Redress A Grievance

January 8, 2024 | General

The Continental Congress approved the wording of the abuses and usurpations that were listed by Jefferson as reasons for the dissolution of “the political bands which have connected them with another.”

“A Declaration” goes on, “In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”

Long before our Declaration, the good people of England induced the monarch, King John, to accept and sign the Magna Carta. The monarchy acquiesced to the demands of the people through the Twenty Five Barons.

At Article 61 the document prescribes the doctrine of Redress and its solution if the monarchy failed to comply.

“If we, our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articles of the peace or of this security, and the offence is made known to four of the said twenty-five barons, they shall come to us – or in our absence from the kingdom to the chief justice – to declare it and claim immediate redress. If we, or in our absence abroad the chief justice, make no redress within forty days, reckoning from the day on which the offence was declared to us or to him, the four barons shall refer the matter to the rest of the twenty-five barons, who may distrain upon and assail us in every way possible, with the support of the whole community of the land, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, or anything else saving only our own person and those of the queen and our children, until they have secured such redress as they have determined upon.”

Before delving into this subject, let me propose a correlation between Article I, and Article II of our Bill of Rights, that of the United States, and Article 61 of the Magna Carta.

Amendment I: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Amendment II: “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.”

It is necessary, indeed it is an imperative of our unique Laws that we understand the progression from one amendment to the other wherein the First addresses a Right, and the Second imposes a duty and resolution constructed long before the Framers of our Constitution designated the means, by which “We the People” were afforded the authority to enforce our Rights.

We must realize that common sense dictates that we have no rights, for which we are unable, at some measure, to Redress. If, at every level of our system of government, “servants” of the people obstruct, restrict, regulate, and usurp the foundations of those rights, we have none. The Twenty-Five Barons, and king John agreed that failure to redress gave the people the provisional authority to rectify the transgression beyond the means set forth as a peaceful conclusion. Today, we are drawing close to an end, or a beginning. Neither will be pleasant for us, but horrific for our children.

I often point to our children because I have come to realize that they will endure either the horrors of a totalitarian state, or the ravages of war. I have also learned over the years of speaking to others that most truly do not have a concern for the future generations.

“We the People” are currently under duress by factions hell-bent on the destruction of freedom. It should be obvious to the most uncertain, foolish, and frivolous amongst us that there is a turn, an agenda, with its eye towards a prize. That price being the enslavement of the common people by way of decimating any liberty still possessed.

The United States has a Bill of Rights noting that it is the people who are the arbiters of their own lives. It is not a Totalitarian state, Monarchy, Caliphate, nor Democracy that we bow to for our day to day existence, although there are many who subscribe to such a life. It is easier to succumb than to resist. The king, the dictator, the president, nor the mob are the final word in our Republic, but rather an armed citizenry that Petitions and seeks remedy and relief from the transgressions of the state and the “useful idiot.”

Several years ago, G. Edward Griffin interviewed Norman Dodd who had been appointed by Congress to investigate Foundations that might be engaged in un-American activities. I suggest that one might listen to the interview linked in this article. Mr. Dodd reveals, the gist of which is a disturbing picture of what has taken place in this nation, and how the education system has aided in our downfall. I have included it to make the point of a populace that, while aspiring to higher education, has been duped into believing that they are of some intellectually superior moral character. Instead, they are the tools that are now being used to dismantle our distinctive form of a nation based on popular sovereignty.

On January 6, 2020, an impressively large group of people gathered in Washington, DC on the date scheduled for the counting of Electoral votes. Briefly stated, a Redress by those who saw an election that had been manipulated in favor of the cabal most bent on the destruction of our liberty. It is unfortunate that some violence ensued, more than likely instigated by federal agents, and an opportunity was given to those who are working to destroy our rights. In the words of many of those who seek our downfall we must never let an opportunity go to waste. As part of that plot, none of our rights are absolute, although the word unalienable defines them as such, is part of the mantra.

In 1689 the English Bill of Rights was enacted. That Bill states: “That it is the right of the subjects to petition the King, and all committments [sic] and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal.”

Instead of what was an attempt at a Redress has been turned against the People, for whom it is the state that must submit if “any Form of Government becomes destructive of” its constitutional limitations. All abridgement of Rights and Powers retained by “We the People” must be rectified to our desired conclusion, not that of elected or appointed representatives, nor the “useful idiot” hell bent on forming the chains of enslavement.

What has, instead, taken place is a re-education, as Mr. Dodd points out, designed to create a monopoly of power and wealth for the few who subscribe to the One World Government agenda. An agenda that prescribes unimaginable power for the elite, and nothing but abject servitude and woe for those of us who are considered the “deplorables.”

The Redress, as I see it, was based on what has been shown to be fact as uncovered over the last several months. At least five states not only violated election laws, but they were aware that what they were doing constituted a grievous affront to the security of our nation.

In the most recent attack on our freedom, the supreme court of Colorado has determined that Donald Trump must be removed from the ballot as one who participated in an “insurrection.” Against whom, I am unsure, but in their high-and-mighty expression of their disdain for “Redress,” those black robed administrators twisted the third section of the Fourteenth Amendment as another indication of the elite’s disdain for “rights secured by our Constitution.”

This latest attack shows contempt for congress’ authority at Section 5; “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article”, and long historical record, to which even king John agreed that the entire community “may distrain upon and assail us in every way possible”.

As to whether our Civil War was an insurrection is debatable. Had the war gone the other way, history would see it in its proper perspective as a fight to maintain the integral structure of our rule of law.

In the debate leading to the ratification of the Bill of Rights, it was questioned; “what *** shall we secure the freedom of speech, and think it necessary, at the same time, to allow the right of assembling? If people freely converse together, they must assemble for that purpose; it is a self-evident, unalienable right which the people possess; it is certainly a thing that never would be called in question; it is derogatory to the dignity of the House to descend to such minutiae.”

We have the solemn duty, and  “the Right of the People to alter or to abolish” government when it acts in such a manner as to be destructive of our sovereign positions.

At what point do we remove the veil that clouds are minds from the truth of who we are, and the recognition of the forces aligned against freedom? We must realize that ambivalence and inaction are not how we maintain this nation’s foundation. “We the People” are not the subjects of laws that abridge our sovereign powers, nor can we be held accountable when those who serve us make a mockery of our institutions.

The ability to have free and open elections that are not clouded by suspicious activities or improbable outcomes must be questioned. There is no excuse for anyone, of any ilk, to sustain dubious conclusions, and then rebuke those who seek Redress. And if that redress is also marred by suspicious activity from planted agents, then there is more the reason that we must constantly assail the plots and plans of the corrupt.

Redress must be held sacred until all questions have been answered with irrefutable facts.