28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
Where do you think they got the military weapons from? Who do you think sent the NYPD to Israel for training?
If you do not know the answer to those questions you have not been paying attention. Those who are serving within the federal government are doing those things unlawfully.
As long as we do not know what those who serve within our governments - state and federal - are ALLOWED to do, when we do not bother to actually learn real history - so what if the schools don't teach it, READ, RESEARCH yourself. Don't need to be lead by the hand.
Here, bet you are not aware of just how close to Nazi Germany we are here in America. Let me give you some examples.
Justice Robert Jackson, Chief U.S. Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials (Nazi Germany about warrantless searches, etc): “Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart.”
A separate government was set up within the legitimate government within the Party to exercise outside the law every sanction that any legitimate state could exercise and many that it could not {Obama’s “Czars”, TSA, DHS}. The Party had its own secret police, its security units, its intelligence and espionage division, its raiding forces, and its youth forces {DHS, TSA, look up “Obama youth” on youtube.com}. It also established administrative mechanisms over time {Patriot Act, NDAA, warrantless searches, warrantless spying, TSA, etc} to identify those who supported the legitimate government. They “encouraged” the populace to inform on their own neighbors, friends, family {“See Something, Say Something”, and other videos the DHS put out here in America}.
Eventually they organized and dominated every phase of German life {as is being tried here thru the UN laws, and executive orders, bills, laws made here}. They created a “Party” police system, which became the pattern and the instrument of the police state, which was the first goal in their plan. {DHS and TSA – starting to arrange themselves throughout our nation to control our every move and where we can go: at airports, bus stations, train stations, Football stadiums, etc, even on our own roads.}
A presidential decree was created suspending the extensive guarantees of individual liberty contained in the constitution of the Weimar Republic. The decree provided that: "Sections 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice.”
Those decree’s were restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion - including freedom of the press, on the right of peaceful assembly, the right of association, and violations of the privacy: postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications; and no need for warrants for house-searches, orders for, confiscations as well as restrictions on property, etc all taken away under the guise of “keeping the people safe”. {much like what is happening within the USA today, as all of the “restrictions” on our freedoms are “for our own safety”} Many were arrested as “belligerents” – no real crime committed, just disagreeing with the destruction of their legitimate government.
Secret arrest and indefinite detention; without charges, without evidence, without hearing, without counsel, and no court could issue an injunction, or writ of habeas corpus, or certiorari. The German people were in the hands of the police, the police were in the hands of the Nazi Party, and the Party was in the hands of a ring of evil men who wanted to rule the world. {NDAA, Patriot Act, various executive orders, warrantless arrests, New World Order, etc}
The chief instrument of keeping cohesion in plan and action was the National Socialist German Workers Party, known as the Nazi Party. First they were to infiltrate the legitimate government and from within bring about “change” {As is happening here, the replacement of our legitimate government with Domestic Enemies}. So began the first part of the “plan” which was to subvert the Weimar Republic. {Communist party and some Nazism taking over the Democratic party but renaming themselves as “Progressives”. Because if they use Nazi or Communist Party name many of the American people would be horrified because – they may not know all the facts, but know enough to recognize they do not want what happened in Germany to repeat itself here in America. But now they are so open about being supported by the communist party that the PRE MADE signs held up in Ferguson had the communist party name on it.}
- Some of their (Nazi) declared purposes sounded good to many good citizens, such as: "profit-sharing in the great industries," {Take from the 1% and share with all}
- "a land reform suitable to our national requirements," {BLM, US land given to Russia oil–rich Alaskan Islands, to other foreign nations, and “authority over our oceans to the UN; and now they can “take” our property, our land, our bank accounts, our vehicles, our labor, etc here in the USA}
- "raising the standard of health." {Obamacare}
- The Party said that a “strong centralized government” was needed. {Same as they are currently saying we need here in the USA}.
- It demanded the creation of a strong central power with unconditional authority, {Democratic (Progressive) political declarations}
- and a "reconstruction" of the educational system. {Same as they are saying we need here in the USA}.
- Etc
Except for mass camps and mass killings, it is all in place here in the USA. Read it for yourself: Opening statement by Justice Robert H. Jackson, Chief of Counsel for the United States http://www.roberthjackson.org/the-man/nuremberg-trial/
"Doesn't that kind of defeat the whole voting thing in a democracy?"
First, Election Fraud already defeats the "whole voting thing" at least here in the USA, and I bet also there in the EU.
Second, and most important, although the USA has some features that uses democratic processes we are NOT a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic, and there is a huge difference between the two.
Here the TAFTA/TTIP so it is NOT Lawful no matter what person in whatever position who serves within our government signs it. Does that mean they will not enforce it, sure, at the barrel of a gun, and they will use what *used to be our US Military and by governmental professional law enforcement - state and federal - who did not learn about Nuremberg, Germany, etc and so will NOT say "NO" to their unlawful orders (*but was given to the UN as their MILITARY by Obama, Dempsey, and Panetta so our family members put their lives on the line NOT for the USA, but for the NWO which IS treason).
Basically, it matters not if it is here or there, ALL people must stand AGAINST these corrupt soulless scum working to be the rulers of the world (old name for it, but same concept for the NWO, One World Government - new names for it, but same old Bull----).
"In your imaginary world, where money is not a function, maybe"
What you are really saying is the size of the profit margin is what counts first, not security.
THAT is what is crazy, security is always first because not secure, lose the business, the life, the house. "Self" defense, be it a person, a business is the natural first step since people came out of caves. What is going on with this when profit means more then security is crazy, definitely not normal.
"You don't make your house windows bulletproof, and steel door,"
Today, if one can afford it, yes. We live in a world where governments in just the 20th century murdered more people then died in all the known wars combined.
Prisons are mostly about having "slaves" do the work so that the corporations who own them make a larger profit. That is why there is a state guarantee that the prisons will be occupied by a certain HIGH percentage or the state will make up the loss in funds to the corporation.
Patrick Henry: "The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them."
And he also said: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”
Funny how educated and thoughtful our forefathers were compared to us today that today their words are still true.
It is always up to us, "We the people of the United States of America. Always.
Thomas Jefferson: "I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power."
Thomas Jefferson: "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories. And to render even them safe, their minds must be improved to a certain degree."
"The people or sovereign are not bound by general word in statutes, restrictive of prerogative right, title or interest, unless expressly named. Acts of limitation do not bind the King or the people. The people have been ceded all the rights of the King, the former sovereign,.....It is a maxim of the common law, that when an act is made for the common good and to prevent injury, the King shall be bound, though not named, but when a statute is general and prerogative right would be divested or taken from the King (or the people) he shall not be bound." People v Herkimer, 4 Cowen (NY) 345, 348 (1825)
Andrew Jackson, Farewell Address, March 4, 1837: "But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing. It behooves you, therefore, to be watchful in your States as well as in the Federal Government."
"28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”. "
"You can't yell fire in a public theater (public safety), you can't claim there is a nuclear device in a stadium when there isn't (public safety), you can't incite to riot (public safety), you can't make credible threats to injure or kill someone (public safety)."
This has nothing to do with Free Speech being protected, and everything to do with "if you have a right to life, everyone else has a right to life".
Basically, a person cannot deliberately cause another to get injured or killed except in a lawfully declared war or in defense of their life.
Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides...
The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights...
The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...”
What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do.
Look at the First Amendment... What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion.
But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability. ..."
It is, and always has been up to us, not those we put into office - be it elected, hired, contracted or volunteered. Our founders knew that the chances of having domestic enemies or even traitors put into office were fairly high. That is why we are armed, educated, individuals, plus why the US Constitution divided our government.
We have the first part of our government: "We the People", the states, then the federal government. It is further divided up into three branches within both the federal and state governments.
Our natural rights, and many that we have that are not put into writing but covered under the Ninth Amendment PROTECTED from those who serve within our governments - the stares and federal.
Then it made sure that we, as the Militia are the only armed people except for when a Military is needed and ONLY THEN are they to be created, but for no longer then the congressionally declared WAR ends or 2 years whichever comes first.
US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 12: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.
James Madison, Father of the US Constitution: “... large and permanent military establishments ... are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”
Daniel Webster: “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? ..."
Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution: "Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence… Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them."
Cockrum v. State: “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power”
Bliss v. Commonwealth: "Arms restrictions - even concealed weapons bans - are unconstitutional, since arms bearing is an individual right and the legislature may not restrict any aspect of such a right.”
Nunn vs. State:'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right”.
Samuel Adams: “It is always dangerous to the liberties of the people to have an army stationed among them, over which they have no control ... The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them.”
Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition: "The body of citizens in a state, enrolled for discipline as a military force, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies, as distinguished from regular troops or a standing army."
James Madison: "An efficient militia is authorized and contemplated by the Constitution and REQUIRED by the spirit and safety of free government." (caps are mine)
John Norton Pomeroy: “The object of this clause [the right of the people to keep and bear arms] is to secure a well-armed militia.... But a militia would be useless unless the citizens were enabled to exercise themselves in the use of warlike weapons. To preserve this privilege, and to secure to the people the ability to oppose themselves in military force against the usurpations of government, as well as against enemies from without, that government is forbidden by any law or proceeding to invade or destroy the right to keep and bear arms.”
Noah Webster: Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
I'd say we are about there, are you ready to do YOUR duty? To learn the US Constitution? To train to be the Militia of your state? To remove the governor of your state if he/she refuses to call up the Militia - though that is not needed per se?
Election Fraud is rampant, but again, that is OUR fault as we allow it.
"Who" does this say does the actions in the following paragraph? "What" in the following paragraph, are those actions they are to take?
Preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Who - We the People of the United States.
What are we to do? "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".
What else did we do? "Ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America".
It is in the first person to show that "WE the People of the United States are always the sovereign of this nation, NOT the UN, not anyone who SERVES within our governments - WE are.
Never be ashamed of naivete. "I used to be a cool aid drinking optimist, now I'm just a disillusioned realist." It is what we are, what we were or they NEVER could have done what they are doing, have been doing since Wilson.
But now there is no excuse for you, or anyone else, to act as the US Constitution tells you/them to.
EO's are not lawful here, they have never been lawful here, they are usurpations that the "courts - another FEDERAL branch that has been increasing its "powers" unlawfully.
The word "All" in Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution makes it forbidden to the other two federal branches.
Article. I. Section. 1: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
An EO is writing legislation and forbidden to all by the legislative branch. It does not matter how long this violation has been committed, it is still not LAW, it is "null and void". It is "color of law", pretend law that exists and is implemented because the people are too ignorant of our legitimate government to know what the powers and authority those who serve within the federal government are ALLOWED to practice.
I understand the dumbing down of Americans was deliberate, and done over decades (mid 1050's - current), but one can always read for themselves at the very least the US Constitution!
You saw some of it in Nevada at the Bundy ranch, and again in Ferguson with the Oathkeepers and the people who lived there defending their businesses and homes, and will see it again - today - in the state of Washington.
The question really is, if you are an American citizen or one who is LEGALLY allowed to be here, are YOU going to learn how to constitutionally implement and defend your rights, yourself, your family/friends/community, state, and country from the domestic enemies and traitors serving within our government?
"It has yet to stand the test of court. Just like with Prenda, the government has been given wide latitude to play legal games but now that the public is aware, judges are going to close this gap, I believe."
Judges were given the authority to determine if they are "In Pursuance thereof" the US Constitution. They are NOT given the authority to interpret it as that was already done within the Federalist Papers, within the writings of the time, dictionaries of the time, notes in the state conventions going on at that time, newspapers, etc. they gave themselves the "power" to interpret the US Constitution, which is a usurpation of powers, a crime.
"I have every faith this will not stand over time." It does not have to "stand over time", as that decision is up to us, "We the People...", no one else.
You were shown in Ferguson, at the Bundy's ranch in Nevada, today in the state of Washington how "We the People" are to conduct ourselves constitutionally and say "no, this is NOT lawful here and we will not allow it to be enforced by domestic enemies or traitors to the USA".
It is our choice, it has always been OUR choice under the US Constitution what crimes we ALLOW those who are REQUIRED to represent us and "support and defend" the US Constitution get away with. It has always been up to us what goes on within our nation.
Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American…The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”.
Richard Henry Lee: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”
George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment: “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
Patrick Henry: “If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost every thing. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity.”
Hamilton said there exists a right of self-defense against a tyrannical government, and it includes the people with their own arms: “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government… if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers… The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair… The people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate… If their rights are invaded… How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized! (being armed)“
James Madison said that: “… large and permanent military establishments … are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”
John Adams said: “There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”
Joel Barlow, Revolutionary War veteran and American whose political writings were debated on the floor of Parliament said of the US Constitution: “… not only permitting every man to arm, but obliging him to arm.”
Patrick Henry: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”
Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides... The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights... The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...” What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do. Look at the First Amendment... What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability."
Americans would have had to understand and enforce their Constitution. You notice I say Americans, not the Congress or the Supreme Court, because who is the final arbiter of this document? [holding a copy of the Constitution] It is not Congress, and it is not the Supreme Court. It is “we the people.” Read the thing. How does it start? “We the people do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States”; not “we the politicians,” not “we the judges.” Those people are the agents of the people. We the people are the principals. The doctrine is very clear that, being the principals, we are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters and enforcers. You don’t have to take my word for it. Let’s go back to the Founding Fathers... The Founding Fathers were profound students of law and political philosophy, their knowledge unequaled by any today. Their mentor in that era was William Blackstone, who wrote Blackstone’s Commentaries, probably the most widely read legal treatise of its time, certainly here in the United States. What did Blackstone write about this subject? He wrote, “Whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself; there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.”
"So when are we going to force Congress to do everything on book..."
When you know that the US Constitution assigned the duty of enforcing it, and the Constitution of each state to us. When you go and train so that you are a part of, and the defender of, yourself, your family, your neighborhood, your city/county/state, and of our nation.
We are the ones assigned the duty of enforcement, no one else. Preamble to the US Constitution:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The Preamble to the US Constitution says who is responsible for doing certain things within our nation. Those things are to be done to “form a more perfect Union”. It is NOT the law enforcement - federal or state because those agencies were forbidden to those in government to create BECAUSE they are ALWAYS used against the people sooner or later. The US President was to use the Militia of the several states when he needed them, or if attacked to hold off the enemy while a military is formed - usually from those in the Militia.
Those duties were NOT assigned to the senate, the congress, those who serve in the judicial and executive branches. Nor were those duties assigned to those who serve within state governments.
“We the People of the United States” are to: - “establish Justice” - “insure domestic Tranquility” - “provide for the common defence” - “promote the general Welfare” - “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”
“We the People of the United States” are to do that by using those who serve within our federal government to carry out the constitutionally assigned duties for each branch within our federal government and our state governments. When they run "amok" and become domestic enemies of the USA, or even traitors, then we are to remove, prosecute, and punish them for their crimes.
