Archive for the ‘Militia’ Category
by Nicholas Testaccio
There are times when I become maudlin over the affairs of the Nation and the World. At those points in my life, I feel the need to lash out with a rant. I see, what to me is an obvious lack of spirit, desire, the absolute soul crunching failure to protect that, which is most precious to the human spirit. I want to run through the streets yelling at the top of my lungs – DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR AMBIVALENCE AND IGNORANCE?
I am very fortunate in that my grandparents saw fit to take that journey from Italy to a country over Three-Thousand miles away. I did not know my paternal grandfather as he passed away when my father was still a boy. He came with a skill and used it to set-up his business as a barber. I wish that I could have spent time with him as I did with my maternal grandfather Vincent. Unfortunately, I was just Ten years old when Grandpa Vincent passed away. In the short period of time I had to spend with him I learned about tools. I learned about the soil as he had quite a large garden in the middle of Brooklyn, New York. There was an apricot tree some thirty feet high that produced hundreds of its sweet fruit. Three peach trees from which we would snack. Strawberry’s, blackberry’s, figs, and nuts that often made breakfast a delight when I’d spend the summer days with my grandparents.
Grandpa was a veteran of WWI. He came to America, walked from the ship to the local recruiting station, and joined the army. Several years later he would warn the young men in the family that “War is a terrible thing.”. As far as I know all the men in my family served in WWII if they were able. I had the privilege of hearing about some of the events that took place at Pearl Harbor on that dark day from one of those men. He laughed as he noted “We didn’t know what was going on.”.
History is replete with stories from the men and women who survived the turmoil and the vicissitudes of turbulent, dark, and dangerous times. For some of those who survived it was a scar that would not heal. For others, the realization that they made it through made them stronger. They could laugh at the past, taking note of the actions they took, and be thankful for another day.
In Henry V, William Shakespeare wrote what would become a battle cry throughout the ages as commanders often took the time to read Henry’s speech. Generals read the words to rouse the spirits of their own men, some of whom would lay down their lives. As I think ahead to what might befall this nation, in the midst of strife, I would like to call together those who see that our country is under siege. We are facing an enemy unlike that, which Henry and his tired, hungry troops faced.
On October 25, 1415, Henry’s depleted force of some Five Thousand Men, were blocked from their return to England by an army of Twenty Thousand French. At Agincourt, Henry used everything he had in front of him to his advantage. The English Men-At-Arms slaughtered about one-third of the French army, while Henry suffered the loss of but a few hundred. Against tremendous odds King Henry V was able to defeat the French in what is marked as one of the great military victories throughout history.
In Shakespeare’s soliloquy of what Henry V might have spoken to his men, he calls forth that spirit that stirs all to victory. The battle was in front of a tired group of soldiers, stressed by the campaign they had fought. This battle was for all that was left within them, and the pages of history that would place the appropriate label upon their victory or loss.
“That he which hath no stomach to this fight,Let him depart. His passport shall be made,And crowns for convoy put into his purse.We would not die in that man’s companyThat fears his fellowship to die with us.”
As you scroll through the pages of history, you may have a glimpse of what was, but more importantly, what may come. Patrick Henry tells us “I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.”. Yet, we are allowing our history to be destroyed by factions that I am convinced are part of a plan influenced by communist agitators and their promotors.
Henry went on to shout “Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun!”. And now we come to the point of my rant, as I see a downfall aided by those who have no inkling of their complicity in our demise.
Let me repeat. “As a citizen, I know the government *** to be republican; and my short definition of such a government is one constructed on this principle -- that the supreme power resides in the body of the people.”.– Chisholm v Georgia 2 U.S. 419, 457. If this be the case of a nation “of, by, and for the people”, then a method of retaining that sovereignty over a servant government should be enumerated in our founding documents. And if that means be so stated, then it must be employed for the purposes of which it was made law.
A Declaration made on July 4th, 1776 explains the principles of this nation where that foundation created government “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”.
Fifteen years later The United States Constitution was ratified as the “Supreme Law of the Land”, defining the delegated authorities, and restrictions for the operation of such a country, wherein the People ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
On August 27th of 2020, the online site Revolver wrote the following; “In a surprising turn of events, the New York Times has done some actual, real investigative reporting and confirmed Revolver’s conclusion that the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting is an open-and-shut case of self-defense. Shockingly, the evidence turned up by the New York Times actually strengthens the case for self-defense.”
