Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

Home/  Archives/ Search /Links / Quotes / Book Reviews/ Advertise /Contact us/ Calendar

Notices

Letters

Light Side

Commentaries by:

• Ron Paul
• Virginia Postrel
• Lew Rockwell
• Thomas Sowell
• Walter Williams  

Recent Articles

Patriots or Traitors – That is the question

Part IV -HOMELAND SECURITY, USA PATRIOT ACT, AND IMPENDING USE OF THE U.S. MILITARY WITHIN THE SEVERAL STATES 

 By Ed Lewis

The actual intent of the Constitution is often forgotten.  Most people assume their rights are constitutional rights.  This is not true.  The rights of Man are the rights of Man whether there is a written document to that effect or not.  The rights of Man pre-exist the establishment of any government or any document written by Man.  Put simply, the rights of Man are God-given from the first human-being created and will continue to exist regardless of any government’s subversive attacks against them.

The Constitution was – and is – unique to the world in that it secures the rights of Man NOT by enumerating rights but by limiting the authority of government.  It thusly provides safeguards against a government that would infringe upon unalienable rights.  When one studies the document closely, one will find that it specifies exactly what government may or may not do and, in this manner, establishes control by the people over the government. 

It, or any of its amendments, never states “this” is a right of Man.  It instead is worded that self-evident rights will not be infringed upon, not by any individual or by any government.  For example, the 1^st Amendment states:  “Congress shall make no law…” The 2^nd Amendment states:  “…shall not be infringed”; and the 3^rd states that “No soldier shall…”  In fact, the 9^th Amendment to the Constitution assures that rights need not be listed – “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

In regard to the Office of Homeland Security, it must first be noted that Congress hasn’t any jurisdiction over the many States.  It may create such an office to protect the District of Columbia, since it does have jurisdiction over the District.  But applying its functions to the many states is prohibited by the Constitution.  States retain their Republic form of government and sovereignty, as do the people who are citizens of the many States.

The USA Patriot Act is in no way related to patriotism.  In fact, it is quite the contrary.  First, the Constitution does not allow for such measures whether war has been declared or not.  One cannot fight to preserve freedom while removing freedoms, since the two are mutually exclusive.  The most the federal government can constitutionally do is establish such measures only in the areas within its jurisdiction. 

Second, in regard to emergency measures, all acts and amendments to the acts passed by Congress that do not comply 100 percent with the Constitution cannot be arbitrarily applied to the several states and should be ignored by the many States.  Within the many States, the Militia – which is the whole of the people – may be called forth (Article I, Section 8, Clause 15). The purposes are to execute the laws of the union (meaning to uphold the Constitution) and suppress insurrections (local matter for the militia, not federal) and repel invasions, whether domestic or foreign. 

Then, Clause 16 states that the Congress may provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing only such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States.  It further reserves “to the States respectively, the Appointment of Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.” 

Thus, the federal government has no power to use the US Military as a means of policing the states and forcing American-by-birthright citizens to comply with unconstitutional acts.  If it does so, it is akin to an act of war or – at the minimum – an act of terrorism within the many States by the federal government.  Waco is an example.  Neither the military nor the FBI should have been pursuing the Davidians.  The FBI, DEA, or Customs could have been involved if the Davidians had imported arms, drugs, or some other product without paying the necessary excise tax placed on the goods.  But the Davidians did not have any goods for which excise taxes had not been paid.  Therefore, the federal government committed either an act of war or an act of terrorism against American citizens on American soil.

Additionally, any military personnel, law enforcement, or other enforcers of unconstitutional laws – whether federal, state, or local – who act to remove rights from the people are committing treason against the American people.  They are traitors to the oath taken to uphold and defend the Constitution.  And a citizen – even if military – may NOT be ordered to surrender his rights, to ignore his constitutional obligations to the people, or to follow orders that are contrary to the laws of God (which are the laws this country was founded on, no matter what corrupted courts and military leaders have stated). 

The dangers to Liberty that now exist because of presidential and congressional abuses of office, including but not limited to malfeasance and nonfeasance, will be discussed in the conclusion.

Weather (Louisville)/ Mapquest / White Pages / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN