Monday, February 4, 2013


"If you would be free, you must have at least as many dictionaries as you have firearms." ~~ A mighty man of the Word, Al Adask

If Clint Eastwood carried a dictionary instead of a 44 magnum, it would be the 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language. You will see why in a moment.

With this old dictionary, I will show you
·     The law as it was intended to be understood by defining the word TRUST.

·               Secondly, I will expose the law as it is now written, and you will at once understand the WHY behind so many issues that sentient, caring men and women are concerned about:

(Just a few examples)
Why raw milk is seized by the FDA and poured out in the gutter and those selling it are arrested and even tortured in modern dungeons like the one in Los Angeles County Sheriff’s office

Why GE and GMO labeling is such a battle, and WHY it is allowed to be created and sold in the first place

WHY we can’t get Fluoride out of the water

WHY the meat sold in your child’s school cafeteria is the dross of the meat packing industry and irradiated to cover it up

Why the govt can outlaw or regulate any herb, any natural medicine that truly heals (cannabis, ephedra, chaparral)

Why deadly vaccines can legally exist and be forced upon us

I. Let us define the source of the Law of this nation, by defining the word TRUST.

TRUST, 1. Confidence; a reliance or resting of the mind on the integrity, veracity, justice, friendship or other sound principle of another. “He that putteth his TRUST in the Lord shall be safe.” Prov. 29

               CONFIDENCE, 1. A trusting, or reliance; an assurance of mind or firm belief in the integrity, stability, or veracity of another, or in the truth and reality of a fact.  
“It is better to trust in the Lord, than to put confidence in man.” Ps. 68
               “I rejoice that I have confidence in you in all things.” 2 Cor. 7.
               Mutual confidence is the basis of social happiness.

                              See Confide.

                              CONFIDE, To trust, to rely on, with a persuasion of faithfulness or veracity in the person trusted or of the reality of a fact; to give credit to; to believe in, with assurance, followed by IN. The prince confides IN his ministers. The minister confides IN the strength and resources of the nation. We confide IN the veracity of the sacred historians. See FAITH.

                              RELY, [from the root, to lie, or lay] To rest on something, as the mind when satisfied of the veracity, integrity or ability of persons or of the certainty of facts or of evidence; to have confidence in; to TRUST in; to depend on. We rely on the promise of a man who is known to be upright; we rely on the veracity of fidelity of a tried friend; the prince relies on the affections of his subjects for support; and on the strength of his army; above all, we rely on the mercy and promises of God. That which is the ground of confidence is a certainty or full conviction that satisfies the mind and leaves it at rest, or undisturbed by doubt.

FAITH, root of Heb, Chaldean, Syrian “that which makes FAST.”
FAST: set, stopped, fixed, pressed close, firm, immovable, firmly fixed

1. Belief. 2. Assent of the mind to truth. 3. theological: assent of the mind or understanding to the truth of what God has revealed. This is historical faith, little distinguished from the belief of the existence and achievements of Alexander or Caesar.
4. Evangelical, justifying, or saving faith, is the assent of the mind to the truth of divine revelation, on the authority of God’s testimony, accompanied with a cordial assent of the will or approbation of the heart; an entire confidence or TRUST in God’s character and doctrines of Christ, with an unreserved surrender of the will to his guidance, and dependence on his merits for salvation. In other words, that firm belief of God’s testimony, and of the truth of the gospel, which influences the will, and leads to an entire RELIANCE on Christ for salvation.

Now that we have defined TRUST, in whom did the Founders put their trust?
Declaration of Independence: “With a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”


Their trust, confidence, and faith in God led them to write these words:
We hold these TRUTHs to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,  that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Legal presupposition: There is a God, our rights come from Him, and govt exists for one reason: to secure (or entrust, keep, protect) those rights by our consent, or confidence.

NOW, what about men who are NOT of goodwill, who are not trustworthy, who spurn the law of God and make a law unto themselves? What kind of govt do they create?


The corporation is a FICTION, not real, it is a strawman without flesh and blood, created by the State to limit liability and to avoid accountability and to prevent true justice from being exacted on their wicked deeds.

How did this republic change from a foundation built on TRUST in God, to one governed by trustees of a corporation?

Three important years:
  • 1861, Congress adjourned sine die; to this day, no de jure Congress
  • 1868, Fourteenth Amendment: federal PERSON,

Then came the death blow: 1906 with the Pure Food and Drug Act

First, let me set the grammatical stage so that you will understand the significance of the language: 

If I said, “Liver or other Bananas”, then I have just quantified liver as a kind of banana. If I said, “Dogs or other Cats,” then by illogical use of words, I have just declared that a dog is a kind of a cat. Get it? If I can get you to agree with me that a banana is actually liver or a dog is a cat (even though reality tells you this is not true), then you have come into agreement with my lie and I now have power over you because you have agreed on the terms of my proposition.

So, let’s go to the law:

The Pure Food and Drug Act. Section 6 says, “the term “drug,” as used in this Act, shall include all medicines and preparations recognized in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary for internal or external use, and any substance or mixture of substances intended to be used for the cure, mitigation, or prevention of disease of either man or other animals.

Pure Food and Drug Act (1906). United States Statutes at Large (59th Cong., Sess. I, Chp. 3915, p. 768-772; cited as 34 U.S. Stats. 768)


Al Adask says: “the government expressly defines the American people to be “animals” rather than men and women made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-28) and endowed by their Creator with God-given, unalienable Rights (“Declaration of Independence”). This definition violates fundamental principles of the Bible and Declaration of Independence and constitutes an act of genocide against the American people.  DE-humanizing people is one of the eight essentials of genocide.

This is blasphemy. This is war. This is treachery. This is treason against both God and man.

This was not an accident of grammar:

4. Here’s a link to the A.D. 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act. See Section 6 wherein the government defines the words “food” and “drugs” to apply to “man or other animals” and thus defines man to be an “animal”. This the earliest instance we’ve found of government declaring the American people to be “animals”. For over a century, your government has regarded you, your spouse, children, parents and friends to be “animals”.   TWO TIMES

5. Title 7 (Agriculture) of the United States Code, (7 U.S.C. Section 136(d)) which defines man to be an “animal”.   

6. Title 21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1) Federal definition of “drugs” defines man to be an animal:   SIX TIMES

7. Texas Health & Safety Code definition of “drugs” at 431.002(14) defines man to be an animal at: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...31.htm#431.002 .   

There are many examples….but to sum up

These FOUR WORDS reveal to you



At any time, you can say, “A banana is NOT liver” and “A dog is NOT a cat” and I am NOT an animal.

You have the unalienable right to do so, and you have the legal right to do so:

That whenever any form of govt becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new govt….”  



Friday, February 1, 2013

Broccoli and Hoes in Fuktupia

Once upon a time in the municipal corporation called Fuktupia, there lived people who loved broccoli. They ate its flowerettes in casseroles or covered in butter. They used its leaves for medicine. They could even take the stalks and make houses, cars, and textiles from it.

Then, one day, another corporation moved to Fuktupia that sold plastic cauliflower. DUPE-on-US wanted the entire market for their plastic cauliflower, so they sent secret agents to the Fuktupia Council with lots of money and pretty women for the greedy ones, and a pack of lies about broccoli for the others.

So it came to pass that broccoli was outlawed in all of Fuktupia. However, many people refused to obey the law and they still grew broccoli, but often they were arrested. They had to pay massive fines, and sometimes, if they were found to have many rows of broccoli, they went to jail. This made the rich people happy and much richer, because they had investments in stocks and bonds, and they actually made lots of money when people had to spend time in jail, waiting for their bonds to be matured.

Now it happened that Sheriff Doonmajob of Fuktupia County knew that broccoli tasted good and was of much value to heal. But what could he do? The law said that broccoli eaters must be arrested, so he arrested them.  

Lucky for his office, sometimes his deputies would find huge fields of broccoli, which they had to burn (most of). But the real prize was the cars and land and money that broccoli growers had, because after the broccoli was outlawed, the price went way up and the few broccoli growers that were left in Fuktupia got very wealthy. The lawyers at DUPE-on-US INC were smart, and they knew that if Sheriff Doonmajob made money on arresting people, that he would keep the broccoli off the market.   

Many years passed, and DUPE-on-US INC knew that the people were getting wise about their shady dealings and what they had done to take away their delicious broccoli. Too many people were growing their own broccoli, as well as carrots and collards and corn, and plastic cauliflower stocks were down. DUPE-on-US INC had to do something! They decided to go back to the Fuktupia Council and ask for a law to ban hoes, rakes, and shovels.

Now Sheriff Doonmajob was really in a moral pickle. He knew that the people would starve without their hoes, rakes and shovels to help them grow all their food (not just the illegal broccoli).  But he also knew that if he dared send his deputies after the people’s tools, they would be very angry and not elect him again.

So Sheriff Doonmajob came up with a plan. He told the people that even if Fuktupia County passed a law against hoes, rakes, and shovels, that he would not obey it. Ahhh! The people were so happy to hear that good news!! They celebrated and posted good words about Sheriff Doonmajob on all their facebook pages.

But one young man, Wise Willie, was known as a math genius because he could put one and one together like no one else could, asked everyone this question, “If Sheriff Doonmajob would take your delicious broccoli because it was the law, even though there was nothing wrong with eating delicious broccoli, why wouldn’t he take your hoes, rakes, and shovels when that’s the law, too?”

And all the people of Fuktupia knew that Wise Willie was correct, but they didn’t want to listen to him anymore. They praised Sheriff Doonmajob and went back to their kitchens to steam some plastic cauliflower.

After all, they had lived in Fuktupia a very, very long time.