Despite the protests, the propaganda, deceit, and the outright lies, a jury of his peers agreed that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense. I am sure that there were many thoughts as to the ramifications of a not guilty verdict that played heavy on the minds of the jurors, but they delivered a verdict that should never have been in question. Instead, the propagandist in the media and government doubled-down on their lust for more blood and suffering. The congressman from New York, Jerald Nadler, has called for the DOJ to investigate the matter.
This is what our future will look like, a nation torn apart by those whose goal is to bring America to its knees. We have already seen the DOJ unleashed on parents concerned about the quality of education their children are receiving. In fact, Attorney General Merrick Garland has lied before congress on this matter, but the AG is part of the internal threat to American’s so he will not suffer any consequences. Hopefully, I am wrong with that assessment.
As I go about the business of learning what others think of such matters, I am constrained to conclude that because of the factors of ambivalence, ignorance of our law, and naivety we may fall to a civil war, or devolve into a tyrannical state. I have heard enough people, who perceive themselves as intelligent, make the outlandish statement that they do not believe in conspiracies. You need only read the words of our Founders and examine the Constitution to recognize that conspiracy is the norm, but not the aberration. The Constitution is clear, it is an instruction manual for limited delegated authority, with the power of the Sword placed firmly in the hands of the people. There are no hidden meanings as professed by self-proclaimed scholars, nor is it open to interpretations made by black robed administrators, and their lackeys, commonly known as lawyers.
As I have attempted to convey, on so many occasions, this is a nation of sovereigns. “We the People” set down the Law, and “We the People,” in order to preserve our sovereignty established that it is our Right and our Duty to protect and defend our freedom, and especially our lives above the protestations of the oligarch and ignorant alike. The rule is “innocent until proven guilty” and “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer..”
Bear in mind that in the Rittenhouse case, without any evidence that the young man was a racist or bigot he was labeled as such, and after the fact that he did not shoot anyone of African descent, the media is still playing the race card. More so disturbing is that there is still a large number of people who believe that young Rittenhouse killed Black men in his defense of himself, and therefore a murderer regardless of the facts.
Consider the fact that our government, I say “our” with a smirk because it no longer acts as our servant, has, for decades worked to disarm the public, and destroy the right of self-defense against this most pernicious enemy; the institution itself.
“We inquire, therefore, what, at the time the Constitution was framed and adopted, [was] recognized” as self-defense? The Constitution is not a difficult document to read, as are the unconstitutional, verbose, and often ambiguous acts of contemporary legislators. It came with a set of detailed instructions from the delegates and observers of the constitutional convention. The history of political and legal doctrine was no secret to the Framers, and they were religious in their reliance on the brilliant minds of politics and law that had gone before them, and fortunately, lived at that moment.
John Locke is referred to as the Father of Liberalism, a political and moral philosophy that underlines our form of government; “Consent of the governed.” His writings and principles helped guide our Founders to establish a government of, by, and for the people. It is no easy task to maintain that mindset when we have a legal system that has bastardized the law and usurped the authority of the people in order to centralize it to the ever growing threat that is government. Let us reflect on Locke’s explanation as it plays an important role with regard to the Kenosha affair and the push to disarm the American people.
John Locke described self-defense in this manner; "The defence of one's self, or the mutual and reciprocal defence of such as stand in the relations of husband and wife, parent and child, master and servant. In these cases, if the party himself, or any of these his relations, be forcibly attacked in his person or property.” Let’s pause here a moment. If you recall, during the Rittenhouse trial the prosecutor asserted that there is no right to protect property. In general, that is, of course, contrary to the instinct of man, and a violation of a natural right.
