Tag Archives: Bill of Rights

Liberty Activists, Constitutionalists To Be Treated Same As ISIS Terrorists

rightwingextremists

Kiss the Founding Fathers, your freedom of speech, religion and due process goodbye.  There are growing calls for the removal, restriction and banning of ideas, speech and history the State considers ‘dangerous’.

No point to adding any comment to the following news stories, which are the fruits of Fundamental Transformation, except to say that the massive support for the self-admitted Fabian Socialist/Communist Bernie Sanders makes sense when you come to grips with the fact we have lost the country.

The Founding Fathers Considered Domestic Extremists Today

 

Liberty activists and ISIS will be treated as identical threats

What First Amendment?  The State will tell you what is permitted speech from now on.

Government Arrests Radio Talk Show Host over his comments against FBI abuse at Oregon Wildlife Refuge

Not only has free speech become a four-letter word—profane, obscene, uncouth, not to be uttered in so-called public places—but in more and more cases, the government deems free speech to be downright dangerous and in some instances illegal.

The U.S. government has become particularly intolerant of speech that challenges the government’s power, reveals the government’s corruption, exposes the government’s lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices.

Indeed, there is a long and growing list of the kinds of speech that the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation and prosecution: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, extremist speech, etc.

Yet by allowing the government to whittle away at cherished First Amendment freedoms—which form the backbone of the Bill of Rights—we have evolved into a society that would not only be abhorrent to the founders of this country but would be hostile to the words they used to birth this nation.

Don’t believe me?

Conduct your own experiment into the government’s tolerance of speech that challenges its authority, and see for yourself.

Stand on a street corner—or in a courtroom, at a city council meeting or on a university campus—and recite some of the rhetoric used by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Adams and Thomas Paine without referencing them as the authors.

For that matter, just try reciting the Declaration of Independence, which rejects tyranny, establishes Americans as sovereign beings, recognizes God as a Supreme power, portrays the government as evil, and provides a detailed laundry list of abuses that are as relevant today as they were 240 years ago.

My guess is that you won’t last long before you get thrown out, shut up, threatened with arrest or at the very least accused of being a radical, a troublemaker, a sovereign citizen, a conspiratorialist or an extremist.

Try suggesting, as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin did, that Americans should not only take up arms but be prepared to shed blood in order to protect their liberties, and you might find yourself placed on a terrorist watch list and vulnerable to being rounded up by government agents.

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms,” declared Jefferson. He also concluded that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Observed Franklin: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

Better yet, try suggesting as Thomas Paine, Marquis De Lafayette, John Adams and Patrick Henry did that Americans should, if necessary, defend themselves against the government if it violates their rights, and you will be labeled a domestic extremist.

“It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government,” insisted Paine. “When the government violates the people’s rights,” Lafayette warned, “insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of the rights and the most indispensable of duties.” Adams cautioned, “A settled plan to deprive the people of all the benefits, blessings and ends of the contract, to subvert the fundamentals of the constitution, to deprive them of all share in making and executing laws, will justify a revolution.” And who could forget Patrick Henry with his ultimatum: “Give me liberty or give me death!”

Then again, perhaps you don’t need to test the limits of free speech for yourself. One such test is playing out before our very eyes in Portland, Oregon, where radio “shock jock” Pete Santilli, a new media journalist who broadcasts his news reports over YouTube and streaming internet radio, is sitting in jail.

Santilli, notorious for his controversial topics, vocal outrage over government abuses, and inflammatory rhetoric, is not what anyone would consider an objective reporter. His radio show, aptly titled “Telling You the Truth…Whether You Like It or Not,” makes it clear that Santilli has a viewpoint (namely, that the government has overstepped its bounds), and he has no qualms about sharing it with his listeners.

It was that viewpoint that landed Santilli in jail.

In early January 2016, a group of armed activists, reportedly protesting the federal government’s management of federal lands and its prosecution of two local ranchers convicted of arson, staged an act of civil disobedience by occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Burns, Oregon. Santilli, who has covered such protests in the past, including the April 2014 standoff in Nevada between the Bundy ranching family and the federal government over grazing rights, reported on the occupation in Burns as an embedded journalist, albeit one who was sympathetic to the complaints (although not the tactics) of the occupiers.

When asked to clarify his role in relation to the occupation, Santilli declared, “My role is the same here that it was at the Bundy ranch. To talk about the constitutional implications of what is going on here. The Constitution cannot be negotiated.”

Well, it turns out that the Constitution can be negotiated, at least when the government gets involved.

Long a thorn in the side of the FBI, Santilli was arrested by the FBI following its ambush and arrest of key leaders of the movement. He was charged, along with the armed resistors, with conspiracy to impede federal officers from discharging their duties by use of force, intimidation, or threats—the same charge being levied against those who occupied the refuge—which carries a maximum sentence of six years in prison.

Notably, Santilli is the only journalist among those covering the occupation to be charged with conspiracy, despite the fact that he did not participate in the takeover of the refuge, nor did he ever spend a night on the grounds of the refuge, nor did he ever represent himself as anything but a journalist covering the occupation.

Of course, the government doesn’t actually believe that 50-year-old Santilli is an accomplice to any criminal activity.

Read between the lines and you’ll find that what the government is really accusing Santilli of is employing dangerous speech. As court documents indicate, the government is prosecuting Santilli solely as a reporter of information. In other words, they’re making an example of him, which is consistent with the government’s ongoing efforts to intimidate members of the media who portray the government in a less than favorable light.

 

…That the government is choosing to target Santilli for prosecution, despite the fact that they do not recognize new media journalists as members of the mainstream media, signals a broadening of the government’s efforts to suppress what it considers dangerous speech and stamp out negative coverage.The message is clear: whether a journalist is acting alone or is affiliated with an established news source, the government has no qualms about subjecting them to harassment, arrest, jail time and trumped up charges if doing so will discourage others from openly opposing or exposing the government.

You see, the powers-that-be understand that if the government can control speech, it controls thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.

Where the government has gone wrong is in hinging its case against Santilli based solely on his incendiary rhetoric, which is protected by the First Amendment and which bears a striking resemblance to disgruntled patriots throughout American history.

Here’s what Santilli said: “What we need, most importantly, is one hundred thousand unarmed men and women to stand together. It is the most powerful weapon in our arsenal.”

Now compare that with the call to action from Joseph Warren, a leader of the Sons of Liberty and a principal figure within the American Revolution: “Stain not the glory of your worthy ancestors, but like them resolve never to part with your birthright; be wise in your deliberations, and determined in your exertions for the preservation of your liberties. Follow not the dictates of passion, but enlist yourselves under the sacred banner of reason; use every method in your power to secure your rights.”

Indeed, Santilli comes across as relatively docile compared to some of our nation’s more outspoken firebrands.

Santilli: “I’m not armed. I am armed with my mouth. I’m armed with my live stream. I’m armed with a coalition of like-minded individuals who sit at home and on YouTube watch this.”

Now compare that to what George Washington had to say: “Unhappy it is, though, to reflect that a brother’s sword has been sheathed in a brother’s breast and that the once-happy plains of America are either to be drenched with blood or inhabited by slaves. Sad alternative! But can a virtuous man hesitate in his choice?”

And then there was Andrew Jackson, a hothead if ever there was one. He came of age in the early days of the republic, served as the seventh president of the United States, and was not opposed to shedding blood when necessary: “Peace, above all things, is to be desired, but blood must sometimes be spilled to obtain it on equable and lasting terms.”

This is how freedom rises or falls.

There have always been those willing to speak their minds despite the consequences. Where freedom hangs in the balance is when “we the people” are called on to stand with or against individuals who actually exercise their rights and, in the process, push the envelope far enough to get called out on the carpet for it.

Do we negotiate the Constitution, or do we embrace it, no matter how uncomfortable it makes us feel, no matter how hateful or ugly it gets, and no matter how much we may dislike its flag-bearers?

Comedian Lenny Bruce laid the groundwork for the George Carlins that would follow in his wake: foul-mouthed, insightful, irreverent, incredibly funny, and one of the First Amendment’s greatest champions who dared to “speak the unspeakable” about race, religion, sexuality and politics. As Village Voice writer Nat Hentoff attests, Bruce was “not only a paladin of free speech but also a still-penetrating, woundingly hilarious speaker of truth to the powerful and the complacent.”

Bruce died in 1966, but not before being convicted of alleged obscenity for challenging his audience’s covert prejudices by brandishing unmentionable words that, if uttered today, would not only get you ostracized but could get you arrested and charged with a hate crime. Hentoff, who testified in Bruce’s defense at his trial, recounts that Lenny used to say, “What I wanted people to dig is the lie. Certain words were suppressed to keep the lie going. But if you do them, you should be able to say the words.”

Not much has changed in the 50 years since Bruce died. In fact, it’s gotten worse.

What we’re dealing with today is a government that wants to suppress dangerous words—words about its warring empire, words about its land grabs, words about its militarized police, words about its killing, its poisoning and its corruption—in order to keep its lies going.

As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, what we are witnessing is a nation undergoing a nervous breakdown over this growing tension between our increasingly untenable reality and the lies being perpetrated by a government that has grown too power-hungry, egotistical, militaristic and disconnected from its revolutionary birthright.

The only therapy is the truth and nothing but the truth.

Otherwise, there will be no more First Amendment. There will be no more Bill of Rights. And there will be no more freedom in America as we have known it.

Speaking against the government is now an act of terrorism according to the Federal Government.

founderragheads

Constitutional advocates, Extremist groups motivated by a range of U.S.-born philosophies present a “clear and present danger” to the country says Obama’s Justice Department.

Many of us saw it coming a long time ago — increasing confrontation between liberty proponents and the corrupt federal establishment leading to increasing calls by political elites and bureaucrats to apply to American citizens the terrorism countermeasures designed for foreign combatants. It was only a matter of time and timing.

My stance has always been that the elites would wait until there was ample social and political distraction; a fog of fear allowing them to move more aggressively against anti-globalists. We are not quite there yet, but the ground is clearly being prepared.

Economic uncertainty looms large over our fiscal structure today, more so even than in 2008. Global instability is rampant, with Europe at the forefront as mass migrations of “refugees” invade wholesale. At best, most of them intend to leach off of the EU’s already failing socialist welfare structure while refusing to integrate or respect western social principles. At worst, a percentage of these migrants are members of ISIS with the goals of infiltration, disruption and coordinated destruction.

With similar immigration and transplantation measures being applied to the U.S. on a smaller scale (for now) the ISIS plague will inevitably hit our shores in a manner that will undoubtedly strike panic in the masses. I believe 2016 will be dubbed the “year of the terrorist,” and ISIS will not be the only “terrorists” in the spotlight.

While scanning the pages of mainstream propaganda machines like Reuters, I came across this little gem of an article, which outlines plans by the U.S. Justice Department to apply existing enemy combatant laws used against ISIS terrorists and their supporters to “domestic extremists,” specifically mentioning the Bundy takeover of the federal refuge in Burns, Oregon as an example.

“Extremist groups motivated by a range of U.S.-born philosophies present a “clear and present danger,” John Carlin, the Justice Department’s chief of national security, told Reuters in an interview. “Based on recent reports and the cases we are seeing, it seems like we’re in a heightened environment.”

“Clear and present danger” is a vital phrase implemented in this statement from Carlin and he used it quite deliberately. It refers to something called the “clear and present danger doctrine or test,” a doctrine rarely used except during times of mass panic, such as during WWI and WWII. The doctrine applies specifically to the removal of 1st Amendment rights of free speech during moments of “distress.”

What does this mean, exactly? “Clear and present danger” is a legal mechanism by which the government claims the right not only to prosecute or destroy enemies of the state, but also anyone who publicly supports those same enemies through speech or writing.

Recently, the prospect of allowing the Federal Communications Commission to target and shut down websites related to ISIS has been fielded by congressional representatives. Many people have warned against this as setting a dangerous precedent by which the government could be given free license to censor and silence ANY websites they deem “harmful” to the public good, even those not tied to ISIS in any way.

Of course, overt hatred of Islamic extremism amongst conservatives is at Defcon 1 right now, and with good reason. Unfortunately, this may lead constitutional conservatives, the most stalwart proponents of free speech, to mistakenly set the stage for the erasure of free speech rights all in the name of stopping ISIS activity. The greatest proponents of constitutional liberties could very well become the greatest enemies of constitutional liberties if they fall for the ploy set up by the establishment.

