The defense of freedom belongs to those who love liberty and despise to the death those who would wrest it with force of arms from you and your posterity.
In the modern world we are face to face with an ultimate choice.
I would personally much rather die vigorously fighting in defense of freedom than to attempt to explain my cowardice to my enslaved children and grandchildren.
Now some may say that I was not a party to the Constitution, thus I have no recourse in it. In answer I would remind them that the Constitution does indeed not grant anything. It merely codifies those God-Given attributes of a free society. The words and thoughts it expresses were imbedded in my soul along with the breath of life from Almighty God.
As such, they were a powerful gift which man cannot take away, and I for one mean to return them, intact to the Giver.
Thus, when the inevitable XO comes down as a declaration from any .gov entity, we would do well to remember the following:
-------------------------------------------------------------
The essence of "martial law" in this third sense may be vague, but its constitutional effect is pellucid: Any attempt to impose "martial law" by force is nothing less than "Treason". The Constitution declares that "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort". And "if ['War'] be actually levied, that is, if a body of men be actually assembled, for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose, all those who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered as traitors". In operation, "martial law" proceeds by arraying men under arms in order to set aside or suspend the Constitution of the United States, in whole or in part, and to employ those arms against anyone who resists--without any constitutional or other lawful authority for doing so. Therefore, inasmuch as "the United States" exists only perforce and through application of the Constitution, "martial law" amounts to "levying War against the [United States]". And inasmuch as WE THE PEOPLE are the authors and beneficiaries of the Constitution, "martial law" amounts as well to "levying War against" THE PEOPLE themselves. It would be immaterial that those who attempted to impose "martial law" wore uniforms (even with United States flags as shoulder patches), or held military commissions, or acted pursuant to orders from supposed superiors. Even someone who commits "Treason" under a claim of "good faith" is entitled to no immunity. This principle is part of the modern Law of Nations: "[T]hat the [officer] acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility". And it subsists in American law of a far longer heritage.
In sum, "martial law" in the third sense of that term cannot exist in this country. It is a legal impossibility. Participation in it would constitute the most serious of all crimes. And it would supply just grounds for mass resistance among the citizenry aimed at overthrowing whatever purported governmental apparatus attempted to impose it. For, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims, under such circumstances "it is the [people's] right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security". And the Declaration of Independence is still very good law in America.
(exerpt from 'A Primer on "Martial Law"' by Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.)
|
No comments:
Post a Comment