From: (<>) Date:
Sat, Oct 23, 2004, 7:48pm (EDT-3) To:
(www.jail4judges.org) Subject: * * * To Enforce The Constitution * * *
J.A.I.L. News Journal
______________________________________________________
Los Angeles,
California=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
October 23, 2004
=A0
Mission Statement=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 JNJ
Library=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
PayPal Support
Federal
J.A.I.L.=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0=A0=A0=A0
FAQs=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
What?MeWarden?
=A0
To Enforce The Constitution
J.A.I.L. - the only means providing a spelled-out mechanism
for the People=A0to do so
by Barbie, ACIC National J.A.I.L. Administration
victoryusa@jail4judges.org
=A0
The Fatal Omission
Law is only as effective as it can be enforced. Without enforceability,
what good is it? Likewise,=A0the Constitution --the Supreme Law of the
Land-- is only as=A0effective as IT can be enforced. Without
enforceability, WHAT GOOD IS IT?=A0 Is it any wonder that the
Constitution is routinely ignored by the powers-that-be, and has been
impotent since its inception?
=A0
Can there be any doubt that the omission of an enforcement provision in
the Constitution when it was framed is, and has been for over 200 years,
fatal to the enjoyment of our life and liberty? to the acquisition,
possession and defending=A0of=A0property? to the pursuit of happiness,
safety, and privacy? Can there be any doubt that the natural course
leading to the fulfillment of these unalienable rights has been
literally=A0blocked through the usurpation of power by an evil and
despotic occupying force in this country under color of law,
fraudulently pretending to be "the government"?
=A0
Does it seem strange to you that what we read in the Declaration of
Independence and in the U.S. Constitution=A0reads like a fairy tale,
(for instance:=A0 "...deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed...") and does not match the reality of what we are experiencing
in this country today, nor even throughout our lifetimes? and that it is
growing even=A0stranger and further removed from reality at an
ever-increasing pace as time goes on?=A0 And does it seem strange to you
that the more we hear about peace, health, and SAFETY, the less of it we
actually have?=A0 Do you really feel safer today than you did yesterday?
And most=A0provocative-- do you feel helpless to be able to do anything
about it?=A0 Well folks, it's NOT going to get any better!
=A0
J.A.I.L. is=A0needed regardless of all else
Although we have often said that the objective of J.A.I.L. is judicial
accountability -i.e., We the People holding judges accountable to
themselves under the standards set forth in the United States
Constitution-we have, over time, become more enlightened to the fact
that the ultimate objective is To Enforce The Constitution by holding
judges accountable to the People under its standards. And to drive home
the fact that "J.A.I.L. is the ONLY answer" to accomplishing that
objective, J.A.I.L. is the ONLY proposal available providing a detailed,
spelled-out method and process designed for the People to do so.
=A0
More and more people are realizing that the objective must be the
enforcement of the Constitution by the People, however no one beyond
J.A.I.L. has come up with the specific means by which to accomplish that
task. Despite all=A0other ideas, none offers an alternative
to=A0J.A.I.L. No, not one! Regardless of what others have suggested as a
solution, all are inherently dependent upon the implementation of
J.A.I.L.=A0to stand guard in keeping government within=A0the bounds it
was designed to function. Yes, government must be leashed by the People,
and that leash must be held firmly by the People on an instant
and=A0permanent basis to maintain our Constitutional Republic. Only
J.A.I.L. provides such=A0leash!
=A0
That's not to say that the People aren't free to pursue whatever project
they deem appropriate. However it's vital to our ultimate freedom to
choose our priorities-- to first put our resources into the cause that
will best and most efficiently bring real security by the People to the
People on a permanent basis. =A0Only J.A.I.L. provides such security!
Government cannot, and will not, provide it on its own.
=A0
J.A.I.L. is rooted in the Declaration of Independence,=A0the Founding
Document of this country and the most logical place to begin in
correcting the tyranny that has overtaken us. ("...to provide new guards
for their future security.") We must go back to Square One which, for
purposes of J.A.I.L., consists of two parts: first, the Declaration (the
foundation); second, the U.S. Constitution read in light of the
Declaration (the ground floor).
=A0
It is imperative that everything=A0that has occurred since
the=A0ratification of the Constitution be cleared from your thinking
--the slate must be wiped clean-- otherwise you will be distracted by
the myriad of irrelevant events that have taken place since that
ratification, inasmuch as they are in violation of the Constitution, and
hence,=A0null and void.
=A0
So forget them (I realize it's easier said than done) --but do so, at
least for purposes of focusing=A0on what we must now do to "get it
right" albeit some 200-plus years later. All that the passage of time
has done is=A0allow the dung heap created by the powers-that-be
(hereinafter "PTB") to pile higher and deeper and at a faster rate with
each passing year, until the heap=A0has gotten so huge over the past two
centuries, that it is doubtfully=A0 even possible to clean up at this
point. But knowing that it is waste (wholly void) --not in compliance
with the Constitution-- we have to by-pass it and start over at Square
One in rebuilding our Constitutional Republic that has been stolen from
us by this usurping, foreign, occupying force operating under color of
law, the PTB.
=A0
In Volume 16, American Jurisprudence, 177, we find the following: "The
general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form
and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and
ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the
time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so
branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as
inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the
question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute
not been enacted.
"Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow
that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows
no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no
acts performed under it. . . .
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An
unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law.
Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the
land, it is superseded thereby.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound
to enforce it. "
http://www.svpvril.com/OACL.html#Our_American_Common_Law=A0
Our American Common Law by Howard Fisher and Dale Pond.
=A0
J.A.I.L.'s Reliance on the
Declaration of Independence:=A0 (the foundation)
The Declaration of Independence (hereinafter "Declaration") describes
government as the body of men (mankind) created by the governed (The
People) for the purpose of protecting the rights of The People-- thusly:
...That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...
When government ceases to function in that assigned capacity as the
protector of the People's rights, it ceases to be government.
=A0
This principle is ably taught by John Locke, prior to the
Declaration,=A0in
Of the Dissolution of Government=A0by John Locke
http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtr19.htm
This is demonstratively to reduce all to anarchy, and so effectually to
dissolve the government: for laws not being made for themselves, but to
be, by their execution, the bonds of the society, to keep every part of
the body politic in its due place and function; when that totally
ceases, the government visibly ceases, and the people become a confused
multitude, without order or connexion. Where there is no longer the
administration of justice, for the securing of men's rights, nor any
remaining power within the community to direct the force, or provide for
the necessities of the public, there certainly is no government left.
Where the laws cannot be executed, it is all one as if there were no
laws; and a government without laws is, I suppose, a mystery in
politics, unconceivable to human capacity, and inconsistent with human
society.
=A0
See also Fisher and Pond, supra, stating:
If any agency of the Federal, State or County government, including the
court, would act as if it were Principal, and Freeman, against its true
Principal, the People, this would be an inversion of the legal principle
of Sovereignty of the People. By so acting, any agency of the
government, including the court, would be a pretender to the power, and
as a pretender, its acts would be a nullity and would not exist, at Law;
that is to say, that it would be null and void, and of no force and
effect, at Law. That, in fact, it would not be government at all, but
would be a private, criminal operation, imposing a rule of force,
fraudulently pretending to be government, since, in this country, the
only legitimate function of government is to protect the Rights and
freedoms of the People. Such acts are not unlike the privately owned and
operated Mafia who demands our money (taxes, fees, etc.) in exchange for
them not committing violence against us or our property. [emphasis
theirs]
=A0
So, we can see that we do not have a legitimate, lawful government in
power, and haven't had since shortly after the Constitution was ratified
more than 200 years ago. Thus, instead of living under the Rule of Law
by government, we are surviving as best we can under the rule of force
imposed by the PTB. Although Frederic Bastiat says that "Law is Force,"
it must be a legitimate Force authorized by Law-- not an arbitrary
power.
(All Law is Force-- if it is enforceable, but not all Force is Law).
Whosoever uses force without right, as every one does in society, who
does it without law, puts himself into a state of war with those against
whom he so uses it; and in that state all former ties are cancelled, all
other rights cease, and every one has a right to defend himself, and to
resist the aggressor. John Locke, supra
=A0
Along the same line, John Locke further states, when people's property
is destroyed under arbitrary power of the PTB, the PTB are at war with
the People who are absolved from further obedience:
The reason why men enter into society, is the preservation of their
property; and the end why they chuse and authorize a legislative, is,
that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the
properties of all the members of the society, to limit the power, and
moderate the dominion, of every part and member of the society: for
since it can never be supposed to be the will of the society, that the
legislative should have a power to destroy that which every one designs
to secure, by entering into society, and for which the people submitted
themselves to legislators of their own making; whenever the legislators
endeavour to take away, and destroy the property of the people, or to
reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a
state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any
farther obedience...=A0... =A0...by this breach of trust they forfeit
the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends,
and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original
liberty, and, by the establishment of a new legislative, (such as they
shall think fit) provide for their own safety and security, which is the
end for which they are in society.=A0 Id.=A0 (Although the above relates
to=A0"the legislative," it has full application to government in
general, as the Declaration indicates.)
=A0
We have been told that we cannot rely upon the Declaration today because
it applied only to the Thirteen Colonies when written. Well, J.A.I.L.
wholly relies on the Declaration because it is based on the Law of
Nature which is universal and ubiquitous. It applies as much today as it
did then, and will apply throughout the future of human existence. As
Dr. Alan Keyes stated:
=A0
http://www.renewamerica.us/keyes/readings/declartn.htm
I believe it can only be made rational to respect the original intention
of the Framers if that intention somehow respects a permanent and
transcendent principle of justice which was true then, and is true now,
which applied then, and which applies now.... [I]f we accept that
understanding, we are still part of a community with them. We still are
part, as it were, of the same society, because we live in a universe
governed by the same moral principles.... There is no common ground
between us and our Founders if there are no transcendent principles of
justice which allow us to understand that their painstaking effort to
establish a government based upon consent was in fact a requirement of
justice.
Presidents' Day lecture by Dr. Alan Keyes, Thomas Aquinas College,
February 21, 1997.
=A0
While the Declaration contains wording that is superfluous to some, when
taken to its lowest common denominator --based entirely on Nature-- it
is certainly a document that can be relied upon by all people, just as
J.A.I.L. is for all people in this country.
http://www.strike-the-root.com/3/wakfer/wakfer2.htm
A Critique of the Declaration of Independence- by Paul Wakfer. =A0
"Laws of Nature" being entirely sufficient since nature - reality - is
all that exists.=A0 [T]hey meant that all men have equal "rights"...=A0
They are unalienable specifically because they are a necessary
consequence of the reality of the nature of human beings - i.e. a part
of existence. They are essential and logically unalienable because their
not being true would be contradictory to the immutable structure of
reality. Nor, being true of reality, can valid rights ever be removed.
All that can be done is to "break" them - i.e. to not allow them to take
their natural course and to be fulfilled. Many people take "life" to
include property and logically this has merit. [The pursuit of
happiness]=A0is logically derivable from the rights of Life, Liberty and
Property. [Happiness] can rightly only be made by the individual himself
under the circumstances of full freedom of life, liberty and property.
=A0
From The Virginia Declaration of Rights (a more accurate statement):
That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have
certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of
society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity;
namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring
and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and
safety.
=A0
The California Constitution begins with, after the Preamble:
All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable
rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty,
acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and
obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. Art. I, Sec.1
=A0
In discussing the various schools of thought regarding the
interpretation of=A0the Declaration, the following site states, near the
end of the article, the method to be used in evaluating the Declaration
in terms of the universal laws of nature:
=A0
http://constantsite.com/essays/history/DeclarationOfIndependenceHistorical=
AndLiteraryAnalysis.htm
(On Interpreting the Declaration):
In the interest of efficiency, people should choose the school of
thought that is most likely to answer their questions. For example, a
person wanting to evaluate the Declaration's place in guiding principles
for human life would look to universalism in history or to liberal
originalism in political theory.
=A0
J.A.I.L.'s Reliance on the U.S. Constitution:=A0 (the ground floor)
We have also been told that we cannot rely on the Constitution because
it was drafted and signed by the elite for their own benefit and "the
common man be damned." One source that would support that view is:
http://www.freedomdomain.com/sovereignty/inform08.html=A0
Settling the matter that, the common man never created the U.S.
Constitution nor was the Bill of Rights for him. - By the Informer
Since 1990 I have been preaching that the Constitution was never mine
and the People in "We the People" was not the common man on the street,
but rather the aristocracy of Hamilton, Jefferson, Adams, Washington,
Jay and others. Lysander Spooner is another man in the 1800's that had
the=A0same sentiments. He too showed that the constitution was not only
NOT a contract with the people,=A0but that none of the signers signed it
with any conviction and it is evident that they only signed in
a=A0witness capacity, check it out
for yourself by looking at how they signed the constitution and
bound=A0no one unless they agreed to the terms in the alleged contract
called a constitution that they drafted.=A0=A0 The following is from the
Cases in Constitutional law.
=A0
An opposing view is shown by the following source, based on the
Preamble:
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_pre.html
We the People of the United States - The Framers were an elite group -
among the best and brightest America had to offer at the time. But they
knew that they were trying to forge a nation made up not of an elite,
but of the common man. Without the approval of the common man, they
feared revolution. This first part of the Preamble speaks to the common
man. It puts into writing, as clear as day, the notion that the people
were creating this Constitution. It was not handed down by a god or by a
king - it was created by the people.
promote the general Welfare - This, and the next part of the Preamble,
are the culmination of everything that came before it - the whole point
of having tranquility, justice, and defense was to promote the general
welfare - to allow every state and every citizen of those states to
benefit from what the government could provide. The Framers looked
forward to the expansion of land holdings, industry, and investment, and
they knew that a strong national government would be the beginning of
that.
and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity -Hand
in hand with the general welfare, the Framers looked forward to the
blessings of liberty - something they had all fought hard for just a
decade before. They were very concerned that they were creating a nation
that would resemble something of a paradise for liberty, as opposed to
the tyranny of a monarchy, where citizens could look forward to being
free as opposed to looking out for the interests of a king. And more
than for themselves, they wanted to be sure that the future generations
of Americans would enjoy the same.
do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States - The
final clause of the Preamble is almost anti-climatic, but it is
important for a few reasons - it finishes the "We, the people" thought,
saying what we the people are actually doing; it gives us a name for
this document, and it restates the name of the nation adopting the
Constitution. That the Constitution is "ordained" reminds us of the
higher power involved here - not just of a single person or of a king,
but of the people themselves. That is it "established" reminds us that
it replaces that which came before - the United States under the
Articles (a point lost on us today, but quite relevant at the time).
=A0
Yet another view states that the Constitution was ratified by "the
authoritative voice of the people":
The ratification process knowingly chose constitutional conventions
instead of State legislatures as the authoritative voice of the people,
the "we" of the Constitution. The goal was to allow the Constitution to
rest on the people and not be at the mercy of the States. [emph. ours]
Thus, the text became the embodiment of the people. The Declaration
announced and created the people, and the Constitution cataphorically
embodied or instantiated them. Though differences in the people can be
identified during the process, one self-referential people began and
consummated a creative act. The Constitution refers to the twelfth year
of independence and links itself to the performative moment of the
Declaration. The reference indicates the continuity of the "we" in both
documents.
On Interpreting the Declaration, supra.
=A0
It is the position of J.A.I.L. that the Constitution must be read and
understood in light of the universal principles set forth in the
Declaration. As the above citation shows, the Constitution is intended
to put into practice what the Declaration sets forth in fact. Stated
more succinctly, the Constitution is the fulfillment of the Declaration.
That is why I state that "Square One" consists of two parts: (1) the
Declaration as the foundation, and (2) the Constitution as the ground
floor (based upon the foundation). The two must go together --be
connected as one purpose.
=A0
Thomas Paine, upon whose thoughts=A0Thomas Jefferson greatly relied when
authoring the Declaration, stated there must be some intermediate
authority between the governed (the People) and the governors (the
government) by which the law must be established. In fulfillment of the
Declaration, the Constitution became that "intermediate authority."
=A0
But as there is a peculiar delicacy, from whom, or in what manner, this
business must first arise, and as it seems most agreeable and
consistent, that it should come from some intermediate body between the
governed and the governors, that is between the Congress and the people.
... [T]hat a charter is to be understood as a bond of solemn obligation
[between the governed and the governors], which the whole enters into,
to support the right of every separate part, whether of religion,
personal freedom, or property... The members of Congress, Assemblies, or
Conventions, by having had experience in national concerns, will be able
and useful counsellors, and the whole, being empowered by the people
will have a truly legal authority.=A0 ...=A0=A0A government of our own
is our natural right:=A0[emphasis ours]=A0=A0 And when a man seriously
reflects on the precariousness of human affairs, he will become
convinced, that it is infinitely wiser and safer, to form a constitution
of our own in a cool deliberate manner, while we have it in our power,
than to trust such an interesting event to time and chance. ... First,
they had a king, and then a form of government; whereas, the articles or
charter of government, should be formed first, and men delegated to
execute them afterwards... [man existed before kings and would be the
creator of government, by nature]=A0=A0=A0Common Sense by Thomas Paine
(1776)
http://www.constitution.org/tp/comsense.htm=A0
=A0
Only the People can Enforce the Constitution
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/7970/jefpco35.htm=A0
The Jeffersonian Perspective
[excerpts]
There is no other mechanism in existence that can adequately and
consistently protect our rights. Power quickly leads to corruption, and
the power to protect the rights of the people can be trusted nowhere but
with the people themselves. Therefore it is the responsibility of the
citizens themselves to look after their own rights.
=A0
To say that our rights are protected by the Constitution is to rely on a
piece of paper if we ignore the control of the powers of government
exerted by the people. It is the people who are the ultimate guardians
of the Constitution and the rights it guarantees...
=A0
A constitution alone cannot control government without republican forms,
i.e., mechanisms that keep control of their representatives in the
people's hands. Constitutions are not self-enforcing.... [W]ithout a
sovereign people in control determining what shall be the constitution
and the form of government functioning thereunder, that determination is
made by the governors themselves. They function as a higher power, and
that higher power then becomes the sovereign, dictating government and
its policies to all others.=A0
=A0
The only check upon arbitrary power is the People:
It is the law, and the law only, which can successfully resist the
encroachments of despotism. In the absence of defined laws, and an
independent judiciary to enforce them, the only check upon arbitrary
power is popular insurrection;... http://www.svpvril.com/comcivlaw.html
=A0
If there is a lesson in all of this it is that our Constitution is
neither a self-actuating nor a self-correcting document. It requires the
constant attention and devotion of all citizens. A Republic, If You Can
Keep It -=A0by Richard R. Beeman, Ph.D., Professor of History and Dean
of the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania.
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/explore/NCCScholarEssays/ARepublic,IfYou=
CanKeepIt.shtml
=A0
It's the People who must be the ultimate judge of constitutional
behavior of government:
http://www.constitution.org/campcons.htm
We need to emphasize the Principle of Nuremberg: that every individual
has the responsibility to make an independent determination of the
constitutionality of every law and official act, to support those that
are constitutional and resist those that are not, and never to try to
delegate that responsibility to public officials or superiors. Not even
the Supreme Court. --Constitution Society, San Antonio TX
=A0
And it's the People who must provide the means required to enforce the
Constitution!
It must be explained to people that many of the unconstitutional
assumptions of power are in response to the demands from people to do
something about real problems, but that they need to refrain from making
such demands unless the Constitution is first amended to make such
measures legal, and if they still insist that such action is needed,
then involve them in proposing the constitutional amendments that might
provide the necessary legal foundation. Id.
[emphasis ours]
=A0
YES, LET'S GET THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN GETTING THE J.A.I.L. AMENDMENT
PASSED IN EVERY STATE THAT WILL PROVIDE THE NECESSARY LEGAL FOUNDATION
TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION!
Our target state is South Dakota for 2006 --but we aren't limited to
just one state. We have 49 more! We must especially concentrate on the
Initiative States first-=A0(about 26 of them).
=A0
Conclusion
=A0
J.A.I.L. is the means of self-defense for an oppressed people:
Must the people then always lay themselves open to the cruelty and rage
of tyranny? Must they see their cities pillaged, and laid in ashes,
their wives and children exposed to the tyrant's lust and fury, and
themselves and families reduced by their king to ruin, and all the
miseries of want and oppression, and yet sit still? Must men alone be
debarred the common privilege of opposing force with force, which nature
allows so freely to all other creatures for their preservation from
injury? I answer: Self-defence is a part of the law of nature; nor can
it be denied the community, even against the king himself...=A0 John
Locke, supra.
=A0
*=A0=A0 *=A0=A0 *
=A0
J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/national_001.htm
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire!
E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at
=A0
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
=A0
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the
root."=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
=A0
-- Henry David Thoreau=A0=A0=A0 <><
.
|
