By Bob Hurt, 7 February 2012 – for immediate release and broad distribution
Foreword. If you want to “cut to the chase,” watch this two-hour uncut video of a patriot meeting and this one-hour video on loyalty oaths in Florida. Find this document at http://www.scribd.com/doc/80878142
ABC News Producer Dan Lieberman called me in mid-January 2012 to tell me he come to Florida the following week and wanted to interview. He had read articles I had written and posted to my blog and Lawmen group. I hadn’t known him as any particular news producer. I said “Sure.”
Dan came into my home and interviewed me on his small camera. He seemed interested in sovereign citizen. I told him I thought myself the wrong person, and he said he thought I was exactly the right person. I explained that I didn’t consider myself a member of any “sovereign citizen” group. Dan asked me to round up others willing to be interviewed.
Dan proceeded to ask me whether I believed any circumstances justify violence against government. I explained that violence means unlawful physical force, and that both the Constitution of Florida and the Declaration of Independence fully justify the use of physical force to “alter or abolish their form of government”.
Florida Constitution of 1838
ARTICLE I. Declaration of Rights.
That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare:
Section 1. That all freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal; and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property and reputation; and of pursuing their own happiness.
Section 2. That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and established for their benefit; and, therefore, they have, at all times, an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may deem expedient.
Declaration of Independence
of 4 July 1776, paragraph 2
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. [litany of abuses follows]
Let us see this matter clearly. Every government employee and registered voter swears an oath to support the Constitution.
Article II Section 1 Clause 8
Before he [the President] enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: — “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Article VI Clauses 2 and 3 This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
(b)Each state and county officer, before entering upon the duties of the office, shall give bond as required by law, and shall swear or affirm:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the state; and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of (title of office) on which I am now about to enter. So help me God.”,
Article VI Section 3.Oath.—Each eligible citizen upon registering shall subscribe the following: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida, and that I am qualified to register as an elector under the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida.”
876.05Public employees; oath.—
(1)All persons who now or hereafter are employed by or who now or hereafter are on the payroll of the state, or any of its departments and agencies, subdivisions, counties, cities, school boards and districts of the free public school system of the state or counties, or institutions of higher learning, except candidates for federal office, are required to take an oath before any person duly authorized to take acknowledgments of instruments for public record in the state in the following form:
I, , a citizen of the State of Florida and of the United States of America, and being employed by or an officer of and a recipient of public funds as such employee or officer, do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida.
Voters and government employees must obey their oaths. That means they must enforce the constitutions’ restrictions on government power, and enforce the constitutions’ guarantees of rights of the people. Everything works well until some government employee commits crimes or abuses procedures. Such behaviors constitute torts against the people even if one cannot measure the damage. Such behavior, when ignored or encouraged by other government employees or voters becomes a “good old boys network” which operates outside government authority under color of constitutionality or color of law. I refer to such perpetrators of crime in government as “Gerps.” Gerps comprise and operate the “good old boys network” in government that abuse the people and encroach on rights of the people through government excess.
Ultimately, Gerps formulate a devious, clever color-of-law violation of the ideals of good government in the form of “public policy.” Public Policy constitutes a form of treason against the Constitutions. It constitutes a betrayal of trust that breaches government’s obligation to retain constitutional structure, operate within constitutional restraints, and enforce the guarantee of rights of the states and the people. “The People” have both the right and duty to put the government right back in its box by summarily terminating Gerp behavior or excising Gerps from government altogether with prejudice.
Let us understand this clearly. The government itself is good. In a sense, it IS the Constitution’s spiritual presence. The people IN government, who perform jobs in and for government, who swore oaths to support the constitutions, enforce the structure of government and guarantee of rights IF they do their jobs. When they don’t do their jobs and begin acting under color of law to do evil, iniquitous, or criminal things, thereby BEG the people to intervene. Intervention should consist of correcting them or excising them from government. It’s that simple. And whoever first witnesses or detects the correct them
Anyone with half a brain knows what it means when “the people” try to discontinue abuse by government perpetrators of crime. The Gerps respond with physical force and jail or kill their adversaries among “the People” who tried to effect their correction or excision. The people know this, so they try to use administrative, legal and political processes to effect the correction or excision of Gerps. In many cases, particularly in the cases of judges, legislators, county commissioners, sheriffs, IRS agents, governors, and presidents, that has become statistically impossible. When people face the impasse typical of the American legal and political system, they naturally start thinking about their other options for dealing with Gerps: physical force.
Physical force, even strong physical force, differs from violence in the sense of reasonableness. Violence connotes unlawful or unreasonable, explosive use of physical force. The Revolutionary War became explosive, with each side exerting strong force against the other. Our nation’s founders considered their use of physical force justified, and the violent reaction of the British adversary unjustified. Their logic makes sense. You put up with abusive invasion of rights just so long and you reach a breaking point. Then you act to stop it. When gentle, reasoned actions have no effect except to increase the abuse, you resort to use of force, and if necessary violent and deadly force.
We of good sense try to soften the terminology, but we simply cannot. We try to inject reason and patience into it, but we can only do it to an extent, and then we must wash our hands of reason and embrace the cataclysm that follows the injustice like night follows day. And, whether or not government employees and philosophers like it, the circumstances of abuse or rights encroachments can fully justify a violent reaction. We have seen this dozens of times in the past century in countries all over the world, including the USA.
When reviewing them, we should take note that the American Revolution and the War of Northern Aggression BOTH constituted CIVIL wars – wars against established authority that overstepped Constitutional authority and pushed the abused to their breaking point. The Revolution ousted the Gerps. The War of Northern Aggression didn’t, in spite of the loss of over a million American lives.
Let us look at some respective definitions.
Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004) , Page 4605
vi et armis (vI et ahr-mis). [Latin] Hist. By or with force and arms. See trespass vi et armis under TRESPASS.
“The words ‘with force and arms,’ anciently ‘vi et armis,’ were, by the common law, necessary in indictments for offences which amount to an actual disturbance of the peace, or consist, in any way, of acts of violence; but it seems to be the better opinion, that they were never necessary where the offence consisted of a cheat, or non-feazance, or a mere consequential injury.” 1 Joseph Chitty, A Practical Treatise on the Criminal Law 240 (2d ed. 1826).
“vi et armis… was a necessary part of the allegation, in medieval pleading, that a trespass had been committed with force and therefore was a matter for the King’s Court because it involved a breach of the peace. In England, the term survived as a formal requirement of pleading until 1852.” Bryan A. Garner, A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage 916 (2d ed. 1995). Page 4851.
violence. The use of physical force, usu. accompanied by fury, vehemence, or outrage; esp., physical force unlawfully exercised with the intent to harm. • Some courts have held that violence in labor disputes is not limited to physical contact or injury, but may include picketing conducted with misleading signs, false statements, erroneous publicity, and veiled threats by words and acts. Page 4857
force,n. Power, violence, or pressure directed against a person or thing.
actual force. Force consisting in a physical act, esp. a violent act directed against a robbery.
victim. — Also termed physical force. [Cases: Robbery 6. C.J.S. Robbery §§ 13–23.] Page 1912
terrorism,n. The use or threat of violence to intimidate or cause panic, esp. as a means of affecting political conduct. See 18 USCA § 2331. See also terroristic threat under THREAT; Page 4605
domestic terrorism. 1. Terrorism that occurs primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. 18 USCA § 2331(5). 2. Terrorism that is carried out against one’s own government or fellow citizens.
FBI’s National Priority #1 – http://www.fbi.gov/albuquerque/about-us/what-we-investigate/priorities
- Protect the United States from terrorist attack
The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The FBI further classifies terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. We investigate terrorism-related matters without regard to race, religion, national origin, or gender. Reference to individual members of any political, ethnic, or religious group does not imply that all members of that group are terrorists. Terrorists represent a small minority in any large social context.
Members of the media seem inclined to accuse patriots, sovereign citizens, freedom seekers, etc of planning or intending to use “violence” against “government,” as though patriots thereby plan or do something shameful, ignorant, stupid, and evil. They seem to have a hard time understanding how any people in our beautiful land of the free and home of the brave could possibly have so severe a grievance against government.
The FBI clearly intends that no patriots who feel angry over abuses by Gerps will succeed in excising the Gerps by any but the peaceable political and legal processes of rigged, corrupt elections and courts. That means, whether or not the FBI and others in government wish to admit it, that organizers and their militias and local force groups will meet a speedy end if they appear to pose a threat of physical force.
But let us see this in perspective. Governments administer and protect nations through the use of real or threatened explosive physical force. So when their employees become corrupt, “the people” must have the ability to use physical force to excise the Gerps. They must have weaponry, training, and skills to match their adversaries, or suffer under tyranny. In the USA, they don’t have anything remotely close to the resources they would need to engage in battlefield combat against government employees.
Furthermore, “the people” cannot trust Gerps or their government to tell them accurately whether or to what extent the people may justly take effective action to correct or excise Gerps. Gerps universally pretend they did and do nothing unlawful or unethical. Gerps pretend the people somehow have a malignant and insufferably ignorant nature.
The people must inform themselves for that reason, and then use their best judgment as to how to fix the problem. If the people cannot get government to read and respond to their petitions, cannot get courts to hear their case, cannot get relief and remedy no matter where they turn, then they have no choice but to suffer tyranny or take whatever action they deem necessary. And when the people determine they must, the people may rightly and lawfully take that effective action, including subterfuge, suicide missions, assassination, out and out bloody warfare, civil disobedience, million-man marches on D.C., Tea Parties, rabble-rousing, petition drives, lawsuits, capture or destruction of government property, deadly force, WHATEVER they deem necessary and to WHATEVER EXTENT they deem necessary. The organic laws of the USA and the several states say so. Therefore it should not surprise the news media that groups of action-takers rise up around the nation for that purpose.
ANY such action becomes fully lawful and constitutional, whether the operatives of the three branches of governments of the USA and the several states like it or not.
Dan Lieberman and Dan Harris wanted me to admit this fact on camera. I felt concerned that if I said too little on the point they might mischaracterize my comments as rebellious against lawful authority. So I tried to give appropriate explanations to defuse any knee-jerk reaction. I didn’t want to give the people of America the wrong idea if and when the interview airs.
Ok, back to the story of the ABC News interview. I sent an announcement to my 1500-member Lawmen group on 17 January, and on 18 January I sent an invitation to the meeting for the 19th. I also included the 150 Tampa Bay area Freedom Seekers, now disbanded, in the recipient list. Several people showed up, as did documentary videographer Francis Knize and the ABC News team comprised of Producer Dan Lieberman, News Anchor Dan Harris, and a camera and sound man whose names I didn’t catch.
I stood and announced the purpose of the gathering and made some comments with Knize’s camera rolling. The ABC men showed up a few minutes later. The interviewers asked questions and commented, and the people responded. You can see the whole thing from Knize’s camera here:
I don’t know when or whether ABC News will air their segment, and whether it will appear on Nightline or elsewhere. I will say that I enjoyed interacting with the people of my area of Florida, and with Harris and Lieberman. They were friendly and gracious.
As to the fundamental point, James Gray gave an explicit statement of how the Lakeland police, the Polk County courts, and the Florida 10th Circuit state attorney have conspired to cover up the brain damage the cops gave him, for which he has made 38 useless court appearances to defend himself against resisting arrest charges. The people generalized about “government abuse,” but several have suffered run-ins with IRS and other state and federal enforcers, and numerous judges who seem to flout the law and rules at whim.
They tried to make the point that incessant, repeated abuse, with no mechanism to stop or repair it or to excise the Gerps responsible, drive people to discover more about their rights and how to protect them, even to the point of becoming physically forceful.
It should go without my saying, but I shall say anyway:
When government employees become abusive and operate outside their constitutional authority under color of law, they thereby scream for their own excision from government by whatever means their victims deem expedient. So, nobody in his right mind should blame any American for becoming armed and dangerous, alone and in groups, to the extent necessary to effect such an excision.
OTHERS in government who learn of such preparation or who hear sounds of protests as the ABC News crew heard and as you have witnessed in the above-linked videos, OUGHT to start looking around at others to find out which of them have become abusive in violation of their loyalty oaths, and then take action IN GOVERNMENT, or in influential positions in business, to correct or excise those GERPS.
They have that duty, if their oaths and the lessons of history mean anything at all.
So, take note, ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox News: the people of Florida with enough pluck and sense to learn the ideals of good government, learn the rules of court and the laws of the land, and start exercising their rights to correct or excise Gerps from government are NOT freedom seekers, sovereign citizens, sovereigns, kooks, bozos, or anything of they kind. They are PATRIOTS, pure and simple. They love our constitutional form of government and HATE any effort by Gerps to alter government through subterfuge, subversion, public policy, coercion, or crookedness away from the restrictions the constitutions mandate.
Members of the news media: when you see patriot groups of any stripe organizing and complaining, investigate to learn WHY. You will nearly always find government corruption underlying such activity. Do YOUR patriotic duty by digging into and reporting the corruption AND the Gerps behind it.
“Whoever’s closest to the snake, grab a stick and hit it.”
Every American, including any in the news media, has the obligation to take effective action to correct or excise Gerps from government. To accomplish that, Americans must learn the law and become disposed to using it, and organize politically so they can, in groups, become effective in keeping government synchronized to the Constitution.
WARNING: I do NOT function as law practitioner, lawyer, licensed attorney-at-law, or legal advisor. Construe my comments ONLY as speculation or general information, and NOT as legal advice for you or anyone else. Consult a well-qualified attorney (good luck finding one) in all questions of legality or law.