Restore The Republic,Militia,Constitution,Founding Fathers,Republic

Restore the Republic

Is Plan For Racial Strife Another Hoax?

December 9, 2017 | General

Reprinted from an article posted on Rense June 14, 2008

By Henry Makow PhD

Wikipedia will tell you that the book “A Racial Program for the 20th Century” (1912) is another anti-Semitic hoax. It says the book and author Israel Cohen didn’t exist.

The reason for this lie? This book contains a famous passage that reveals the Illuminati-Communist race strategy, later applied to women and other minorities in the guise of “feminism” and “diversity”:

“We must realize that our party’s most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause.”

Rep. Thomas Abernathy read this passage into the Congressional Record on June 7, 1957 (Vol. 103, p. 8559, top of page.) Wikipedia tells you Abernathy read the quotation in a Letter to the Editor of the “Washington Star,” and the newspaper subsequently determined it was a hoax and apologized. “The quotation has retained some popularity among racists and anti-Semites to this day,” Wikipedia chortles < A_Racial_Program_for_the_Twentieth_Century>.

I have subsequently added this line to the Wiki entry: “However, the author fits the description of Israel Cohen (1879-1961) a prolific Zionist author who wrote the Foreword to Israel Zangwill’s ‘The Schnorrer’ as well as 30 other books. Like many purported ‘hoaxes,’ the quotations does describe events as they subsequently unfolded and the operations of the US Communist Party.” ( Article=FinalWarn04)

“International” Jews, like other globalists, serve the Rothschilds’ sick megalomaniac program of world government dictatorship. “National” Jews, like other patriots, owe their first loyalty to their country and fellow citizens. Like Benjamin Freedman <>, Myron Fagan <>(1887-1972) was one of the latter, a courageous American who fought the bankers’ Communist agenda for the greater part of his life.

Myron Fagan, a successful Broadway playwright and director, met Israel Cohen, Israel Zangwill and George Bernard Shaw at a party to celebrate the opening of Zangwill’s play “The Melting Pot” in 1910. He knew the three men to be founders of the Fabian Society. Cohen told Fagan he was planning to write “A Racial Program for the 20th Century” as a “humanitarian” follow up to “The Melting Pot.” At the time, Fagan didn’t realize that the play, which described how Jews and Blacks triumph against White prejudice, was pure propaganda, part of the Communist campaign of fostering “guilt” in white Liberals described above.

It all fell into place in 1957 when Fagan read the “Washington Star” quotation in the context of the debate over school desegregation. In 1966, he recalled:

“That book was published in 1913 … the NAACP and the ADL were created [by the bankers] almost simultaneously to carry out those directives. That was more than a half-century ago. Can there be any doubt that that was intended to launch our present Negro upheaval for a Black Revolution?

“If that isn’t enough evidence, in 1935, the Communist Party’s ‘Workers Library Publishers’ issued a pamphlet entitled ‘THE NEGROES IN A SOVIET AMERICA.’ It urged the Negroes to rise up, especially in the South, and form a Soviet State in the South, and apply for admission into the Soviet Union … it contained implicit assurance that the ‘revolt’ would be supported by all American Reds, and on page 38 it promised that a Soviet government would confer greater benefits on Negroes than on Whites and that ‘Any act of discrimination or prejudice against a Negro will become a crime under the Revolutionary law …

” … When Abernathy published that Israel Cohen excerpt in the Congressional Record, we (Cinema Educational Guild, Inc.) promptly issued a ‘News-Bulletin’ in which we published the entire story — and warned of the coming Negro uprisings…

“Two years went by and nobody even tried to deny the matter, but, suddenly, after two years, during which the ADL and similar groups had ferreted out ALL copies of the book and destroyed them, they announced that the whole thing was a fraud, that there never had been such a book, or an ‘Israel Cohen’ … Why did they wait two years? And how could they deny the existence of a writer named Israel Cohen in the face of all the books he had written? Copies of which I have. More important, bear in mind that Israel Cohen had been a prime mover in all ‘Fabian Socialist’ and Communist movements in England — also that I had met him in person when he actually discussed the book at that banquet.”

