You have found this site for a reason.  Are you ready to remove the blindfold from your brain?  

The United States Geologic Survey Azimuthal Equidistant map of the world.

The United States Geological Survey Azimuthal Equidistant map of the world.  Have you ever seen it? I doubt it.

If there is one thing that practicing law for 25 years has taught me, it is that a single WELL PLACED question is a very powerful tool.  String two or three together and you can stumble into some pretty surprising information.  Ask the wrong questions, and you will get nowhere.

I know, I was surprised how cut he was too.

I agree, I was surprised how cut he was.  I didn’t even know he worked out.

In order to ask the right questions you have to FIRST understand the actual situation, what you ACTUALLY KNOW, and maybe even more importantly, what you don’t KNOW but have assumed.  Like the U.S.G.S azimuthal equidistant projection map right above… a perspective change is sometimes the key to seeing what you’re missing.  It can change everything without having to “change” anything.  Do you see?

“if I had an hour to solve a problem I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking about solutions” — Albert Einstein

Why do you think they make everyone go to school for 12 years using THEIR mandatory curriculum?  If you say “to get an education”, then they have done their job on you.

It all depends on your point of view. They make sure to give you yours.

It all depends on your point of view. They make sure to give you yours.

If you’ve had a vague idea that there is “something wrong”… you’re right. There are many things wrong with what you have been taught.  The reason things don’t add up wherever you look is that there is a disconnect between what you are told and what you observe.  The systems in place are DESIGNED to CREATE that disconnect to make sure you become confused, or discouraged or just apathetic to the system, like most people.  



The system, especially the legal system, is not what you have been told.  It is a maze without an exit, you can’t win within it.

Okay people, this is a timed event. Good luck. A maze without a solution, that's what most people are living in. Most don't even know it.

Okay people, this is a timed event. Good luck.

This same “false paradigm”  is used in many areas besides just the law.  These illusions are there to confuse and thereby CONTROL YOU.  And, like most big deceptions, the truth is hidden in plain site.  It WAS THERE all along.  You just didn’t SEE it. 

The blocks are the SAME color. Don't believe me? Cover the line with your finger.

The blocks are the SAME color. Don’t believe me? Cover the line with your finger.

Don’t feel bad, I certainly didn’t understand what I was looking RIGHT AT for most of my life. I kept trying to figure things out from within the paradigm I had been taught. Now I know that CAN NEVER WORK, because the system itself is NOT OPERATING INSIDE the paradigm we are taught.  And once you see this, you cannot UNsee it.

“The task is … not so much to see what no one has yet seen: but to think what nobody has yet thought, about that which everybody sees.” schrodinger — Erwin Schrodinger 



It took 25 years after graduating from law school to UNlearn all the bullsh** they had taught me there.  When you finally understand the REAL system and how it actually works, many confusing and frustrating things will finally make perfect sense.  At that point you can avoid a lot of problems and you will no longer be frustrated by a lot things, because it will all make sense.   It is a journey my brainwashed Brethren you have to take the time to unlearn.

Unlike most people, the dog knows he is being controlled.

Remember, if you don’t “do well in gov’t school” you can’t “get a good job” and you “won’t amount to anything.”  Got it?

Religion was the heart of the control system used on the masses for a very long time.  But in the last few hundred years or so, that has changed.  Now, the law is the heart of the control system. 

Its success, just like the success of the religious control systems  before it, relies on a deep pervasive mis-education about the system itself.  That mis-education amounts to a kind of brainwashing.


Look again. Things often are not what they appear to be.

Look again. See it yet?  That’s where they flush the truth.

  “Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the State.”James Angleton.

It has always been known by those who rule over the masses that most people are not prepared to deal with the truth.  So the masses have always been “taught”, at best, a sort of a fairy tale or parable, at worst, outright lies.  And this is true regardless of the control system being used.

It is so in religion,

 I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, — First Corinthians

 in politics,

Remember, everything I say is a lie. "I am lying".

Remember, everything I say is a lie. “I am lying”.

and even in the history we are taught that shapes our beliefs and provides the basis to operate the control systems.napoleon on horse

                                      “History is a set of lies agreed upon.” — Napoleon


The very first step on the journey to understanding the real system is to be genuinely open to the idea that what you think you “know” and were taught, may be fundamentally incorrect.  As simple as that sounds it is probably  the thing that keeps most people from moving forward.  They either don’t really want to admit that they are wrong or don’t know, or they prefer not to know what they suspect may be true.  So they ignore it all and hence, continue to be ruled by those who DO KNOW and don’t hesitate to use this ignorance against the masses for their own power.tiger concern

“The bigger the lie, the more it will be believed.” — Goebbels



To understand the system you have to first grasp that you have been PUT into A system.  And when you grasp the full significance of that, you can begin to  be RE-educated about what the actual system is for the first time.  And once you see that, then you can step outside the mental box that the system is.  And once you can do that, you are free.  Free in a way that they can never take from you, because you will never be fooled by any of the systems again.

The key is to find a solution outside the RULES THEY GIVE YOU.

And the truth shall set you free my friend. 

The best way to understand the way a system works is to start by looking at one part. Master one area and then apply the lessons.  Like the old Hermetic wisdom says:

“As above, so below.  As below, so above.”

If you can start to see the scope of the deception perpetrated in one area, like the law, then I find that people become more open to the idea that perhaps they have been greatly misled in other areas as well.  And since my expertise is technically in the law, perhaps you will give me a bit of leeway in showing you some of that giant con that is “the law”. 

So now as the narcissist said, I’ve talked enough about me for now, why don’t you talk about me for a while.  Let’s have some fun. Everyone likes to have fun, right?  Let’s see if I can show you what I mean and let’s see how you think.  Before we go any further, I want to be clear upfront:


superman wink   And that statement is true, MY ENTERTAINMENT purposes.

YOU HAVE TO PARSE EVERYTHING. That is one way a truth can be hidden in plain sight.  You don’t see it at first, but then once you see it you can’t UNsee it.   But that’s “just a trick” Legalman.  Well you can call it a “trick”, but that  “trick” has LEGAL IMPLICATIONS.  That is my point.  Words matter. But what do they actually MEAN?  

quesiton 2Think about statements like, “the country has decided”.  “It is “the law”.  “You consent through a social contract”.  “We all must sacrifice.”  “You don’t have standing to bring suit”.  “The juror is “disqualified”.  “The evidence is not admissible.”  “The committee is in charge of that.” “It’s just a side effect of the medicine”.  “They are our enemy”.  “They are a terrorist.”  And on an on.  Do you see that the devil is in the details.

This mix is supposed to taste like chicken. I think Chef Ramsey made the contestants use it on a "Master Chef" challenge once. Apparently it's easy to overcook.

This mix is supposed to taste like chicken. I think Chef Ramsey made the contestants use it on a “Master Chef” challenge once. Apparently it’s easy to overcook.

So you still may be thinking, so, that’s a just piddly crap.  Games, nothing but games, I don’t have time for GAMES, lol.  Okay, let’s do another little test. This one certainly doesn’t involve anything that can even arguably be called a “trick”.  Let’s see how much you know about the fundamental law of the land that RULES YOU.  You know the “holy constitution”. 

Are you generally a liberal a conservative or some kind of a “mix”?  You know a mix, socially “liberal” but fiscally conservative for example? Take a look at this list. Which things do you think, if any, the federal government has a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to regulate in some way?  Here’s a link to the Constitution in case you need to brush up first. 

Drugs, both “street” and pharmaceuticals.
Unemployment insurance.
National parks.
Social security.
Energy production.
Gay marriage.
Fighting ISIS overseas.

How many made your list? A lot, a few? How much agreement between people do you think there is in the country on this list? Now I know that a lot of people don’t feel “qualified” to give an opinion on whether something is “constitutional” but I’m not asking whether you know it is or isn’t, I’m just asking your opinion.

Something that old and cool looking HAS to be good.

Something that old and cool looking HAS to be good.

Can we at least agree that there are a lot of people with opinions on each side of each of those issues? And can we agree that there are a lot of people who may agree that the government has a constitutional right to do some of what they are doing in any one area, but not other things in that same area?
Would you agree then that on most any issue there are people on both sides of the “it is constitutional” or “it is not constitutional” issue?

Okay I understand the theory, but what does this array mean? Is it constitutional or not?

Okay I understand the theory, it makes a lot of sense.  I’m just having a hard time figuring how it works in practice.  So what does this array mean? Is it constitutional or not?

And now would you agree that one of those groups is right and one is wrong? In other words, the government either does have the constitutional right to do something or it doesn’t. Is that a fair statement? Because, if that isn’t true, then why is there a method to amend it,?  Isn’t that the whole reason it is there, to add to or remove from the list of things that are constitutional? Of course it is.

Now think about how big the government is now. How much it has grown over the 200 plus years it has existed under the constitution. Do you believe we need to “get back to the constitution” in many areas because what the government is doing is “unconstitutional”?
If you think we have strayed from the constitution, you are not alone. A very large number of people agree with you. But would you agree that a very large number of people disagree with you? And those people believe that what the government is doing is fully supported by the constitution, like most democrats on the blue team?

A meeting of the "blue team" who appear to want more government.

This is either a Blue team meeting or Scientology ceremony.  They are very difficult to tell apart.   I think that crazy chick is the key.

So in the end would you agree that there is a disagreement about whether the government has the authority to do what it is doing?  Can we agree on all of this? Okay.

Now I want you to read this quote and think about it.

The Constitution has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist. – Lysander Spooner

Please reread it and take a moment to let that sink in.

Do you see the consequence of that statement?

Do you see the unassailable logic?

The unavoidable result of the reasoning is that if you think the government is doing things that are “unconstitutional”, and you think we “need to get back to the constitution,” that entire way of thinking is fundamentally illogical and can NEVER lead anywhere. It doesn’t make sense. Because, if you are right, and the government is doing things where it has no CONSTITUTIONAL authority, then, nonetheless, the “highest law of the land”, the Constitution, has not been able to prevent this fundamental violation of the fundamental law. In other words, the Constitution has not provided any protection for the people from the federal government continually and repeatedly violating it.

Remember, the government’s SOLE source of ANY authority at all IS the Constitution. So if it is acting without constitutional authority, it is acting without ANY authority. But the Constitution has not been able to prevent the government acting outside of its legal scope of authority. So what good is it? It is no good. In fact it is a source of harm, because it masquerades as a protector of the people and a limitation on the government.

My image of what would happen if people found out the truth.

Relax, people the constitution will fix the issue with the Facebook server shortly.  Follow us  on Twitter @USGov4U# help! for updates.

And, if on the other hand, the Federal government in fact HAS Constitutional “authority” to regulate any and every aspect of our lives as it now claims, and in fact acts, such as dictating how much water your toilet can use per flush, then the limitations that the Constitution proclaims to put on the Federal Government are in fact, non-existent. Certainly any document which professes to create a limited government, when it in fact authorizes an unlimited government, is a fraud on the people. And any such document does not deserve to exist.

It's two ply, and it's sooo soft. You have to try it.

The Constitution is now available in  two ply, and it’s EVEN Softer. You have to try it.

The point is either way, THE CONSTITUTION IS UNFIT TO EXIST, because it either can’t prevent the federal government from doing whatever it wants, or it authorizes the federal government to do whatever it wants, even though it professes to be a document creating a LIMITED federal government.

Do you get it now?  Do you now see that any and all discussions about “getting back to the constitution”, or looking at the constitution are a waste of time! They are just a distraction! All part of the red/team blue/team “work within the system” scam.  The constitution has PROVED that it is either useless or a fraud.

Now let me tell you that the quote I gave you above was written in the 1860’s! 150 years ago!  Imagine how much the government has grown since then!

The great one, Lysander Spooner in his hippie phase.

The great one, Lysander Spooner in his hippie phase.

My point is simple. The entire framework within which the people are immersed and think in this country is intentionally misdirected. Why have you never seen the point I just made? Why have you never heard this argument?

Simple, the LEGAL system serves the people in power, the Status Quo, the Money Power, the powers that be, the rulers or WHATEVER you care to call them.  The LAW is the means by which they control the people. The great trick that has been played on everyone is that the people believe the law serves THEM.

You must understand the following.  Most everything you know about the law is fundamentally incorrect.   When you understand and accept that, you can open your mind sufficiently to begin to make sense of the law.

HL_Mencken_quote_nobody_ever_went_broke“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are.”  — H. L. Mencken

You simply will not see the vast majority of the information I have on this site other places.   If you can find any of it, it is going to be in an academic format. It will be dense and it will be intimidating to most people.  Certainly it is not available in a format that any normal person would wade through.

That’s the whole reason I started this.   People do need to know. They WANT to know, but there was no way to find it out, until now.

I toil for mankind.

I toil for mankind.

Once you have seen, you cannot UNSEE, as I said my friend.

I add articles and audio posts all the time.  The topics will never end.  They can’t, because the LAW is involved in almost everything.

EarJust click on the “A starting point for the TRUTH” if you want to start to understand.  I give you a organized way to understand it all.  If you go to a post and you see a little ear, it means that I have provided additional audio material to go with the article.

My “Fascinating other stuff” and all of the “More Fascinating stuff” additions are an amalgam of different very cool non legal topics.  The stuff is great.  There are so many things to investigate.  I don’t claim expertise on them, but I have researched all of them to some extent or the other.  I would love to get a heads up on crazy stuff you have seen or see.

This post also appears in Distractions in the "news".Distractions in the news” is a section where you can see articles I find of interest and WHY I find them of interest.  I discuss topics and tell you why I suspect they are “in the news” or NOT.  A nice place to see the principles I discuss used to see the world in a new way. When posted they appear with the man reading the newspaper.  I then repost them separately in my “Distractions” section so you can see what I have discussed throughout time in order all together and judge for yourself the effectiveness and predictive ability of using the system I try and explain.

Feedback is great. If you like what you read, or you don’t, leave a comment.  I can only provide bread and circuses if the people tell me what they like. I don’t share info with anyone so feel free to sign up. I know that won’t convince most people, but what else can I actually offer to convince? Nothing.

And as always if you want to actually DO something to spread the word and wake people up, which is step one,  send them to my site or to one of my posts.  You will be doing them a big favor.  Knowing the truth is the best protection you can get.

As the saying goes. A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step… and ends when you find the truth.

Take care my brainwashed Brethren. Move towards the light, and tell someone the truth about the law. — Legalman

And the truth shall set you free.

…And the truth shall set you free.





  1. The Practical Madman

    I have only today came across your site and I gleefully add you to my list of admired legal beagles with the likes of Lysander Spooner and Riccardo Johanson (Emergence from Illusion.) I have been into the investigation of the legal system (and the word games it plays) for a long time and I thank you for your site for the continuance of this quest and the information it contains. We are all responsible to spread the information we glean from the background noise and share it with others, and you my brother, seem to do it in spades.

    My adventures into the legal system began in 1971 in 9th grade civics class (dating myself here) when I argued with my teacher that the 9 black robed, appointed for life, “authorities” were in fact our collective dictators, and that in fact we were a country “by the corporation, of the corporation, and for the corporation.” In 1972 I was involved in a lawsuit against the local school board for our “right to freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom to petition.” We spent 3 days in Federal District Court in New Orleans and Judge Christianberry’s (sp?) final decree was that we “had no Constitutional rights till we were legal voting age, which at this time is 21.” We appealed and the Appellate Court upheld that decree. The Supreme Court refused to hear our case because we “had no standing.” This only served to confirm my previous arguments with my Civics teacher. This was at a time when friends only a year or two older were getting drafted and sent to Viet Nam and the legal drinking age (in Louisiana) was 18.

    Now think of this. In 1971 it was decided in “Federal Court” that you had no rights till a appointed time in your life, and that it was upheld in the “Appellate Court”, and finally in the “Supreme Court” that you had “no standing” … how could you possibly rely on that “government” to “protect you rights?” Or that these “Courts” had the ultimate say in your ultimate destiny? Or even the fact that this is all INSANE on any human level.

    It is my opinion that critical and analytical thinking skills have been eliminated from our tool kit by the “education system.” When I read or hear the term “system” I imagine a sewer system that is designed for moving crap along. The Trivium is the tool that is sorely lacking in our times today and I invite all to explore this at This is my site and just like yours it is provided at cost to myself to awaken the masses and bring discussion to the topic, so that we may free ourselves from this “legal illusion.”

    The Trivium teaches us to pay attention to the meaning of words (the Grammar) and also to the logical fallacies and lies incorporated into the “legal system” and “education system” (there are those crap moving systems again) to move the masses into a direction desired by the insane ones in power through the lack of Logic, and then to finally not arrive at a conclusion by not analyzing both sides by way of the lack of Rhetoric. That is our collective relief, the Trivium … Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric. Lawyers do not use “words” … they use “terms” that sound like our words but have different meanings. They are of the “Legal Society” and by law a society has the legal right to create its own language to hide its goals, and the language they chose is an abomination of the English language that we use everyday.

    I will cut this post short by saying thank you for your work and I only hope that others are paying attention, for that is our only hope. Keep up the great work and “love ya’ bro!”

  2. Kram

    Yo Legal, have missed seeing recent posts lately. Distractions are an amazing tool of the PTB’s. Cognitive Dissonance is rampant. Divisions and schisms among the slaves seems to have gone too far. Those pulling the strings may have frayed a string or two causing a downward trend in profits. Control may be waning due to too much pressure causing meltdowns in the populous. Maybe a little too much poisoning from big pharma, big agra, and a plethora of corporate interests with” pay to look the other way politics”. But we still have the masses wearing their favorite teams jerseys to mindlessly cheer and spout those all important statistics. But not all is lost… there is always the upside of a much lowered population to manage. and our quantum computers and colliders teaming up to rip holes in the fabric of time and space with the very promising prospect of plainly changing history. OR the PTB’s are simply bored and want to ramp up the excitement by harassing the livestock and giggle while watching the chaos, oh and have an election with hopelessly pathetic and unqualified people to just see how far these slaves will go to prove out the experiment…lol it is truly, in that arena, a mad mad mad world. Hope to hear from you… Stay healthy as best as you can. look to what is important, family, friends helping others. .. Peace

  3. Hereticdrummer

    Absolutely brilliant Legalman. For most people, what Jack Nicholson said in “A Few Good Men” applies; “You can’t handle the truth.” Your quote on history was excellent but my favorite is Voltaire’s, “History is a trick the living play upon the dead.” The bottom line is that the legal industry in the ooo-esss-aaa was created for lawyers (and bear in mind that judges are just lawyers in black Halloween costumes) to extract wealth from the people and funnel it up to themselves and the entities they serve, be they governmental or private. The distinction hardly matters anymore, both are part and parcel of the Big Brother matrix. No document made of ink and paper will protect you from a power system that has sycophants with weapons in their employ and the keys to the cages to enforce their edicts. Deal with reality or reality will deal with you. By the way, that “strawman” bullshit is just more patriot mythology to delude and confuse the masses, like the gold fringed flag and your name in caps is a fiction and not the real you, ad nauseum. Keep punching Brother.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thank you Hereticdrummer. Glad you enjoyed it. I liked the line you slipped in that was modified in “Payback” “take care of business or the business will take care of you”. great movie. lol And yes the entire system is a transparent fraud. A joke really on the people who think it is something else.

      Thanks again for saying hi. I hope to see you over on twitter sometime. Take care. — L

  4. gt

    Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, 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.TJ
    this guidance means more today than back in his day…

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      GT, I believe I addressed the value of mere words. Lots of people say lots of brilliant things they never mean. We simply cannot know what kind of a man he was. But to throw away the conduct that contradicts the words with a waive of the hand and a “who cares” really is not very persuasive. But I know one thing. I can’t change people’s minds and I don’t bother trying.

      I might suggest trying that whole throw off government thing with the current government he supposedly created and see how far you get. — L

  5. Jughead Jones

    Show me a presidential swearing in where one of them has adopted THIS constitution ! It simply sits dormant and unable to do what it was meant to do. I think it’s the difference between an article 2 and an article 6 oath.

  6. Oliver Manuel

    Jean-Francois Revel explained why the truth is difficult to see: “There are essentially two kinds of totalitarian systems. There are those whose ideas I will call straightforward, and that makes their aims perfectly clear. Mussolini and Hitler always said they were hostile to democracy, to freedom of expression and culture, to political pluralism and free trade unionism. Hitler, additionally explained at great length, well before coming to power, his racist, and specifically anti-Semitic, ideology. Therefore, supporters and adversaries of this type of totalitarianism were from the start on opposite sides of a clearly defined line. There were no “disillusioned” Hitlerians: Hitler accomplished what he promised. His downfall was due to external causes.”

    “Communism differs in that it made use of ideological subterfuges. If I may use some Hegelian jargon, I would say that Communism was “mediated by way of utopianism” It is the utopian connection that allowed this ideology, and the political regime it produced, to proclaim an unending stream of successes even as it was doing the opposite of its declared program. Communism promised abundance and produced misery, it promised freedom and led to slavery, it promised equality and ended up in the most stratified of societies, with a privileged nomenklatra such as had not been seen since the age of feudalism It promised to respect human life and engaged in mass murders, it promised the cultural enhancement of all and led to generalized mental crippling, it dreamed of a “new man” and instead petrified him. And yet for many years believers accepted all these grotesque contradictions because utopia is always somewhere in the future. The intellectual trap of a totalitarian ideology mediated by utopia is therefore far more difficult to counter than the straightforward ideology of nazism and fascism because, in utopian thinking, real facts never suffice to prove to believers that the ideology itself is false.”

    “As the devious strategies of totalitarian utopianism have been dissected by the very intellectuals whom they were designed to mislead, and defeated by the very people whom they were suppose to hold in servitude forever, we in the West should recognize our debt to them, our eternal debt.”

    – Jean-Francois Revel from the the Forward to Eyewitness: Writings from the Ordeal of Communism (Edited and compiled by Ross Mackenzie and Todd Culbertson)

  7. Kram

    Thanks Legalman, Man having any hope is a dangerous thing. I have always considered myself as insignificant and not so tasty. Not formidable, by any means. I have already been hounded by IRS for numbers of years and I am prepared to settle the accounts. That is how a dead man’s estate is handled. If that means that some disgruntled justice or some other power may react, I cannot control that or live in fear of the imagination of consequences. I will not be contentious. I am just settling the estate as straight up as I can. I do not know how to do it any other way. I would like to see their convoluted excuse for their claim. Hey, I appreciate you taking the moment. Peace.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      I am familiar with that case Kram. Unfortunately I think he is right in his analysis. lol. But does it make one bit of difference? no. b/c nothing they do is legitimate anyway. They have the guns and the bulk of the people fooled into thinking they are legitimate and need to be followed and supported, and that they can only voice their dissent through “elections” etc. So that is that. Sure you can raise the stuff he references on jurisdiction, of course you can. But ultimately all that will happen is you will either get stomped on right there by the court, or you will be cancer’d or accidented down the road. If they really want to make an example of you, then you will be found hanging with your pants down after “accidentally” choking yourself to death during some lurid sex act etc. in some hotel room where you were “looking at” kiddie porn etc. They reserve that for people who just don’t take a hint. lol

      The world is what it is. A giant farce. A fraud from head to toe. Best to see what you’re actually dealing with and then deal with what you are actually seeing. There is no other advice I can give that will be of more assistance I’m sorry to say. Doesn’t mean the advice leads to outcomes you like, only that it will lead to the best outcome available. — L

  8. Kram

    Thanks L. There are layers upon layers of meaning. The passage you shared echoes what the Teacher said choosing this day whom you shall serve- in that our lot here is as a creation, no disrespect just a statement of fact. lol do we get to choose “none of the above” not sure how that looks at this moment. In the meanwhile I plan on having fun with the whole self determination thing (as a slave to my Creator) while i settle all commercial claims and accounts. regardless in the end when there is nothing belonging to the name, this flesh and bone is noncollectable at the very least not worth the effort. I am learning the game a bit. RPC, RFP, simple principles, standing, jurisdiction, burden of proof, etc. lol a game that is a loaded deck. I have no illusions here. Nice to share here. Be well.

  9. Kram

    Some insightful words by Peter the apostle writing to the now believing Israelite s at that time. He says alot about what we are experiencing now. Here are a couple of quotes. Please I am not trying to convince anyone to believe in dogmatic Christianity which is a joke if one condones violence, coercion, intimidation, or misinformation to meet an end result, regardless. With that said . 2nd Peter 2 15-19 …Leaving the straight path….who loves the wages of injustice…For , uttering pompous vanity, they are luring by the lusts of the flesh, in wantonness, those who are scarcely fleeing from those who are behaving with deception; promising them freedom, they are inherently slaves of corruption. ”
    Legalman you said…. Once you have seen you cannot unsee.. there is more there for those who learn the truth and then return to mindless participation as being worse off than if they never knew the truth in the first place…
    There is this crazy responsibility with knowledge. “My people suffer for lack of Knowledge” my paraphrase ‘woe to those who have hidden the keys to knowledge’ or ‘who have obscured the tables (law) from the people’ You my brainwashed friend are flicking your Bic and that light is being seen. Peace.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well thank you Kram. I agree that people who know and still continue to support and encourage and hide for personal gain are doing themselves a lot more damage than the vast majority of poor dupes who simply cannot see. And of course I am a big believer that people can only accept the truth at their own pace. No point trying to force it on people it doesn’t work. You have to make the truth available to them. If they are curious then answer their questions. If they are not curious or don’t believe, then let them go on their way in peace. Everyone has to find their own way.

      I like the Bible and have read it many times. I am certainly not a “Christian” by any means, but that doesn’t mean the book does not have a lot of very profound wisdom. It does. Of course most of it is misunderstood, in my humble opinion. But it is there to be culled. Your comment reminded me of a passage from the book of James that I like a lot. There are many many things we simply do not know and the what and why are beyond our direct knowledge at this point ultimately. And that must always be kept in mind.

      “Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast in your arrogant schemes. All such boasting is evil. If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.”

      But just because we can’t know the reasons or the “why or how” does not mean there is not reason and a why and how. So we must use the little we do figure out each time we are here to keep moving forward. Regardless of how unpleasant that fact may be to accept. lol. From what I can tell there is no other choice.

      To him who much is given, much is expected. And so it goes. Take care — L

  10. sully

    Hi Legalman,

    Just wondering, in re your posting of the USGS map if you happen to be an FE type of guy?
    Enjoy all your work.
    Please continue… but what can we actually DO about it all??

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Sully I’ve been looking at it for almost a full year. Many unanswered questions that should be simple but aren’t. Several empirical observations I have carefully performed do not fit with standard line we are given. Gyroscopes are problematic. Moon illumination change pattern does not fit orbit pattern we are told is causing moon illumination change. Antarctic treaty’s rapid ratification during Cold War very suspicious. It’s terms and enforcement raise serious questions. And there are many other issues. Why do so many “people” just happen to spend huge amounts of time making very expensive “debunking” vids? Where do they get time and money and why? I don’t see the logic behind debunking things that are “obviously” bs. There are no zombie debunking videos or vampire debunking etc. why such a profusion available? Why do they avoid or misrepresent the basic arguments? Why so much animosity? Truth doesn’t rely upon attacks. Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows that investigation will lead to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques we see used against This idea. Paid trolls, personal attacks, obvious controlled opposition, well organized “debunking” etc. So if I was more of a suspicious person I might be suspicious. Luckily I have full confidence in NASA and my government so I can relax and know that I have the full story

      So of course it is all kookery. I mean if it were true then everyone would know right? You could never keep it a secret. Every government in the world assures me of the truth. And that’s good enough for me. And as forest gump said, ” that’s all I have to say about that.” Take care. — L

      1. sully

        Yes, I agree. Just too many things that are simply observable that don’t fit the standard line model. I can see problems with both sides; I suspect that the reality may be some other truth that maybe we don’t fully understand yet.

        I find it very interesting that certain Hollywood types (illusionists) are very into pushing the NASA an moon landings etc, e.g. Tom Hanks and Ron Howard for starters.

    2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      One more thing sully. My next post will present the simplest fix available. And of course you won’t hear about it anywhere but here. Lol. — L

  11. Oliver K. Manuel

    Only the human ego prevents mankind from now realizing Aston’s 1922 promise.

    See paper, “Stalin’s science,” posted earlier.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Oliver I allow a post or two like this because I know you are passionate. But they are just so far off topic I will keep them to a minimum. I wish you the best in spreading your message. — L

  12. serena

    Legalman ?

    is there any way you can help us out ?
    simply by explaining WHO EMPOWERED THEM ?
    there is a lot of sheer crap legislation out here inflicting misery on people starting with the CPS crew and then the probate bastards w/illegal guardianship cases=our people are kidnapped and it seems that these courts go after any attorneys even attempting to DARE challenge-bringing us to the bar associations which will suspend their licenses or in a few cases they are disbarred–
    can you think of anything ?
    this is a cartel.
    we are truly powerless as THEY ARE THE LAW and the laws are BS, and THEY ENFORCE THE LAWS and we can’t get our family members FREED or in some cases,even get them REUNITED WITH THEIR LAW ABIDING FAMILIES.
    i simply need to know WHO EMPOWERED THEM AND HOW ?
    THEN we can maybe get something moving.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well Serena I am not sure exactly what the issues are that you are facing. But I don’t give legal advice to people over the web. I am sorry.

      As to who “empowered them”. That would be your neighbors. lol I hope things improve. Take care. — L

  13. Elvis Zeppelin

    This site is the BEST Legalman!

    There’s no disputing the content here.
    I’m so glad I found it, as it reaffirms that there are people like yourself who actually understand how things work and are willing to share the truth.

    I have a suggestion that may help.
    Youtube videos are always getting deleted for various reasons.
    You may want to consider downloading the ones you feel are important and creating an Amazon S3 bucket to put them in to preserve the content. It’s really inexpensive as well.

    Thank you for all the time you’ve put into this and stay strong!

  14. Sean Dix

    ” I would love to get a heads up on crazy stuff you have seen or see.”
    I have a story for you that is something at least 15 experts in my case have never seen if you are interested.

    Sean Dix

    1. crazy

      I’ve read alot on the illuminati…. and their history … AND even presently. … George soros…??? 911…. LOSE change. .. Awesome information that I get entangled in.

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        There is a lot of stuff out there Crazy. Of course there is a lot of disinfo as well. I’d say figuring which is which is one of the most difficult tasks there is. I hope you find my site useful and entertaining. Glad you’re here. — L

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        El Floyo, I have answered this type of question many times in my comments. I don’t have the energy to do it yet again. I will simply say that I am more than familiar with all of the “all capital letters” maritime law, the united states is a corporation arguments. Please simply read the comments I have made on this many times. Take care. — L

  15. Mai has potential, you can make your site go viral easily using one tricky method.

    Just type in google:
    Isud’s Method To Go Viral

  16. ecrp

    I’ve been trying (several times now) to register but your site appears not to accept the activation link.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Sorry to hear that ecrp. I have checked again, and I can’t seem to duplicate the issue. If it continues please let me know. — L

  17. Bonza

    “I’ve come to your site a few times and have been entertained and informed by the articles here-not to mention the little graphics asides!
    I’m from Australia, and our constitution was modelled partly on the US system and partly on British models, even with some Swiss and perhaps other influences.
    Our constitution seems to be essentially the same deal as the US constitution-lots of rights apparently, but a movable feast when it comes down to brass tacks.
    Lefties criticise the way a small state like Tasmania can have disproportionate political clout because all States have equal representation in the Senate, regardless of population. Perhaps they have a point, because the basis for this is that this system was voted on by voters across Australia back in the 1890’s. No-one alive consented to this.
    I’ve studied the small constitutionalist movement in Australia such as Upmart and Brian Shaw and they are all into the idea that the current Federal arrangement is valid because people over 100 years ago agreed to it. That makes me a little suspicious of these groups.
    They also have this odd tendency to celebrate the Australian sacrifice in the First World War. They seem to believe the dead in this war fell for freedom and the constitution rather than the bankers who benefited from it. No doubt you are familiar with this type of thing among the US populace.
    That sentiment also make me suspicious of these groups and who is really behind them.
    What do you think of Strawman theory? Do you have any time for it?
    Upmart used to go into quite a lot of Strawman stuff but now recommend against it. I wrote to them asking for clarification and they ignored me.
    Maybe that means Strawman works. Maybe too many people were deriving too much benefit from Strawman strategies so whoever is really behind Upmart told them to stop teaching it. Or maybe not. All I know is that they wouldn’t answer my simple question of why they used to teach and now are against it.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Bonza, I am not familiar with how you are using the term Strawman. I know what a strawman argument is, but I’m not sure that’s what you’re asking. I apologize for the delay, I was out and unavailable for a week. Of course like you, when they can’t answer a simple question, well… that says a lot. — L

      1. Rog

        I think by strawman he means the legal name, the corporate fiction that looks like your name, the strawman. There is a great deal of contention regarding this thing. Some, like Rob Menard, say make a claim on it, use it. Others say it is a NAME registered to the crown and is not yours, so the idea is to remove the nexus between the living man and the fiction, thereby placing the burden of all claims against that name on the owners of that name (the Crown). I believe the most cogent perspective on this comes to us from Anna Von Reitzinger
        The citizen thing comes into play here as well. The Strawman, the NAME, is a US citizen while the man, born in one of the fifty states, not a federal employee, not born in DC or a naturalized citizen is an American national, one of the creators. They know this. The maxim here is government can only control that which government creates, everything else is outside its jurisdiction. However, since we are under “special admiralty” that has no rules of procedure the PTB make up the rules as they go. Now ,it seems, they have decided the Hell with with all of it it’s time for the great culling so they may rule the world as they see fit. We have no place in that world. We sure are in a pickle.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thanks for the comment Eggsistence. And thanks for the links. I will check them out. Hope to hear from you again. Glad you enjoyed. We few have to stick together. — L

  18. H2O

    Your articles are great!

    I have tried to post comments many times to no avail. The comment does not go thru and upon second attempt there is a message that says, “Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that!”

    Did you know that folks can’t post?

    It sure is frustrating! Many people will just go somewhere else.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      I’m sorry to hear about that H2O. That is the first I have heard about such an issue. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. If it happens again please let me know. I have done an investigation and can’t find anything to account for it. At least it worked now. lol. Glad you enjoy the site DESPITE that problem. 🙂 — L

  19. andrew johnson


    I just found your site “legalman,” like superman?
    So far, it’s a fresh cool air!
    thank you.


    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well thank you Andrew that is a nice thing to say. I hope you find it entertaining and tell whoever might be open to hearing a bit of truth. And the reference of legal man actually comes from old Robert Ringer books that I loved growing up. Glad you’re here. We have to stick together. –L

  20. Al T

    Good grief Legalman, if you didn’t look so much like my brother in law, you’d have so much more credibility with me!
    Still, you deserve a shot, because your logic resonates with my instincts.

  21. Crocodile

    Hello Legalman.
    I like what you have to say. Most of it seem to be true.
    What is DEFINITELY wrong is, you follow the midless crowd to condemn fiat money. Fiat money is the ONLY money that can serve people. All money based on commodities, controllable by the oligarchy, is NOT in the interest of the people.
    I will give you first a link to a true story :
    And second to a book about money :
    If you want, you can learn what money is.
    Enjoy (if you want)

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thanks Crocodile for the comment. I think all I can really say is that some short hand has to be used when talking about any topic. I have to assume some understanding by the reader. Fiat, is short hand for privately owned and operated state sponsored currency, which is the only type of currency, as far as I am aware, that circulates anywhere in the world at this time. Could a government issue “money” in a fashion that was secured by the people etc. and then “retired” etc. yes. But it does not happen, and that is not what people think of when they think of “fiat” currency. So I hope that clears that up as far as where I am coming from. Glad you’re here. — L

  22. John De Herrera

    In answer to your question as to why any new amendment will have any efficacy? You’re confusing the concept of a new amendment within the current status quo with the concept of a constitutional process which destroys the status quo: once the call goes out all it does is state loud and clear to all citizens–we’re now going to sit down as a society and examine our high law. Do politicians want to sit down with us and examine the Constitution? Of course not. Once the call is issued politicians are going to immediately–literally overnight–begin walking and talking differently. Why? Because the people have taken the first step to wield their ultimate right of alter and abolish.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Hi John, I appreciate the clarification. I HOPE you are right, but I am not expecting that to be the case. The status quo is much much too deeply embedded at this point to be tossed out or even concerned about a “convention”. Such a thing is easily controlled. And if not controlled, then the outcome can be quashed over time. If it gets through then it won’t be implemented, or the Court will interpret it to render it useless. But I HOPE I am wrong! lol I really do. I would love to see some change. But I think the masses are way way way beyond reaching with arguments. Only about 10 or maybe 15% of the population is even awake enough to listen. Far fewer than that are ready to hear the real truth. Most people just get angry when you try and tell them. And that says a lot. But, glad you’re here as usual. — L

  23. Oliver Manuel

    Sorry. This is where I intended to post my above reply to your comment.

    I agree the “nuclear holocaust” is a scare tactic. Galen Winsor (a former Radiation Safety Officer from Richmond, WA where nuclear fuel elements were re-processed in the 1940s-50s) reported that dangers from exposure to nuclear radiation were widely exaggerated after WWII. If you are interested, I will post Galen’s video. Radiation oncologists or radiation physicists may be better trained to evaluate the video’s validity.

    Yes, the Electric Universe correctly identifies electrical properties of stars are generally ignored. E.g., magnetic loops at the solar surface apparently accelerate protons to energies that induce the CNO cycle previously thought to occur only in the deep interior of stars [“Observational confirmation of the Sun’s CNO cycle,” Journal of Fusion Energy 25, 141-144 (2006)]

    I especially appreciate your warning, remember your audience and where you are posting. It is possible to do more harm than good for your own cause if you’re not careful.

  24. Oliver K. Manuel

    What a sad, sad state of affairs for all humanity, driven by a 1945 decision to “save society from annihilation” by hiding from the public the source of energy that destroyed Hiroshima – NEUTRON REPULSION in cores of
    _ 1. The universe
    _ 2. The galaxies
    _ 3. Ordinary stars
    _ 4. Some planets
    _ 5. All atoms heavier than ~150 amu (atomic mass units) including atoms of Uranium & Plutonium that destroyed Hiroshima & Nagasaki on 6 & 9 AUG 1945.

    An attempt to save society destroyed the integrity of national governments and government science.

    The pulsar core of the Sun made and sustains every atom, life and planet in the solar system, perhaps guided by the “conscious and intelligent Mind” Max Planck recognized behind the “matrix of all matter” in 1944.

    “Oh what a tangled web we weave,
    When first we practice to deceive!”

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Oliver my fellow inmate, I appreciate your passion on this issue. I read a book you must be familiar with called “The Harmonic Conquest of Space”. I was intrigued, but I must say, not so much convinced. More importantly, I just don’t see how it actually matters whether they can only set bombs off at certain times or places etc. They lie about everything. So why wouldn’t they lie about this too? lol. I just have not believed that they are ever going to set off some world wide “nuclear holocaust”, for a very long time. The whole show between “nations” is just that. A show. Why must we “punish” the people of Cuba or Russia or N. Korea? It makes no sense. Our politicians disagree with their politicians. So? what does that have to do with the people? It makes no sense. I don’t support Obama and I didn’t support Bush. Should we be punished as a “people” for what some power crazed politicians do? I think not. Same for other. Nuclear war and its “threat” of hundreds of bombs going off all over the world, to me, is just a transparent propaganda tool that serves every side of the issues. It is not going to happen. They just use it like “terror” to get control of the people through fear, and to waste their money etc.

      Along the same lines you always post, I also think that there is something to the Electric Universe theory. I put that in my Fascinating other stuff section. So I get where you’re coming from. But my friend, remember your audience and where you are posting. It is possible to do more harm than good for your own cause if you’re not careful.

      That all being said, I enjoy passion. I understand you care about your point. However, if you can’t tie it into the topics ON MY SITE, or IN RESPONSE to someone’s comment, or if others don’t engage your point, then I will not permit continuous posting on the topic. It drives people away and turns them off to the topics I have raised and which this site is about. This is not a site about nuclear energy or weapons. It is a site about the law and how the law plays into current topics and the way the society is being controlled and the poor brainwashed masses. So, you are welcome to post all you want in topics all around that as everyone is. All opinions on the issues at hand are welcome, including yours. I hope you understand.

      Anyway, that’s my two cents. Take care. — L

    2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Oliver my fellow inmate, I appreciate your passion on this issue. I read a book you must be familiar with called “The Harmonic Conquest of Space”. I was intrigued, but I must say, not so much convinced. More importantly, I just don’t see how it actually matters whether they can only set bombs off at certain times or places etc. They lie about everything. So why wouldn’t they lie about this too? lol. I just have not believed that they are ever going to set off some world wide “nuclear holocaust”, for a very long time. The whole show between “nations” is just that. A show. Why must we “punish” the people of Cuba or Russia or N. Korea? It makes no sense. Our politicians disagree with their politicians. So? what does that have to do with the people? It makes no sense. I don’t support Obama and I didn’t support Bush. Should we be punished as a “people” for what some power crazed politicians do? I think not. Same for other. Nuclear war and its “threat” of hundreds of bombs going off all over the world, to me, is just a transparent propaganda tool that serves every side of the issues. It is not going to happen. They just use it like “terror” to get control of the people through fear, and to waste their money etc.

      Along the same lines you always post, I also think that there is something to the Electric Universe theory. I put that in my Fascinating other stuff section. So I get where you’re coming from. But my friend, remember your audience and where you are posting. It is possible to do more harm than good for your own cause if you’re not careful. Anyway, that’s my two cents. Take care. — L

  25. Dav3

    I Parsed your article carefully and have a few considerations for you to evaluate.
    The Constitution wasn’t meant to be a rule set for government to follow, rather an empowering guidance directive for the public at large. It’s the PEOPLE that failed, not the Document.
    If I replace every instance of Constitution in your article with PEOPLE or the American Public it will be much closer to the TRUTH.
    No document has ever or will ever protect an individual or group from criminal predation.
    We can argue about why this has happened – as you point out about the constitution…
    Was it Education?
    Was it mass drugging?
    Was it space aliens?
    Was it divide and rule?
    Was it all of the above?
    It’s moot.
    People failed to realize what was happening and did nothing effective enough (as a group) to stop it.
    Therefore, People (as a group) are getting the exact outcome they worked to get.
    The rest of the story is the long feast at the banquet of consequence.
    Ignorant muppets will be first in line.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Dav3 I believe we are in basic agreement. Of course the document can never actually do anything. It is the peoples’ fault in a way. They are limited, and they have been intentionally misled and abused. So I don’t really blame them entirely. The Internet, for now, provides a means to learn the truth. But still people don’t bother. And thus I assume they never can for the most part. I don’t know how much of my site you have looked at but my basic point about the constitution is that it is NOT what people think. It does not protect them. It does not prevent JACK S**T from happening. Only the people can do that. But the people have been brainwashed to believe that the system and the constitution somehow do it on their own just because the system is so “perfectly constructed” etc. It makes people even more complacent. And that is my big problem with it. I think the structure it set up might have been fine for the small 13 colonies etc. But it surely does not work for a country our size. Regardless of the details. Glad you’re here. — L

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        I hear you Serena about the nuclear science. I have had other people raising the same issue recently. I have addressed it several times with the poster. I don’t like to edit or censor, but people need to stay at least reasonably on topic. And while I get his point and appreciate his passion, he just never has tied any of the comments into the TOPIC at hand. So regretfully, I have taken a couple of them down. They are repetitive and confusing to be honest.

        Anyway, glad you’re here. — L

    2. Robyn Kelley

      The largest tools used were propaganda, indoctrination, distractions, and legal maneuvers. If one is awake, and reads between the lines, in the letters reproduced here:
      one can see clearly that:
      lawyers have taken over practically every aspect of our lives
      it was a hostile takeover
      England is and has been a significant factor
      the constitution was not made for “the people” but for certain people
      that the president is a magistrate (administrator)

  26. barbara

    You’re right, it’s all a racket. I would like to see you mold a new form of governance that would serve the people. Or, should we go with no governance, like burning man?

    I recently invoked the worthless piece of paper in stating we not only have the right but the duty to throw off a corrupt government but I wasn’t intending to give it credence. Just wanted the assure the people that not only can we, but we should and we will.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Burning man, lol I like it Barbara. If you’re referring to the movie with Denzel, that is one of my favorites. I love the scene when the rave drones cheer the place blowing up. lol. As to your question, I did address it some in a comment to John in my comments from the front page. It is quite a big topic. Generally a much smaller flexible parliamentary system has the best chance to the extent we have to have one at all. Perhaps I will do an article or two on it at some point. Glad you’re here, take care. — L

      1. Barbara

        I meant the real Burning Man L., the one that’s held in Nevada in August every year. No money. Sharing, bartering. No government. The more I think about it, the more it seems the way to go. 99.9% of the monster that’s become the u.s. government can be thrown into the dustbins of the dark ages.

        Don’t have a tv so haven’t seen the movie you mentioned but it sounds interesting. One of my favorite all time movies is “The Stand”.

        As far as the constitution goes I think it could be summed up by a few words. The proof is in the Puddin. We’re in the mess we are while operating under that constitution so that invalidates it. The question is, is there a form of governance that could be incorruptible? I’ll check into the smaller flexible parliamentary system. I think it’s exciting that you are talking about it here, good on you! Your website contains so much useful information exposing the fraud of the legal system. I’m curious too about what you would set up as a legal system if given a blank slate.

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          lol, gotcha Barbara. That’s a cool little get together isn’t it? I think if you like “the Stand” you will really like “man on fire” and Denzel’s more recent “the Equalizer”. similar movies. Take care. — L

  27. John De Herrera

    No disrespect meant, but your reply is typical–“it’s been going on a long time”–so I’m absolved of doing anything about it; I can tell you how learned I am about what’s happened to us, but…. You asked a question above and I answered it: the reason politicians will be made to obey is because the entire process of a national convention to propose amendments creates and restores a political dynamic that currently does not exist. All governments have a tiger by the tail, get enough of the society cognizant of something (our ultimate right of alter/abolish) and those in power will blink.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well none taken John. But I do not believe that I give the impression that I need not do anything. For one thing, the material on this site did not create itself. lol. I just know the way any governmental system will work regardless of what the words say in some amendment UNLESS the people understand the way the systems are manipulated. So for me, I believe step one is to truly educate some people. That in no way is meant to denigrate efforts in other directions, such as what you have undertaken. I applaud them. I simply have a healthy cynicism regarding their efficacy. My belief is that efforts in waking people to the underlying systemic machinations will do more long term good. At least that is the part that I am willing to play at this point. There is much work to be done all around. I certainly don’t suggest people not make efforts. I simply say, for me, fundamental education or RE-education is what I see as the primary goal. IF we could make headway in that area, then the other areas would fall into place. WITHOUT progress in that area, it MAKES NO DIFFERENCE what other progress is made temporarily or “apparently”, the results will be quickly undone. That at least is my thinking. To the extent I am even capable of thinking in light of the fluoride and spraying and the GMO’s and the EMF and the disinformation lol. As always, glad you’re here and I enjoy the passion. — L

      1. John De Herrera

        Legalman, please take a breath and hear this: If education is key, then look at the convention process as a grand civics lesson of two or three generations all at once. Why? Because in order to propose amendments you have to examine the Constitution! And yes, once the process starts all kinds of Americans are going to pick apart all kinds of things, and talk about all kinds of ideas, and all kinds of history. It is the process of a federal convention that re-educates us all, all at once, as a nation and society. In other words you’re currently writing away on one website of thousands, having interesting conversations about what happened and what is happening, not about what objectively must be done to alter/abolish our current state of corruption. What’s more important when you run out of gas? Information about how a gas engine works, or information on where to get more gas? You’re saying that the Article V Convention is my cause, when I didn’t write the Constitution–it’s not my cause. If you won’t multi-task and advocate for the ultimate right of the people–and because it will result in a mass re-education–then please–at least–study the work of Bill Walker on FOAVC and write a new blog about how the convention clause embodies the DOI, not the 1st Amendment. After all, what’s more powerful? The right to complain about government, or the right to reform it altogether?

