An Oath is an Oath is an Oath

flagft.gif (3415 bytes)

With the most important hearing in U.S. History coming to
the Supreme Court this next week... Please review APFN web page;
"The Law"

and "THE TEN COMMANDMENTS" - "SO HELP ME GOD!" An Oath affirmed!

Word Study from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary
"Truth / True"

Word Study from  Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary

Word Study from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary

Word Study from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary

Word Study from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary

The Law Library - Reading Room

"I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out
of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: An Oath is an Oath is an Oath
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 07:31:55 -0800
From: Tom Atlee <

Dear Maggi,

It is so valuable to have patriots like you who play the watchdog role,
blowing the whistle when powerful people violate -- or threaten to violate
-- our Constitution.

And since you wrote at the end of your article (below) "Now, when someone
comes up with an answer to this, I want to hear from them. Posthaste."  I
figured I should oblige....

It seems to me that if Mrs. W.J. Clinton wants to propose an amendment the
Constitution, that's not only her Constitutional right of free speech, but
fully within the Constitution and the Founders' intention.  First of all,
I'll share the Constitution's Article V about amendments, and then a few
thoughts from Thomas Jefferson and George Washington:

                                Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary,
shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of
the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a
Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid
to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by
the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions
in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may
be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made
prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner
affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first
Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its
equal Suffrage in the Senate.

And here's what Jefferson and Washington said about our right to rework the

1)  Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Samuel Kercheval July 12, 1816

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them
like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the
men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they
did to be beyond amendment.  I knew that age well; I belonged to it, and
labored with it.  It deserved well of its country.  It was very like the
present, but without the experience of the present; and forty years of
experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they
would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead.  I am certainly not
an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions.  I
think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once
known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of
correcting their ill effects.  But I know also, that laws and institutions
must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.  As that becomes
more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths
disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of
circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the
times.  We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted
him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of
their barbarous ancestors.... Let us not weakly believe that one generation
is not as capable as another of taking care of itself, and of ordering its
own affairs.

2)  George Washington, Letter to Bushrod Washington, November 10, 1787

The warmest friends and the best supporters the Constitution has, do not
contend that it is free from imperfections; but they found them unavoidable
and are sensible, if evil is likely to arise there from, the remedy must
come hereafter; for in the present moment, it is not to be obtained; and,
as there is a Constitutional door open for it, I think the People (for it
is with them to Judge) can as they will have the advantage of experience on
their Side, decide with as much propriety on the alterations and amendments
which are necessary ourselves. I do not think we are more inspired, have
more wisdom, or possess more virtue, than those who will come after us.

So what about the Electoral College?  There's been a lot of talk about it
since all this electoral confusion bubbled up in Florida.  I've been
hearing a lot of pros and cons about it.  I, for one, wish someone would
come up with a website that seriously looked at ALL those pros and cons,
and that treated us citizens as the intelligent, free-thinking men and
women that we are.  We all need to get a better sense of what the
consequences might be if we eliminated the Electoral College or changed it
in various ways (and I've heard a number of proposals) -- AND what we can
expect if we keep it exactly as it is.  A really good example of the kind
of powerful citizen-education site I'm talking about is

- Destination Democracy -- which
explains the ins and outs and unintended consequences of various campaign
finance reform proposals.  It seems quite unbiased and VERY informative.
It's SO much more helpful than watching people fighting over the issue --
and then trying to make head or tail out of all their bit-and-piece
arguments.  I hope someone does something like that for the Electoral
College issue.  I'd like to see your good arguments set up alongside the
good arguments of folks who have other viewpoints on it.  Makes sense,
doesn't it?

But when it comes to Mrs. Clinton violating her oath by proposing an
amendment, I'm afraid I just can't agree with you on that one.  I think we
have to watch it, and get clear on when people are really undermining the
Constitution (like Waco) and when they are being responsible citizens who
we happen to disagree with.

Good luck to us all.


Saturday, 09-Dec-00 12:19:36 writes:

      Maggi's Musings
      An Oath is an Oath is an Oath

      by MAGGI BAUER
      Vigo Examiner

      Isn't this interesting. Before Mrs. William Jefferson
      Clinton ever leaves Chappaqua, in ritzy upstate New York,
      where she won (and there's already questions about HOW she
      won, the total amounts of outside money that bought her this
      election, which means that New York, which she is supposed
      to represent didn't, give her the money, California did) she
      is issuing pronouncements that she will file legislation to
      eliminate the Electoral College. And keep this in mind,
      this is BEFORE she is ever sworn in on Jan 20th.

      The Electoral College is part and parcel of our United
      States Constitution. It was designed that way, so that
      little states like Wyoming without the population count of
      larger states such as say Florida, could still have some say
      in who the next President is. In simple terms that even the
      illegals who have voted in this presidential election can
      understand, every state gets 2 senators, and a number of
      representatives proportional to their population. That's
      LEGAL CITIZENS, not wetbacks or smuggled in aboard ship
      aliens, but LEGAL citizens.

      Every state then has that 2 senator count, plus the number
      of Reps by population, as stated above. That's not too
      difficult to understand. I mean, even a wetback can count.
      It's 2 + whatever. The Electoral College is whatever that
      number comes out to be. Again, it's not difficult.

      The men (and God help me, I'm gonna be railed against by the
      feminists who want "hers" included, but they weren't there,
      so forget that!) who drafted and signed that Constitution,
      said that little states MUST HAVE fair representation in
      electing a president.

      When I said at the top that Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton
      is already sending out the word that she wants the Electoral
      College eliminated, it raises a VERY SERIOUS question, and I
      want you to pay attention.

      On the 20th of January, she will raise her right hand and
      take a Solemn Oath before Almighty God, religious that she
      claims to be, Who will One Day, be her Judge, and she will
      say " help me, God." to "protect and defend" that very
      Constitution. Since she cannot legally write or further any
      legislation UNTIL she is formerly swore in, when she takes
      that Sacred Oath to "protect and defend the Constitution
      against all enemies, both foreign AND DOMESTIC..." how can
      she then proceed after being sworn in, to institute or even
      support by another party, legislation to rip asunder that
      Constitution, that she previously swore to "protect and
      defend" i.e. eliminating the Electoral College?

      And please, forget all the Sacred Oaths that Willy swore to.
      That's like spitting into an onshore wind. I'm not talking
      about Slick. I'm talking about the MRS.

      Now, when someone comes up with an answer to this, I want to
      hear from them. Posthaste.
Lawyer Asks Boies to Explain Misrepresentation

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of
others to differ from me in opinion"   
           Thomas Jefferson

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.....!"
                              ---- Hosea 4:6
"There ain't no knowledge in the SECOND kick from a mule!"
                              ---- APFN ADVISOR


The military, and the cops both work for US civilians.

Date:  Fri, 26 Oct 2001 00:30:25 -0400
From:  "Ken Murrell"
To:  "American Patriot Friends Network"

To united States Citizens:

I am a 10th generation American. My Family Roots go back to Jamestown (the first colony), Virginia. I am also a U.S. Army Veteran (1965-68 Vietnam era volunteer), and I am an x-Criminal Investigator. My point in saying this is, many times I have (taken one step forward, raised my right hand and) sworn to support and defend The Constitution of The united States of America. I love MY Country and MY LIBERTY! I am qualified to point out something very important to all united States Citizens. Our Constitutional form of government is civilian NOT military! My point, the many American Flags we're seeing displayed everwhere today on TV (in the background of Courtrooms, the Halls of Congress, even in Churches and on Religeous shows) are military flags! Any time you see an American Flag with pretty gold roping (braid and tassel) added to it, you are looking at a military flag! The very display of a military (Admirality) Flag represents military authority. U.S. Citizens please BEWARE of what you're NOT recognizing. You are being deceived! It's right before your eyes! In January 1961 (just 40 years ago) the farewell message from outgoing President Eisenhower warned America to "beware of allowing a large Military Industrial Complex to come into power." If any person in the world knew what that danger was, President/General Eisenhower certainly knew. He had more experience in such matters than any one man has ever had in the history of our government. All military personnel are trained (brainwashed) to kill. They are not trained to think of YOUR Constitutional Rights. The 'psychological profile' of a marine, a special forces soldier or a navy seal is not qualified to be turned loose on our civilian streets as a law enforcement officer! All U.S. Citizen's need to become tailors. Why you wonder? So that wherever we go, we can each carry a small pair of scissors. Then anytime we chance upon a military flag in a civilian setting we use our scissors to cut the first stitch. Then we proceed to RIP that gold military roping off OUR Flag! If we're going to have a showdown with the military let's get it on now and get it over with!  The military, and the cops both work for US civilians.                                             "LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OATH" I,                ("The Cop")              , SWEAR that I will support "The Constitution of The united States", "The Constitution of The State of                (one of 50)              ", and I will faithfully impartially discharge my duties as a        police officer/Deputy Sheriff       of              city/county           , according to law, to the best of my ability, SO HELP ME GOD!                                     _______________________________________                                                             (cop) Signature   America, our only hope in this matter is that these soldiers and cops are Christians who have a conscience. We must remind each of them of what their "Individual" oath to God really means!   Ken Murrell


The United States Constitution Protects Our "INDIVIDUAL" Right To Contract in "Privacy!"


United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 10

Hale v. Henkel 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906)
             HALE v. HENKEL 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906)

Hale v. Henkel was decided by the united States Supreme Court in 1906. The opinion of the court states:

"The"individual" may stand upon "his Constitutional Rights" as a CITIZEN. He is entitled to carry on his "private" business in his own way. "His power to contract is unlimited." He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. "His rights" are such as "existed" by the Law of the Land (Common Law) "long antecedent" to the organization of the State", and can only be taken from him by "due process of law", and "in accordance with the Constitution." "He owes nothing" to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights."

                                                                 HALE V. HENKEL 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906)

Hale v. Henkel is binding on all the courts of the United States of America until another Supreme Court case says it isn’t. No other Supreme Court case has ever overturned Hale v. Henkel

None of the various issues of Hale v. Henkel has ever been overruled

Since 1906, Hale v. Henkel has been cited by the Federal and State Appellate Court systems over 1,600 times! In nearly every instance when a case is cited, it has an impact on precedent authority of the cited case.

Compared with other previously decided Supreme Court cases, no other case has surpassed Hale v. Henkel in the number of times it has been cited by the courts.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick!"

Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the united States of America (1901-1909)


Each U.S. Citizen has the SOVEREIGN RIGHTS of an "Individual" Nation "GUARANTEED" to them by The United States Constitution!This fact alone makes the united States of America the "only" multitude of Nations in existence.                                  Genesis 48:19


The Real Story of the Money-Control Over America
flagft.gif (3415 bytes)
American Patriot Friends Network (APFN)

flagft.gif (3415 bytes)

"The Law"

The Lawyers Secret Oath


Without Justice, there is JUST_US!

American Patriot Friends Network -
Founded - Feb. 21, 1993 - Kenneth L. Vardon
a/k/a - American Patriot Fax Network
6630 W. Cactus Rd #B107-760
Glendale, Arizona [85304]

Subscribe to apfn-1
chooser.gif (706373 bytes)
Powered by

American Patriot Friends Network

"...a network of net workers..."

APFN Message Board

APFN Sitemap

APFN Contents Page

APFN Home Page


Hit Counter

Last updated 02/23/2012