On War

I'd like to talk about the subject of war. This won't be a discussion of the morality of war itself. It is a necessary evil. This won't be a discussion of tactics or strategy. Nor will we discuss it in an abstract sense.

I want to discuss the lawful conduct of war by the American Republic. How do we conduct war and when?

"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 Constitution

Art 1, § 8, "The Congress shall have Power... to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"

Article 2, § 2, "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;"

There is no provision in the Constitution for the President to send military forces to war. There is no provision in the Constitution for military adventurism such as Korea, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Gulf War 1, Bosnia, Iraq or any other conflict. There is no provision in the Constitution for maintaining a standing army. There is a provision for raising and supporting an Army, but the appropriations for that use can't be for any longer than two years.

The Founders didn't make any kind of allowances for Wars of Agression. Their plan was to provide for and enable the national defense only. Hence, the Militia.

During the cold war, I remember that we had a 1 million man force in the armed services. The largest portion of the national budget went towards defense. We are still maintaining posts and bases in 130 of the 150 nations of the world. Consider the drain on taxpayer's resources. Did you know that the largest employer in the United States is the Federal Government?

Where am I going with this? Simply this, there are necessary elements for national defense that we must maintain. Just as a Navy was up until the invention of the military aircraft. Now, it would seem logical to me that we would have to maintain the infrastructure for both naval and air defense. That would be a hefty chunk of money charged to the taxpayers, yes, but necessary. I also believe that some sort of human intelligence would be absolutely necessary. On the other hand if we recalled every soldier, sailor and airman stationed abroad, there would be a significant savings since not only could we return them back to civilian society, but we wouldn't have to pay the huge amounts of money maintaining bases.

Maintaining a standing army, such as we have; conducting wars that have not been declared, such as those we were involved in previously; and now Iraq, Afghanistan and very possibly Iran in the very near future; are unconstitutional.

Think about it...

Republic or Democracy?

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship." —Alexander Fraser Tyler, 1700

I don't know who Alexander Fraser Tyler was, or even that this is attributed to the correct source, but I do know that this quotation is prophetic.

What kind of government do we have in America? Is it a Democracy or is it a Republic? Time and again I hear the talking heads of the 'free press' and the pundits they air, calling our government a democracy. I read in various sources something like, "In a democracy such as ours..." What twaddle!

Allow me to recount an anecdote I once read:

In 1788, as the Constitutional Convention came to a close in Philadelphia, a woman approached Benjamin Franklin and asked, "What have you wrought, Sir?" His reply was, "A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it."

His words apply as much today as they did then.

What's the difference anyway? Most will ask that question and it's a valid question.

A Democracy is a simple Majority Rules system. It seems fair; in reality it isn't. The reason is that there are no protections from the mob. The mob will always be swayed by the most eloquent speaker. The laws can be changed at the whim of the leader, and as long as he can sway the majority (mob), he can have his way. There are no checks and balances in a Democracy. Don't be deceived by those who think a democracy is a better system of government. In a democracy, the shiftless and lazy can take your wealth through taxes and give it to themselves. There are no laws to protect you from them. Because, they make the rules as they go along. Nothing is permanent. It all depends on how the mob feels, if you will.

A Republic, on the other hand, is a system of rule by law. Our Constitution enumerates the powers that Congress, the Executive and the Judicial Branches may exercise. Congress was delegated 20 powers in Article 1, § 8. There are 10 prohibitions in Article 1, § 9, and 10 further restrictions in the Bill of Rights, the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution. As you've seen, government cannot ride rough-shod over you, the individual. Why? Because you have laws that prevent it from doing so.

In a democracy, there is no protection from government's abuses. And, Dear Reader, that's what's wrong with our government today. Everyone thinks it's a democracy, so they ignore the laws that protect the private person from abuse. They pass laws that plunder his labor, that have stolen his children, his property and invaded his privacy. Is this what you want?

• Would you rather sit on your comfortable couch, with a cold beverage and watch the square screen across the room as it blares its mindless blather at you?
• Would you rather hear the comforting words of the talking heads, assuring you that everything is okay while each day you sink deeper and deeper into debt and slavery?
• Or would you rather challenge the status quo and become a free people once again?

Freedom isn't free, people. It takes the dedicated efforts of everyone to keep it. As long as you are willing to let someone else do it. You won't be a free people much longer, regardless of what your favorite TV personality tells you.

Think about it...

Our Benefactor, the State

There is a popular notion that pervades our society today. It's the notion that all good things; life, liberty, property, education and the fruits of our labor, just to name a few are derived from a beneficent State. That, Dear Reader, is a bald-faced lie!

There is nothing beneficent about the State. The State is raw force. Without limits imposed upon it, it is a voracious beast. Here's what General Washington had to say about Government.

“Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant -- and a fearful master.” —George Washington, 1797

This is an excellent article about government and force.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28843

For too many years, "There ought to be a law," has been the catch-phrase of well-meaning busybodies lacking understanding of the true nature of Government and the State.

Don't misunderstand me. I believe that government is necessary to protect our rights from those who would enslave us under some form of tyranny such as socialism, communism or the hybrid of those two, communitarianism.

“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” —Frederic Bastiat, The Law.

“A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” —Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1801

Bastiat's statement was written about 1850 in a little book refuting the Communist Manifesto. And you can see when Jefferson made his statement. I'd say these guys were pretty smart!

"Everything government does involves compulsion (force).

When Congress sets up a government pension plan and forces everyone to contribute, that is force, even though it achieves a noble aim of assisting people in their old age.

When Congress set up a government health care program for seniors and forces the workers to support it, that is force, even though it achieves a noble aim of relieving seniors of most health care costs in their old age.

When Congress stands in the schoolhouse door at the bidding of government school workers and blocks all reform of a failing government school system, that is force.

And the question every Congressman must be forced to answer is: Why? Why is your vision for America always about force?"

The preceding 5 paragraphs are from an article by Christopher Cantrill titled, "Earth to Michael Moore: Government is Force" at http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/07/earth_to_michael_moore_governm.html and revised by me.

I have no intention of plagiarising Mr. Cantrill's writing. His writing is clear and elegant. However, I disagree that the Democratic party was solely responsible for Social Security, Medicaid and the failure of public education. Ultimately, both houses of Congress and the majority of Congress are required to pass a bill and send it to the president (remember the Constitution?). Ultimately, we have no one to blame for the bad laws in existence except ourselves.

Examine things for yourselves. Is our government the same one that our Founders passed down to us? I think you'd have to say, resoundingly, "NO!"


Think about it...

Understanding Your Liberty 101, Part III

There are six amendments left that are important to you. Four of them have to do with rights in a court of law, both criminal and civil. And the last two have to do with the enumeration of rights of the states and the people; and the separation of the powers of the states and the people.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The Fifth Amendment is probably, along with the First Amendment, the most well known amendment to the Constitution. You see the television cop dramas where the actors Mirandize each other, while in the court dramas, they're taking the Fifth Amendment to avoid incriminating themselves. However there are other important rights here as well.

• You can't be held to answer for a capital crime without the indictment by a Grand Jury. The exception is the military. They come under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
• You can't be tried for the same offense twice where life or limb is in jeopardy.
• You can't be compelled to witness against yourself.
• You can't be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
• Your private property cannot be taken from you without just compensation.

So, you see, there's more than protection from self-incrimination in the Fifth Amendment.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

This is the amendment that protects your rights in court.

• You have the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury.
• You have the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.
• You have the right to confront the witness against you.
• You have the right to subpoena witnesses in your favor.
• You have to right to the assistance of counsel in your defense.

The Patriot Act allows for you to be incarcerated without any Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights. Did you know that?

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

You have the right to a trial by jury in a civil court where the value exceeds $20.

Even more importantly, a jury's verdict is final. It can only be examined, i.e. appealed, according to the rules of law. Did you know that a jury can nullify a law or court ruling? The trial jury is the last line of legal defense against tyranny.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

This one is simple. No excessive bail, fines or cruel and unusual punishment.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

This is an important amendment to you. This amendment tells government that, just because we've only enumerated certain rights in this document doesn't mean that our other rights are denied, unimportant or inferior.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

If you do not find a power delegated to the Congress, Judicial Branch or Executive Branch, then those powers belong to the States or the people.

A word of warning here... Some will use the phrase, "The Rights guaranteed by the Constitution." Don't be misled, these are unalienable rights. They have been endowed to you by your Creator. They are protected by the Constitution and given by the Creator to every one of us.

Think about it...

Understanding Your Liberty 101, Part II

We'll continue our examination of the Bill of Rights.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Third Amendment is pretty much self-explanatory. In colonial days, soldiers were quarted in colonists homes without compensation. Now, Congress has to pass a law to make that legal.

Which brings us to the Fourth Amendment.

Take careful note: Your Right to be secure in your person, house, papers and effects agains unreasonable search and seizure SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED. What gives here? You have the right to demand that a Warrant to search your house be produced when the cops appear at your door.

When The Patriot Act was passed, actually, I believe it was the War on Drugs, the Fourth Amendment was set aside. In the name of "safety" or "national security", or some other blather, Citizens no longer have the protections of the Fourth Amendment from the State. Any police organization can now conduct searches and seizures of anyone's domicile or business, without having to show probable cause or the accompanying warrant.

Any law passed such as The Patriot Act is repugnant to the Constitution. It is totalitarian. I've read that The Patriot Act is remarkably similar to Nazi Germany's, Enabling Act of 1933.

Read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933
Article 1, § 9, clause 2, The Constitution for the united States:
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

The Writ of Habeas Corpus has historically been an important instrument for safeguarding individual liberties against arbitrary state action. Essentially, Habeas Corpus was based upon the idea of, "producing the body." It was used to prevent the state from detaining a citizen without justification. A good example is this: in a country like Communist China, the state can throw you in jail without a warrant or conviction indefinitely and the citizen has no Writ of Habeas Corpus to protect him.

Along with the Fourth Amendment, the Writ of Habeas Corpus was suspended. I don't recall that we got any of that information from the "Free Press." But then; it isn't the media's job to keep us informed about what Congress, The Executive Branch and The Judicial Branch is up to. No, contrary to some opinions, it's Your job to keep them in line!!

While the pundits and talking heads are babbling like Chicken Little and wringing their hands at the the mere thought of terrorist crime being perpetrated upon us, I don't see any Rebellion or Invasion on the horizon. Terrorists are criminals not combatants. We have good laws to prosecute them. Why aren't we hunting these men down like dogs and prosecuting them? Is our intelligence operation that bad?

Think about it...

Understanding Your Liberty 101

Let's talk about the First Amendment.

Amendment I:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There are five clauses in the First Amendment;

• The right to practice religion without Congress' interference,
• The right to Free speech,
• The right to a Free press,
• The right to assemble peaceably and
• The right of petition for redress of grievances to the government.

The Freedom of religious beliefs and activities has been skewed; Free speech is very well known and misapplied to protect wickedness. The free press has been suppressed it has become a propaganda machine; the right to assemble peaceably requires a government permit which requires a tax; And The right to petition the government for redress of grievances is misused by ne'er-do-wells, and not understood at all.

You have a right to practice your religion, or the lack thereof, without fear of government intervention. Prior to the American Revolution, the State Religion was the Church of England. When the colonies formed, they each had their own brand of a State sponsored religion. Once The Constitution and The Bill of Rights was ratified, that was all done away with. No legislative body could establish a religion over any other as the approved faith.

This rule applies to people of faith, agnostics and even atheists. Contrary to the ACLU, et al, and their stance on separation of church and state, you have the right to practice your faith without interference from anyone. The anti-religionists are misusing their First Amendment right to petition to force governments into establishing their particular religion.

Look up the definition of religion. According to any dictionary, the object of faith doesn't necessarily have to be, for instance, Christianity, Judaism, Islam or paganism. Work, politics, music or art can be your religion. Logic follows then, that atheism is a religion. It is the belief that there is no supreme being. They believe in philosophies such as Hegelianism and Darwinism and Humanism.

The next clause concerns the Right to Free Speech.

To my best recollection, I have never seen a suit filed to protect the free speech of religious people, publicized in the national media. What I have seen is all manner of desecration, anti-religious prattle, atheist rhetoric, etc., represented in the courts as being under attack.

Personally I think that somewhere, some one or some thing has worked to skew things around. What things have come to is this. I don't have a right to speak my mind since it goes against the proper sentiments espoused by the enemies of our Republic. On the other hand, any politically correct, anti-religious, pro-collectivist idea needs to be protected. You figure it out.

This brings us to the free press. I'd like you to consider the following quote:

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did you know beforehand that it would never appear in print.
I am paid $150 a week for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for things, and if any of you would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before 24 hours, my occupation would be gone.
The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of Mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press. We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes.
We are Jumping-Jacks -- they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes!" -- John Swinton, former Editor of The New York Times, 1914

Do I need to elaborate? Don't let this little fact stop you from watching the nightly news or from reading your daily newspaper.

When was the last time anyone, anywhere in the country was allowed to assemble peaceably without paying a tax and obtaining a permit? Maybe prior to 1933 when the Republic was set aside for socialism. That excludes churches, shopping malls, theaters and other public venues.

The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances is only honored now when the agenda suits the State. I know of four petitions before the courts right now that are meeting great resistance at the hands of the State.

Read about them here: http://givemeliberty.org/

As usual, I won't be doing a great amount of elaborating on topics. I'll try my best to give you pertinent facts and hope that you'll take the time to verify them and make them your beliefs.

Think about it...

The Hinge Pin of America's Liberty

Where do your rights come from?
Can your rights be taken away by legislation?
Who are "the People" spoken of in our founding documents?

Amendment II, U.S. Constitution:
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.

Now… where do we find the definition of the militia?

According to USC 10, Subtitle A, Part 1, Chapter 13, § 311(a) and (b); all males and females between the ages of 17 and 45, with certain exceptions, not currently serving in the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marines, the Coast Guard, the National Guard or the Naval Militia, are members of the unorganized militia. Here's the law...

United States Code: TITLE 10 , Subtitle A , PART I , CHAPTER 13, § 311 § 312. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

§ 312. Militia duty: exemptions

(a) The following persons are exempt from militia duty:

(1) The Vice President.
(2) The judicial and executive officers of the United States, the several States and Territories, and Puerto Rico.
(3) Members of the armed forces, except members who are not on active duty.
(4) Customhouse clerks.
(5) Persons employed by the United States in the transmission of mail.
(6) Workmen employed in armories, arsenals, and naval shipyards of the United States.
(7) Pilots on navigable waters.
(8) Mariners in the sea service of a citizen of, or a merchant in, the United States.

(b) A person who claims exemption because of religious belief is exempt from militia duty in a combatant capacity, if the conscientious holding of that belief is established under such regulations as the President may prescribe. However, such a person is not exempt from militia duty that the President determines to be noncombatant.

Can there be any doubt after reading the law that the 2d Amendment is the legal basis for an unorganized militia of armed citizens?

The Second Amendment is the hingepin of all American liberties. Without it, you and I have no guarantee of our rights at all. I offer the following quote as justification.

“No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” - Thomas Jefferson

The Second Admendment isn't about owning guns for the sake of owning them. It isn't about punching little holes in a piece of paper. It isn't about hunting rights either. It is about protecting ourselves against tyranny in government. Is it any wonder then, that the premier right, that of self defense against tyranny is under assault by the socialist 'gun grabbers?'

Think about it...

A Short Introduction

Welcome to my little corner.

Thirty years ago, I learned something that completely changed my worldview. I'd like to share what I've learned with whoever visits.

To all who would post comments. Be aware...

• I'm not open-minded in the conventional sense.
• Political-correctness is the worst form of pretension that exists today. It is intellectual dishonesty. I'm not tolerant of anyone's simpering, political-correctness. It's pathetic. Take your mewlings elsewhere.
• I don't want to hear your humanist view of how society should bow down and accept the chains of any form of socialism.

I am a patriot, an Americanist. I believe that the Republic forged by our Founders is the only acceptable form of government for a free people.

I served our country in an illegal war 37 years ago. I objected to going, nevertheless, I went and I served. I did the best I could to protect my fellow servicemen from harm. That was my job. I came home a very different man than the one who left a short year before.

Over the last 30 years I have witnessed the decay of our American culture, our education system, our money and our economy. The list is a whole lot longer that that.

It frightens me that our government has become the enemy of the very people that it was commissioned to serve.

What happened to limited government?

Why is the passage of questionable laws that are repugnant to the Constitution, the rule, rather than the exception?

What gives Congress the right to trample upon one group of people in deference to another?

According to our Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident... that all men are created equal..." do we really need new laws to enforce that truth? To those who would respond with a comment about slavery, the Civil War or segregation, my response is this, "Get over it. We have a more serious problem on our hands. Our government sold us all into slavery in 1933.

Our nation faces a crisis that is unprecedented in the annals of our history. That is the substitution of International Socialism for the Constitutional Republic created by our Founding Fathers in 1789.

I'll close with these words from the past:

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” - Samuel Adams