Locke goes on in his description to say, “it is lawful for him to repel force by force; and the breach of the peace, is chargeable upon him of the human mind; and (when external violence is offered to a man himself, or those to whom he bears a near connection) makes only who began the affray. For the law, in this case, respects the passions it lawful in him to do himself that immediate justice, to which he is prompted by nature, and which no prudential motives are strong enough to restrain. It considers that the future process of law is by no means an adequate remedy for injuries accompanied with force; since it is impossible to say, to what wanton lengths of rapine or cruelty outrages of ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
The charge of Treason has been bandied about for some time now in light of government infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. After years of listening to the charge cast, I have decided to examine the issue in order to ascertain whether I could make the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Article III, § 3, Cl. 1 – “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
The Constitution is clear as to how such an indictment might come about. To start I must ask the following questions:
Is there someone, entity, agency, or organization engaged in “levying War” against the United States?
Does war include covert acts, propaganda, sabotage, and acts subverting our ability to wage a war and defense of the nation?
Is there someone, entity, agency, or organization who “in adhering to their Enemies, [is] giving them Aid and Comfort”?
Considering the unique form of government in the United States, do the definitions of “levying War”, “Aid and Comfort” expand the criteria by function and implication of our law?
Does disarming “the body of the people” rise to the level of treason?
In his commentaries, William Blackstone wrote, “Treason, proditio, in it's very name (which is borrowed from the French) imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of faith. It therefore happens only between allies, *** This is looked upon as proceeding from the same principle of treachery in private life, as would have urged him who harbours it to have conspired in public against his liege lord and sovereign: *** [W]hen disloyalty so rears it's crest, as to attack even majesty itself, it is called by way of eminent distinction high treason, alta proditio”.
Sir Michael Foster, Discourse on High Treason. “High Treason being an Offence committed against the Duty of Allegiance, it may be proper before I proceed to the several Species of that Offence which will be the Subject of this Discourse, to consider From whom, and To whom Allegiance is due.” Foster goes on to explain that “Natural Allegiance is founded in the Relation every Man standeth in to the Crown considered as the Head of that Society whereof He is born a Member”.
Foster wrote his Discourse in 1762, a time when monarchs ruled, and the not yet formed United States was nothing more than a hope and dream of a few who wished to throw off the bonds of allegiance to royalty. Someone who came to power in birth under the divine right of kings. Those who claimed the loyalty of the people simply by being born into the right family.
In 1776 a new nation was formed with the unique concept “That all men are created equal, That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, *** That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”. Within those words are the construct of a government of, by, and for the People. It was an idea so novel as to foster a revolution here and in nations so inspired by our Declaration. Sadly, in today’s world, the principle of the rule of law for this nation has died through years of judicial and legislative twists that “evinces a design to reduce [us] under absolute Despotism”. Be that as it may, this country remains, in the rule of law, a Nation “constructed on the principle that the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people”.- Chisholm v Georgia 2 U.S. 419, 457
The United States Constitution requires an oath of allegiance that we have assigned to every officer, from dog catcher, to jurist, to representative, to the president. In so doing we bind those public officials, and ourselves to adhere to the powers and restrictions laid out in the Constitution. The contract and the rule are pointless if both parties avoid and deny the force of law as it was laid out in plain language.
That “the Supreme Power” be the doctrine of this nation, it is only logical that the people constructed the State, and therefore the central government subordinate to the State. In 1776 when the Colonies “dissolve[d] the political bands” with England, they created a unique nation in law by vesting authority in the People who would be the caretakers of their freedom, rights, and liberty. The first act of the Continental Congress was to lay out the doctrine of law, by which all law is to follow the fundamental principal that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”.
In simplest terms, this is a nation based on popular sovereignty. Everyone owes allegiance to the Constitution created by “We the People”. The sovereign, in international law, claims the right to prosecute, to defend, to wage war, and ultimately to control all that is within his/her sphere of influence. As a sovereign, I do not consent to any “statute *** extending beyond those matters which it was within the constitutional power of the legislature to reach.”. - McCullough v. Commonwealth Of Virginia, 172 U.S. 102
While our form of government is unique throughout the world, it is nonetheless a fact of law instituted and defined in our first two documents of Law: The Declaration, and the Constitution. They clearly establish that in our nation, “Sovereignty, is of course, not subject to the law, for it is the author and source of the law, but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to agencies of government, sovereignty itself, remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”. – Yick Wo v Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356
To protect and defend the principle function of a nation so fashioned in the matter that “the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people” there must be a method for caretaking. Of course, it ...
1 Comment »
by Nicholas Testaccio
Dr. Miles Bennell here singing, “Great Googamooga, can’t ya hear me talkin’ to ya? It’s a Ball of Confusion. That’s what the world is today.”.
Yes, that is what I awoke with in my head this very morning. I showered, shaved, brushed my teeth, and gargled so that I might look and smell good for my computer. Heck, who else am I doing it for? I am restricted from moving around, going down to the local watering hole, and perhaps imbibing a beer or two with the regulars. If I go anywhere, the fascist mask Nazi’s demand that I must wear a face obliterator to prevent the spread of germs for a virus that doesn’t really appear to be as deadly as they keep promoting.
My head has been in a perpetual state of turmoil as I watch my country torn apart by psychotic, megalomaniac’s, power hungry bigoted sociopaths that occupy both the halls of government and the media.
By the way, it is extremely important to note that those people are chosen to govern by our vote, a process that has now proved that the Founders were correct in setting out parameters for eligibility. What does a person think about when they cast a vote for someone who not only is an incessant liar, but does the exact opposite of what they promise? Top that off with a two party system, and tyranny, turmoil, and dissolution are inevitable.
Onward!
It has been over two months since the election, or whatever else you might call it considering the confusion, and we are headed toward an administration that has promised to hunt down Trump supporters and make them pay. Yes, that has been the rhetoric that has come from that side, and it is most certainly validated by last year’s turmoil in which several cities, including DC, were set ablaze, pillaged, and plundered. Just like the good old days. Wonderful!
I did not hear people condemning the violence then. While video of fires and looters were all over, the media proclaimed it was mostly peaceful, and our newly elected vice-president was proclaiming the virtues of the rioter’s behavior, she was also assisting in their release from jail.
But! But when protesters stormed the capital there was no end to the condemnation by both sides of the aisle. Accusations of sedition and treason were spewed from the leftist media and incoming communist party members. Trump was blamed, again, by his mere existence.
And of course, after a second impeachment, the FBI comes out with the fact that they had received information that the storming of the Capitol was planned. What else is new? It’s not that we don’t already know that the DOJ is thoroughly corrupt and filled with democrat partisans.
For those of you who do not know, Kevin McCarthy played the role of Dr. Miles Bennell in the 1956, original edition of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I have made mention of the character before because I believe, unswervingly, that I am watching the people of this nation, and probably the world being consumed by some sort of entity that does not allow for rational thought.
Follow me now, especially those who are condemning the violence and warning that “they”, the democrats, are coming for our second amendment rights. I may have to wander a bit before I come to my pressing question, but I promise I will arrive at some point. My mind is all over the place right now trying to understand what is taking place.
Mark Levin pointed out that in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia the democrats went around the State legislatures by going to the executive and judicial branches in order to affect changes in voting. It is clear as the nose on your face, but since you are wearing that ridiculous mask you may not see your nose. I should also note that the full videos of Levin and two constitutional law professors has been removed from YouTube.
To provide for the selection of the delegates to the Electoral College the U.S. Constitution requires “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors…” I am not going to discount the Twelfth Amendment, which explicitly explains how the election of a president is to take place. I’m simply going to recommend that you go read it, and hopefully understand that the current process is a corruption of the Electoral College.
In support of the claims that the election was corrupt, I contacted my State representative here in Pennsylvania to advise him of the law. He told me that there was nothing that the legislature can do. I objected, but he told me that their counsel advised them that there was nothing that the legislature could do.
In my quest for truth, justice, and the American way, no I am not Superman, I sent my representative and the leadership the following:
-----I am linking to McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892). Of particular importance, according to SCOTUS comes at 34 & 35 where the Court rules;
-----"The appointment of these electors is thus placed absolutely and wholly with the legislatures of the several states. They may be chosen by the legislature, or the legislature may provide that they shall be elected by the people of the state at large, or in districts *** This power is conferred upon the legislatures of the states by the Constitution of the United States, and cannot be taken from them or modified by their state constitutions *** Whatever provisions may be made by statute, or by the state constitution, to choose electors by the people, there is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated."
-----I hope that McPherson clarifies the fact that the legislature has the ultimate authority to place the electors, and in particular when public officials and courts ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
The idiom, “Stupid is as stupid does”, popularized by the film “Forrest Gump” indicates one’s level of ignorance or stupidity. Some definitions grant that it could also indicate one’s level of intelligence but given the fact that the word stupid is emphasized, I am going with the negative.
This is a constitutional Republic as I have noted many times in the past. Yet, we allow the people we send to congress, other public officials, and the media to continually label our nation a democracy. It cannot be a simple mistake because the U.S. Constitution commands that “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”.
So, is the constant rhetoric about democracy a mistake, a clear violation of the law, or insidious propaganda? Vladimir Lennon is credited with saying that “A lie told often enough becomes the truth”. That particular mode of propaganda has been used quite effectively over the years. For anyone paying attention, we are deluged with it from the same political bent from which it arose. That is to say that it is a tool of the Marxist, elitist, oligarchs, and mainstream media who are all part of the cabal to overthrow liberty. If you question this, refer to the title because I am almost certain that others besides myself see the same picture.
The Founders of this nation were wary and skeptical as to whether we could keep a Republic. They were students of history, and as Patrick Henry conceded, “I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.”. Given the history gone by, and the character of man, both good and evil, Thomas Jefferson lamented “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”.
It is easy enough to look back at history, and second guess those who lived in some of the most interesting times. We can accuse those who lived in a moment of great importance and question their actions. We can celebrate those who fought for freedom, denounce the evil doers for their wrongs, and learn from the errors that all of mankind makes. Abandoning our history is akin to ignoring that “one lamp by which [our] feet are guided”. That certainly would not be wise for within the dusty pages that comprise our past are the building blocks for a better future.
As astute as the Founders were, they knew that liberty shines brightest when the people, who are for the most part peaceful, have the means to maintain their freedom without the corrosive interference of bureaucrats. Evil doers abound, the murderers, the thieves, the greedy, the power hungry, and the genocidal maniacs do not disappear from the pages of news simply because the law exists to prevent their ambitions. With that in mind, the Framers recognized for the people the tool that they deemed “necessary to the security of a free State”.
It would be simple enough to read the law of the land, and the papers written by those who explained, in detail, what the words meant, and the recognition of the pitfalls that might ensue. Given the predilection of man to be swayed, particularly in today’s world, by silver-tongued viper’s claiming the title of expert, I have little hope that reading every word in the Constitution, and comprehending that it not only must be interpreted by what the Framers understood, it must be enforced as detailed.
I took to writing these articles with the hope that, in their short version, people would take the few minutes needed to read, and gain some understanding of our law. I was prompted to this when I made a statement, years back when debating the application and enforcement of the income tax, that the American people are stupid. I made the claim because the facts are spelled out, and those facts of law are not the same as policies enforced by bureaucrats, and dishonest judges. I was immediately rebutted by another stating that the American people aren’t stupid, they just don’t know. I handed him a stack of papers proving the law as I had claimed, to which he responded, “I haven’t got time to read that shit”, thus validating Forrest Gump’s now famous idiom.
I spend my days reading articles, listening to the opinions of others, and trying to make heads or tails of today’s issues. Sometimes, I am asked to comment on a particularly high-profile case. In many cases, I find that the interpretation does not square with what was opined, ruled, or decreed. I remember the words Paul Simon wrote in “The Boxer”; “Still, a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest…”
How poignant when we consider the rule of law, and the Forty-Two Hundred words of the U.S. Constitution. The document requires that every public official of the federal and State governments, be they elected or appointed, swear an oath to protect and defend. In those Forty-Two Hundred words are delegated authorities, and restrictions that “We the People” have made law. Each word must be given its due force as the Constitution must be read in its entirety in order that the rule of law “[o]ne constructed on the principle that the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people”, be interpreted by “[w]hat *** those who framed and adopted it underst[oo]d [its] terms to designate and include”.
“In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force, and appropriate meaning”, and what could be more important to “the Supreme Power *** of the people” than the ultimate authority “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions”?
John Locke wrote in his Second Treatise “To understand Political Power right, and derive it from its Original, we must consider what State all Men are naturally in, and that is, a State of perfect Freedom to order ...
No Comments »
Recent Form Posts