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          John, I believe I do advocate for the ultimate rights of the people. We just disagree what that is. I do not believe the constitution holds the key to my ultimate rights. I do not want to engage in a civics lesson to educate people that the answer lies in amending the constitution because I do not believe that it does. To that end I will make just a couple quick points. One, we don’t even have agreement that the people should have to amend that document. Next, we don’t have agreement that the amendment process itself is acceptable to the people. What if 24% of the states or the people don’t agree to the amendment? Are they free to go on their way out of the “union”? I don’t think so. So right away the system violates my beliefs about CONSENT. The entire process assumes consent that has not been given. When did anyone consent to be bound by this whole art V. convention system? and to live with the results either way? What amendments will be proposed and who has a right to propose them? What does it mean if they are not confirmed by a state? Is every state free to leave the union right now and not participate in the convention at all? Who agreed to the idea that 75% is the right number? Who agreed to the process to determine whether a state “agreed” or confirmed? None of THOSE issues are part of an Art V convention.

          The fact is that an Art V convention gives massive legitimacy to the idea that we are bound by the constitution itself, which I do not agree with. It leaves the impression that the people must go through that document. That right there is the HEART of what I disagree with. Any education of the people along those lines is not something I believe in. Is an art V a step better than what we have now and the dreamland the people are in now? yes it is. But that doesn’t mean it is the right step IN MY MIND. I don’t oppose anyone getting behind it. I am just not behind it.

          For me it is simple. The constitutional system itself ignores what the constitution says right now. Nothing about amending it can change that. They can still ignore it and they will. The answer comes in having people realize that things like “the constitution” ITSELF is what is wrong. The existence of things like that gives the people the impression that there is some thing, some document, some board, or some court, etc. that “protects” them when the truth is that only the people themselves being aware of the game can protect them. They must be free to leave at any time.

          What would even the text of one actual proposed amendment be? I think that would be helpful to see. I hope you will post one so anyone following the comments can see it as well. No need to discuss it in theoretical terms. Let’s just see one of the proposed amendments. Because for me, the first one I propose is that any state shall be free to leave the union at anytime with 24 hours notice for any reason and the federal government has no authority to prevent or hinder any state in so doing. Do you think THAT amendment can get agreement? Because without that, there is no deal for me.

          The basic structure of the document is problematic. It has too much baggage. What about the blatant violation of the constitution already committed by those in power and those still alive who have been in power? What will the Art. V. do about that?

          As long as the aim is to “keep the country together” at all costs, I think the aim is wrong. That should not be a priority at all. Freedom and consent should be the priority. Period. Art. V does not address my issues.
          So that is my very brief two cents. I feel compelled to stop just because it will get even longer and less readable. lol. But I could go on and on with why I don’t think Art V is the answer John. And any education of the population that attempts to do it inside that paradigm, for me, JUST for me, is not how I choose to spend my time. Should an Art. V break out, then I will be more than willing to wade in with my point of view. But I suspect that it will not be procedurally, or substantively capable of addressing the points I made here.

          As to your car analogy i think you have employed the old adage that to frame the question is to control the conversation. lol, I disagree with the choice you have put me to. I think the more accurate analogy if we are going to use a car analogy is that they have forced us to all ride in a car together, and they have made the people believe they NEED THE CAR. So when the car starts having all sorts of problems, everyone starts wasting their time trying to figure out how to “fix the car” or “find some gas”. But the reality is THOSE RUNNING THE SHOW don’t waste their time in cars. They are sitting at home laughing at us believing we are stuck beside the road. They can’t believe we are so distracted by trying to fix the car, that we don’t realize that we are already on the block we live on so we don’t NEED the car. We don’t have to go anywhere or fix the car. We can just get out of the car and walk home. If we want to meet the next day to decide what we want to do then great. I think that is a much more accurate analogy to the problem we find ourselves in. Art V seeks ways to fix the car, and I say we just get out and leave the hunk-a-junk that is stranding us.

          I hope My points have been made. I am open to hearing the other side. As always, healthy debate is essential. — L

          1. John De Herrera

            1) When did anyone consent to be bound by this whole art V. convention system?

            When the Constitution was ratified. Yes, some contend it was never legally ratified, but let’s leave that discussion for fringe dwellers. In practical terms, and in fact, the Constitution is accepted by the great majority of Americans today as the final authority of this society. If you don’t agree you have one of two choices: create a community of dissenters, or arbitrarily decide when you consider yourself a member of American society and when you don’t (for instance, you can consider yourself one while you travel on our state and federal highway systems, and then balk when it comes to constitutional mandates).

            3) What amendments will be proposed and who has a right to propose them?

            Two popular amendments today are a Balanced Budget Amendment desired by the right, and an Campaign Finance Amendment desired by the left. Another popular amendment is one to deal with the Supreme Court itself, and another is national referendum and recall–and naturally–because we’re not a bunch of idiots and we know what would obstruct those few who would enslave the rest of us. As to who has the right to propose amendments to the Constitution, there are only two Americans—members of Congress, and Article V Delegates.

            4) What does it mean if they [Article V Delegates] are not confirmed by a state?

            The question regarding who is eligible to be delegate and how they become so rests with the constitutional principle of equal protection under the law: if a member of Congress must suffer an election to attain the power of amendment proposal, so too must delegates. In fact all questions regarding the Article V Convention are answered via that principle—the people must be equally protected that delegates attempt no more or less than what’s allowed to Congress; if it takes 2/3 of both houses to formally propose an amendment, it will also take the approval of 2/3 of delegates at a convention; what is the criteria to become a member of the House shall also be the criteria to become a delegate, and so forth.

            5) Is every state free to leave the union right now and not participate in the convention at all?

            Yes, but only if the people of a state were of like mind in opposing or desiring to become an independent republic. It might take less than 80%, but regardless, in terms of political science, as history teaches, once the people are united in mind and heart “the government” has no choice in the matter.

            6) Who agreed to the idea that 75% is the right number?

            The people and the states who ratified the Constitution did, and it seems to have been a sound idea because no generation since has contested it: 3/4 is a political principle–meaning whatever idea for change—conservative/liberal—it must get all one side of the political spectrum signed on, plus half the other, or it goes nowhere (this idea arose in part because the Articles of Confederation required unanimous consent and that law was causing problems, including states threatening war against each other).

            7) Who agreed to the process to determine whether a state “agreed” or confirmed?

            The people of the several states did when they let representatives know they wanted to be apart of this new enterprise in the grand history of representative government. In fact Federalist Paper (85) was the final persuading argument to the people of the several states in 1788/89: If this new enterprise ever faltered, 2/3 of the states could cast applications for a convention to propose ideas to Alter/Abolish. At that time conventions were seen as they really are—an open discussion of the status quo and formal proposal of ideas for change. Which would make it a logical choice for folks who think the current system is operating outside the Constitution and/or the Constitution is flawed because it’s the only practical way to formally discuss what to do about it.

            8) The fact is that an Art V convention gives massive legitimacy to the idea that we are bound by the constitution….

            No, it simply provides a way to formally engage in discussion about things you dislike.

            9) It leaves the impression that the people must go through that document….

            The Constitution is the current controlling law of this society. Call it a straightjacket, a web we’re all caught up in—you can say you don’t believe it’s key to your rights, and theoretically it isn’t, but in practical terms it is—unless you think things like federal government and the IRS don’t exist–it is. We have to go through that document to get anywhere other than where we are now—where Washington DC dictates how we all approach existence. The Article V Convention does not give legitimacy to the Constitution or the status quo, it’s simply the alternate mode of formally discussing/proposing change. The US Congress is currently consolidating the powers of the federal government so it’s unlikely it’s going to begin dismantling what’s been built since the National Security Act of 1947. In sum, everyone today has an idea of the way things ought to be, but until we all come to the table, nobody is going anywhere.

            10) Is an art V a step better than what we have now and the dreamland the people are in now? yes it is. But that doesn’t mean it is the right step IN MY MIND.

            Your current position is both irrational and illogical, and not because I say so, but because fact, all history, and everything we know about the human condition says so: a) we’re currently bound by the Constitution, b) only two ways to propose change and one (Congress) has construed the Constitution so as to defeat its obvious aims, c) unless you’re talking about a different Earth, a different USA, the Article V Convention is not one step of many, it’s the only practical step available to us as a society. Your fear of “educating people” that we must go through “that document” is irrational because all it is, is FORMAL discussion, as opposed to this discussion here which is INFORMAL.

            11) The constitutional system itself ignores what the constitution says right now.

            Don’t confuse the system as it operates today with the Constitution itself (which is what Spooner does). Hamlet said that a legal contract is only as relevant as the people behind it. If ignored by politicians, it’s a failure of the people, not the law itself.

            12) Nothing about amending it can change that. They can still ignore it and they will. The answer comes in having people realize that things like “the constitution” ITSELF is what is wrong….

            It is not an amendment or the Constitution itself that makes/keeps people free, it’s the collective understanding of the society at large (e plurius unum), and we’ve been kept in the dark since 1947 under the doctrine of “national security.” Going through the formal process of proposing amendments via a convention, rather than by today’s Congress, can and will show everyone just who is boss.

            13) What would even the text of one actual proposed amendment be?

            Amendment proposal: From here on, upon ratification by 3/4 of the several states, all constitutional principles as set forth in this Constitution shall apply to natural human beings only.

            Amendment proposal: From here on, upon ratification by 3/4 of the several states, all private monies shall be strictly prohibited from public elections; the right to vote in public elections and the right to have such votes transparently and accurately tallied shall not be denied; individuals found to be engaged in electoral fraud shall be imprisoned for not less than twenty years.

            14) Because for me, the first one I propose is that any state shall be free to leave the union at anytime with 24 hours notice for any reason and the federal government has no authority to prevent or hinder any state in so doing.

            OK Legalman, now you’re engaged in the proposal of amendments; except here you’re doing it informally, rather than formally and on the authority of the Constitution.

            The legal requirement for a “convention for proposing amendments” has been satisfied by the states and the only reason we’ve never had one is because some people think they know what they’re talking about regarding Article V, when they really don’t. Yes, we know there are problems with the document—that’s clear—and many of the Framers said as much. So what are we going to do about it? What ought to be done about it? What can be done about it? Until you answer those questions, you’re everywhere and nowhere. If it’s that someone is incapable of backing up their words with action, that’s understandable, that’s nothing new.

            If you start at the very first comment to this exchange and comprehend up to here, then there should be no question, go to and begin reading the reference material by Bill Walker so that you can learn how to talk about the Article V Convention with other Americans–which is actually pleasant, because the issue sails right over partisan politics into non-partisan amendment language. In the end, as mentioned, everyone has an idea of what ought to be done, but until we all come to the table, nobody is going anywhere (and according to history, staying put gets more dangerous every day). Let’s not fear standing up for the Constitution when politicians ignore it, let’s begin calling for a federal convention in order to discuss things the politicians never do.

          2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

            John, I appreciate that you are passionate about this topic, but it is becoming clear to me that we are not going to agree. And that is fine. We don’t have to. I am not going to go through each of these points again but I will address a few of your responses and then clarify for the last time my position.

            As to the first point. That consent is not valid in any way. Nobody else can consent for me. And THAT is the heart of the issue. You act as though some crap from 200 years ago has ANY validity. It does NOT. Then you turn and make it clear that because the “people” supposedly “accept it” as the law of the land that that too is a reason. It is not. The people accept all sorts of things. The people accept the ENTIRE SYSTEM AS THE LAW OF THE LAND. SO? that is just an argument that the people can be fooled. It is just an argument that the only thing that matters as a practical matter is what the people will accept!! that is just making MY POINT. The law or the “constitution” or Art. V has no more validity than whatever the population allow it to have when those with the guns and the brainwashing come to enforce it. And If you believe that the constitution’s AS WRITTEN right now doesn’t matter as you say, like you comment about Spooner, (Don’t confuse the system as it operates today with the Constitution itself (which is what Spooner does)) then that alone demonstrates that rewording it or having yet more amendments to is is a waste of time. Which is MY POINT.

            We have the 9th and 10th amendments. Ignored. We have the 1st and 2nd. Ignored. We now have obamacare based on nothing. We have gay marriage and abortion based on nothing. We have Art 1 sect. 8 specifically enumerating the limited areas. Ignored. There is NO POINT in adding amendments to “clarify”. BECAUSE IT IS NOT AMBIGUOUS. Ambiguity is not the problem. So clarification is not the answer! The problem is that governments themselves are inherently criminal operations. Criminal operations that need to be barely tolerated in the smallest possible form. Until the people stop romanticizing the idea of a holy constitution and now some holy amendments it will only get worse. Peoples’ minds need to be shifted into seeing governments themselves as basically low level criminal operations that need to be closely watched and barely tolerated. Not held up with high sounding ideas about constitutions and amendments AS THOUGH THEY MEAN SOMETHING, or as though they are law that those enforcing and interpreting the law will follow.

            Until Art. V. supporters can explain why any new amendment will have any more efficacy than what we already have that is already ignored then what is the point? You say the states can leave. That is not an honest answer. That is an answer that MIXES your two positions. Theoretically of course they can, but not practically. The feds will stop it. The s.ct. has said they have no such right. So when you say they can, you are doing what you claim spooner did “wrong”. You are claiming rights that only exist in theory. Just like whatever “new rights” or obligations or limitations are “added at some art. v. convention. They will just be ignored or reinterpreted over time to be meaningless or to mean the opposite.

            I will go on record right now about the Art. V. convention. There will not be one. If there is one, no substantive amendment that can do anything of real value will come out of it. If something of value comes out of it the amendment will not be ratified. If it is ratified it will not be implemented. If implemented, the implementation will not be consistent with the language of the amendment. If the implementation is consistent it will not be enforced. If it is enforced it will be challenged. If it is challenged it will be compromised. THAT my friend is the reality of ANY attempt to change through using a constitution.

            It will never work because the structure can’t work. And the overall size of the country is TOO BIG to ever be controlled by “the people”. Further, there can never be a “final law” in some hokey constitution because people are born each day and they haven’t agreed to those rules!! The only thing that can ever work, and this is only off the top of my head, so it is not exhaustive. is a very small extremely responsive parliamentary system with limited authority, that is closely watched, has a court with virtually no power, has forced sunset provisions for every law every every 2 years, massive penalties for any corruption, all elected officials have to get at least 90% in an election. All bills can only pass with 80% approval. All elected officials must sign a pledge of positions. Any vote in violation of that position is cause for immediate termination and personal fines against them. People say that such a system can “never work”, and of course they are right. It could never work to support WHAT WE HAVE, and that is the point of why we need this type of system. Because it makes it impossible to grow it into what we have. It can work. It is just that the area of agreement would be very small. So the government would be very small. And that is great. That is what we need. People are more than happy to cooperate when it is in their interest. They must be forced when it is not.

            And that is just that. If people want to spend their time pushing amendments then be my guest. If you imagine it will implement real change, well, I just don’t buy that. The interests AGAINST such an outcome are too strong. The people are too brainwashed. Does that mean I believe that we will get a system like I propose? lol, of course not. Do we have a government of philosopher kings? lol no, but it doesn’t mean that the concepts should not be discussed. It doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be the goal. I do not work on projects I KNOW have no chance of succeeding in the world. I work on things that have VALUE TO ME. I KNOW I can change some minds. I KNOW I can open some minds. I KNOW that will help each of those people. I KNOW that some of them can open some other minds etc. So I choose to work on what I KNOW can actually make a difference at a SMALL scale, rather than on a BIG project, that has no chance of effecting Big change. Because that project will in all likelihood be infiltrated, co-opted, steered down the wrong path, and then used for the OPPOSITE of what it was designed to do. That is just the nature of the world right now. And from everything I can tell, always has been and always will be.

            The only thing any of us can control is our own mind. And from what I can tell, people can’t even do that. I would rather correctly and fully inform a much smaller group of individuals who can do ZERO about the “bigger problem” of the system, but who are then in a better personal position by simply knowing the truth, than work on a project that theoretically could make changes to the system, when I KNOW those changes will never occur and wouldn’t work even if they were implemented. So I wish you the best with Art. V. I have made my predictions. I stand by them. I HOPE I am wrong. But unfortunately I have a great track record of being right. lol I enjoyed the debate my friend. Perhaps we will continue it in the future when new facts arise. Take care. — L

            please enjoy the following in honor of my position and our great founding. lol It is truly classic.

    1. Oliver K. Manuel

      Experimentation, observation and contemplation by physical scientists lead to the same truths that spiritual leaders of various religions realize through meditation and prayer !

      The return of social sanity to planet Earth will depend on a merger of a science and spirituality.

      In 1543 Copernicus accidentally intruded on the turf of religious leaders when he correctly observed that a giant FOUNTAIN of ENERGY at the gravitational center of the solar system controls planet Earth and its inhabitants.

  28. Olgam

    Just stumbled onto your site today and have already shared some of your links – I can’t wait to read more.

    Since I am so new and have yet to read but a drop I was wondering if there are any “solutions” articles – even if it is to find a cave and hide.

    The more I read the more I realize everything is a house of mirrors and I would like to begin to develop some sort of an action plan going forward – any thoughts will be appreciated.

    Keep up the good work.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well olgam I have written on it a few times. You might look through the comments a bit. I always get a kick out of how many people hope there is some simple answer. Sadly a big problem like this only has somewhat big answers. But there is hope. Glad you’re here. –L

      1. John De Herrera

        I read through the introductory stuff and commend you on the clear writing and explanation(s), although I believe I have news for you regarding “a solution.” Does this mean I have to compose a long email? Or may I have the pleasure of speaking with you over the phone? I can guarantee that you will “see” things differently.

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          John I appreciate the interest. Let me just say that if the proposed solution has to do with an Article V type of solution I think we can just agree to disagree. I did look at the info on If it is something else then I would be curious to hear. My position on the art V is just that they already ignore the amendments we have. How do we improve our situation by passing more that they ignore? Look at the 1st amend right to petition I wrote about. The language is crystal clear. They just ignore it. Look at the recent aca ruling. They just read in the language. That is reality. They will read in what is not there and read out what is. I don’t consent to the structure ITSELF. It isn’t a matter of adjusting what is inside the structure. I disagree that something this big Can ever work. It can’t. It must be shrunk down. That means shrink what they control. Not shrink their authority within the same system. That will just end up in the same position. Anyway like I said if it is not art v then I might be curious. Also if there is something inside the whole art v area I don’t get that could also be true. But from what I can see they ignore the 9 the 10th the 2nd and on and on. What is the point of beating my head against that wall? They have made it clear they will do whatever they care to within THIS system. And we are not allowed to leave. So now that you have seen my response perhaps you will respond briefly and then we can take it from there. I am always open. Glad you are here. I always love passion. –L

          1. John De Herrera

            They are allowed to ignore the Constitution and its amendments because that has slowly become the status quo at this late date. What is true, the vast majority of Americans are upset and if they ever get a few leaders and alerting folks that a federal convention is not dangerous, the powers that be will blink, they’ll issue the call, and for there, in a natural progression of events, the current members of society find out what 75% of us agree on for a 28th Amendment: BY THE TIME WE GET TO THAT POINT IN HISTORY–HAVING GONE THROUGH A NATIONAL DISCUSSION AND THE RATIFICATION PROCESS–THE STATUS QUO OF POLITICIANS IGNORING THE LAW WILL HAVE BECOME A THING OF THE PAST; A RESET BUTTON WILL HAVE OCCURRED VIA A POLITICAL PRINCIPLE THAT SPOTLIGHTS THE STATUS QUO–THE ARTICLE V CONVENTION (a proper noun).

            And even if billionaires send delegates, guess what? Their idea will not only expose them for who and what they are, it’s hot air unless they can get 38 state legislatures to ratify it. The call itself transforms political reality because every member of Congress and federal judge will begin walking and talking differently once the call goes out because it will begin to dawn on all that the way of doing things is now going to be destroyed by public consensus. We just need to get to the tipping-point, and that starts with people like you putting up the lantern for others. At present this site claims the 1st Amendment to be the ultimate right, not Article V.

            And if you wonder what will have a chance of being ratified today, we already know, 90% have always agreed on some form of public funding of elections. Why? Because we’re all smart enough to know that money corrupts.

          2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

            Well John I agree and disagree. I would take the position that it has always been this way. It has not slowly occurred. The only thing that has slowly occurred is the evidence in public this time around. But the M.O. has always been the same. Even in the good ole U.S. of A. It has been a lie for a very long time. — L

    2. Rulo Logan


      Thank you. Just when I thought I must be crazy I find a tool to direct others to.

      Thank you again sir,
      Thank you.

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        Rulo you are most welcome. We have to stick together to maintain our own sanity in this world of make believe they serve up. Take care. – L

  29. Oliver K. Manuel

    We have all been snookered for decades by government data tampering.

    We know the problem: Stalin essentially won WWII, united nations (UN) and national academies of science (NAS) into a giant, worldwide “Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Scientific Truths” on 24 OCT 1945, giving control of federal research agencies in the United States to the US NAS – a private group of distinguished scholars that President Lincoln appointed to advise the government on all matters of science and technology in 1863.

    What is the solution? To get the jackass out of the ditch as soon as possible, we need to know if Galen Winsor’s report is valid about the post-WWII “Nuclear Scare Scam.”

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Hi Oliver. Always enjoy your passion. Yes we need to get the jackass out of the ditch ASAP. Lol. But the damn thing is just so stinking stubborn!! Lol. –L

  30. Joel

    Interesting article. Your slightly wrong about the religion angle. “Religions”, loosly defined, are exploited and manufactured to confuse but some still contain truth and one has it all. They are not all created equal-or wrong. “Religion” contains the only true truth of our existance on earth. It shows us the future too. It is not mearly an opiate of the mass. It’s the hole that man tries to fill with everything but God.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Joel, I am glad you’re here. I think to be fair to me, what I said was that religions have been used as control systems, not that there is not truth in them. For me, religion itself is a control system. The beliefs associated with any religion of course are the foundations and have many great truths, but they are not the religions. The creeds and the other works are not set up by the founders, they are set down and set up by those who follow. Jesus didn’t write anything down that we know of. Nor did he start a church. Neither did Mohammed or Siddartha or any of the other foundations for the big religions. The rules and requirements come later. They are devised by those who seek to use the beliefs to create a religion to then use the creed to gain power for themselves over the masses. That was my point. Of course we are not accidents etc. I am far from a materialist. But every “religion” has multiple sects and styles. Each one disagreeing with the other. It matters not if it is Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Taoist, or anything else. And now that we live in a materialistic age, the Law has replaced these systems in most places, at least in name, and at least as far as the purported “legitimacy” of the State’s use of force, i.e. the government. The topic is much much too big for a comment. It would require a whole book, at least. lol. Regardless, I am glad you’re here and hope you come back and tell your friends. take care– L

  31. red

    great blog, Of course “The public license” is always the most abused but desirable outcome for the many.
    That is to say all people equal under the rule of law, though historically purchased by the few with credit.