(Fagan, “UN is Spawn of the Illuminati,” <>1966)


  1. Communism and Zionism are Rothschild proxies: two pincers in the banker’s plan for world government dictatorship, currently masquerading as “globalization.”
  1. Through Communism and Zionism, the Rothschilds duped many Jews into advancing their demented plan to enslave humanity. Happily the majority of Jews are not duped. They are either indifferent or opposed to world government and war.
  1. The promotion of women and minorities is part of an agenda to undermine the European heterosexual Christian character of Western society. So is mass immigration and interracial marriage. Most of what passes for modern culture (TV, movies, literature, punditry etc.) and politics are propaganda and social engineering. For example, opprobrium for “sexism” and “racism” are actually designed to undermine gender and race.
  1. “Guilt” is a huge weapon for them. Women were taught they were “oppressed “for centuries by virtue of having to raise their children while men performed hard labor and died in battle. Similarly the Illuminati have used guilt to give their Zionist and Communist agents immunity. The charge of “anti-Semitism” is a canard designed to disarm opposition to an evil and all pervasive occult power that holds mankind in its thrall.
  1. Another “hoax” –the “Protocols of Zion” states “We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the government of the goyim.” (16-4) We’ll never know how many other books the bankers suppressed like /”A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century.”


I believe people should be promoted on the basis of merit, not race or gender. But let’s not pretend the bankers really care about women, homosexuals or minorities. As the above quotation implies, they are just a means to an end.

Western society has been subverted by a satanic cult, Kabalistic Freemasonry, led by the central bankers. (Zionism and Communism are both branches of Freemasonry.) Their pyramid and Eye of Horus are on the US dollar and on corporate logos everywhere. To reach the top, you must literally serve the devil (or his disciples.) After instigating 9-11, they are using the “war on terror” as a pretext to erect a police state.

On June 12, the Irish people temporarily stalled the advance of world government tyranny. Nevertheless, a Satanic Dispensation –the New World Order–has risen in our midst. We must find new ways to expose and resist it.


Your Child Has Been Murdered

October 16, 2017 | 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Founders, Militia

by Nicholas Testaccio

The pages of history are filled with blood, massacre, and genocide. Battles where the soil was stained red to mark the savagery of men towards other men.

In the battle of Teutoburg Forrest, it is estimated that Three Roman Legions lost as many as 20,000 men.

Here on our own soil, casualties at the Battle of Gettysburg alone exceeded 50,000 men.

Military deaths for WWII are estimated at over 25,000,000 men.

Those were wars, and soldiers die in war. They attack, they defend, they invade while bullets and bombs whiz above them, around them, and through them. They risk life and limb for what often turns out to be a lie. It has been a part of who we are for eons.

Too many of us ignore the darker side of humanity’s character. There is something within some of us that spurs hatred so deep, and disturbing that we’re willing to exterminate our fellow man. Men, women, children, old, and invalid are not spared. The oppressed run in fear, and hide in terror. They watch as their loved ones are carted off to some horror. Children are ripped from their parents while mothers and fathers watch helpless, and tormented.

The number of those slaughtered for some inexplicable reason can’t be reconciled. While the world seems to be content with a number around 60,000,000 in the Twentieth Century the count has been revised upward several times. As records are examined, the genocide under Mao Zedong alone is somewhere around 90,000,000. Stalin is reported to be responsible for the murder of 20,000,000, but as a former KGB once told me, the number is more likely over 30,000,000.

Those people were starved, tortured, and murdered in some of the most hideous of fashions. Christian Armenian women were stripped naked, and crucified as an example of the extreme cruelty one sect can carry out against another. It is estimated that the Turks exterminated as much as Sixty Percent of the Armenians.

Adolph Hitler is credited with saying, “Who now speaks of the Armenians”. Whether he made such a statement or not is irrelevant. Someone thought it, and others grasped the idea that we do not remember as we should the record of the past.

If you’ve looked for the pictures of the crucified Armenian women, or researched the quote by Hitler, I want you to keep the images, and thoughts in your head as you read what I’ve written here.

The genocide of the Twentieth Century, in which more than 250,000,000 people were slaughtered, should be foremost in our minds when we open any discussion on government, and the relationship between it, and the people it governs.

Government is a fiction that is run by people who have the same fears, aspirations, and sins as you and me. They are not infallible because they’ve been elected to a position, or hired to fill some bureaucracy. They often lie, cheat, and steal from the very people whose rights they were elected, or appointed to protect.

Those in government often abuse their power, and cause more harm than good. Some are power hungry megalomaniacs with no conscience at all. Some hate those they serve with a passion that is beyond comprehension. Because of their hatred, they create atrocities such as the Killing Fields of Cambodia. In far too many cases the depravity knows no end.

Tens of Millions of helpless women, children, sick, and elderly have been slaughtered over the years at the hands of someone with the authority of government to back their heinous crimes.

In Las Vegas, Nevada, there was a mass shooting, in which fifty-eight people were killed, and five hundred plus wounded. The details of the event are sketchy, and of course we the common folk are not allowed to know all the details. We’re only given a view from a mile away, and never allowed to know the whole truth. At best, we will be given conflicting information.

In the wake of this tragedy, the calls have once again come out to disarm the public. Ban “assault weapons”, limit magazine capacity, and the ultimate insult to those who authored our founding documents, remove the Second Amendment.

Throughout history, the common man has generally been defenseless against whatever madman who fired up the troops and set off to rape, pillage, and plunder. Today, collateral damage is used as a means of mollifying the horror imposed on the innocent.

Disarmament of the public has been the general rule. The aristocracy would not allow for the chance that the people of the country could posses enough arms to throw off the yoke of tyranny. The obvious, and foremost action was, and still is, to maintain a docile, and impotent populace.

The pages of history are filled with massacres of innocents, primarily at the hands of some bellicose body acting under the direction of someone claiming the authority of a government official.

However, in America, our Forefathers who were students of both history, and the character of men, incorporated what they saw as an important aspect of “a free state” that would allow We the People to stop an encroaching tyranny. “The Militia of the several States,” as it is clearly stated in the text of the Constitution was not placed there to turn-a-phrase, or add insignificant banter to our rule of law. It was placed there because those who fought the Revolution saw first hand the acts of a tyrant, but more importantly they were keenly aware of the lessons of history.

Where is the Militia today? It lies dormant, and incompatible with a nation of ignorant, ambivalent people whose only ties to what happened in the past has been programmed by sound bites, and history text that is doctored to suit the agenda of those who seek unlimited power.

You need only look as far as the mirror to understand the problems we face today.

We are a society led by our lack of knowledge, fueled by prejudice, and nurtured by ambivalence. We function by knee jerk reactions, and following the crowd that knows only what their told to think. The clear majority has no regard for the rule of law, or the history that brought us to this point in time. They are, as Vladimir Lenin called them, “useful idiots”.

In Vegas, a child was murdered. In fact, fifty-eight children were murdered. They may have been a mother, or a father, but they were none-the-less the children of someone. The act, with what we’ve been allowed to know, was that of a madman. Suffering, and grieving will sweep the nation. There must be something done of substance that will prevent such tragedy, and maintain “a free state”, but not by “sheep”.

In 1902 the Congress passed “An Act To promote the efficiency of the militia, and for other purposes.” For those who’ve never actually read the act, nor the history and development of the militia, the act did two things:
1. It revitalized the Militia statutes that were essentially moribund.

2. It allowed the states to “keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace,” under Article 1, Section 10, Cls. 3.

Why was the Dick Act necessary? The States had failed in their responsibility under Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 15&16 to maintain a Militia.

