these individuals in their former countries. The founders were keenly aware of this fact and it is reflected in Jefferson's Notes on Virginia Q.XIII, in 1782: "[We] should look forward to a time, and that not a distant one, when corruption in this as in the country from which we derive our origin will have seized the heads of government and be spread by them through the body of the people; when they will purchase the voices of the people and make them pay the price. Human nature is the same on every side of the Atlantic and will be alike influenced by the same causes."

The danger to the United States and its Constitution, and to the basic human rights of the American people, posed by the continuing threats of corruption from these different sources, therefore, became an issue that was one of grave concern to the founders, because what would in essence affect us as Americans, would in turn also affect the rest of the world. Thomas Jefferson affirmed this in 1811; "Whenever our own dissensions shall let [monarchism and Anglicism] in upon us, the last ray of free government closes on the horizon of the world."

So to safeguard the Constitution's "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights against such serious threats, and to preserve and protect those basic American human rights, and to preserve and protect the republican form of government ordained and established by the United States Constitution, the power of proprietary rights was ordained and established within the Constitution of the United States of America. Those proprietary rights [FOOTNOTE 2] are declared in the Preamble to the United States Constitution, in the clause, We the People…secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. Therefore, the founders of the United States of America, and all of their surviving future descendants, for generation after generation to come, are those to whom the right of constitutional proprietary rights was passed. It is within this group of individuals, i.e., the founders and their Posterity, that the primary responsibility of maintaining (preserving), and protecting the Constitution, and the Principles of the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America, was first ordained to.

[FOOTNOTE 2: This in no way denies any constitutional rights to other United States citizens and their Posterity, that came here after America was founded, it only establishes that the founders and their Posterity have a prior first claim and legal right to preserve and to protect the United States Constitution, and the principles of the Republican Form of Government enumerated within the Constitution.]

The framers of the United States Constitution knew that the necessary and required maintenance of the original principles enumerated to in the Constitution, was and is essential to preserving a republican form of government, that works for the people and not against them, and that it was this type of a Constitution and government that would preserve best the Blessings of Liberty to all the people. Thomas Jefferson in 1819 wrote on this subject; "[It is] in maintenance of [our] principles… I verily believe the future happiness of our country essentially depends," and earlier in 1810 Jefferson is quoted, "So long as [the principles of our revolution] prevail, we are safe from everything which can assail us from without or within." The protection and preservation of a republic is critical and therefore essential to a free society in which there is peace and good order, because as Jefferson recorded in his Commonplace Book, from the writings of Montesuieu, the Spirit of the Laws, VIII,c.12, "When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil." Putting the people and the principles of the republic, on which this great Nation was ordained and established, firmly back into the United States government, and especially the Congress thereof, is therefore mandatory and necessary for bringing back the peace and good order to the United States of America.

"The example we have given to the world is single: that of changing our form of government under the authority of reason only, without bloodshed." Thomas Jefferson, 1788

"It is indeed an animating thought that while we are securing the rights of ourselves and posterity, we are pointing out the way to struggling nations who wish, like us, to emerge from their tyrannies also." Thomas Jefferson, 1790

In protection of, and for the inalienable preservation of the United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the republican form of government; the Posterity of the founder(s) of the United States of America, do hereby invoke the constitutional claim of the proprietary right(s) to a full, just, and therefore complete prosecution and appropriate punishment of those herein named individual(s) and/or groups, who have gravely and/or injuriously harmed the Constitution and Republican Form of Government of the United States of America; charges as fully outlined within this First Amendment "absolute" right of redress of grievances.

In protection of, and for the inalienable preservation of the United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the republican form of government of the United States of America; We the People, the Posterity of the founder(s) of the United States of America, do hereby invoke our constitutional claim of the proprietary right(s) of the founders and their Posterity, to a full and complete redress of grievances, as outlined within these grievances.

The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, are a clear testament to the republican foresight and wisdom of the founders and the framers of the United States Constitution, and the Republican Form of Government, that those founders chose for the United States of America.

Who, if not the Posterity of the founders of the United States, is better qualified to present this redress of grievances more effectively for all of the people? For if truly, We the People, are the government of the United States, and this is our Constitution and true republic, as established by the founders, then the government will have no choice, but to accept and immediately respond in a positive manner to this redress of grievances.

"We have no interests nor passions different from those of our fellow citizens. We have the same object: the success of representative government. Nor are we acting for ourselves alone, but for the whole human race. The event of our experiment is to show whether man can be trusted with self-government. The eyes of suffering [millions of] humanity are fixed on us with anxiety as their only hope, and on such a theatre, for such a cause, we must suppress all smaller passions and local considerations… The last hope of human liberty in this world rests on us."
Thomas Jefferson, 1802, 1811

END OF APPENDIX A

SUMMATION
This right to a full constitutional reparation and restoration of the Constitution and the government of the United States thereof, by We the people, is hereby being initiated by the founding American Ensey family and their Posterity, i.e., Sherwood C. Ensey, et al.; in accordance to the ever binding "declaratory" and "restrictive" rights and "republican" principles enumerated to in the United States Constitution, as they were ordained and established in 1787 to Jacob Ensey and his Posterity, and to all the Posterity of the other founding American families. It is our constitutional right, in fact it is our constitutional duty as founders and Posterity of the United States of America, and as long standing Americans in our duly ordained and established republic, to invoke our constitutional right to preserve and defend the Constitution and the republic of the United States of America .We do therefore invoke this constitutional right for the love, support, and preservation of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America. We hereby assert those founding basic American rights and "republican" principles to the fullest extent of the United States Constitution and laws thereof, and we do so in the name of peace and good order for the republic and the people of the United States of America.

When those in Congress fail in their constitutional obligation to adhere to, and support the United States Constitution and the Republican Form of Government, and continually attack the Constitution and the Presidency with hostile and subversive intentions, then it has come to the time and place in our history, where the people of the United States must take control of the necessary measures to save our republic from the grasp of those that would further seek gain and profit at the expense of our true republic.

It is the "republican" principles and rights contained in the Constitution, that form the basis and legitimacy for the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America. These are the principles and rights that are intended by the framers of the Constitution, to be inviolable and absolutely necessary for the support and preservation of the Republican Form of Government. As long as members of Congress and others in United States government, remain hostile to and ignore these inviolable "republican" principles and rights, then they squander away what is barely left of the true republic and the Constitution of the United States.

"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." Thomas Jefferson, 1799

"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." Thomas Jefferson, 1807

"[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

42 USC Sec. 1983
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, Any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. This United States Code has been upheld by the Supreme Court: "The innocent individual who is harmed by an abuse of government authority is assured that he will be compensated for his injury." Owen vs City of Independence, 100 S.Ct. 1398 (1980)

Here is what American Jurisprudence has to say about the supremacy of the United States Constitution, and these excerpts are supported by an overwhelming amount of cases to firmly back these legal opinions. Cases are so numerous in support of the Constitution, that there is not enough room here to cite them all.
1. Any attempt to do that which is prescribed in the Constitution in any manner other than that prescribed, or to do that which is prohibited is repugnant to that supreme and paramount law and is invalid. (16 AmJur 2nd, 82)
2. No public policy of a state can be allowed to override the positive guaranties of the Federal Constitution. (16 AmJur 2nd,70)
3. No emergency justifies the violation of any of the provisions of the United States Constitution. (16 AmJur 2nd, 71)
4. Neither emergency nor economic necessity justifies a disregard of cardinal constitutional guaranties. (16 AmJur 2nd, 81)
5. Since the Constitution is intended for the observance of the judiciary as well as the other departments of government and the judges are sworn to support its provisions, the courts are not at liberty to overlook or disregard its commands, or countenance evasions thereof. It is their duty in authorized proceedings to give effect to the existing Constitution and to obey all constitutional provisions, irrespective of their opinion as to the wisdom or desirability of such provisions, and irrespective of the consequences.
If the Constitution prescribes one rule and the statute another and a different rule, it is the duty of the courts to declare that the Constitution, and not the statute, governs in cases before them for judgment. (16 American Jurisprudence 2nd)

WHEREFORE, the petitioner(s), We the People, i.e., Sherwood C. Ensey, et al., prays for the following relief:
1. That the United States government "strictly" adhere to the ordained and established United States Constitution, and grant a full reparation and restoration for what is herein constitutionally requested by We the People, i.e., Sherwood C. Ensey, et al., in this just and lawful redress of grievances.
2. That the true republic be restored, with all of the republic's essential "republican" principles and rights working, and in good order, as required for the support and preservation of the Constitution and the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America.
3. That the members of Congress and/or others herein named in this redress of grievances, be prosecuted and punished to the fullest extent of the law for their high crimes against the Constitution, the people, and the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America, and as those crimes are enumerated to in this redress of grievances.
4. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as provided by law; and
5. Such other and further relief as the United States Constitution and government thereof may deem just and equitable, including injunctive and declaratory relief as may be required in the interest of justice and for the peace and good order of the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Republican Form of Government of the United States of America.

Respectfully submitted,
Dated this 5th day of October, 1998

Sherwood C. Ensey
[Address Deleted For Security Reasons]

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.