Archive for the ‘Sovereignty’ Category
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
From time to time I will pass along, to those on my e-mail list, an article that I have read. Recently, I circulated an article titled “Election 2020: The Worst Case Scenario Is The Most Likely One”. At the end of the article, the author Brandon Smith suggested “community based security” as a means of solving some of the current issues rather than accepting what might come about by embracing more government intervention. I commented to the author that “community based security” is a requirement in that the Constitution commands that we maintain “A well regulated Militia” in order to fulfill the duties imposed at Article I, § 8, Cls. 15 & 16, and Article II, § 2, Cl.1.
In the e-mail I sent to my list, I wrote “I've taken the time to e-mail Mr. Smith inferring that his idea is another term for Militia, and how the Constitution commands it”. Inferring, as the dictionary defines it means “to derive as a conclusion from facts”, “to involve as a normal outcome of thought”, or simply to “indicate”. Why would I make that inference? The Militia Act of 1792 reads as follows, “That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment…” The Militia Act of 1792 was repealed by the Act of 1795 and revised in 1861 to include all able-bodied males.
I have mentioned in at least a few articles that on April 19, 1775, Captain John Parker and 70 Militia mustered on the Green in Lexington as a show against the force of 700 Regulars that Thomas Gage had sent to disarm the militia. That company of Militia did not just appear on the Green. They were required by law to be organized, armed, and trained to fulfill the duty of “citizen soldier” under British law. In the case of Parker’s company, they stood upon the principle that their duty was to stand up against an unlawful act. This belief can be traced back hundreds of years in English law. Instead of “redress of grievance”, the colonists received threats and punishment for their complaints to the crown and parliament. Contrary to the rights secured in the English Bill of Rights, and previous incarnations of guarantees, British regulars marched to disarm the lawful Militia.
As the record shows, someone fired a shot on that day that later became known as “the shot heard round the World”. It was the beginning of a nation conceived in liberty, and the long and arduous path that has brought us to protests, riots, looting, destruction, and the death of many at the hands of those who wish to destroy this nation.
We have been on the path of a fledgling nation to a modern day superpower. Yes, we have made many mistakes along the way, but we strove to correct them. Today we are in the midst of, what I believe is the definition of a civil war. The power structure is not clear, and there are factions that wish to tear us apart. They are doing so by threats and violence. Amid this they are calling for the abolishment of police.
There is no need to dissolve, limit, or defund police departments around the country. What needs to be done seems simple enough to me. By the historical record, “a member of a group of men pledged to take up arms at a minute's notice during and immediately before the American Revolution”, our police can be redefined and restructured to be our modern Minutemen.
What is the difference between a policeman and a minuteman? While minutemen were called to duty, police are there patrolling the streets on a constant basis. Police are armed and organized under the command of the local government. Minutemen were able-bodied men of the community, armed, and trained. In essence, a “community based security” operating under the militia statutes enacted by the State government. Police, on the other hand operate by the edicts of, far too often, unconstitutional acts of the local and State governments.
Let us take some quite simple steps before we place the brave men and women who serve every day into the lawful role “to execute the Laws of the Union”. We admit to ourselves that our idea of “doing something” is akin to doing nothing at all, or even worse when we are doing the wrong thing. I received a question from a so-called pro-2nd group, and for those insulted by the term so-called, the dictionary defines it as “used to show that something or someone is commonly designated by the name or term specified”. Having settled that misconception, I move on to more pertinent issues.
The question referred to the way those who argue for the right to keep and bear arms using the “individual right” theory are wrong because it is not being done by my method. To which I reply, good grief!, why would you do it my way? I simply ask that you do it the way the Framers of the Constitution, those men and women who sacrificed, wrote it into law.
Granted, I have taken the time, several years, to read through the history, the acts, and the laws surrounding the foundation ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
This Fourth we should take stock of what we were, what
we are, and what we will be.
There is an effort, an agenda so to speak, to change
what this nation has strived for in the past, what it has accomplished, and the
turmoil that is tossing us all about.
John
8: 2-7
At
daybreak he appeared in the Temple again; and as all the people came to him, he sat down
and began to teach them.
The scribes and Pharisees brought a woman along who had been caught committing adultery; and
making her stand there in the middle they said to Jesus, 'Master, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery,
and in the Law Moses has ordered
us to stone women of this kind. What have you got to say?' They asked
him this as a test, looking for an accusation to use against him. But Jesus bent down and
started writing on the ground with his finger. As they persisted with
their question, he straightened up and said, 'Let the one among you who is
guiltless be the first to throw a stone at her.' Then he bent down and
continued writing on the ground. When they heard this they went away one
by one, beginning with the eldest, until the last one had gone and Jesus was left
alone with the woman, who remained in the middle. Jesus again
straightened up and said, 'Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?'
This nation was formed in blood by a rebellious people
who were sinners the lot. They were traitors to the Empire of Great Britain.
Their acts were that of people who used any tool, method, and any other device
they deemed necessary to sever ties with those who lorded over them.
After a long and arduous fight, the chains were cut, and a new nation began the complicated struggle to form a Union of independent States. The battle was just beginning for this country, for it was developing in a manner that was unique in all the history of the world. It was to be a Republic wherein the People would be sovereign, and thus hold the reins over government.
“In order to form a more perfect Union” clarity, and determination were essential as it was obvious to the Founders that this nation could not survive as Thirteen small countries at odds with each other. Some compromises needed to be struck so that they could secure for their posterity a form that could flourish with the knowledge that aid and comfort would be provided by a Union.
No one is perfect, and certainly no one is without
sin. We are once again embroiled in a skirmish to save this nation from annihilation.
This time the enemy is not Three Thousand miles away, but is here in the
courts, the legislatures, and sadly the schools and universities that most of
our children attend.
We face a foe that is so insidious that it has absolutely no qualms about lying, deceiving, and even fostering violence in order to secure its goal; a country of slaves as has been created in so many other places. We are being torn apart from within. Marcus Tullius Cicero stated, long before the land we live on became this nation, "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague."
The struggles that this nation has endured from the Revolution, through a Civil War, a great Depression, two World Wars, and civil strife is a testimony to the fortitude of those who came before us.
Now we are engaged in what appears to be the opening
salvos of a true Civil War wherein race, creed, and ideology clash. The battle
lines are drawn by the one side with the help of their “useful idiots” as
soldiers causing discontent, and chaos. They are led by corrupt politicians who
are on record calling for violence against the opposition. They are supported
by educators who have a deep hatred for what they perceive as some injustice,
or slight. They are bolstered by a judiciary that has long lost its mandate of
justice for all.
The other side is led by those who have long ago forgotten how this nation came into being, and cower at the mere word that might have them perceived as some sort of villain. They “indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. *** [they] cry, Peace, Peace but there is no peace. The war is actually begun!” - Patrick Henry
I am reminded of the words of Thomas Jefferson; “God
forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people cannot
be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be
discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If
they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of
death to the public liberty. *** What country before ever existed a century
& half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties
if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the
spirit of resistance? *** The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to
time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.”
History repeats itself in a manner that is often
frightening to this writer, and hopefully to others.
So, this Fourth of July I will look upon the words of
the men who struggled with life and death to
form a new and unique nation. I will remember history as it was with all
its lessons. I will remember ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
“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.” – Patrick Henry, Richmond, Virginia March 23, 1775
History tells us that men are more likely to sit quietly and suffer rather than to right the wrongs that are cast upon them. They make no allowance for what their docile attempts at reconciliation may have on their posterity. “Not a man lives on the continent but fully believes that a separation must some time or other finally take place, and a generous parent should have said, ‘If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace’; and this single reflection, well applied, is sufficient to awaken every man to duty.” – Thomas Paine
Over the
years, I have been called many derogatory names for my stand on the Second
Amendment. I’ve been called an idiot, a dolt, moron, and even a traitor. On
more than one occasion I’ve been told to go back to my masters. Nope! I’ve not
heard that from anyone who wants to take our guns, but rather supposed
supporters of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. That group of so-called
patriots, as far as I can tell, know little to nothing about the subject. They
parrot much of the false doctrine promoted by groups such as the NRA, and GOA.
In fact, I was asked to leave a group for speaking about what the Second
Amendment clearly states; “A well regulated Militia, being necessary
to the security of a free State…” It does not go on to say that we mean
only the individual, but in the context of the Law as the Framers knew it to
be, the individual was ultimately responsible for acquiring and maintaining his
“weapons of war”, in order to fulfill his requirement to be armed and trained
in the Lawful Militia.
When I started my journey, the first thing I asked was, “What do those words, "A well regulated Militia" mean?” I was told by members of the NRA that they meant nothing. So, the men who debated, and understood the meaning of the words that they placed in the document, were what? Were the words irrelevant? Did someone say, let’s add some words to confuse people? Was the intent to make the document a twisted wrangle of unexplainable non-sense so the good People would eventually lose their rights?
The Constitution begins with “We the People”. It then goes on to delegate certain limited powers to the federal government and impose duties and restrictions on the States. So that the People are firmly in charge, the Framers clearly placed in our hands the authority to enforce the rule of law. Over the years, the judiciary, and its esquire’s have muddled what the Constitution clearly states. Warnings came from those who opposed the Constitution that the judiciary would usurp what the Framers enshrined, and then take justice from the people and centralize it to, what has become an oligarchy.
In debating
the rule of law, I’ve noted over the years that it comes down to one recurring
fault, the People have lost the concept of a free society in which they are the
ultimate authority. It eludes even the most well read among us. In fact, they
will argue assiduously for their own demise by citing every so-called expert
who knows so little as to refer to this as a democracy wherein the branches of
government should decide what the Constitution says.
Thomas
Jefferson wrote the seminal document on the relationship between the people and
the governments they form in order to protect their rights. To some this means
that we have a body that dictates and enforces the law. In our form of
government, what the Founders did was to create a vehicle for the legitimate
enforcement of a set of rules that We the People have prescribed. The
underlying fact is that government was never given any authority to prosecute
without the overriding consent of the People. We have a Grand Jury that
investigates a complaint in order to determine whether a wrong was committed. If
that wrong can legitimately be established, and if that suit can be rectified
to the satisfaction of the person who has been violated then justice is served.
If the
violation cannot be rectified, and the perpetrator is not readily within the
grasp of a sheriff, or marshal, then the Militia is called forth “to execute
the Laws of the Union”. Once the perpetrator is in custody, a Petit Jury is
empaneled so that the facts, and the law may be examined in order to make a
final determination of whether or not a harm has been inflicted, whether or not
the accused is indeed the perpetrator, and if the facts reconcile the complaint.
In the case
of some supposed crime against the State, in other words if a statute that
originates from some limited authority granted by the People, then the Petit
Jury also has the duty to examine the law, and make the determination on the
constitutionality of the law in question. For it is We the People who are the
author and source of the Law. As Justice Joseph Story wrote in his commentaries
on the Constitution, "It is to be
interpreted, as all other solemn instruments are, by endeavoring to ascertain the
true sense and meaning of all the terms and we are neither to narrow them, nor
to enlarge them, by straining them from their just and natural import, for the
purpose of adding to, or diminishing its powers, or bending them to any
favorite theory or dogma or party. It is the language of the people, to be
judged of according to common sense, and not by mere theoretical reasoning. It
is not an instrument for the mere private interpretation of any particular men.
The people have established it and spoken their will; and their will, thus
promulgated, is to be obeyed as the supreme law."
This is a
Constitutional Federal Republic despite the constant repeating of the term
democracy. It is based on a series of laws that “The Senators and Representatives *** and the Members of the several
State Legislatures, and all executive and ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
I have struggled over the last few months to complete an article. It’s not because I don’t have something to contribute to the latest problems. It’s certainly not because there aren’t many issues that should be commented on in the face of the propaganda that is being spewed out to the general public. It’s definitely not because there isn’t a myriad of questions that never seem to be asked.
I am frozen by the fact that despite the evidence
placed right in front of us, most Americans will do nothing at all, while some
will do nothing more than contribute to the downfall by either applying the
same methods that are proven failures, or actually promoting the divide.
One of the issues we face today regards immigration. Let’s
set the record straight right from the start so that readers will go into this
article with a clear picture. I am not against lawful immigration wherein a country
has the Sovereign authority to protect its borders, and its people from harm of
any type.
The Declaration of Independence reads that “[King George] has endeavoured to prevent
the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for
Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their
migrations hither…”
At the time that our first law was ratified, the
population of the Colonies was approximately Thirteen Million people who occupied approximately Four Hundred Thirty Thousand, square miles,
or more than Two Hundred Seventy-Five
Million acres.
America was sparsely populated, and would certainly
benefit from an influx of people, particularly those who would be needed
tradesmen. There was also the fact that Westward of what was to become the
United States, was a vast landmass. The Founders were cognizant of the fact
that there were Hundreds of Millions of
acres that could become productive parcels of land.
Simply put, the Colonies needed an influx of migrants
who were capable, adventurous, and hungry for Liberty as it was hitherto unavailable
to the World’s population. America needed immigrants willing, and able to
create a great nation.
Do we need migrants today that are unskilled? Do we
need to have millions come across our borders who pillage our coffers? Do we
need to have those entering the country and shouting that we should leave here
as it is no longer our country? Do we need to have violent gang members coming
here to establish their brand of crime?
The answers to these questions should be obvious. We
need to protect our sovereignty, and not allow this nation to become a staging
ground for civil war, and the loss of all our rights.
Next up is the question of taxation. Despite what may
or may not be believed about this point of law, taxation as it is today saps
billions of dollars out of the economy and accomplishes next to nothing other
than pilfering the wealth of the nation in order to promote an oligarchy. It is
done by convincing the people that taxing provides for the running of government,
offers assistance to the needy, and a host of other, often unnecessary, and
unconstitutional acts.
Taxation as it is applied today is unlawful to begin
with. As the Supreme Court stated in Stanton v Baltic that “it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no
new power of taxation”. So why are we paying a direct tax on the wages, or
income we receive?
In 1947, undersecretary of the Treasury Beardsley Ruml
concluded that if we start withholding small amounts of money from paychecks of
Americans that they would simply go along with it. 26 U.S.C. requires that the
Secretary send, by December 31 of that particular year, a notice to anyone who
owes money to the government. Ruml reasoned that people would not voluntarily
comply with a large bill received at the end of the year. However, taken in small
doses there would not be any pushback.
While there is no law that anyone can find that
requires the individual living and working in the United States to pay a direct
tax on the money he earns, the government takes Trillions of dollars from the American people by the hands of an
unchartered agency that the Supreme Court has stated was not created by any
organic act of Congress. It simply exists to terrorize the public into handing
over their property to an out of control government.
So, the question often comes, why do people who don’t pay taxes go to jail? Simply put, we currently lack the courage, spirit, and knowledge to act as the Founders of this nation did and had hoped that future generations would. However, there are a few out there who rise to the occasion, listen, comprehend, and act accordingly; see The Government v Whitey Harrell.
What Marcy Brooks, the foreman in the above case, did was
to go beyond the indoctrination, and take a stand for justice. That jury did
something that most would never consider. They rendered a just decision based
in fact as applied to law, and justice.
Next up, the legal profession and the courts. Those
who opposed the Constitution during the ratification debates realized that given
time, and the position that they were granted, the judiciary would corrupt the
rule of law, and centralize power to the government. It should be fairly
obvious that we now have a judiciary that does not follow the limited delegated
authority granted by We the People in our Constitution. The judges placed in
such high positions work to implement their own agenda, and thereby place
liberty in jeopardy.
Anyone who has gone through the court system can tell
you that it does not serve justice at all, it functions to create a criminal
base, and therefore wealth for those who belong to the private organization
known as the Bar. It is also creating a class of elites who are not brought to
justice for any of their crimes.
While I could go on about the condition of our legal
system, none said it better than H.L. Menchen who wrote; “All the extravagance and incompetence of our present government is
due, in the main, to lawyers, and, in part at least, to good ones. They are
responsible for nine-tenths of the useless and vicious laws that now clutter the
statute-books, and for all the evils that go with the vain attempt to enforce
them. Every ...
No Comments »
Recent Form Posts