The Reuters article outlines the future implications quite plainly:

The U.S. State Department designates international terrorist organizations to which it is illegal to provide “material support.” No domestic groups have that designation, helping to create a disparity in charges faced by international extremist suspects compared to domestic ones.

It has been applied in 58 of the government’s 79 Islamic State cases since 2014 against defendants who engaged in a wide range of activity, from traveling to Syria to fight alongside Islamic State to raising money for a friend who wished to do so.

Prosecutors can bring “material support” terrorism charges against defendants who aren’t linked to groups on the State Department’s list, but they have only done so twice against non-jihadist suspects since the law was enacted in 1994. The law, which prohibits supporting people who have been deemed to be terrorists by their actions, carries a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.”

The Justice Department goes on to explain that they are “exploring” options to make “material support” charges more applicable to “domestic extremists.”

So what constitutes “material support?” Well, as mentioned earlier, John Carlin just told us. His use of the phrase “clear and present danger” denotes that 1st Amendment speech will be restricted, ostensibly because some speech will be labeled “material support” of terrorist organizations. The liberty movement, likely in the near future, is about to be outwardly defined by the establishment as a terrorist movement, and those who support it through speech will be designated as material supporters of said terrorism.

To be utterly clear, this could apply to any and everyone who promotes anti-government sentiments online, and will likely be aimed more prominently at liberty analysts and journalists. The argument for this move is rather humorous in my view — bureaucrats and others complain that it is “not fair” that Islamic terrorists are being treated more harshly than “white rural domestic extremists” and that material support laws should be enforced against everyone equally.

Yes, that’s right, the 1st Amendment is under threat because the Justice Department does not want to appear “racist.” At least, that is their public excuse…

Will this all take place in a vacuum? Of course not. Something terrible is brewing. Another Oklahoma City-stye bombing, perhaps. Or a standoff gone horribly awry. The standoff in Oregon continues without Ammon Bundy and is about to get worse in the next week according to my information (you will see what I mean). The point is, the narrative is being finalized in preparation for whatever trigger events may be in store, and that narrative closely associates ISIS with liberty activists as being in the same category.

“As law enforcement experts confront domestic militia groups, “sovereign citizens” who do not recognize government authority, and other anti-government extremists, they also face a heightened threat from Islamic extremists like the couple who carried out the Dec. 2 shootings in San Bernardino, California.”

 This is why I have consistently argued against giving any extra-judicial powers to our already bloated federal system. I am a staunch opponent of Islamic immigration and terrorism, but some people are so desperate to fight one monster that they are willing to give unlimited powers to another monster thinking it will give their minds ease. These people are fools, and they are putting the rest of us at risk.

If you want to fight ISIS, then fight them yourself. Do not give the same government that helped create ISIS and then deliberately transplanted them to Europe and the U.S. even more legal authority over our lives to supposedly “stop” ISIS. This would be absurd.

In the meantime, I would point out that regardless of how the federal government wishes to label us, the liberty movement could not be more different from the Islamic State.

  1. We don’t enjoy covert funding and training from the government at large as ISIS does. (Though according to leftists, we all take our marching orders from the Koch Brothers).
  2. Most of us were born in this country and are rather attached to it.
  3. ISIS fights to dismantle traditional Western values. We fight to restore traditional Western values, and we will not only fight ISIS but also cultural Marxists and collectivists who share the same disdain for liberty.
  4. Many of us are far better trained than ISIS goons, so if anything, we are a more severe threat to the enemies of free society. (We actually look down our sights when we shoot rather than hiding behind cars with the rifle over our head and squatting like a constipated dog. We can also operate their AK-47s better than they can).
  5. We are as opposed to Sharia Law as we are to martial law. In fact, we see them as essentially the same unacceptable circumstance.
  6. We don’t cannibalize our enemies. (Who would want to take a bite out of Henry Kissinger’s spleen?)
  7. We might look down on the insane ramblings of today’s feminists, but at least we would not stone them, enforce female circumcision, then rape them, then throw acid in their faces, then slap a hijab on them and take away their driver’s licenses. So maybe, just maybe, we toxic masculine conservative barbarians aren’t as bad as they seem to think we are.
  8. We understand that black pajamas are not the best camouflage, but ISIS may have better fashion sense than we do.
  9. Our beards are all-American. Their beards are just plain creepy.
  10. They fight to be martyred. We fight to win.

When all is said and done, who is the greater threat to you and your freedoms? A psychotic theocrat that has taken his religion so far into the forbidden zone that any evil, no matter how heinous, is justified through the circular logic of zealotry? The criminal government that funded that psycho, trained him, slapped a rocket launcher in his hands and then gave him a free plane ride to your favorite shopping mall? Or, some weirdo that stores lots of food and gas masks in his basement and every once in a while talks to you about 9/11? Come on, think about it…

1 Comment

Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny

“Our Rights Do Not Come From God” Sayeth The Leftist – They Come From Obama And Government

The Tyrants on the Left up the meme that Our Rights do not come from our Creator, rather they insist that ‘rights’  are ‘agreed to’ and ‘permitted’ by Government

The seig-heiling of government power and the rewriting of our history by Leftists in media and education, from Obama on down – is accelerating to obscene levels of the ridiculous and false.  Just as we saw with Brian Williams, the media no longer reports news – it lies to further the Leftist Narrative and the MarxoFascist Agenda.

In this case of Godless media propaganda, CNN anchor Chris Cuomo attempted to shame Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore in a heated argument over the imposition of homosexual marriage upon the states and the people of this country.  When Judge Moore stated that our Rights come from God – Cuomo went ballistic and insisted that our “collective rights” come from men and government, NOT God.

The fact of the matter is that if Rights are granted by men or government, Rights can be easily rescinded by men and their governments at any time of their choosing – and if that be the case – then they are not rights at all – merely ‘privileges’, granted by government.  I have heard Leftists often state and opine that ‘rights’ they disagree with should be recategorized as ‘privileges’ – especially speech and religion, while at the same time they insist homosexual sex and marriage is an inalienable right they are born with and must be upheld and agreed to by all.

What you see taking place here with this whole homosexual marriage agenda is Genesis 19 come alive right in your face.  It will never stop, they will never be satisfied – not until they have their way and until your beliefs match theirs or is exterminated.

Liberty and a republic cannot exist within a society that thinks Rights come from men and government.  Because the moment enough people actually believe their inalienable rights come from men and government, a tyranny of men will ALWAYS make legal, the justification to eliminate such ‘rights’ it finds an obstacle to complete and total power and control.

CNN Anchor: ‘Our Rights Do Not Come From God’

During a heated discussion over gay marriage, CNN morning Anchor Chris Cuomo opined that the unalienable rights endowed to all Americans do not come from God.

Cuomo was debating Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. Near the end of the back-and-forth and after Moore argued that rights cannot be handed down by men, Cuomo blurted out:

“Our rights do not come from God, your honor, and you know that. They come from man… That’s your faith, that’s my faith, but that’s not our country. Our laws come from collective agreement and compromise.”

Maybe Mr. Cuomo flunked elementary civics. The opening sentence of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence clearly affirms:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

It may be more convenient to Cuomo’s political philosophy that a select few are empowered to grant rights to the masses, but it certainly is not part of this country’s foundation.

What’s worse is Cuomo is advocating “collective” rights. He speaks as if every American right can simply be overturned at a whim simply because “times change.” “Sure, freedom of speech was great in 1789, but we’ve evolved beyond that as a collective society.” This is a very dangerous slope on which to tread.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture War, Obama Marxist Tyranny

Supreme Court Justice Stevens: “Change 2nd Amendment – Only Military Should Have Right To Arms”.

BurnSecnd-Amendment

Former Supreme Court Justice advocates changing Six Amendments in the Bill of Rights – including the Second Amendment in new book.

As with all MarxoFascists (i.e.: liberals, progressives, Democrats et al.) there is consensus among their arguments that the Constitution is flawed because it restricts government’s power over the people and the states, and focuses too much on individual rather than ‘collective’ rights.  In other words, it’s not Communist enough for them.

While we would normally laugh off the insanity coming from screwball MarxoFascists like you would find on MSNBC – the reality is that such ideologues hold the highest positions of power in our nation.  As such – the advancement of their total transformation agenda of a Republic into a Communist State is the only focus and goal.

One such ideologue is former so-called Republican and Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who revealed his platform to commit treason in a new ‘manifesto’ he is hawking “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution“.

One such Amendment he advocates changing is the Second Amendment.  His proposed treason is to change the text of the Second Amendment so that it reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.”

Essentially what Stevens is advocating is that ONLY those serving in the military should have a right to arms.  Notwithstanding the history of every single genocidal regime ever come to power in mankind’s history, limits weapons to be in the hands of the military, loyal to it’s leader.  That is a history Stevens and his MarxoFascist traitors never seem to note.

The Constitution explicitly states “the right of the people”, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  It says NOTHING about WHEN they are ‘allowed’ to keep and bear arms as Stevens’ proposal demands.

But even in regards to the MarxoFascist argument that only the militia should have arms, let us look at who the Founding Fathers considered the militia.  George Mason, called the ‘Father’ of the Constitution, wrote this:

“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except
for a few public officials.” — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia
Convention on Ratification of the Constitution

But in the world of the MarxoFascists and the tyrants they seek to empower – ‘the militia’ is the National Guard or the military – under the direct authority of the President to command.

A people stripped of arms are much easier to subjugate and eradicate by a tyrannical regime such as the one in power right now.  Our arms are the only thing that is preventing what is going on in Venezuela fro happening here.

FORMER JUSTICE STEVENS: CHANGE 2ND AMENDMENT TO IMPROVE CONSTITUTION

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has released a new book focused, in part, on “improving” the Constitution through amending the Second Amendment–by making the rights protected therein applicable only to a militia instead of the citizenry at large.

Stevens’ book is titled Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution.

As written, the text of the Second Amendment is: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

According to Bloomberg Businessweek, Stevens believes recent court decisions–notablyDistrict of Columbia v Heller (2008) and McDonald v Chicago (2010)–placed too much emphasis on individual rights, rather than on what he believes was the Founding Fathers’ primary goal: namely, to answer “the threat that a national standing army posed to the sovereignty of the states.”

His solution is to amend the text of the Second Amendment so that it reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.”

In other words, the protection of the right becomes collective and is only protected for those serving in the militia.

Among the many problems with Stevens’ idea is the often overlooked fact that the Second Amendment did not create a right when it was ratified in 1791. Rather, the Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment to protect a portion of the “certain unalienable Rights” with which man was “endowed by [his] Creator.”

The rights protected by the Second Amendment are individual rights, as are the rights that are protected, but not created, by the First, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, among others.

7 Comments

Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny

Interpretation Of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing

BloomturdVoid-Constitution

Bloomberg prods the media to stoke a meme that in the wake of the Boston Jihad attack, Our Rights must be surrendered for greater security.

The question is, will America simply let them take away our God-given Rights, protected and enshrined in the Constitution – which LIMITS Government – and in the Name of Security and Public Safety – surrender those rights and accept whatever change these MarxoFascist Rulers decide must be made to the once Supreme-Law of the land?

That question will need to be answered… and soon.

Or you can be assured that they WILL CHANGE the Constitution to suit their desire for total government tyranny over what limits the Constitution has placed upon them.

How many Reichstag fires will it take before the American people let them have their way and ‘fundamentally transform’ our Constitution and decide what rights you are allowed to have?

Will the Boston Bombing and Sandy Hook Massacres suffice – or will the Rulers gleefully welcome more and maximize each instance towards their more purposeful desire to subjugate We The People?

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” – Benjamin Franklin

Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing

In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change” to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

Mr. Bloomberg, who has come under fire for the N.Y.P.D.’s monitoring of Muslim communities and other aggressive tactics, said the rest of the country needs to learn from the attacks.

“Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11,” he said.

“We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to,” he said.

The mayor pointed to the gun debate and noted the courts have allowed for increasingly stringent regulations in response to ever-more powerful weapons.

“Clearly the  Supreme Court has recognized that you have to have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and what it applies to and reasonable gun laws … Here we’re going to to have to live with reasonable levels of security,” he said, pointing to the use of magnetometers to catch weapons in city schools.

“It really says something bad about us that we have to do it. But our obligation first and foremost is to keep our kids safe in the schools; first and foremost, to keep you safe if you go to a sporting event; first and foremost is to keep you safe if you walk down the streets or go into our parks,” he said. “We cannot let the terrorists put us in a situation where we can’t do those things. And the ways to do that is to provide what we think is an appropriate level of protection.”

Still, Mr. Bloomberg argued the attacks shouldn’t be used as an excuse to persecute certain religions or groups.

“What we cant do is let the protection get in the way of us enjoying our freedoms,” he said.  “You still want to let people practice their religion, no matter what that religion is. And I think one of the great dangers here is going and categorizing anybody from one religion as a terrorist. That’s not true … That would let the terrorists win. That’s what they want us to do.”

2 Comments

Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny

Lines Are Being Drawn – The Time For Talk Is Over

Three-Percent-Patriots

Civil war or subjugation?  Obama and the MarxoFascists push the nation into a stark choice.

Can two walk together, unless they are agreed? Amos 3:3

Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Satan? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? – II Corinthians 6:14-15

Several weeks ago, I read an editorial posted at NC Renegade’s site from a veteran who sees this nation at the brink of impending war within itself.  The startling truth of what the vet had stated so calmly, without malice but with determination – left me unsettled since I read it.   It is a sober truth, one that few are willing to acknowledge.  I was reticent about linking to it, and even for me – the truth about what he posted was something I was unwilling to admit to myself.  The Normalcy Bias still has a grip on me in these evil days despite my own pessimism of our near future.

As I read that editorial, it evoked immediate sadness and a heart wrenching  over a truth I did not want to accept: America has reached the breaking point and it’s people are now hopelessly divided.  Divided to the point of resigning themselves to the formerly unthinkable in order to preserve what they cherish, in the face of those who are advocating the dismantling of our institutions and foundations that they see standing in their way.  I knew he spoke truth, and I recognize some people with wisdom, understand what time we have arrived at as a nation.  Written calmly, with regret and resignation – he and many, many like him – are preparing to do what must be done when that last mistake by tyrants is made.

In the weeks that have passed since I first read it, statements, writings, suggestions and visceral vocal hatreds made by those on the Progressive/Left against Christian Conservatives, the Constitution and liberty-minded Americans, have made that editorial’s recognition of reality self-evident.  I did not really want to believe the civil society had broken down to the point of separation or war.   The White House petitions for secession and the vitriol in response, were merely the first real outward signs that the body politic is no longer willing to abide one another.  Indeed, there are those advocating we forcibly strip away or ignore the very bulwarks of the civil society in favor of what Obama and the Progressive/MarxoFascists will impose upon us.

It is those rantings of the “progressives’ and Marxofascists against those in opposition to the Left’s actions in the last several weeks, that confirms what the Veteran already understood; the time to water the tree of liberty may be near at hand.   Like someone who was diagnosed with a terminal disease, I have passed the points of disbelief, denial, and anger – into acceptance of where I did not wish to believe this nation stood.

Obama and the ‘Progressive’ Left in America lecture that there are Two America’s – coined from a speech given in 2004 by disgraced Democrat Adulterer John Edwards.  Those Two Americas he outlined were The Haves and the Have Nots.  Right thinking Americans understand those Two Americas to be the Makers and the Takers.  The Left sees them as the Evil Rich of White Privilege, and the Disenfranchised Minorities.

Middle and Conservative America made the mistake of assuming such rhetoric was considered nonsense by the majority.  A mistake that may yet prove fatal.  Not only did the Progressive/Liberal/Left believe in Two Americas – they went into a cold war with the America many of us on the Right believed in. This is one reason why the Left is so willing to empower government to punish, penalize and eventually eradicate the ‘other America’.  An America that they consider to be evil, racist, rich, white, intolerant, bigoted and detrimental to the planet.  An America they suggest needs to be ‘replaced‘, ‘ignored” and ‘changed’ and certain of it’s people ‘silenced‘, ‘rounded up and jailed‘ or ‘summarily executed in their homes’ and Republican politicians chained to pickup trucks and dragged around a parking lot – mockingly suggestive in half-joking humor.

Given this rhetoric of late from the Obama media and Leftist talking heads, I now believe we are past the point of peaceably co-existing alongside the Progressive/Liberal/Left ideology  in America.  They are going to force their ideology upon us at the end of a government gun – or we are going to resist with our own guns.  There is seemingly no other outcome at this point.  

Such rhetoric from the Obama Progressive Left – as I’ve linked to – establishes the hard fact of what I just stated.  They publish and broadcast such vileness with impunity, inciting their comrades to support government tyranny upon those they are opposed.  Imagine the insane uproar and calls for arrests and imprisonment if Limbaugh or Beck or some Conservative pundit suggested Democrat politicians be dragged across parking lots until they change their views or that liberal citizens should be summarily executed in their homes.  But the Left continues to spew such hate and make suggestive Brownshirt-level thuggeries and intimidations – with nary a harsh rebuttal.

We must understand: MarxoFascists are hell-bent in their woeful ignorance and malice, upon plundering, punishing and subjugating the America and Americans they loathe and hate.

We cannot exist peaceably alongside such ideologues, these self-proclaimed ‘Progressives’ because they will not live and let live or leave well enough alone.  They do not trust their neighbors with liberty or freedom or possession.  They see the Constitution as the cause of our national problems and those who revere it as ‘cultists‘.  They only trust themselves, and the government they empower to redistribute what they deem to be fair.  Dare to question them, their hypocrisy and their agenda – they will have their minions rough you up:

But it is much worse than just an ideology whose pig-Latin Motto is “Gibsmedat!”  To read and hear them now, is nothing short of the kinds of rhetoric an obsessed party has for a Socialist dictator ranting against his political enemies.  The willingness of so many to empower government into a tyranny in order to subjugate their countrymen and neighbors to accept ideals anathema to our national and religious foundations is no longer in doubt.  In fact, the longer Americans are willing to allow the Progressives and Leftists in America to continue to war upon our foundations without stopping them cold, the more certain liberty as we have known it – will be eliminated.  Of course, that is their goal.

I have read of these moments before in history, when it becomes pointless to appeal to common sense and reason from such ideologues. They are entrenched upon imposing their ideology inasmuch as Conservative Constitutionalists are resolved to resist them.  When one side refuses to relent it’s imposition, and the other side – if it compromises any further – surrenders itself to subjugation, an impasse exists that ultimately leads to conflict.  A moment arrives where there is but two choices left a people: submission to tyranny and slavery, or resisting by force of arms to the death.

We are very near to that last moment if it is not already upon us.

Winston Churchill noted, there is but a window of time to stop madness before the cost in blood is more than a people can bear.  A people unwilling to fight when the cost is minimal will cost them everything later on.  Should that window of time pass without effort to rectify evil when it is easily defeated, there comes a time when a feeble resistance to preserve one’s own life or to live in subjugation, is all that is left a people.  And then, even that becomes futility.

We are now in that window of time.

There is no possibility of co-existing alongside the Progressive Left in America today.  They do not seek to co-exist.  They seek to shame and ridicule.  They seek to dominate and subjugate.  They seek to intimidate – which is why the MarxoFascists tell us that disarming us is a ‘fait accompli’ because they possess and control drones that can kill us from 20,000 feet up without risk to themselves.  A declaration of tyranny in itself to assert we are powerless against them. That subtle suggestion should rock every American to their core that such people would so casually advocate military air power be used on citizens.  To the Leftist, such is merely the means to an end, and perfectly justifiable since they see the Conservative Right and their bitter clinging ways as a danger to them.

It should not surprise us, for that is the nature of the ‘Progressive’ ideology.  Same as it is for the nature of sin itself.  As the Apostle Paul wrote – “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” (Galatians 5:9) –   Sin is never content to sit alongside righteousness. It will ALWAYS work to eradicate and subjugate morality and redefine it in order to justify sin’s dominance.  Likewise the nature of Progressive/Liberal/MarxoFascists will never be content to sit alongside the America they despise.  They are working to eradicate and subjugate it, redefining morality to justify their dominance, and using newspeak to get the low information person to go along with great-sounding platitudes of their Big Lies.  All in the name of the Children, or Safety, or common sense, or intellect.  Genocides begin under such societies.

For they will demonize, ridicule and openly declare their hatred of Conservative/Constitutional Americans, and Southern White Christian Males.  They demand we surrender our rights and principles, bow down to their king, embrace their evil hedonism, submit ourselves to government and allow ourselves to be disarmed.  They encourage their president to act as dictator, to ignore the rule of law and impose his will by fiat.  They have perverted the law and the courts to their will.   They ally themselves with our Jihadist enemies, decry Christendom and shove abomination by force of law down our throats and into our faces.  They openly call for the deaths of those Americans asserting their God-granted and Constitutionally-protected Rights and gleefully suggest the subjugation of entire areas of the country where Progressive/Liberal MarxoFascism is eschewed. They call for the abolishment of the Constitution and suggest that those who oppose them and the fundamental transformation of our society are committing treason.

White, “Christian” and Treasonous: Who Will They Kill?

A bunch of far right white mostly southern paranoid extremists are preparing for armed revolution and apocalypse. They speak treason: literally….Let’s talk about racism and white Southern males who can’t get with the program. Let’s talk about what’s really going on with “gun rights,” which has nothing to do with hunting or home protection or even the Second Amendment, but has everything to do with the delusional paranoia of people who really believe the world is out to get them because it’s changing from white to brown, from homophobic to tolerant, from exclusionary to inclusionary, from anti-woman to pro-woman.

With the evidence of those positions made manifest, how then can anyone think  that those of us whom they declared enemies, continue to co-exist alongside such people?  What do we have in common any longer?  It is clear we do not define liberty or freedom in the same way.

“The founders may have disagreed on many things, but they agreed on the meaning of liberty: the right to live as an individual, without centralized planning infringing basic property rights, economic opportunities, and religious freedoms. Obama’s fundamental redefinition of liberty to include communitarianism is not merely wrong, it spells the end of the political commonality that has held the fabric of the nation together. If we define liberty differently, then there is nothing to talk about: my liberty is your tyranny, and vice versa. Our goals can never be shared. That gap can never be bridged.

I think a large number of those whom signed petitions for Secession understand this fact.  Only one side is going to prevail in this fight: tyrannical Leftist/Socialist government and secular hedonists – or individual Constitutionalists, biblical Christians and Libertarians.  The latter already defined by this government as being domestic terrorists and a danger to the nation.  Clearly this regime in power and it’s supporters see us as a larger danger to their power and safety than from Jihadists.

Since that is the obvious case, there is no point in remaining a united nation.   No point in pretending we are all Americans with a shared sense of core values.   No point in accommodating and affording time, space or opportunity for the Progressive Left’s viewpoints in our realms of ownership and influence.  No point in maintaining friendships or communication with those who see us as terrorists and would happily see us rounded up, imprisoned and eliminated.  It is time to separate, defy and ignore those who would impose themselves upon us and the edicts and decrees they make.

Can a sheep in this age really think it can lie down with the lion and not end up in the belly of the beast?

Some Americans already understand where we have arrived.  They see no need to serve or assist Progressive Leftists in their own destruction.  Some are firing employees who support the regime.  Ending friendships, partnerships, business and correspondence with those who support the liberal/Left/Marxist ideology.  They no longer wish to read, hear or see what the Progressive Leftists/Statists have to say about anything any longer.  While the Left continues to ridicule, demonize and castigate the Constitutional Right, Conservatives are becoming quiet, receding from engagement and going ‘Galt’.  An unsettled calm is emerging, the ‘deep breath before the plunge’ mimicking shades of what I have read existed in early 1860-61.  Meanwhile the Left thinks they have won and now dominate the public square in discourse with increasing disdain and overreach – while Conservatives are furiously but quietly preparing for a much feared outcome.

The stark truth of understanding where we have arrived is what the veteran was resigning himself to knowing; there is no further possibility of peaceably co-existing with the Progressive Left.  To do so, leavens the entire lump.  The time for talk is over.  There can be no peace with such people and their ideology if God is our Sovereign and liberty our unalienable gift.  Our only choice is going to be submission to slavery and eventual eradication – or resisting by every and all manners, up to and including deadly force – to the death.  Patrick Henry understood that also and gave an impassioned sermon at the House of Burgesses over nearly the same exact issues, one that should echo in our minds and hearts.

What our forbears understood when faced with the same situation some 238 years ago – was that submission to the “Legal” authority being forced upon them was breaking the First Commandment of the Lord, by allowing a king and his government to legislate and replace God as their sovereign.  Galatians 5:1 became the rallying scripture for Independence, and likewise now for our generation – Americans who cherish the liberty enshrined for us by Almighty God will have a duty to resist and throw off those who would become our evil masters once they make their last mistake.

In fact, this duty is the actionable clause in the Declaration of Independence which states:

when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

As the veteran has steeled himself to prepare for the inevitable, I too have resigned myself to accept that the Progressive/MarxoFascist Left will make that last mistake – and it will then become our duty to act as the Declaration states.  As Jefferson wrote and I paraphrase for this generation:

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our liberal Progressive Countrymen. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by the legislatures to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of our Constitutional Rights and historical heritage. We have appealed to their sense of logic, justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common nationality to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our union. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

The editorial from the Vet is essentially saying the same, exact thing Jefferson, Adams and Franklin wrote above.  It comes down to the fact that a free people can no longer abide those who are working to fundamentally transform their nation, and in the process – rob them of their unalienable rights, their wealth and eventually their freedom and their lives.

All that is left is to defend ourselves against them, and for many in America – they are preparing for that need, not IF – but WHEN.  You might see this essay as nonsense and pooh-pooh the conclusions, but Americans are not breaking records buying guns and ammo to hunt rabbits and squirrels. They KNOW the Obama regime and it’s Alphabets are also stocking up on hollow point ammunition in the BILLIONS of rounds and arming their police and alphabet agencies.  I fear a bloodbath in the model of the French is in our very near future.  But the choice is either to live as slaves and be eliminated by the MarxoFascists and the State – or to resist them.

There is a time for everything under Heaven, including the unthinkable.

A Time to Kill

soldier-fighting-position-m240

I am a soldier.  I know what war looks like, what it sounds like, smells like, what it feels like in my soul.

I stand today in the twilight of my nation’s grace, looking into the darkness of impending war.

My sleep is troubled, knowing what awaits, yet the ignorant and the ‘true believers’ sleep easily in their delusions, and I am saddened by it.

Daily, I see the Blackhawk and Apache helicopters flying over my city, the military vehicles which appear so frequently now on our roads, often with ‘guns up’ in violation of Posse Comitatus, and I know why they prepare, that it is not far off.

Nightly I hear the report of gunfire near my home, the noise angry men make as they prepare to boil over.  These are not soldiers – they are but angry men.  And though I share their well-justified anger, I am cautious with them, for they are not disciplined, and they know not the face of war, nor the burdens it imposes upon mind, body, and soul.  Because of this, they are dangerous, and I am saddened by this – that dangerous men should roam the streets near my home, full of anger and the lust for vengeance.

All about me are the ceaseless murmurs of soulless politicians and media propagandists, who wear their agendas on their sleeves as a badge of superiority, and the boundless echoes of their contrived ‘message’ assaults me from all sides, even repeated from the mouths of dear friends, and I am saddened by it.

I bear witness to the fact that throughout my lifetime, the lifeblood of my republic has been drained away by greedy and self-serving men, from high to low, who contrive nought but deception against their neighbors and countrymen, and who fail to consider that their children and mine shall share the same fate, the same future, and I am saddened by it.

But I am a soldier, and I know what must be done; and so I shall put away my sadness and I shall harness up the bitter steed of war, and gird myself up for the battle; and I shall ride out to meet the enemies of Liberty; not in rage, not for anger sake or the hope of vengeance; but because I swore an oath before God, to jealously guard our Republic and its Constitution against all enemies; Him I shall not disappoint, for He is my Hope and my Trust.

Therefore, as much as my soul laments against the harsh truth before me, I make this declaration to my enemies who press me into this battle, that none shall be able to afterwards say “I did not know, you did not warn me”;

I do not care why you took that job with the government, or why you continue to hold it.  I only know that you have become Judas and sold yourself to an oppressive state – your government office buildings and vehicles are part of the battlefield, and as a soldier I shall act accordingly.

I do not care why, as a journalist, you choose to spin and corrupt the news, rather than report the plain truth and let the people judge for themselves.  I only know that you have violated the public trust in the most vile and seditious manner, and thus your homes, offices, studios, vehicles, and any other place you may find yourself are part of the battlefield, and as a soldier I shall act accordingly.

I do not care why you signed that union card.  I only know that you pay dues to a communist organization which conducts treasonous works against my Republic daily – and so your union hall and your work-sites are part of the battlefield, and as a soldier I shall act accordingly.

I do not care that you only voted for the traitor because you are elderly/disabled or otherwise dependent upon government largess.  Are you so ignorant and/or disinterested that you could not see through their propaganda, to the fact that your sustenance was assured either way?  What have you gained now that the public housing areas you live in, and the public facilities you depend on are part of the battlefield?  Though I am a soldier, I can afford you little protection, for you have placed yourselves on the battlefield.

sniper-fiftyI know that all of these places andall of these people are part of the battlefield ,not just because I am a soldier, and have experienced a few battlefields in my day; but also because our President declares that even our own homes are on the battlefield, whether we wish them to be or not, and I have no choice but to believe him; it’s not just that the NDAA passed – a battlefield is not defined by law; it’s the profound build-up of martial power and resources across my once-great nation which tells me a battle is being prepared here.  Over two billion rounds of ammunition procured by DHS and its sub-agencies in the past 18 months, plus machine guns in the tens of thousands, armored vehicles, combat aircraft, drones, and other implements of war being staged throughout our nation, our home – how do you explain that except as the preparation for battle?

Private-AI will fight not because I desire it, but because I cannot justify any other course of action – when the enemy attacks, you must fight – you must kill or you will die.

I smell you, my enemy; I can feel the ambush you have laid for me and my true countrymen, all about like a sticky spider’s web, yet we will not back down, and though you will kill some of us, you will not get us all before we have finished with you.

I stand here, ready, on the eve of battle, and I ask God why I have been brough to the threshold of this battlefield, about to be thrust in, when I though my soldiering days were through; and I am reminded that there is by His decree, a Time to Kill, as well as a Time to Die…  who am I to question why?

 Saddle up, boys, it’s time to ride out and meet them.

 

Revolution? Line in the Sand Drawn

If there is one element missing from today’s liberty fight, it is the lack of participation from America’s pastors. By and large they are MIA. How many pastors today are warning their congregations of the threat against their Second Amendment liberties? Every pastor in America, regardless of denomination, should have already started proclaiming “the spirit of resistance” (Thomas Jefferson) to their church congregations; they should already be extolling the Biblical mandate to resist tyranny; they should already be warning their congregations of Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein’s plan to disarm them.

Let me ask my church-going readers: has your pastor said one word from the pulpit regarding the impending gun ban now being drafted? Has your pastor explained the Biblical principles of lawful resistance? Has your pastor exhorted his church congregation to not surrender their firearms and to do everything in their power to demand that your senators and legislators hold the line for the Second Amendment? And my next question is if your pastor has not done any of this, why are you still attending that church?

‘Some of the Southern Areas Have Cultures that We Have to Overcome’

Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), speaking on “MSNBC Live” on Jan. 16 said that “some of the southern areas have cultures that we have to overcome” when it comes to gun control.

Southern Discomfort

Now the South is becoming isolated again. Every demographic and political trend that helped to reëlect Barack Obama runs counter to the region’s self-definition….The Solid South speaks less and less for America and more and more for itself alone…Southern political passions have always been rooted in sometimes extreme ideas of morality, which has meant, in recent years, abortion and school prayer…As its political power declines, the South might occupy a place like Scotland’s in the United Kingdom, as a cultural draw for the rest of the country, with a hint of the theme park.

CBS compares NRA and gun owners to Nazis

You may be spared execution

I asked, “Well what is going to happen to those people that we can’t re-educate, that are diehard capitalists?”  And the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated; and when I pursued this further they estimated that they would have to eliminate twenty-five million people in these re-education centers — and when I say “eliminate,” I mean kill; twenty-five million people….  And they were dead serious.

And due the above – it appears I am not the only one making a similar acknowledgment today:

Will You Submit & Obey?

The moment is at hand. We will either stand up and be reckoned with as free men – or we will sit down forever and accept any degradation, any humiliation. And in that case, we shall have proved worthy of such treatment.TSA 2 Future generations will look upon us with the same mixture of incomprehension and contempt that our generation looked upon those who meekly lined up naked in queue for their turn at the edge of the pit. Because it will come to that, in time.

5 Comments

Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny

Bill of Rights – A Dying Document That Was Always Threatened

bor.jpg

“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” – Alexander Hamilton

Today’s essay is most excellent and captures the true history of the Amendments securing 10 of our most sacred rights, that if not adopted – we would have lost those rights long ago to the tyranny of government and the courts.

Even now, the efforts to redefine them are before the Supreme Court – and by next Summer, the watering down, redefinition or abolishement of some of them may in fact become a reality, that will seal our coffin as a free republic.

To Secure These Rights…

By Mark Alexander

Patriot Post US

Saturday, 15 December, is the 216th anniversary of the adoption of the Bill of Rights, the first Ten Amendments to our Constitution, as ratified in 1791.

The Bill of Rights was inspired by three remarkable documents: John Locke’s 1689 thesis, Two Treatises of Government, regarding the protection of “property” (in the Latin context, proprius, or one’s own “life, liberty and estate”); in part from the Virginia Declaration of Rights authored by George Mason in 1776 as part of that state’s Constitution; and, of course, in part from our Declaration of Independenceauthored by Thomas Jefferson.

James Madison proposed the Bill of Rights as amendments to our Constitution in 1789, but many of our Founders objected to listing the Bill of Rights at all, much less as “amendments.” Their rationale was that such rights might then be construed as malleable rather than unalienable, as amendable rather than “endowed by our Creator” as noted in the Constitution’s supreme guidance, the Declaration of Independence.

Alexander Hamilton argued this point in The Federalist Papers, the most comprehensive explication of our Constitution: “I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous… For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?” (Federalist No. 84)

George Mason was one of 55 who authored the U.S. Constitution, but one of 16 who refused to sign it because it did not adequately address limitations on what the central government had “no power to do.” He worked with Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams against the Constitution’s ratification for that reason.

As a result of Mason’s insistence, ten limitations were put on the Federal Government by the first session of Congress, for the reasons outlined by the Bill of Rights Preamble: “The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution…”

Read in context, the Bill of Rights is both an affirmation of innate individual rights (as noted by Thomas Jefferson: “The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time…”), and a clear delineation on constraints upon the central government.

However, as Jefferson warned repeatedly, the greatest threat to such limitations on the central government was an unbridled judiciary: “Over the Judiciary department, the Constitution [has] deprived [the people] of their control… The original error [was in] establishing a judiciary independent of the nation, and which, from the citadel of the law, can turn its guns on those they were meant to defend, and control and fashion their proceedings to its own will… It is a misnomer to call a government republican in which a branch of the supreme power [the judiciary] is independent of the nation… The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch.”

In Federalist No. 81 Alexander Hamilton wrote, “[T]here is not a syllable in the [Constitution] which directly empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution, or which gives them any greater latitude in this respect than may be claimed by the courts of every State.”

That admonition notwithstanding, the federal judiciary has become “a despotic branch.”

Indeed, since the middle of the last century, judicial despots have grossly devitalized the Bill of Rights, asserting errantly that our Founders created a “Living Constitution” amendable by judicial diktat.

For example, the Leftjudiciary has “interpreted” the First Amendment as placing all manner of constraint upon the exercise of religion by way of the so-called “establishment clause” and based on the phony “Wall of Separation” argument. At the same time, the courts have asserted that all manner of expression constitutes “speech.”

The judiciary and legislatures have undermined the strength of the Second Amendment, a right of which James Madison’s appointee, Justice Joseph Story, referred to as “…the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers…”

Equally derelict is the manner in which the Tenth Amendment has been eroded by judicial interpretation.

In Federalist No. 45, Madison outlines the clear limits on central government power established in the Constitution: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”

Alexander Hamilton added in Federalist No. 81 “…the plan of the [Constitutional] convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States.”

There was a very bloody War Between the States fought over offense to the Constitution’s assurance of States’ Rights.

All is not lost, however.

Sunday, 16 December, is the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party (1773). The “radicals” from Marlborough, Massachusetts, who threw 342 chests of tea from a British East India Company ship into the Boston Harbor in protest of tyrannical rule, did so noting, “Death is more eligible than slavery. A free-born people are not required by the religion of Christ to submit to tyranny, but may make use of such power as God has given them to recover and support their… liberties.”

Three years later, this rebellion had grown to such extent that our Founders were willing to give up their fortunes and lives, attaching their signatures to a document that declared, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Judicial and political despots, take note.

7 Comments

Filed under Culture War, History