    The constitutional problem always arise’s i.e. “who will be boss?” in defence of this rule of law? read
    English civil wars. U.S.A and Rome came closest to fulfilling this higher purpose. Alas same problem
    the monopoly of credit and too many wanna be bosses’ Silver is the only pure contract untouchable
    by the wheels of power. Until people understand credit they will flounder on the trickery of the”rulers”

    Silver is the most feared substance on the planet for those with pretence to power. There is a reason
    for the mythology surrounding it. JMO great blog U.S.A in my opinion is the great tragedy of the
    common man alas slain by the vein and greedy. I hope it survives but doubt it.
    sincerely Red

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thanks for the comment and the compliment Red. I agree hard money is a serious problem for those who create money from nothing and then make us use it. There is a lot of work to be done in just re-educating people. I think the reality is that it is more of matter of keeping the knowledge alive at this point, than truly hoping it will spread and catch on. The brainwashing is just so so deep. At least we can stick together. take care– L

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well Mark, I’m not sure how much of my site you have read, including my comments. I have addressed this topic many times. It is a big topic. People seem to want a “solution”. But the problem is quite big so it doesn’t lend itself to a simple solution. Some of it is inevitable because it is due to human nature. But it can be mitigated. Next it is really two questions. One, how do you protect yourself? and two, what can you do to change the system? The first is like living in a neighborhood that you don’t know is controlled by a gang and that most of the cops are on the take. If you live in that situation you are at a serious disadvantage if you don’t KNOW this. You call the cops, you expect a certain result from the system that you will never get. However, if you know the situation then you can work around it and know what to actually expect. The second issue would be like asking, how do I clean up the neighborhood and get rid of the gangs and crooked cops? That is much more complicated and not something that you can do alone. And that is why the most important thing someone can do is to address the FIRST part of the question. Learn how the system actually works so you can work around it and anticipate problems. Then when they do come up you know how to deal with them instead of calling the cops and expecting something that will never happen. Anyway, that is my short answer. Glad you’re here. — L

  32. Oliver K. Manuel

    Can humans live with nuclear energy?

    After “The Great Social Experiment of 1945-2015” explained how world governments hid from the public the source of energy in the core of the Sun that

    1. Made our chemical elements,
    2. Birthed the entire solar system,
    3. Sustained life’s origin, and
    4. Evolution of species by
    5. Controlling Earth’s climate, . . .

    An intriguing and extremely well-done video response described this same seventy-year period of totalitarian rule as “The Long Peace of 1945-2015:”

    World leaders may see no option, living 1AU (astronomical unit) from the pulsar-centered Sun other than:
    _ a.) Worldwide nuclear war
    _ b.) Tyrannical world rule, or
    _ c.) Nuclear energy paranoia

  33. usurykills

    Amazing! You are the 2nd lawyer I’ve found online who does not have the predator mindset.
    It seems you have found the outskirts of TRUTH by heading down a completely different path than I.
    I got here by following the money. The same money that pays the legal bills.
    You are quite right — we have to start over. Next time, we should have RESPECT for one another.
    Bust up the legal system, the financial system, the political system and the religious system. (system(s))
    My take on legalese is we really just need one rule and it’s golden. All violations are theft (of something.)
    Thank you for your efforts — please keep up the good work.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thanks usury. I haven’t put the concept up yet about the difference between natural law and positive law, but that is the heart of the issue. But it is complex and I haven’t quite figured out how to break it down and make it interesting. But yes, natural law is the key. It is all about the law of mine and thine. It used to be taught. It used to be known. But in the last 150 years they ptb’s have wrestled control of every educational outlet and media outlet and thus the people are ignorant and misled and believe that just because a group of crooks goes through some “process” that the outcome is a “law” that is sacred and must be obeyed. That is the key piece of the legal control system. The religious one leans on the fear of god and punishment. The legal one relies upon this baseless faith in the “process” of “law making’. etc. — L

  34. Oliver K. Manuel

    I recommend that you check out Galen Winson video on The Nuclear Scare Scam (2012)

    I know beyond doubt that frightened world leaders united nations (UN) and national
    academies of sciences (NAS) into an Orwellian Ministry of Scientific Truths on 24 Oct 1945 to forbid public knowledge of the nuclear energy that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki – NEUTRON REPULSION – but it never occurred to me before that false fear of nuclear energy may be part of the government scam.

  35. Oliver K. Manuel

    Thank you for this site. Truth is a noble objective, perhaps beyond the comprehension of humankind. My understanding of truth is just this, and nothing less:

    The Sun is the creator, destroyer and sustainer of every atom, life and world in the solar system: See: “Solar energy,” Adv. Astronomy, submitted 1 Sept 2014 or
    See: “Solar energy for teachers”

    The Sun is one of billions of stars in the Milky Way. The Milky Way is one of billions of galaxies in the infinite universe, dynamic (alive) because mass (m) is reversible converted into energy (E) or visa versa:

    1. Expanding as compressed electron-proton pairs (neutrons) spontaneously decay into expanded electron-proton pairs (hydrogen atoms) while entropy increases and part of the neutron rest mass (m) becomes restless mass (kinetic and gravitational E), and then

    2. Contracting as expanded electron-proton pairs (hydrogen atoms) collapse into compressed electron-proton pairs (neutrons) while entropy decreases and restless mass (kinetic and gravitational E) are converted back into neutron rest mass (m).

    1. Oliver K. Manuel

      The autobiography of my late research mentor – My Early Days at the Imperial University of Tokyo by Paul Kazuo Kuroda (1917-2001) – identified an error in nuclear physics that became part of the worldwide consensus science dogma after WWII:

      That error prevented mankind from understanding the main source of energy (E) stored as mass (m) in cores of:

      1. Atoms heavier than ~150 amu (atomic mass units)
      2. Some planets like Jupiter
      3. Ordinary stars like the Sun
      4. Galaxies like the Milky Way
      5. The now expanding Universe

      Japan Times allowed a comment yesterday that may let the people of Japan understand the real source of energy that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki: NEUTRON REPULSION

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        Well I have found that most of science has been filled with disinformation as well. People think “science” is some holy thing as well. It is the new religion for so many. But they don’t see that it has a lot of things that simply are not proved. Just theory. The great oracles are now just doing “math” where they come down and instead of reading the chicken bones, they tell us that 3 blackboards worth of math “proves” that everything came from nothing all at once for no reason. Even math itself apparently must have come from something “for no reason” and “by chance”. They don’t seem to catch the absurdity of their own position. — L

        1. Oliver K. Manuel

          Thank you, Legalman. Big Bang Cosmology (BBC) is one of four major government lies:

          SNM: Standard Nuclear Model – neutron attract other neutrons
          SMM: Standard Solar Model – stars are hydrogen-fusion reactors
          BBC: Big Bang Cosmology – nothing exploded to hydrogen & time
          AGW: Anthropologic Global Warming – CO2 controls Earth’s climate

  36. Yonghy-Bonghy-Bo

    An appreciative “you da man” to Legalman from the founder and Prez of the Godzone Chapter of the Legalman Fan Club (hereinafter “LFC”). Jaysus, you’re funny! And spot on, of course. Thank gawd I’m no longer in the legal field. Saw firsthand what a con it was, and managed to escape from the USSA a while back, before the Empire turned into an in-your-face police state. (Not that Godzone is a bastion of freedom, mind you, as our PM is a former Vampire Squid bankster and current all-around corrupt minion of the Deep State, as are most people who seek that kind of power over others. And we’re part of the Five Eyes, damn it all, in thrall to Sauron.)

    The last time I tried to open someone’s eyes was in 1995 or so, when I handed detailed info on ECHELON, that I had gleaned from an obscure part of the Intertubes, to a young, bright whipper-snapper who was newly in the computer security field. He couldn’t grok it and looked at me like I was a nutter. Yes, I was the one whose car always sported my favorite bumper sticker — Mencken’s “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” All y’all should buy one at the website.

    Anytime that you’re in the vicinity, I’ll shout you. (That’s Kiwispeak for “I’ll buy the drinks.”) Come on down and give your LFC inaugural speech at our town’s microbrewery. After a few of our manuka-flavored craft brews, you’ll enjoy watching the water flow down the drain the WRONG WAY!! har.

    1. Carey Nottingham

      Second to Legalman, you are my favorite poster-er Yonghy-Bonghy-Bo!

      Where do I sign up for your LFC? *wink*

    2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well Yongy I appreciate the comment! I hope I can take you up on your offer. I’ve never been to NZ but I’ve heard it’s beautiful. If it has more people like you I would probably quite enjoy it. And if I stayed long enough perhaps I could learn a bit of the language as well. lol take care hope to see you back again. — L

  37. Andrew Szell

    Laws are nothing but artificial, man-made contraptions, interpretations of something or event. It could be anything from nature to art.

    When we encounter something we never did before, we want to make sense of it, so we make up “laws” or “theories” to explain them. Just like when two people come together who never heard or saw each other before. The first thing they do is size each other up and after a certain amount of interaction, conversation, each puts the other into a box. This very same procedure is going on right here and every time someone new shows up. Once one is put into a box by another, it is virtually impossible to get out of it. This behavior of ours is catastrophic to our advancement.

    What we are doing is trying to force a square object into a round hole. The only way it can be done if the square object is smaller than the round hole, but obviously it is not a perfect fit. This non-perfect fit is the reason for the “anomalies” and “exceptions to the rules” we already made up. Something will always “squeeze by” at the “cracks”. The fly in the ointment, every apple has a worm, nothing is perfect. The little screw that stops the big machine from working.
    Nothing is perfect that was based on laws.

    The other idiocy in law is the negative words and terminology that are used. Nobody can ever, ever honor or fulfill a negative condition or contract. It is impossible! For example; it is impossible for you to do “no parking”. In order for you to be “guilty” of anything, you must “do” something. This is just another scam to extract “money” out of you, based on language fraud they practice.

    We need “order” not “law”. Order is an internal attribute, given to everybody! Suppressing this internal order within us and replacing it with the artificial external “law” is detrimental to our very existence.

    Interesting to see that when things get out of hand in a courtroom, the judge yells “order in the court”. This is a misnomer by the judge. What the judge really saying is; “I want my control/ruler-ship back, because I am loosing it”. So, it is never ever “order” in any courtroom but “control”. And as a side note, one should never want “justice” for himself/herself. The meaning of the word “justice” (when dissected) means “judge title speaks outlaw” (reversed, since English is a reversed language). “Justice” is not good for you. There is only “damage” and “equity” and obviously, you want “equity”.

    When we have law, we have friction, disorder and disease. Anybody can see that humanity is plagued with diseases everywhere and we are slowly but surely dying out, yet as an idiot, we keep doing what we did before, over and over. Like a broken record.

    When we have order, we have peace and ease. At least that is what I want.

  38. health

    Heya i’m for the primary time here. I found this board and I in finding It truly useful & it helped
    me out a lot. I am hoping to provide one thing again and help others such as you helped me.

  39. Andrew Szell

    It is interesting to note that during the reign of Attila the Hun, there were no laws but order. Everybody was free to do whatever he/she wanted to do without hurting others. The “Thous shalt not kill” was an internal attribute in people not a “law” but later a shyster came along and put it down on paper, therefore making it an external “law” and all hell broke loose after.

    Attila was the only king ever, to whom the Vatican paid taxes in the form of gifts. Of course the history of Attila the Hun is perverted in status quo history books. They promote and spread “law” not “order”.

    “Law and order” don’t go together as you were brainwashed to accept. Law has nothing to do with order. Law is an external, foreign to human nature, chaotic, ambiguous, subject to interpretation, favoritism and private opinions chain, in various sizes with the selections from iron to gold. But still a chain.
    Order has to do with peace and safety but there is no “money” to make in that, so who wants it. In nature there is order, contrary of what you were led to believe that there are “natural laws”. Nature will do whatever it wants to do, regardless of your “laws”. Can’t strip and put nature into their box of “law”. They can’t even predict the weather a day ahead with their “laws”.

    The shysters made an external “coat/law” and try to fit everybody into it but there are unlimited possibilities so it can’t work. This is the reason why the legal system takes only a very small “slice” from an entire event and “judge” everything on that “slice” of event. Other parts of the event are to be taken only into “consideration” but not judged. It is pathetic and sooooo phoney what they are doing!

    Anyway; to put it simply; law is external, order is internal.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      I didn’t know that about Attila, but I like it. I’m not surprised. Of course the only legitimate law is Natural law. Positive law is just a scam they run. I always laugh to myself when I hear people talking about law and order. As the earlier Nazarene said. “They know not what they do.” so to speak. lol. Glad you’re here. –L

  40. Syn

    It would seem most Americans have forgotten that the Constitution was written to grant our government certain rights and limits of power. It was NOT written to grant we the people with rights, our rights are one hundred percent organic. Individuals rights are called natural rights because we are born with inalienable rights.

    Again, I repeat, the Constitution was created to limit the power of government, not individuals. Let that sink in.

    The Constitution is not some magical piece of paper, it cannot enforce itself. The chains of the Constitution that were to bind down our government with the rule of law have become weak and corroded over time. We have not been vigilant, we have been complacent, apathetic, and distracted.

    We the people have failed to hold our public serpents accountable to the Supreme law of our land, ie, the Constitution. Without the rule of law there is only the rule of man.

    1. Grey

      Sorry buddy but that’s all part of the con of the “constitution”. It does limit the government, it creates an all-powerful government (proof is all around you). The Articles of Confederation preceded the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, yet the “forefathers” completely ignored the laws found within the Articles of Confederation and created the Constitution is secret, the constitutional convention was a secret meeting, pure and simple.

      After the Revolutionary war the United States had no way to pay their war debts (strange, King George lent us money to fight a war against himself). The constitution was fomented on the people in order to make us debt slaves in perpetuity. Find out what it means to be “constitutor”. After that go back and read the “Treaty of Paris”.

      America was a corporate venture (and still is). Do you really think we beat the most powerful empire on the planet? It was a bait and switch. Listen to what Cornwallis had to say about the matter:

      “A holy war will now begin on America, and when it is ended America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown [. . .] in less than two hundred years the whole nation will be working for divine world government. That government that they believe to be divine will be the British Empire. All religions will be permeated with Judaism without even being noticed by the masses, and they will all be under the invisible all-seeing eye of the Grand Architect of Freemasonry.” – Charles Cornwallis.

      “The Crown” is a corporation and is not owned by the Kings or Queens of England. It’s owned and operated by bankers. The war started when George Washington gave a charter for The First Bank of the United States. We went to war in 1812 because congress refused to grant the Rothschild Banking Dynasty a second 20 year charter. They burned down the White House and generally kicked our asses, hence the Second Bank of the United States was created (forget about Andrew Jackson’s victory down in Louisiana).

      We haven’t failed, per say, the Constitution is a scam, it was meant to d exactly what it has done.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well G.Small, I am not sure we do need one. But of course the big variable is the average person. And once you go down into that area, well… all bets are off. Certainly, the issues of consent are a lot more important than “precedent”. Who cares what the people 100 years ago wanted to do? How am I bound by that? It makes NO sense. Even if we could know what actually happened. And of course they just lie about what happened in order to beef up there position. But yes, I agree with the sentiment. The number one thing people have to open their eyes to is the concept that the constitution and whatever those guys said about it is just an idea. HOW am I in any way bound by it? Nobody is. They teach everyone that we “must be” in order to do whatever the f they care to. lol. I say the proof is all around. But people don’t want to see it. — L

      1. G. Small

        Thank you for responding. I agree – even after trying to talk myself out of it. Didn’t know about Lord Corwallis but am not surprised. Please continue your work. It is appreciated.


  41. Rev. Dragon's Eye

    Just as much as I end up with arguments and epithets directed at me, to varying degrees, on discussions of this very subject. Sooo many people believe that their rights come from the “Constitution”, yet seem to blithely-forget what the Declaration of Independence had to say about the nature of our rights: “endowed by their (as in – “The People’s”) Creator“. The Creator did not create these “governments”, and the Creator did not create these “constitutions”. The (few) People (supposedly) did! However, our Rights were pre-eminent even BEFORE the fact (if you will) of “government”.

    Good piece.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Glad you enjoyed it. There is so much wasted time discussing our grand constitution as though it is some protector of us. It just makes me laugh. We don’t get our rights from the government. We don’t wait to see if we “have rights” by hearing what those “esteemed” justices say. As soon as the people concede to HAVE THAT discussion, well, they’ve already given up the only parts that matter. They have conceded that they will be ruled by those who created that system. That is the important point. That is the point that is never discussed. That isn’t an accident. –L

      1. ynotawoody

        Thomas Jefferson principal author of the Declaration of Independence and James Madison, Jr. who is hailed as the “Father of the Constitution” understood this concept as evidenced by their absence in Marbury v. Madison.

      2. sgm

        Brilliant blog. Can’t get enough. I am beholden to no man, no ruler, no politician, no constitution… my rights are not given to me by any of these entities. I like to say my rights are given to me by what I call my Source (call it a Creator if you will. And I have no problem with the word God, either). I am not repeating anything new. Those who try to wield power over me are the same as me, flesh and bone. They might be stronger, have more weapons, have the power to ruin my life … but they can never ruin or destroy what is inside me which is beyond time, space, man, law. Do I want to have this fight.. No. Basically it has come down to the fact that a banking and finance cabal (including and run by wealthiest families ) have been wielding power behind the scenes for a long time. I’m sure they were behind the farce of a constitution as well. For more information on that, I suggest reading the essays of Miles Mathis. I have already sent Mathis a link to Legalman. Question everything.

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          Thanks SGM, I appreciate the comment. I always appreciate meeting like minded people. I really don’t write to convince, I just write to put the truth out there. And so I reach only a small audience because most people are not able to handle the truth. They just can’t hear it. And you’re right the truth about who is really in charge is just that. A very small group who stay quite hidden, FOR GOOD REASON. lol.

          Question everything is excellent advice to anyone. Whenever I am faced with a problem/issue I ask myself is there a MORE fundamental assumption that I am making here that I have NOT examined yet? If so, then I examine it for any KNOWN validity and then see how THAT impacts the other issue. It is amazing how many “assumptions” and “givens” people have incorporated into what they “know”. lol For me it is a simple thing really, there is a small group who seeks to control a large group. Knowledge is power, the truth sets you free, so the small group who seeks to control will never give the larger group ANY knowledge or truth. EVER. That doesn’t mean they don’t find some. They do of course. But the small group will have planted so many alternative “seeds” of disinfo around it that there will be much doubt as a result. And for me, if there is something that “everyone knows”, THAT for me is the most suspicious “fact” of all. lol

          Glad to hear from you. Take care. — L

        2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          Oh, and SGM since you enjoy my blog, you will enjoy my Twitter page as well. There’s a link at the top right of this page, and I’m at @uslawreview — L

  42. Oliver K. Manuel

    The course of world history was changed by events on 12 Dec 1922 & Aug-Sept 1945:

    Aston revealed the promise and danger of nuclear energy on 12 Dec 1945

    Stalin emerged victorious from WWII holding Japan’s atomic bomb plant at Konan, Korea and the American crew of a B29 bomber during negotiations for Japan’s surrender and formation of the United Nations on 24 Oct 1945:

    “Aston’s WARNING (12 DEC 1922); CHAOS & FEAR (AUG-SEPT 1945)”

  43. Alan Donelson

    Question the Einstein homage, though metaphorically I suppose useful for the narrow purpose enlisted. One conspiracy theory at a time seems good self-advised direction! Delighted to have discovered your cache of legal wisdom!

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Yes, one at a time. You know a lot of people get overwhelmed when confronted with even just a little truth. So yes, I relegate most other matters to my Fascinating other stuff and news. Glad you enjoy it. remember to tell your friends. Or your enemies. lol — L

  44. platypus

    The Spooner quote was a nice touch. Unfortunately it assumes fact(s) which either it cannot prove or are known to be impossible. Take the part about the constitution preventing its misuse. How is a document supposed to do that? Is there any record (true or manufactured) of ANY document ever protecting itself?

    Putting that aside, the truth is that on this planet force makes right and force makes wrong. Without the ability to project force, there is no ability to be safe from attack. No hole deep enough, no island remote enough, no fortress impregnable enough.

    You are very correct about what you say: there is truth, most of it is right in front of us, and it is placed in an environment that is designed to be unable to be perceived easily. However, the truth only sets you free when you can comprehend it in context with everything else around it.

    I wish for you to explain how a document or a set of ideas can defend themselves without humans to do the acting (defending). Madison (IIRC) said that the constitution was fit only for a moral and religious people. I submit that what is wrong with America is not the constitution but the people in whose custody it now rests.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well of course no document can “defend itself”. And yes the people are in a sorry state. But the point of the quote, for me, and the way I think he meant it was, that look, if people can POINT to that document and claim IT JUSTIFIES something as ridiculous as the STATE making war on its own people, (civil war) which is the context for the quote. Then the document is crap. And I agree. If it is open to an interpretation that people can claim JUSTIFIES the state killing its own people because they no longer consent to be ruled by it, well, I’m sorry, but that is not freedom. And any document that can be claimed to support that conduct is not a document that deserves to “govern” any FREE people.

      Yes, the people have sunk quite low. I say it all the time. Ultimately it is up to the people to defend their own rights. We have a lot of work to do to just open the peoples’ minds to the idea that they aren’t FREE right now. lol. Because most still think they are. You aren’t going to get anyone to do anything so long as they can’t even SEE the problem. lol. Glad you’re here. Hope you tell anyone you think might be reachable. — L

      1. Rev. Dragon's Eye

        The People were warned about being too lazy to stay ahead of the power-hungriness of the state. – Did anyone listen and take heed? DO WE HAVE ANY MORE FREEDOM TODAY? – I’d say “history”, in any form, seems to indicate otherwise.

        NO document, agreement, contract, or any other “instrument” has any value, nor any real power, unless the (human) parties to it enforce it. I operate by a simple saying: “An agreement or contract, is only as good as the honor of all parties to it.”

        We, The People, have simply, for generations, failed OUR part in the responsibilities of running this country! Therefore, the “Constitution of the United States” is NO GOOD, because – We, The People did NO GOOD by it.

        1. Grey

          Again, problem is “we” aren’t the “We the People” written in the Constitution. Did you sign it? I sure as hell didn’t so what part do I have in it? None, just like you. The men who signed it are bound by it, and any people who “consented” to be ruled by them and their new form of government. I don’t recall getting a choice when I came of age as to whether or not I wanted to partake in a 200 year old agreement between rich, American elites.

          Don’t blame this huge failure on me. Again, I don’t even agree with what is written in the document.

          How can the Constitution be a document for a free people when it forces taxes on us? We cannot even own private property (we are only tenets). Refuse to pay your property taxes and see what happens. Does that sound like freedom to you? If you own the property then you own it, you don’t have to pay rent on what you already own. Unfortunately though, you think you’re free when you’re not.

          No offense of course, just stating the obvious. Government has the means to pay for itself, it doesn’t need our money.

          1. ynotawoody

            The Constitution is not a perfectly drafted document, and those who drafted it were not all seeing and knowing, nor were they as pure as the wind driven snow. They were no better or worse than you or I. The Constitution is a document that expresses an idea. Nothing more. It can’t protect you or your Rights. You have to do that. The crooks of the problem is that most of us have deferred that responsibility to the very ones who are undermining the ideas set-out by the Constitution. So who is really to blame?

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          You know what it says in Ecclesiastes:
          There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven, there is a time to agree and a time to disagree, and there is a time to appear to agree even if you disagree just so dinner is not ruined.

          Okay, maybe not a 100% accurate quote, but the thought is there. lol

  45. GeorgiaCracker

    This truth really hurts. Not sure I can handle it. Documents have no power–only the power people give them and enforce. Guess we have to change people.

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        Yes GSmall, to a limited extent of course that is right. We do a medium of exchange. But that is not what we have. We have a scam. Check out my “worthless currency based upon a court packing scheme” article. That is the key.–L

  46. ol'Pappy

    Excellent point. Even our venerable and esteemed constitution seems to be a kind of controlled opposition blueprint. If it were as good as we think it is then none of the unconstitutional BS heaped upon us would have occurred. Clearly, if one is purely logical and detached from emotion, this constitution has failed. Should we take the risk of replacing it? Because that IS a big risk as the powers enslaving us are so in control they would surely trick the people into accepting something far worse. This brings up a salient point – trickery. THEY use it always and everywhere. How do honest people stand a chance when those in control are fundamentally dishonest?

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      This is all true. Perhaps you might look at what I say under “Begin with the Basics”. Plus I will be addressing this exact point of trickery many more times. I hope you return. And perhaps we can continue the discussion.


  47. ptm

    I really like it a lot. Was hoping that Spooner would make an appearance sooner rather than later. His statement about the constitution is unassailable.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *