From the August 2006 Idaho Observer:

Criminal Ignorance: Are You a Criminal?

by LB Bork

Are you a Bearer?

This legal short is to determine if you are a criminal. To determine this, we ask this in regard to the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:

If the method of representation for the States in the Union was referenced in the body of the original Constitution under Article I, why then is it being discussed again in the Fourteenth Amendment under Section 2?

Was anything formally repealed in the original Constitution or were most of the state constitutions just altered to adapt to the "United States citizen" forced mandates? Was law implemented by the states to cover the mandates? Did anyone in the de jure Southern state governments approve of this constitutional transition without being forced to?

Could it be possible that each person has to approve of the new political/governmental system established by the Fourteenth Amendment by voting for such system?

Below is a statement (in part) set forth by President Andrew Johnson in regard to the post Civil War (so-called "Civil War") "Reconstruction Act" proposed by the insurgent, RUMP Congress. Note this act later evolved into the Fourteenth Amendment:

"...Here is a bill of attainder against 9,000,000 people at once. It is based upon an accusation so vague as to be scarcely intelligible and found to be true upon no credible evidence. Not one of the 9,000,000 was heard in his own defense. The representatives of the doomed parties were excluded form all participation in the trial. The conviction is to be followed by the most ignominious punishment ever inflicted on large masses of men. It disfranchises them by hundreds of thousands and degrades them all, even those who are admitted to be guiltless, from the rank of freedom to the condition of slaves... That the measure proposed by this bill does violate the Constitution in the particulars mentioned and in many other ways which I forebear to enumerate is too clear to admit the least doubt..."

Of course President Johnson vetoed the unconstitutional act, but the RUMP—meaning not lawful or incomplete—Congress pushed the act through nonetheless. It should be noteworthy that Johnson referred to the soon-to-be disenfranchised Southerners as slaves. The Reconstruction Act later fermented into the infamous Fourteenth Amendment of the new United States Constitution. Little do Americans know that this infamous amendment created a new governmental system which overruns the original Constitution’s lawful political system. But wait until you see what the amendment actually does. . .

Now look at the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 2. The criminal activity arises in the Fourteenth Amendment. If you look at the last part you will find: It is a crime to vote!

See the language below:

"the right to vote at any election... is denied... except for participation in rebellion or other crime..."

And it goes on to state:

". . .the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens (the ones voting, i.e. citizens of the United States: new federal citizens that are participating in elections, i.e. the rebellion) shall bear to the whole number of male citizens 21 years of age in such State."

Keep in mind that "Governments are instituted by the consent of the governed."

To create the new governments, they had to trick the people into voting for them. What the above clause is stating is: The ones voting are represented and they are taking away the right to vote of the lawful body politic. As a matter of law, the "disenfranchised" people that cannot vote cannot be lawfully represented, see the statement above which has been taken from the Declaration of Independence for this legal premise.

Now, let us look at the word "bear." The word bear has several meanings in its general usage in the English language; as it is used in the above part of the Fourteenth Amendment, we can only venture to what the exact meaning is in its usage.

In speculation of such usage, let us look at some definitions of the word or term BEAR, a verb, of which may be suitable from American Heritage Dictionary:

1. To be accountable for; assume.

2. To exert pressure, force, or influence.

Because the Fourteenth Amendment was a device to force the American states to change the way they held their elections prior to the so-called Civil War, in the way the syntax is in the above part of the Fourteenth Amendment, it is asserted that these definitions are the most fitting. Furthermore, as most are aware, America was largely settled by people from England of which the customs and laws were adopted; accordingly, American law is grounded in the law of England or English law.

One should be advised that most such law was thrown off over time; however, could some of it still be applicable in a stealthy manner? In view of this, look at the following definitions from Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856:

  • BEARERS, English criminal law. [n.]

Such as bear down or oppress others; maintainers.

And now look at this definition from Bouvier’s:

  • SEDITION, crimes. The raising commotions or disturbances in the state; it is a revolt against legitimate authority. The distinction between sedition and treason consists in this, that though its ultimate object is a violation of the public peace, or at least such a course of measures as evidently engenders it, yet it does not aim at direct and open violence against the laws, or the subversion of the constitution.

Hence, it is determined that "Treason" is the subversion of a constitution, such as the alteration that was done to all state constitutions to conform to the unlawful Fourteenth Amendment and ITS political system, which mind you was not lawfully ratified by the states. And, it is noted that a "BEARER" is one that oppresses others.

Moreover, how can the authorities of the state—i.e. government—be legitimate when the Fourteenth Amendment subverts the citizenry of the original states and installs federal citizens? That is to say: The state officials are now elected by federal citizens via the Fourteenth Amendment, not the rightful (de jure) state citizens.

The answer: Here is what the United States Supreme Court stated in regard to the "New Political System" established under the Fourteenth Amendment:

"The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government. . . .he owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties." U.S. v Cruikshank

Now. . . What PENALTIES do you think the Cruikshank court is talking about?

Could it be the criminal act of treason or sedition against the sovereign authority of the Lawful Body Politic of each state—actually country—that is/was held under the original constitutional system of the Union of which existed prior to the implementation of the Reconstruction Acts and the Fourteenth Amendment of the insurgents?

Accordingly, the people that are participating in the Fourteenth Amendment system have disenfranchised themselves. Implementing the statement of Andrew Johnson in logic, the participants are slaves. . . Also known as: United States citizens.

Understand that you are dealing with a double-edged sword here; accordingly, you are forewarned that: You have been SET-UP to be a criminal.

You are advised to understand the meaning of Legal Fiction.

LB Bork is founder of the People’s Awareness Coalition, PO Box 313, Kieler, Wisconsin

PAC may be reached via email at:

Home - Current Edition
Advertising Rate Sheet
About the Idaho Observer
Some recent articles
Some older articles
Why we're here
Our Writers
Corrections and Clarifications

Hari Heath

Vaccination Liberation -

The Idaho Observer
P.O. Box 457
Spirit Lake, Idaho 83869
Phone: 208-255-2307