The Constitution assigned “We the People of the United States” to “establish Justice”, “provide for the common defence”, plus to “promote the general Welfare” and most importantly to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” - no one else.
Thomas Jefferson: “Freedom is lost gradually from an uninterested, uninformed, and uninvolved people.”
Thomas Jefferson: “The government created by this compact (the Constitution) was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party (the people of each state) has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”
Alexander Hamilton, concerning the supremacy clause, Federalist 33: “It will not, I presume, have escaped observation that it expressly confines the supremacy to laws made pursuant to the Constitution.”
Alexander Hamilton: “There is no position which depends on clearer principles that that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.”
As most here know that is "contrary to the commission under which it is exercised" and it is "void", not valid. Can it, and will it be enforced? Sure, all manner of "laws" today are being enforced by those ignorant of our legitimate government or deliberately to destroy us and the US Constitution from the inside.
Enforcement of unlawful "laws" created as "color of law" (pretend law created by someone occupying a position where it may be assumed they have that "authority", but they were never given that power) is *terrorism under our laws.
*28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
"It is the nature of a right that it is – and must be – absolute. If there are codicils, appendices, restrictions, however, and buts, then it is a privilege, granted and controlled by others." Unknown
George Washington: "A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies."
US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions."
Clause 16: “To provide for organizing, ARMING, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.
Yeah, those weapons of war going to the law enforcement and to foreign nations and foreign terrorists are LAWFULLY to go to the Militias to train with and use IF ever needed. Giving it to the law enforcement and to foreign nations and foreign terrorists are crimes AGAINST our nation and the American people, treason. When they are used against us it IS terrorism.
Each state's Militia is made up of “We the People” protecting our own interests, homes, states, nation, and enforcing our governments. The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
Enforce the US Constitution and each state's Constitution, Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which is constitutional laws ONLY), Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.
The US Constitution guarantees to each state its own “Republican form of government”. It is every state's Militia that is the ONLY Constitutionally assigned force to “counter Invasions” and “Domestic Violence” within our nation.
Go find your nearest constitutional sheriff (cspoa.org has a list), volunteer to train. Go to oathkeepers.org and learn who to contact to join their Community Preparedness Teams, all training is free and you are NOT required to be a member. Plus go to tenthamendmentcenter.com and learn how to nullify things in your state and other things you can do.
What happens IS up to you, and me, and him, and her....
The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4.
Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order that further defines the law for purposes of enforcement.
5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take before assuming office.
5 U.S.C. 3333 requires the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law.
18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”.
The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311.
Executive Order 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.
Webster’s 1828 Dictionary says for “Constitution”: “…In free states, the constitution is paramount to the statutes or laws enacted by the legislature, limiting and controlling its power; and in the United States, the legislature is created, and its powers designated, by the constitution.” If any Branch fails to obey the “supreme Law”, then, in order to preserve the Rule of Law, the other Branches, or failing that, the States or the people, must overrule them”.
But who is constitutionally charged with enforcing the US Constitution and each state Constitution and all laws of our land that are in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution?
"We the people" are as the trained Militia of the several states. But until we bring the militia back, and start training we have no one who is lawfully assigned those duties.
The Preamble to the US Constitution; starts with: “We the People of the United States do ordain and establish this Constitution”,
By those words it is saying that “We the People” are the source of any and all legal status of the state and federal governments. “We” created them for specific purposes, and it was NOT to destroy our lives, control us, spy on us, track us, or murder us. Basically all public officials – state and federal representatives, state and federal law enforcement, state and federal judges, the multitude of state and federal bureaucracies – are called “public servants” for a reason – they are literally our hirelings.
Each state's Militia is made up of “We the People” protecting our own interests, homes, states, nation, and enforcing our governments. The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
Enforce the US Constitution and each state's Constitution, Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which is constitutional laws ONLY), Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.
The US Constitution guarantees to each state its own “Republican form of government”. It is every state's Militia that is the ONLY Constitutionally assigned force to “counter Invasions” and “Domestic Violence” within our nation.
Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American...The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
Richard Henry Lee: "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment: "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
“Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be.” Westbrook v. Mihaly, 2 C3d 756
”The Legislature, either by amending or otherwise, may not nullify a constitutional provision.” Rost v. Municipal Court of Southern Judicial District of San Mateo (1960)
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional rights.” Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 946
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which would abrogate them.” U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 380 U.S. 436 (1966)
“State Judges, as well as federal, have the responsibility to respect and protect persons from violations of federal constitutional rights.” Gross v. State of Illinois, 312 F 2d 257; (1963).
“Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a Government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Crime is contagious. If government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law it invites every man to become a law unto himself and against that pernicious doctrine, this court should resolutely set its face.” Olmstead v U.S., 277 US 348, 485; 48 S. Ct. 564, 575; 72 LEd 944 U.S. versus Verdrigo-Urquidez, 110 S. Ct. 1056, 1060-61 (1990) South v.Maryland/Bowers v. DeVito
Re: Re: Re:
Re: Charges
Re: Not that they will
If you do not know the answer to those questions you have not been paying attention. Those who are serving within the federal government are doing those things unlawfully.
As long as we do not know what those who serve within our governments - state and federal - are ALLOWED to do, when we do not bother to actually learn real history - so what if the schools don't teach it, READ, RESEARCH yourself. Don't need to be lead by the hand.
Here, bet you are not aware of just how close to Nazi Germany we are here in America. Let me give you some examples.
Justice Robert Jackson, Chief U.S. Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials (Nazi Germany about warrantless searches, etc): “Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart.”
A separate government was set up within the legitimate government within the Party to exercise outside the law every sanction that any legitimate state could exercise and many that it could not {Obama’s “Czars”, TSA, DHS}.
The Party had its own secret police, its security units, its intelligence and espionage division, its raiding forces, and its youth forces {DHS, TSA, look up “Obama youth” on youtube.com}.
It also established administrative mechanisms over time {Patriot Act, NDAA, warrantless searches, warrantless spying, TSA, etc} to identify those who supported the legitimate government.
They “encouraged” the populace to inform on their own neighbors, friends, family {“See Something, Say Something”, and other videos the DHS put out here in America}.
Eventually they organized and dominated every phase of German life {as is being tried here thru the UN laws, and executive orders, bills, laws made here}.
They created a “Party” police system, which became the pattern and the instrument of the police state, which was the first goal in their plan. {DHS and TSA – starting to arrange themselves throughout our nation to control our every move and where we can go: at airports, bus stations, train stations, Football stadiums, etc, even on our own roads.}
A presidential decree was created suspending the extensive guarantees of individual liberty contained in the constitution of the Weimar Republic. The decree provided that: "Sections 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice.”
Those decree’s were restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion - including freedom of the press, on the right of peaceful assembly, the right of association,
and violations of the privacy: postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications;
and no need for warrants for house-searches, orders for, confiscations as well as restrictions on property, etc all taken away under the guise of “keeping the people safe”. {much like what is happening within the USA today, as all of the “restrictions” on our freedoms are “for our own safety”}
Many were arrested as “belligerents” – no real crime committed, just disagreeing with the destruction of their legitimate government.
Secret arrest and indefinite detention; without charges, without evidence, without hearing, without counsel, and no court could issue an injunction, or writ of habeas corpus, or certiorari. The German people were in the hands of the police, the police were in the hands of the Nazi Party, and the Party was in the hands of a ring of evil men who wanted to rule the world. {NDAA, Patriot Act, various executive orders, warrantless arrests, New World Order, etc}
The chief instrument of keeping cohesion in plan and action was the National Socialist German Workers Party, known as the Nazi Party. First they were to infiltrate the legitimate government and from within bring about “change” {As is happening here, the replacement of our legitimate government with Domestic Enemies}.
So began the first part of the “plan” which was to subvert the Weimar Republic. {Communist party and some Nazism taking over the Democratic party but renaming themselves as “Progressives”. Because if they use Nazi or Communist Party name many of the American people would be horrified because – they may not know all the facts, but know enough to recognize they do not want what happened in Germany to repeat itself here in America. But now they are so open about being supported by the communist party that the PRE MADE signs held up in Ferguson had the communist party name on it.}
- Some of their (Nazi) declared purposes sounded good to many good citizens, such as: "profit-sharing in the great industries," {Take from the 1% and share with all}
- "a land reform suitable to our national requirements," {BLM, US land given to Russia oil–rich Alaskan Islands, to other foreign nations, and “authority over our oceans to the UN; and now they can “take” our property, our land, our bank accounts, our vehicles, our labor, etc here in the USA}
- "raising the standard of health." {Obamacare}
- The Party said that a “strong centralized government” was needed. {Same as they are currently saying we need here in the USA}.
- It demanded the creation of a strong central power with unconditional authority, {Democratic (Progressive) political declarations}
- and a "reconstruction" of the educational system. {Same as they are saying we need here in the USA}.
- Etc
Except for mass camps and mass killings, it is all in place here in the USA. Read it for yourself:
Opening statement by Justice Robert H. Jackson, Chief of Counsel for the United States http://www.roberthjackson.org/the-man/nuremberg-trial/
Re: Re: Only one fitting option remains
Re: Only business lobbyists?
First, Election Fraud already defeats the "whole voting thing" at least here in the USA, and I bet also there in the EU.
Second, and most important, although the USA has some features that uses democratic processes we are NOT a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic, and there is a huge difference between the two.
Here the TAFTA/TTIP so it is NOT Lawful no matter what person in whatever position who serves within our government signs it. Does that mean they will not enforce it, sure, at the barrel of a gun, and they will use what *used to be our US Military and by governmental professional law enforcement - state and federal - who did not learn about Nuremberg, Germany, etc and so will NOT say "NO" to their unlawful orders (*but was given to the UN as their MILITARY by Obama, Dempsey, and Panetta so our family members put their lives on the line NOT for the USA, but for the NWO which IS treason).
