Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

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

Two constitutions – two countries – but only one people

 By Ed Lewis

An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens.  Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Melish, January 13, 1813

This may seem like a strange title – like what is this idiot talking about.  But, there must be two constitutions.  And if there are two, then one must be for one country and the other must be for another.  But, there are only one people, the American people.  So, what’s the deal?

Recently, a small city (16,000 in population) in California – Arcata – not only signed a resolution that local law enforcement was to refuse requests from federal agencies acting under the Patriot Act – more aptly called the anti-Patriot act – but passed a city ordinance that outlaws voluntary compliance with the Patriot.  It applies only to the top nine (9) managers and requires each request be referred to the city council.  The fine isn’t hefty but it is a start – 57 FRNs (fiat dollars we call erroneously call “money”)

My Constitution – the Constitution for the united states of America, the organic 1787 Constitution – states quite clearly that the federal centralized government we call the U.S. government hasn’t any authority within the states, except the very limited authority specified in the document.  The authority isn’t actually “within” the states except for posting roads (and I am not certain about this one as it may mean posting roads only in federal areas) and Post Offices.  Posting roads to my knowledge has been a local issue, such as naming streets and so on.

And in reference to calling forth the militia, it provides for it but as far as I can tell, it is the people who call up the militia since the people ARE the militia.

Anyway, here are the provisions that relate in some manner to the several states.

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.  Article I, Section 8, Clause 5

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States; Article I, Section 8, Clause 6

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;  Article I, Section 8, Clause 7

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;  Article I, Section 8, Clause 15

All else in Article I, Section 8 does not in any way apply within the states.  Clause 17 of Section 8 specifies that the legislative authority of the U.S. government is only over the District [of Columbia], the ten-mile square and never more, property states have ceded jurisdiction to and those places purchased for the “Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings and, from clause 18, “To make all Laws which be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

And, then from Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2, Congress has the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territory or other property belonging to the United States; and – remember this – nothing in the Constitution may be construed so as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state.

Then, Section 4 of this article guarantees the each state will be protected against invasion and, on application of the Legislature or the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

Did the Constitution the writer once pledged a solemn oath to protect so help him God, in any way give the U.S. government authority over him as a flesh and blood man?  The question is whether the writer could be “ordered” to do anything by the federal government.  Put simply, can the federal government order the writer to NOT exercise his inherent rights?  Wouldn’t that be plenary power, with the writer in servitude to the federal government?

Or can the federal government order state governments to follow its edicts?  Are the states federal enclaves? 

Can the federal government order armed agents of agencies into the geographic areas of the states to enforce its laws applying to the District, territories, and other federal enclaves?

Does the federal government have the authority to tax within the states, or to tell any American that we can’t ingest certain drugs?  Or own certain firearms?  Or that we will educate our youth in government controlled educational institutions?  If it isn’t given the authority by being listed in Article I, Section 8, or Section IV of the Constitution, then authority does not exist.

You see, my Constitution is one that limits the government to specified duties, none of which may interfere with the rights of the people, whether enumerated or not.  What are our Rights, inherently held by birthright as a free American man or woman living in one of the states?  Anything we wish to do as long as it doesn’t interfere with another’s Rights.  As long as another is not harmed or his property damaged by our activities, no level of government has any regulatory authority, including local governments, which in fact are not constitutional governments to begin with.  Check your state statutes and you will find that the power of political subdivisions – cities and counties – is zip, nadda, does not exist, over the sovereign people living within the area.  Each only has the authority to regulate public properties and themselves or artificial persons (corporations and the like) created by the artificial state or federal government.

That is the FREEDOM and the LIBERTY our forefathers killed and died for, that each of we flesh and blood born within one of the many states is “SOVEREIGN”, meaning of the highest and supreme power over all artificial creations.

However, the Sovereignty has proved to be rather too stupid or too lazy to understand what our forefathers created.  We in essence are the kings of our own domain; we each acquired what the King of England did have – plenary power over ourselves.

Now, back to Arcata’s ordinance and comments by a federal employee that hasn’t any idea of what my Constitution says.  He has to be reading a false document created through fraud and then enforced by armed invasions of the many states. 

Here are the thoughts of a federal agent that should be tried for treason (my emphasis). 

“Both the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act, which created the Cabinet-level department, follow the Constitution, says Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo.  Federal law trumps local law in any case, which would mean Arcata would be in for a fight -- a fight it wants -- if the feds did make a Patriot Act request.”  From “Local Officials Rise Up to Defy The Patriot Act”, By Evelyn Nieves, Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, April 21, 2003; Page A01

Let’s analyze this statement in relation to my Constitution.  This un-American, anti-patriot to America, says the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act follows the Constitution.  Where in the Constitution for the united states of America – known as the States in the Constitution – does it give Congress the power to invade the states and placing all sorts of rules on the rights of the people.  The Constitution only gives the authority to defend the shores except in specified federal enclaves or territories of the United States defined as the District of Columbia and federally controlled areas.

The U.S. government has no jurisdiction over the 50 states.  It cannot order states to do anything, let alone let its draconian agents armed to the teeth and ready to kill within the states.  They can cross to get to a federal enclave but cannot bother any free American Citizen on the way.

The writer knows this is hard to believe but one can only be searched or arrested in relation to a crime and only by those who have arrest power AND within proper jurisdiction.  A crime is damage or injury to another man or woman.  The damaged or injured person must make a complaint under oath to the Grand Jury and then the Grand Jury must issue an indictment of probable cause.  Federal agents must have a specific federal warrant for a specific Citizen(s) issued by a federal Grand Jury – and permission to enter the states.

Warrants are the most misused, abusive document ever – other than officials using statutes meant to apply only to artificial entities (including the federal government as God didn’t create it – men did). 

Let’s say – for example – that you wish to try marijuana.  Does the federal government have any authority to tell you that you can’t? 

Let’s say you manufacture some drug that produces a high or whatever.  Does the federal government have the authority to tell you that you can’t? 

Let’s say you want to buy an operational military tank.  Does the federal government have the authority to tell you that you can’t? 

Let’s say you want to produce your own alcoholic beverages.  Does the federal government have the authority to tell you that you can’t? 

Let’s say you want to sell the above to your neighbors and fellow Americans wherever they are.  Does the federal government have any authority to tell you that you can’t?   

Unless you happen to be in a federally controlled area specified in the Constitution for the united states of America, the answer to each of these is NO!!!

You should – or must – understand this.  The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is a bureau established in – of all places, Puerto Rico – to collect taxes due on imported firearms, tobacco, and alcohol.  It has no authority within the 50 states or to regulate any commerce in these between the states.  In commerce, no contracts between people of one state with another or within their own state can be interfered with. 

Also, understand this – both taxing powers and commerce regulatory power is given only in relation to the states as a whole – among – but not between.  This means the federal government can regulate commerce between the states as a whole and FOREIGN sources – including the United States – but not between Missouri and Illinois, for example. 

This is easier to understand when one remembers the federal government is actually foreign to the geographic states and that every state is guaranteed a Republic form of government.  Republics can’t be regulated by outside forces.

Then Coralla from the justice department stated that federal law trumps state law.  Now, the writer doesn’t know what country the apparent idiot thinks he is in but it darn sure isn’t the many states making up America.

Federal law applies only within the District of Columbia, territories, and federal enclaves.  Read the definition in every title of the United States Code.  The only time the definition of United States or State includes the many states is in the cases of federal employees being in the state or to assure the safety of the people when a federal organization – such as transportation – crosses the states. 

Think, People.  There is federal jurisdiction and there is state jurisdiction.  If federal law trumps state law, why are there two different jurisdictions?  Why do the states exist at all?  Why is it not named the UNITED STATE OF AMERICA?  Or is that it – that this second country exists in the minds of federal psychological terrorists and rampaging federal armed enforcers?  And, now the American Sovereign believe it because of disinformation and armed force that has been used thousands of times against the American people?

Last, Corallo made what should be considered as a threat of armed violence against Arcata when it stated the city would be in for a fight.  Since it is well known the federal government uses armed force to force compliance – never forget Waco, Ruby Ridge, and a multitude of armed attacks on thousands of American Citizens – then Corallo’s threat should be taken as meaning the Department of [In] Justice will use armed enforcers to apply federal laws outside its jurisdiction.

Thus, it seems as if people such as Corallo have a different Constitution, one that gives the US Government (the corporation) plenary control over the states, which are the people living in the same geographic areas.  He believes he has the right to threaten the American people with armed force.  He is a “terrorist” by the definition before and in the Patriot Act.  And so are all those who help him and the balance of the federal government to apply federal laws within the many states.

That, Folks, is an imminent threat and deserves a pre-emptive strike by the U.S. Military against the Department of [In] justice, trying Corallo for high treason as he is aiding and abetting the enemy of freedom or – at the very least – a threat of physical or psychological terrorism against the Arcata.  That is what a pre-emptive strike is used for – to halt imminent invasions, not to attack other countries based on “might have weapons” and “might use them in the future”, and other fictitious reasons.

Call up the militia, Folks, the invasion of the feds is coming.  But, wait, the invasion by the enemies of the Constitution is already here so where are the American Citizens united as one people – the American People? 

And so the writer closes with these statements.  Read it carefully and grasp the significance. 

"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia', the 'security' of the nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms', our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason, I believe the Second Amendment will always be important."  President John F. Kennedy

And you can bet your bippy it is becoming increasingly important with each passing day.

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