Though you all might like to see this, basically confirms that the old patriot strong holds are a distant memory, but if you call yourself citizen then one option is given for change, but the fact is that if you stop doing business with them all together and on their terms they will cease to exist. The following was submitted to an alabama newspaper from north carolina:
--------> update below --------------------> ---------------> Olaf Childress c/o The First Freedom PO Box 385 Silverhill, AL 36576 Dear Olaf, Since the US Army Corps of Engineers came onto my property on May 11, 1999, I have been working nearly full time to understand where this country went wrong and how I could fix the problem. I first studied the Constitutions of my State, North Carolina, and of the United States as a starting point. I quickly realized that the solution had to be to re-instate, or re-invigorate, our organic law founding documents. It appeared to me that the best way to do that had to be through the judicial system, the courts, as the ACLU has done. To win this war, it became imperative that I fully understand myself and my enemies. My first goal was to absolutely identify those enemies. In that effort, I studied the government, followed the money, and learned all I could about the Federal Reserve System and those who own and control it. To understand those who control it and those who, in fact, are the enemy or, at the very least, their representatives, I began a prolific study of the Holy Bible and anything I could find related to it. I studied the Koran, the Books of Mormon, and many of the "forbidden books" not canonized in the Bible. Along the way, I had battles with the government, defensive battles mostly (except for my wars against Iraq II and illegal immigration), fighting to preserve my basic unalienable rights from those who would deny them to me. This involved several court battles, state and federal (not the least of which was a suit to prevent the Iraq conflict of 2003). Then, as I began to better understand the "practice" of law, I started to exercise my rights to life, liberty and property. I sued the system, I began to wear a sidearm wherever I went, I "traveled" in my automobiles without titles, registrations, insurance, inspections, etc., I took on the income tax and property tax, and I tried to educate those who would deny us our freedom. My objective was to either prove we could not recover our freedoms and liberty; or to push through all the paradigms of public school, college, church and the media and restore our Constitutions and our rights in what I believed to be the America of our Founders. I have now accomplished that objective. This week, what I once knew as "America" finally slipped beneath the waves. Now, all that is left is merely a mopping up operation on my part: Completing whatever outstanding legal battles I have remaining; and protecting and defending my immediate perimeter and family. This week, I discovered beyond the shadow of a doubt that most Americans" are not worth saving. This revelation came at the end of my three-day trial in superior court on a charge of bearing arms openly in the local courthouse. Now, at first blush, one might say, "Of course, he was found guilty for wearing a gun in a courthouse"; but that is just what they want us to say, isn't it? What one doesn't know is that, prior to that exercise of my constitutional right to bear arms, I had a conference with the local High Sheriff in November, 2007, in which we discussed that very issue. The subject had arisen over my question about the signage and decals on the courthouse door which on the first floor prohibited only concealed weapons, and on the second floor, the floor where the actual courtroom is, prohibited all weapons. My argument was, "Don't we have a constitutional right to bear arms anytime and anywhere so long as we don't violate the rights of others to life, liberty and property?" After some discussion, he agreed with me. So, based upon that conversation and the signage on the courthouse which only prohibited the wearing of concealed weapons, I began to wear my sidearm every time I visited the first floor of the courthouse, which is a very frequent occurrence. As reported previously, I was found guilty in the district court in September. That trial was very simple; and I didn't put much time into it, knowing full well I would be found guilty and would appeal to superior court. In that trial the arresting officers lied under oath. The second trial was different. I threw everything I had into it. As always, I never granted jurisdiction, and stood mute on the plea. Plus I argued: Lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction; Constitutional right; lack of willfulness to violate the law; ignorance of the statute (which was the truth); my conversation with the sheriff; the misleading signage; etc. Prior to jury selection, the judge ruled on all of these save the signage and the conversation. He assumed jurisdiction; he assumed a plea of "not guilty"; he ruled that the law restricting my right to bear arms was constitutional; he denied willfulness as a defense; and "Everybody knows ignorance of the law is no excuse." That left me with very little. I tried as I might to bring the Constitutions into my defense, and willfulness, and natural, unalienable rights, but was thwarted at every turn by the judge. I was not allowed to mention the Constitution to the jury. I was not allowed to read the Second Amendment to the jury. I was not allowed to read the article in the NC Constitution to the jury which guarantees our right to bear arms, except concealed. It would seem that not being allowed to speak of the Constitution to a jury panel in a court of law is like not being able to speak of God or Jesus Christ in church. But, wait, that also is coming soon to a church near you under threat of losing their tax exemption. At the end, the judge told the jury what the law was in his "charge", that they could only consider the evidence presented during the trial; that if the evidence showed I had carried a "lethal weapon" (and, he said, the Glock 26 is a "lethal weapon) into the court room they must find me guilty as they had promised to do at the beginning; and they retired to consider a verdict. They were back in seven minutes with a verdict of guilty. What was there to decide? The judge told them it was against the law to carry a gun in the courthouse, and all they had to decide was whether or not I had done that. That was easy enough, because I told them I had done that as a matter or right. The judge sentenced me to 45 days, suspended, twelve months probation (I am under orders to obey ALL laws of all states and the United States) and a $500.00 fine. I appealed, of course; but that is merely a formality and a waste of time. I will follow through, of course; but as far as I am concerned my twelve-person jury is the last indicator I need that "The People" are no longer worth our effort. They don't realize that, in the final analysis, the only weapons will be held by the State; and we will be at their mercy. It is ludicrous that we must be disarmed so the minions of the State feel secure. On another subject, as you know I filed a Demand for Injunctive Relief, Case #08CV1076, on October 20th, against the NC Secretary of State to have Obama's eligibility for the office of President validated. The Attorney General's office filed a motion to dismiss on the 27th. It was a very good motion to dismiss, and on October 29th, my Demand was dismissed for cause, but not "with prejudice". What they didn't know was that I had filed the case without any legal research just to get it on the record before the election. The result was that the three assistant attorney generals did a great deal of legal research for me in their brief on their motion to dismiss; so I could easily file my follow-up case, with corrections, after the election. On November 7th, I filed a "class action" Notice and Demand for Injunctive Relief with the Superior Court of North Carolina, Case #08CV1153, with the Board of Elections and the Secretary of State as Defendants. I have not yet been notified of a hearing date. I did receive the order from the first case on November 20th. In it, the judge had added "with prejudice" to his ruling. I have moved to amend that order and will be heard December 1st. I have received numerous phone calls and e-mails from people from all over the country who are either interested in my lawsuit, or who have information to share in its regard. I was also contacted by the attorney for Presidential candidate and former ambassador to the UN, Allen Keyes, who has filed a similar lawsuit this past week against Obama's candidacy. Maybe we have something on this Obama fellow, since there are, at last count, at least 18 similar actions in several states and in the federal courts. In any event, I am of the opinion that our next president, be he Obama or some other ne'er do well, shall be our last, for all practical purposes. I am attaching my new Obama bumper sticker for your perusal. My next day in court, unless the Obama suit gets there quicker, is on December 1st. It will be a hearing on my Notice and Demand to Amend Order in the permit case where the county and the court are threatening to destroy my house if I don't get permits, and charge me almost $40,000.00 in fines, as of this month, for building it without permission. The Obama motion is also calendared for that date. Following that, I have a trial on December 15th in my appeal of a conviction in the second right to travel case. It is, after all, a target-rich environment. My motto: "If nobody goes to jail, and nobody dies; it don't mean nothin'." As always, I will provide updates as they come in (if I'm not in jail). Deo Vindice, my friend. Best to you, Sir. Donald Sullivan PS- It is worthy of note that, when the judge briefed the jury as they were leaving for the night on day 2 of the trial, he warned them not to read the Constitution, and not to go to the library looking for the Constitution; because they were forbidden to look at it during the trial. It seems very odd that, in an equity/contract court, the jurors are not allowed to look at the contract. After the trial, in response to a juror's question about how do we fix the apparent problems with the government and our rights (the juror said he agreed with my arguments!!??), the judge said, "There are only two ways to do that: Legislation and Revolution". It looks to me like Door #2 is the only option at this point. This was on November 18, 2008. Years earlier, during the hearing on my request for a TRO to prevent the Iraq conflict of 2003, a federal judge used as the government's argument that "The Constitution has been overwhelmed by events and by time…It is not relevant", a quote from Rep. Henry Hyde during the committee meeting which drafted the "Iraq Resolution" in November, 2002. Judge Fox' example was the 16th Amendment, which he said was not properly ratified. The writing is on the wall, ladies and gentlemen. I'm proud to be an American where at least I'm told I'm free. -- "History repeats and life emulates" by; Silver Dollar