Basically, it matters not if it is here or there, ALL people must stand AGAINST these corrupt soulless scum working to be the rulers of the world (old name for it, but same concept for the NWO, One World Government - new names for it, but same old Bull----).
Re: Re: Re: Re:
What you are really saying is the size of the profit margin is what counts first, not security.
THAT is what is crazy, security is always first because not secure, lose the business, the life, the house. "Self" defense, be it a person, a business is the natural first step since people came out of caves. What is going on with this when profit means more then security is crazy, definitely not normal.
"You don't make your house windows bulletproof, and steel door,"
Today, if one can afford it, yes. We live in a world where governments in just the 20th century murdered more people then died in all the known wars combined.
Think about it.
Re: Other Law Enforcement Truth
It is about $$, not anything else.
Re:
And he also said: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”
Funny how educated and thoughtful our forefathers were compared to us today that today their words are still true.
It is always up to us, "We the people of the United States of America. Always.
Thomas Jefferson: "I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power."
Thomas Jefferson: "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories. And to render even them safe, their minds must be improved to a certain degree."
"The people or sovereign are not bound by general word in statutes, restrictive of prerogative right, title or interest, unless expressly named. Acts of limitation do not bind the King or the people. The people have been ceded all the rights of the King, the former sovereign,.....It is a maxim of the common law, that when an act is made for the common good and to prevent injury, the King shall be bound, though not named, but when a statute is general and prerogative right would be divested or taken from the King (or the people) he shall not be bound." People v Herkimer, 4 Cowen (NY) 345, 348 (1825)
Andrew Jackson, Farewell Address, March 4, 1837: "But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing. It behooves you, therefore, to be watchful in your States as well as in the Federal Government."
Re: immunity
Re: Fearmongering
Re: Re: Balance on a slippery slope....
This has nothing to do with Free Speech being protected, and everything to do with "if you have a right to life, everyone else has a right to life".
Basically, a person cannot deliberately cause another to get injured or killed except in a lawfully declared war or in defense of their life.
I agree with the rest of your comment.
Re: Acquisition = seizure
Dr. Edwin Vieira:
“This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides...
The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights...
The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...”
What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do.
Look at the First Amendment... What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion.
But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability. ..."
It is, and always has been up to us, not those we put into office - be it elected, hired, contracted or volunteered. Our founders knew that the chances of having domestic enemies or even traitors put into office were fairly high. That is why we are armed, educated, individuals, plus why the US Constitution divided our government.
We have the first part of our government: "We the People", the states, then the federal government. It is further divided up into three branches within both the federal and state governments.
Our natural rights, and many that we have that are not put into writing but covered under the Ninth Amendment PROTECTED from those who serve within our governments - the stares and federal.
Then it made sure that we, as the Militia are the only armed people except for when a Military is needed and ONLY THEN are they to be created, but for no longer then the congressionally declared WAR ends or 2 years whichever comes first.
US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 12: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.
James Madison, Father of the US Constitution: “... large and permanent military establishments ... are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”
Daniel Webster: “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? ..."
Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution: "Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence…
Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them."
Cockrum v. State: “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power”
Bliss v. Commonwealth: "Arms restrictions - even concealed weapons bans - are unconstitutional, since arms bearing is an individual right and the legislature may not restrict any aspect of such a right.”
Nunn vs. State:'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right”.
Samuel Adams: “It is always dangerous to the liberties of the people to have an army stationed among them, over which they have no control ... The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them.”
Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition: "The body of citizens in a state, enrolled for discipline as a military force, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies, as distinguished from regular troops or a standing army."
James Madison: "An efficient militia is authorized and contemplated by the Constitution and REQUIRED by the spirit and safety of free government." (caps are mine)
John Norton Pomeroy: “The object of this clause [the right of the people to keep and bear arms] is to secure a well-armed militia.... But a militia would be useless unless the citizens were enabled to exercise themselves in the use of warlike weapons. To preserve this privilege, and to secure to the people the ability to oppose themselves in military force against the usurpations of government, as well as against enemies from without, that government is forbidden by any law or proceeding to invade or destroy the right to keep and bear arms.”
Noah Webster: Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
I'd say we are about there, are you ready to do YOUR duty? To learn the US Constitution? To train to be the Militia of your state? To remove the governor of your state if he/she refuses to call up the Militia - though that is not needed per se?
Re: Job ONE! MONEY
"Who" does this say does the actions in the following paragraph? "What" in the following paragraph, are those actions they are to take?
Preamble:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Who - We the People of the United States.
What are we to do? "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".
What else did we do? "Ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America".
It is in the first person to show that "WE the People of the United States are always the sovereign of this nation, NOT the UN, not anyone who SERVES within our governments - WE are.
Never be ashamed of naivete. "I used to be a cool aid drinking optimist, now I'm just a disillusioned realist." It is what we are, what we were or they NEVER could have done what they are doing, have been doing since Wilson.
But now there is no excuse for you, or anyone else, to act as the US Constitution tells you/them to.
Re:
EO's are not lawful here, they have never been lawful here, they are usurpations that the "courts - another FEDERAL branch that has been increasing its "powers" unlawfully.
The word "All" in Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution makes it forbidden to the other two federal branches.
Article. I. Section. 1: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
An EO is writing legislation and forbidden to all by the legislative branch. It does not matter how long this violation has been committed, it is still not LAW, it is "null and void". It is "color of law", pretend law that exists and is implemented because the people are too ignorant of our legitimate government to know what the powers and authority those who serve within the federal government are ALLOWED to practice.
I understand the dumbing down of Americans was deliberate, and done over decades (mid 1050's - current), but one can always read for themselves at the very least the US Constitution!
Re:
The question really is, if you are an American citizen or one who is LEGALLY allowed to be here, are YOU going to learn how to constitutionally implement and defend your rights, yourself, your family/friends/community, state, and country from the domestic enemies and traitors serving within our government?
Re:
Judges were given the authority to determine if they are "In Pursuance thereof" the US Constitution. They are NOT given the authority to interpret it as that was already done within the Federalist Papers, within the writings of the time, dictionaries of the time, notes in the state conventions going on at that time, newspapers, etc. they gave themselves the "power" to interpret the US Constitution, which is a usurpation of powers, a crime.
"I have every faith this will not stand over time." It does not have to "stand over time", as that decision is up to us, "We the People...", no one else.
You were shown in Ferguson, at the Bundy's ranch in Nevada, today in the state of Washington how "We the People" are to conduct ourselves constitutionally and say "no, this is NOT lawful here and we will not allow it to be enforced by domestic enemies or traitors to the USA".
It is our choice, it has always been OUR choice under the US Constitution what crimes we ALLOW those who are REQUIRED to represent us and "support and defend" the US Constitution get away with. It has always been up to us what goes on within our nation.
Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American…The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”.
Richard Henry Lee: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”
George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment: “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
Patrick Henry: “If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost every thing. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity.”
Hamilton said there exists a right of self-defense against a tyrannical government, and it includes the people with their own arms: “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government… if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers… The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair… The people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate… If their rights are invaded… How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized! (being armed)“
James Madison said that: “… large and permanent military establishments … are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”
John Adams said: “There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”
Joel Barlow, Revolutionary War veteran and American whose political writings were debated on the floor of Parliament said of the US Constitution: “… not only permitting every man to arm, but obliging him to arm.”
Patrick Henry: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”
Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides...
The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights... The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...”
What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do. Look at the First Amendment... What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability."
Americans would have had to understand and enforce their Constitution. You notice I say Americans, not the Congress or the Supreme Court, because who is the final arbiter of this document? [holding a copy of the Constitution] It is not Congress, and it is not the Supreme Court. It is “we the people.” Read the thing. How does it start? “We the people do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States”; not “we the politicians,” not “we the judges.” Those people are the agents of the people. We the people are the principals.
The doctrine is very clear that, being the principals, we are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters and enforcers. You don’t have to take my word for it. Let’s go back to the Founding Fathers...
The Founding Fathers were profound students of law and political philosophy, their knowledge unequaled by any today. Their mentor in that era was William Blackstone, who wrote Blackstone’s Commentaries, probably the most widely read legal treatise of its time, certainly here in the United States. What did Blackstone write about this subject? He wrote, “Whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself; there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.”
We the people are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters. Dr. Edwin Vieira, http://www.constitution.org/mon/vieira_03225.htm (End Dr. Vieira quote)
Re:
When you know that the US Constitution assigned the duty of enforcing it, and the Constitution of each state to us. When you go and train so that you are a part of, and the defender of, yourself, your family, your neighborhood, your city/county/state, and of our nation.
We are the ones assigned the duty of enforcement, no one else. Preamble to the US Constitution:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The Preamble to the US Constitution says who is responsible for doing certain things within our nation. Those things are to be done to “form a more perfect Union”. It is NOT the law enforcement - federal or state because those agencies were forbidden to those in government to create BECAUSE they are ALWAYS used against the people sooner or later. The US President was to use the Militia of the several states when he needed them, or if attacked to hold off the enemy while a military is formed - usually from those in the Militia.
Those duties were NOT assigned to the senate, the congress, those who serve in the judicial and executive branches. Nor were those duties assigned to those who serve within state governments.
“We the People of the United States” are to:
- “establish Justice”
- “insure domestic Tranquility”
- “provide for the common defence”
- “promote the general Welfare”
- “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”
“We the People of the United States” are to do that by using those who serve within our federal government to carry out the constitutionally assigned duties for each branch within our federal government and our state governments. When they run "amok" and become domestic enemies of the USA, or even traitors, then we are to remove, prosecute, and punish them for their crimes.
The Constitution assigned “We the People of the United States” to “establish Justice”, “provide for the common defence”, plus to “promote the general Welfare” and most importantly to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” - no one else.
Thomas Jefferson: “Freedom is lost gradually from an uninterested, uninformed, and uninvolved people.”
