HIYO~
It appears Sullivan is a very good man if just short of ability! Someone needs
to tell him about Abraham Lincoln and all the little Lincolns up to the next
big one, FDR.
He of course was in a corporate for-profit court. Well, I do guess he wouldn't
like to hear that, even with their EIN!
~Hal~
SilverDollar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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 s`id, "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 timeĀ
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