During the Civil War, and the Spanish American War it was apparent that able-bodied men were no longer “well regulated”. That is to say, those who should be ready for war, trained to arms, and organized were woefully unprepared. Congress attempted to revitalize the militia, and establish a military unit that the States could call upon, a voluntary unit, to fill the void.

While militia was compulsory, the states were not enforcing the statutes, and as it is today, the people had no intention of putting themselves on the front line. They would much rather pass it along to someone willing to step up, and perform the duty that all should embrace, but refuse to accept.

Well America, we are in crisis mode. I don’t care what nonsense you believe, or propaganda you consume. This nation is on the verge of critical mass because We the People do nothing more than follow along like lambs to slaughter.

What needs to be done is for the American people to stand up now, and demand that every legislator, executive, and justice abide their oath of office. We must also demand a clean slate from those, who’ve destroyed our system, to come forward and admit their crimes against humanity.

There is a problem with my wishes. It is We the People, for which government exists, and acts. So, it is our duty to reign in the terror created by decades of buffoons who’ve come close to totally destroying family, community, and culture. We have allowed for every wild scheme to take hold, and ruin millions of lives. Instead of demanding that the myriad of laws created by this constantly encroaching government stop, we ask for more punishment.

What happened in Las Vegas, like so many other events will be cloaked in secrecy, and mystery.

Instead of looking for motives, lets look for the facts. Account for the hundreds of spent brass cases that should have been on the floor of room 135 on the 32nd floor. Let’s have full disclosure of the trajectory of the gunshots. There were more than 500 shot. There will be a true story told by the wounds. Let’s hear all the testimony from people like Rocky Palermo. Give us all the gruesome details so that We the People can make the proper call as to what took place.

Congress, the ignorant, and the media are all over gun control instead of the facts. Why aren’t we asking for full disclosure? Are those who want to disarm their fellow citizens so foolish to think that a government that spits on the rule of law will maintain “a free state”?

Look in the mirror so that you can remember your face as you sold your country down the drain. Remember that look so when your children, or grandchildren ask you why, you can recount the errors.

The lessons of history, the repeated lies, the dismantling of our fundamental law, and a constant barrage of propaganda should have put a wary person on guard. Instead, we took the road that was fed to us despite all the signs, and all the deceit.

If I Were The XO Of the NRA

September 29, 2017 | 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Founders, Founding Documents, Militia

by Nicholas Testaccio

What would I do if I were in the position as the person directing the NRA?

Where would I start?

What goals would I set?

What confessions would I make to, not only the membership, but also the entire country?

Would I be bold enough, and brave enough to set the record straight on the organization I have the opportunity to direct?

Would I receive the backing of the board, and the Five Million members?

I am not in the position of Wayne LaPierre so I must go at this a different way knowing full well that people in his position are more likely to dismiss my thoughts, and just go on about the business of keeping the gun control issue on the table. My goal would be to wake the membership, and others of course, to the true nature of the Second Amendment.

My first task will be to remind the members of the NRA that Fifteen Years before the ratification of the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson penned what is considered the seminal document on the relationship between the People and the governments they form to “secure” their “unalienable Rights.” The document that recognizes our God given rights, and among those is the individual right to keep and bear arms.

My second task, and this should be the object of all so-called supporters, would be to read, and study these words until they sink in; “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.” 

For One-Hundred Fifty years prior to the Declaration, militia were organized, armed, and trained. They were generally Able-Bodied men between the ages of 17 to 45 bearing the arms that a regular soldier would carry, and maintaining the equipment, including artillery, that an army would employ in battle.

The militia was not voluntary. It was not comprised of individuals pretending to be soldiers, but rather organized by state statute compelling all to serve in a fashion, with duties, and armament prescribed. They trained much the same as our reserves do today, and performed the all-important tasks of protecting the Colony, and enforcing the law.

Most importantly, while a significant part of government, they were not obliged to obey commands they thought unlawful, and dangerous to liberty. Thank you Captain John Parker and your Minute Men for clarifying.

The Founders, those people who had first hand experience with the institution, explained it in this manner “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people.George Mason. “Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped.”- Alexander Hamilton. “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry.

At that point I would have to pose the question to not only the board, but also the entire membership as to whether they have done even a modicum of research on the body that the Founders declared to have the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions”? – See Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 15

Correcting the fallacy seems a daunting task based on years of misinformation, and indoctrination, but as we look out upon our current political landscape, what options do we have to change the course?

Those of us who understand the foundations laid in the Declaration of Independence “That *** Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” have both the right and the duty “to alter or to abolish” the institution when it runs afoul of our rule of law are often labeled as “conspiracy theorists”, or nuts. How do you overcome what appears to be a very potent form of mind control that has the general public questioning that, which is right, but abiding that, which is wrong?

So how do you turn a potential powerhouse such as the NRA into a true force for truth, and freedom?

To answer my own question, I’ll start with a letter to each and every member of the board of directors. I will also contact Wayne LaPierre, Pete Brownell, Chris Cox, and Dana Loesch.

Since I am no longer a member of the NRA, one reason being that I’ve seen them deliberately assist in the passing of anti-2nd amendment legislation, I’ll have to start my campaign to restructure the group by asking for the help of those who recognize that there is something really amiss in the organization.

The membership must speak up if they have not already completely succumbed to the propaganda both those who are anti-2nd, and those who claim to be pro-2nd have fostered for decades.

I might start with a letter of the following nature.

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am a former member of the NRA, an American Eagle plank holder, and a firm supporter of all Twenty-Seven words of the Second Amendment.

You can ask why I am a former member, but the fact that in the eyes of the men who authored both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution I understand “the whole people” to posses the power and authority “to execute the Laws of the Union” should suffice. However, if it is not clear then allow me to explain further.

My understanding of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the first Thirteen words of the Second, including “necessary”, is significantly different from yours. The law can only be understood in the way that “would be most likely to fulfill the intentions of those who framed the Constitution.” – See Ogden v. Saunders, 25 U.S. 213, 332.

I can abide no theories of later day jurists who seek to undermine our Fundamental Law to support their own political agenda by “build[ing] magnificent legal edifices on elliptical constitutional phrases —or even the white spaces between lines of constitutional text.” – Silveria v Lockyer, Ninth Circuit, Justice Alex Kozinski, dissenting. 

I certainly cannot be tolerant of those who ignore “the theory of our institutions of government, [and] the principles upon which they are supposed to rest” in order to profit from decades of lies, propaganda, and agenda’s that are destroying this nation.

I am distressed, to say the least, that an organization the size of the NRA does not have the wherewithal, the man-power, the intelligence, or honesty to support and abide the defined power of the People acting as the only constitutionally recognized authority “necessary to the security of a free State”. 

“[T]he whole people”, as noted by George Mason, is the backbone of freedom. It is the force that protects OUR juries from judicial error, and zealous prosecutors. It is the force that guarantees proper redress of grievance. It is the “bright line” for the proper use of force by “We the People”. 

The Founders of this nation who “pledged to each other [their] Lives, [] Fortunes, and [] sacred Honor” deserve more than rhetoric, compromise, and backroom deals. They deserve the truth to be passed from generation to generation in order to secure liberty.

The Second Amendment contains Twenty-Seven words, not just the last Fourteen. The men who authored those words understood that they were building the foundation for a nation of free and Sovereign People. They knew that while delegating limited authority to government, the true power must remain in the hands of the People. The only way for their posterity to remain free was the open exercise of all powers including the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union”. 

How can anyone with one scintilla of honesty ignore the principles upon which this nation is supposed to function and exist?


Nicholas Testaccio

I’ve signed my name because I truly believe in the Second Amendment as the Founders intended. What they practiced, and utilized was considerably different from today’s interpretation. I say interpretation because with One Hundred Fifty years at its back, with state statutes to define its implementation, there is no way to see militia in the light it is portrayed today.

“The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them.”

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to *** prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams

“Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American *** the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” – Tenche Cox, PA Gazette, 1788

“The constitution ought to secure a genuine militia and guard against a select militia. *** all regulations tending to render this general militia useless and defenseless, by establishing select corps of militia, or distinct bodies of military men, not having permanent interests and attachments to the community ought to be avoided.” – Richard Henry Lee

The Founders had a clear picture of what the Militia was, and should never be. It should never be “select militia” such as National Guard. It should be nothing other than “the whole people” in service to their community and country. It should be a lawful Constitutional body “reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia.” – See Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 16

It is disturbing enough to see the law as it is clearly stated being dismantled by those who sit in positions of delegated authority, but it is downright disheartening to see those who should realize the significance of “A well regulated Militia” helping to diminish the power of the People with legal arguments that ignore the intended purpose of having arms in the hands of trained, Able-Bodied Men. To have those who pretend to be patriots and pro-2nd advocates find any excuse they can to deny the good People their proper role in Militia is beyond tolerable.

What the individual rights proponents fail to see is right in front of them. Walking into a court and expecting a corrupt judiciary to render honest constitutional decisions is outright madness. Accepting edicts such as “bright lines”, “compelling interests”, and not knowing the difference between a right and a privilege is tantamount to colluding with the enemies of freedom. 

There are opponents of an armed citizenry that control the legislatures, and the courts. For some reason, pro-2nd groups ignore this aspect of the fight. 

“The right of a member of the general public to carry a concealed firearm in public is not, and never has been, protected by the Second Amendment,” ***. “Therefore, because the Second Amendment does not protect in any degree the right to carry concealed firearms in public, any prohibition or restriction a state may choose to impose on concealed carry — including a requirement of ‘good cause,’ however defined — is necessarily allowed by the Amendment.” – See Peruta V California, Ninth Circuit

The Peruta decision rests heavily on what was written in the Heller decision. In Heller in a slim 5-4 decision, Justice Scalia wrote, “How far it is in the power of the legislature to regulate this right, we shall not undertake to say, as happily there has been very little occasion to discuss that subject by the courts.” – See District of Columbia v Heller (No. 07-290) 478 F. 3d370 

Regulate a right? For those who have little understanding of rights, and privileges, you cannot regulate a right, but you can regulate a privilege. I warned, just 15 minutes after the Heller decision was published that this would become poignant to those opposed to an armed citizenry. Regulate a right? Really?

We now have an entire population who cannot “bear Arms” as was practiced, and intended by incorporating Militia into the Constitution. In actuality, we have no lawful Militia in this nation “necessary to the security of a free State.” 

Militia is there to prevent mischief, corruption, and of course tyranny. It is there as a lawful authority to procure indictments, and arrest those who violate their oath to the Constitution.

It is not a last line of defense, but rather was intended as the first line to protect the interests of the good People from “A [government] whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant”.

Need I say more than I’ve decided to send this entire article to the NRA, and wait with bated breath for an honest reply? If any at all will come.

“to execute the Laws of the Union”

September 7, 2017 | 2nd Amendment, Civil Liberties, Constitution, Founders, Founding Documents, Militia, Sovereignty

by Nicholas Testaccio

Execution of the law requires some means of actually enforcing in terms of bringing about a form of relief, bringing a perpetrator to justice, or enforcing a judgment. A principle that is at best a clouded issue in our system wherein sovereignty is supposed to remain with the People.

In response to the Supreme Courts decision in Worcester v Georgia, President Andrew Jackson said, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” Jackson was saying that I am the enforcement branch of this government, but I have no intention of forcing compliance with a decision, for which I do not agree.

“The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men.” That is to say that “We the People” have delegated certain sovereign powers to agencies of government, and we expect that representatives of the People abide by those rules. If they do not, if they overstep their bounds, and the rule is enforced by created agencies, how do we reconcile the abuses, and corruption?

Let us start with some basic principles. 

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. *** The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” – Federalist 45, written by James Madison

To which the Supreme Court declared in kind; “We start with first principles. The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers. See U.S. Constitution, Art. 1, 8. As James Madison wrote, “[t]he 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.”” – United States v. Lopez  

“There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Federalist 78, written by Alexander Hamilton

To that fundamental idea of government the Supreme Court confirmed that “Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.

“This theory is essentially attached to a written constitution, and is consequently to be considered by this court as one of the fundamental principles of our society.” – Marbury v Madison.

What’s that you say? We have laws, and the states have unlimited powers. NONSENSE!

First, and foremost in any logical thinking persons mind is whether, or not the political genius of the Founders created a document that reads “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof *** shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding”, but then turned a blind eye to the possibility of abuses that may be perpetrated in any given state. The conclusion can only be no, because tyranny can spread much the same as ignorance, greed, and corruption across all boundaries as the Founders experienced first hand.

If you are not convinced of the fact that the states must comply in all matters within the federal Constitution, you need only look to the Fourteenth Amendment that reads in part; “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

What would be the solution, if any, to abuses of government at any level? Could the People maintain a free and independent life if bureaucrats, or elected representatives at local, state, or federal positions declared that they were not obliged to adhere to the principles of limited delegated authority? Would a slow decay of society bring us full circle, and back into the hands of an oligarchy if there were no means of control for the general public?

The Founders recognized what had already been established and relied upon to enforce the law, and help to prosecute the Revolution. They drew upon what they experienced for decades, and years of guerrilla fighting.

The Founders added a Bill of Rights with restrictions, and guarantees that incorporated a body of law enforcement designated as “necessary to the security of a free State” so that in any one given district, county, or state, the good People could employ their arm “to execute the Laws of the Union”, and thereby obtain justice. Restraining government could be as easy as placing power in the hands of the People to determine, and then alter abuses perpetrated by bureaucrats. 

As we study the nature of our institution of government and its development, more questions should form in any thinking mind. Would the Fifty-Six men who signed the Declaration of Independence, and essentially their own death warrants, have written the words “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” without recognizing and institutionalizing a lawful method for the People to not only prevent, but to also arrest, prosecute, and jail those who run afoul of our “rule of law”?

I’ve presented some questions in a different manner. I showed how the courts originally looked at the rule of law. I’ve gone on a bit about how conflicts between what takes place in the world, and what was intended dilutes the authority of a government of the People. I’ve done so in hopes that I would stir some thought as to what would even be the point of a written Constitution if those who seek power interpret it away? Why bother with a piece of parchment? Was it worth the time, effort, money, and blood it cost to print the document if there are those who, not only ignore it, but also tell us its black when we know that it’s white?

Article IV, Clause 3 reads, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”.

Why even suggest adding such an oath to the document unless it would be enforced by “We the People”?

The concept of enforcing the document so that the government will redress grievances to our satisfaction seems to be beyond the scope of comprehension for almost all of the general public. It was not past the understanding of those opposed to the Constitution. They were cognizant of the character of man. They fought for, and obtained a Bill of Rights.

In that Bill of Rights, there is one word that sticks out. It was so important to the men who wrote our Constitution that it is repeated Four times in the body of the Constitution. It is the only institution that the Founders deemed “necessary”.

George Mason, co-author of the Bill of Rights; “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”  

With that in mind lets think of the Second Amendment in full context, as it was recognized in each of the Thirteen Colonial Constitutions, as our Forefathers understood, and practiced; The whole of the People, well trained, and well armed is the best, and most effective way to maintain freedom, justice, peace, and the welfare of our posterity.

The men who vigorously debated, and ratified the Constitution were fully aware that they were creating a system, in which the People would firmly hold the sword so that we could keep sovereignty with the good People. In order for us to maintain our freedom, we must recognize that the duty “to execute the Laws of the Union” rests with us, and then admit to ourselves that we have forsaken the responsibility to enforce the law.