It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Has anyone read "The Red Ammendment" by L.B. Bork?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 12:15 AM
I personally have not and am looking for people that have that can that can post some of the key topics on exercising ones rights under the Organic United States Constitution before the bastardization of it with the 14th amendment without doing anything illegal.

I ran across this site Peoples Awareness Coalition and it is interesting for those that want to break free and be a true Patriot.

This .pdf explains how the 14th amendment steadily broke down 'civic law' and introduced the 'commercial based constitutional system of law' that we all live under in the U.S. and introduced the Police State that is in every ones face now. I highly recommend it if you want to know how your "rights", or "you", for that matter do not exist under "The Corporation".

PAC Dual System of Law.pdf

Vote Ron Paul! - even though the .pdf says you are consenting to the system if you do.

[edit on 25-1-2010 by timewalker]

[edit on 25-1-2010 by timewalker]

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 12:22 PM
Hate to bump my own thread but it's prime time. Any takers. This is an important read if you want to break the Matrix.

Note to Mods: Can you please correct my typo in the title. please.

[edit on 25-1-2010 by timewalker]

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:04 AM
reply to post by timewalker

I have not read the book but I did look at your links supplied.

Is the "People's Awareness Coalition" a think-tank?

It sure looks like one based on what I have seen so far.

The name is a bit off to me though.

Are you talking about this 14th Amendment?

Quote from : Wikipedia : Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution, along with the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, was adopted after the Civil War as one of the Reconstruction Amendments on July 9, 1868.

The amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling the decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had excluded slaves, and their descendants, from possessing Constitutional rights; this was used in the mid-20th century to dismantle racial segregation in the United States, as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954).

Its Due Process Clause has been used to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states.

This clause has also been used to recognize:

"substantive due process rights, such as parental and marriage rights; and procedural due process rights requiring that certain steps, such as a hearing, be followed before a person's "life, liberty, or property" can be taken away."

The amendment's Equal Protection Clause requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions.

The amendment also includes a number of clauses dealing with the Confederacy and its officials.

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:22 AM
No. This one.

Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

U.S. Constitution

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:30 AM
Think tank? I'm not sure. It seems to be headed up by the author of the book. It seems that I read of others involved, but cannot confirm that now. The site is a little difficult to navigate. I will have to dig some more later.

Here is a .pdf giving resources. It still only states him. Pretty vague.

PAC Resources.pdf

[edit on 26-1-2010 by timewalker]

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:45 AM
reply to post by timewalker

When you look further let me know.

Oh and it is the same 14th Amendment, I just did not go further down in my quote.

The P.A.C. seems to me to be some sort of think-tank or non-profit.

However the wording is written differently.

I'll re-read it again and ask around about the organization.

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:57 AM
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

I google'd them and got a bunch of hits. Here's on on the Daily Paul website by by Michael Nystrom

Daily Paul

I found one ripoff report. I will dismiss it due to being only one. SH.

Rip Off Report

posted on Mar, 1 2010 @ 09:15 PM
I am reading The Red Amendment right now. I've been researching the whole patriot/freeman on the land/sovereign citizen stuff for a couple years now. It's a bunch of half-truths. The Red Amendment & the Peoples Awareness Coalition is the real deal. Here's the skinny as i understand it so far:

Prior to the 14th Amendment, the United States was always referred to as a collective, a 'they' or 'their' or 'them' as it should be. The United States is a federation of sovereign states (nations), a union. People were citizens of their state (nation). They were state nationals.

A13.1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

The 14th Amendment changed that. A usurper government was created named 'The United States'. The 'United States became an 'it', an entity unto itself. The 14th Amendment also created a 2nd citizenship, that of the federal government. We became dual citizens, a state national AND a federal citizen of this usurper de facto gov.

A14.1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

We are in violation of our rightful nationality. We are insurgents. We are subject to the private law of the de facto gov 'The United States' that was created. When we vote for the officers of this usurper government, we engage in rebellion as he states on p36 of TRA & eliminating extraneous text of A14, sec 2:

A14.2. The right to vote at any denied...except for participation in rebellion, or other crime..."

There is so much more, but i don't want to butcher the work of LB Bork. I want to really understand it all before i comment much further.

The 'Expatriation Act' (actually Public Law 15; United States Statues at Large, chapter 249, pps 223-224 (1868)) allows for one to lawfully expatriate, to remove oneself from federal citizenship. You are no longer part of the de facto government nor subject to it (no income tax, no heeding statues or codes, etc), but you also can no longer benefit from it either (no collecting SS, no medicare, etc). It is true freedom under the de jure government of custom & practice, but with it comes true responsibility. Uncle Sam won't be there to bail you out. You're on your own, just like how this union of nations was founded.

The goal of PAC is to withdraw from the de facto gov & let it wither & die.


[edit on 1-3-2010 by mal1970]

posted on Mar, 1 2010 @ 09:46 PM
Have not read the book. The link on the 14th amendment is good. Looking from a bit higher perspective, what you see is that "black is white and white is black". Things are often the opposite of what they are stated or presented to be. The glory of the "US Citizen" is a scam. This, again, matches perfectly the "Jesuit way". What is the Jesuit way? It is to be everything to everyone. To make it appear that you are on everyones side or no ones if necessary. To make the enemy believe you are their friend. To play all sides. The Jesuits "goal", or superficial allegiance, is to the NWO which is the Vatican, the Catholic Church in control of everything. The view of the Pope is that they own everything and I do mean everything.

Most people may not realize it, but during the period immediately proceeding the Revolutionary War, Catholics had no voting rights in much of Europe and in particularly England and the new world. This is because a Catholic has first allegiance to a foreign power, the Vatican and the Pope. Many Popes have clearly stated their believe that they own everything.

Post Revolutionary War and post Constitution, we have "Freedom of Religion" and separation of Church and State. This is a great idea, of course, but in the Jesuit mind and manipulation it means that Catholics gained the right to vote and to be involved in politics and sad, but true that opened the door wide to the Vatican slowly taking over the States United as it's property. Undeclared as it may be, the Vatican is the Owner of post Civil War Corporation of the "United States of America" and the incorporation of everything including the States United is the surrender of the States to the Vatican. The bankruptcy of 1933 is a further surrender. It's all a mind game of fake documents and fake agreements that the NWO is trying to codify before too many people realize their viewed as fodder for the Pope. Good read is "Rulers of Evil" a book that came out about a decade ago after a many years of research by an excellent scholar. You can also track down Vatican Assassins by Phelps.

Is the Vatican the NWO and the Illuminati? Is the Vatican in true power behind the thrown? Perhaps, perhaps not. I suspect the real power are the families that manufactured Catholicism from it's inception. Now Catholicism being what it is and with a long history of a clearly nonspiritual nature, it is likely that the NWO will migrate the Vatican behind the scenes into a NWO Religion. This is no different than the Freemasons owning allegiance to an unknown supreme leader who is none other than the Black Pope, the Jesuit General. The early opponents of Jesuits where the Freemasons who where actually following the instructions of the same leader. Hold your friends close, your enemies closer.

Yes people will make posts claiming this or that about Phelp but the content of the material is what matters.

posted on Mar, 1 2010 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by mal1970
Thanks for the input. What I find reading about much on the topic is as you stated "half truths" or just downright contradictions. There seems to be no place that all the right info is in the right place. Just enough to get you up the creek without a paddle.

I am in a bit of rough times right now, and to be honest, cannot afford to buy a damn thing right now. I would very much like to know more about this book and hope you will post more on it when you have time. I think it would be a great benefit to many here on ATS.

Here is a thread I did on the 14th, you might get something out of it.

Don't Be Upset That Corporations Have Free Speech, U.S. 'Citizens' You Are A Corporation

And here is one by sizzle that is great.

Attention ATS! Know The Hidden Meanings Behind the Laws in America, Before it is Too Late!

There are many resources telling what the problem is, but not enough that provide a solution.

[edit on 1-3-2010 by timewalker]

posted on Mar, 1 2010 @ 10:06 PM
reply to post by ReelView
Thank you as well for the contribution. I will look into the books you mentioned. Knowledge is power.

posted on Mar, 1 2010 @ 10:31 PM
As i read more i'll post updates (i'm at only p48 of the core 187 pages). There is a lot of info on the PAC site. Lots of PDFs to read to get an idea. Also one can join the forum at:

The best is to buy the book, The Red Amendment. It is sited & documented *thoroughly*, but it is a tough read if you're not used to reading legaleze.

You can listen to the 10 archived talkshoe calls at:

This is also pretty interesting:

posted on Mar, 5 2010 @ 04:23 AM
Good thread, I'll add my two cents:

Their is a huge LEGAL difference between a privilege and an unalienable right.

The Fourteenth Amendment, under Section 1, defines our citizenship and the privileges and immunities that come with that citizenship quite clearly:


The Fourteenth Amendment-"Civil Rights"
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Black's Law Dictionary, Third Pocket Edition defines a 'Privilege' as the following:

privilege. 1. A special legal right, exemption, or immunity GRANTED to a person or class of persons; an exception to a duty

legal,adj.1. Of or relating to Law; falling within the province of Law. 2. Established, required, or permitted by Law; LAWFUL. 3. Of or relating to Law as opposed to equity.

grant,verb. 1. To give or confer (something), with or without compensation. 2. To formally transfer (real property) by deed or other writing. 3. To give permit or agree to. 4. To approve, warrant, or order (a request, motion, etc).

As you can see, by the Fourteenth Amendment you are U.S Citizens who falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government; and the Federal Government grants you your so-called "unalienable rights.

Here are some links for those who want to learn law:


The Common Law

And you should look for a volume of books called Corpus Juris Secundum, it is a 22 or 23 set about US Law.

I have not yet read The Red Amendment yet, and I really want to. I joined the PAC group but I find trying to navigate the forum difficult. Plus I do not want them to file any paperwork for me, I would rather educate myself and do it on my own.

top topics


log in