Thomas Jefferson: “The government created by this compact (the Constitution) was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party (the people of each state) has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”
Alexander Hamilton, concerning the supremacy clause, Federalist 33: “It will not, I presume, have escaped observation that it expressly confines the supremacy to laws made pursuant to the Constitution.”
Alexander Hamilton: “There is no position which depends on clearer principles that that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.”
As most here know that is "contrary to the commission under which it is exercised" and it is "void", not valid. Can it, and will it be enforced? Sure, all manner of "laws" today are being enforced by those ignorant of our legitimate government or deliberately to destroy us and the US Constitution from the inside.
Enforcement of unlawful "laws" created as "color of law" (pretend law created by someone occupying a position where it may be assumed they have that "authority", but they were never given that power) is *terrorism under our laws.
*28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
"It is the nature of a right that it is – and must be – absolute. If there are codicils, appendices, restrictions, however, and buts, then it is a privilege, granted and controlled by others." Unknown
George Washington: "A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies."
US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions."
Clause 16: “To provide for organizing, ARMING, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.
Yeah, those weapons of war going to the law enforcement and to foreign nations and foreign terrorists are LAWFULLY to go to the Militias to train with and use IF ever needed. Giving it to the law enforcement and to foreign nations and foreign terrorists are crimes AGAINST our nation and the American people, treason. When they are used against us it IS terrorism.
Each state's Militia is made up of “We the People” protecting our own interests, homes, states, nation, and enforcing our governments. The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
Enforce the US Constitution and each state's Constitution,
Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which is constitutional laws ONLY),
Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
“to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.
The US Constitution guarantees to each state its own “Republican form of government”. It is every state's Militia that is the ONLY Constitutionally assigned force to “counter Invasions” and “Domestic Violence” within our nation.
Go find your nearest constitutional sheriff (cspoa.org has a list), volunteer to train. Go to oathkeepers.org and learn who to contact to join their Community Preparedness Teams, all training is free and you are NOT required to be a member. Plus go to tenthamendmentcenter.com and learn how to nullify things in your state and other things you can do.
What happens IS up to you, and me, and him, and her....
Re: Re: Negative bias article ignores "CwF+ RtB" actions
Basically everything about EA sucks except its marketing dept.
Re: Re: Negative bias article ignores "CwF+ RtB" actions
Re:
The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4.
Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order that further defines the law for purposes of enforcement.
5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take before assuming office.
5 U.S.C. 3333 requires the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law.
18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”.
The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311.
Executive Order 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.”
Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States.
Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.
Webster’s 1828 Dictionary says for “Constitution”: “…In free states, the constitution is paramount to the statutes or laws enacted by the legislature, limiting and controlling its power; and in the United States, the legislature is created, and its powers designated, by the constitution.”
If any Branch fails to obey the “supreme Law”, then, in order to preserve the Rule of Law, the other Branches, or failing that, the States or the people, must overrule them”.
But who is constitutionally charged with enforcing the US Constitution and each state Constitution and all laws of our land that are in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution?
"We the people" are as the trained Militia of the several states. But until we bring the militia back, and start training we have no one who is lawfully assigned those duties.
The Preamble to the US Constitution; starts with:
“We the People of the United States do ordain and establish this Constitution”,
By those words it is saying that “We the People” are the source of any and all legal status of the state and federal governments. “We” created them for specific purposes, and it was NOT to destroy our lives, control us, spy on us, track us, or murder us. Basically all public officials – state and federal representatives, state and federal law enforcement, state and federal judges, the multitude of state and federal bureaucracies – are called “public servants” for a reason – they are literally our hirelings.
Each state's Militia is made up of “We the People” protecting our own interests, homes, states, nation, and enforcing our governments. The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
Enforce the US Constitution and each state's Constitution,
Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which is constitutional laws ONLY),
Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
“to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.
The US Constitution guarantees to each state its own “Republican form of government”. It is every state's Militia that is the ONLY Constitutionally assigned force to “counter Invasions” and “Domestic Violence” within our nation.
Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American...The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
Richard Henry Lee: "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment: "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
“Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be.” Westbrook v. Mihaly, 2 C3d 756
”The Legislature, either by amending or otherwise, may not nullify a constitutional provision.” Rost v. Municipal Court of Southern Judicial District of San Mateo (1960)
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional rights.” Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 946
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which would abrogate them.” U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 380 U.S. 436 (1966)
“State Judges, as well as federal, have the responsibility to respect and protect persons from violations of federal constitutional rights.” Gross v. State of Illinois, 312 F 2d 257; (1963).
“Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a Government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Crime is contagious. If government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law it invites every man to become a law unto himself and against that pernicious doctrine, this court should resolutely set its face.” Olmstead v U.S., 277 US 348, 485; 48 S. Ct. 564, 575; 72 LEd 944 U.S. versus Verdrigo-Urquidez, 110 S. Ct. 1056, 1060-61 (1990)
South v.Maryland/Bowers v. DeVito
More comments from Cal >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Cal.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt