Our constitutions do not grant we the People any of our rights or authority.

Both are inherent in us as the creator of our government and the offices within it.

A law is not allowed to perpetrate a harm against the People, our rights, or our
property, and we are not and cannot be obliged to support or obey any such law.

There are also some so-called “laws” that are not laws at all, but are nothing
more than decrees by the judiciary. Some examples of such “laws” are the
exercise of “imminent domain,” where government can claim the right to steal
your private property for some “governmental purpose.” I have read the entire
federal and Texas constitutions. I have done electronic word searches on both,
and I cannot even find either the word “imminent” or “domain” within the federal
constitution at all, and it did not exist in any version of the Texas constitution until
the 1876 version was later amended in the 1990’s. Does it make any sense that
the founding fathers or our fellow Texans would craft such documents, each
specifically designed and written to protect individual liberties, and then leave
such a gaping hole for the courts to basically nullify those very same liberties by
unilaterally declaring such a doctrine to be the “law?”

Another example is the judicially declared doctrine of “official immunity.”

Again, I cannot find the word “immunity” within either constitution, and I am
willing to bet you will not find it in your particular republic’s constitution either.
But under this doctrine the courts have declared that, by and large, governmental
actors are not liable for their actions if they can cloth them in some color of
official authority. This includes the commission of crimes against the People by
these same public servants. By what authority do the courts, an entity themselves
created by the constitution, declare the sole power to interpret or understand its
true meaning? So much for it being the People’s document and chains upon the
government.

Which brings us to yet another of the doctrinal frauds that has and is being
perpetrated upon the People of every state of the union, that of “driver”
licensing, and “vehicular” inspection and registration as being a mandatory
requirement upon all people rather than a select group of persons engaging in a
specific regulable activity.
1
 What I am going to show you is how this system is being used to not only
illegally tax the general public through various fees and fines associated, but to
also limit our right of liberty and use of our private property.

Consider this; most people are against gun registration, and for obvious
reasons. Registration will eventually lead to confiscation. Indeed, we see its evil
beginnings already rippling across America in every republic of the union.

But why do we think we should limit what private property the government
knows we own to only guns? If the government has no right to know what guns
we own, why do we think it has a right to know what property we own at all?
Wouldn’t this just as well include our cars, or who we allow to use them, or
when? How can we be required to register our private property at all?

Most folks will start screaming about “public safety” and the need to know if
the “driver” of the other “vehicle” is competent and qualified to “drive” it. But we
argue the government has no right to require licensing or registration to own or
carry a gun, why? Don’t misunderstand me; I am absolutely FOR the right to carry
a gun, either openly or concealed, without a license or permit of ANY kind from
anyone. I support the right of the People to have any manner of weapon that our
public servants deem as proper and necessary for themselves or our military, save
for certain weapons capable of mass destruction and death, such as biological or
nuclear weapons.

I also firmly believe that the government has no right whatsoever to know
where I am, where I’m going, or where I have been unless I am actually implicated
by factual evidence in the commission of an actual malum in se crime motivated
by mens rea.

 Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - Malum In Se.pdf.

So, why do we allow the government to force us to register and license our
right to own and make use of our own property for its intended purpose? We
don’t want it to happen for guns because we have a right to own, bear, and use
them for our own defense, so why are we so willing to surrender our equally
important right of liberty through locomotion to the STATE?
2
 Show the case law document as a brief reference.

 Show the definitions document as a brief reference for definitions.

 Show and discuss the “Transportation Script” and discuss the due process
issues raised by it.

o Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - TTC §601.053.pdf

o Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - TTC §201.904 & 545.351.pdf

o Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - Presumption of

Innocence.pdf

o Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - Bill of Attainder.pdf

o Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - The TTC - The Law vs The Lie
- Rev 4 Excerpt Definitions.pdf

o Show the Alex Jones Show 2013-04-11 - The TTC - The Law vs The Lie
- Rev 4 Excerpt Right to travel Case Law.pdf

 Show the Cross-examination script and the due process issues raised by it.

 Discuss the “Seven Deadly Sins” of “transportation.”