More on Ed Snowden: Spy or Hero?

For me, the whole Snowden saga is intensely interesting and fraught with many burning questions and monumentally serious concerns. So, please indulge me again. In truth, like a good book, this subject is well-nigh impossible to shelve.

In a recent interview with CNN, former CIA officer, Robert Baer, for whom I have great respect, opined that Edward Snowden was likely a spy for the People's Republic of China.

Well, like Mr. Baer, we're all entitled to our opinions. And, of course, the diligent among us must always consider all possibilities until the full, unadulterated truth is fully disclosed--if it ever is.

That said, having thrice listened to the Guardian's interview of Snowden and carefully observing his facial patterns & manner of expression, I could not detect the slightest telltale sign of  pretention or concealment. What I saw was a genuinely bright, very well-spoken, remarkably poised and, yes, lonely and beseiged American who thought he was doing the right thing for America, and was willing to take the hits for doing so. And until there is solid, incontrovertible proof to the contrary, I am compelled to adhere to that view. Not exactly scientific. But no less scientific than Mr. Baer's position.

Though I suspect both detractors/dissemblers and supporters alike are working on it, missing so far is a more comprehensive background analysis and objective psychological profile of Snowden, both of which would be helpful to those of us who have more than a passing interest in his motivations and in any proof of NSA's lawlessness. In any event, to date nothing in his background has suggested the makings of either a hero OR a spy. And had there been hints of either, one could logically deduce that the security clearance check he was subjected to by the US Government would have disclosed such dispositions.  One would hope so anyway.

Curious to me is Mr. Baer's opining that Snowden is likely a spy for the PRC because, I gather, Snowden opted to flee to Hong Kong. To me, that is a  rather foundationally flimsy deduction on Mr. Baer's part. Reportedly,  albeit unsuccessfully, on more than one occasion Mr Snowden brought the issue of NSA's highly questionable and likely unconstitutional actions to the attention of his superiors. And there's the nub of my disagreement with Mr. Baer's preliminary assessment: why would Snowden run the risk of exposing himself to his superiors as a "troublemaker" IF he were a spy? Makes little sense to me.

My bet is that Snowden fled to Hong Kong because 1) it was geographically closer to Hawaii than Iceland, and 2) the chances of PRC's extraditing him to the US was minimal to nil. On balance, and assuming he gave the matter of asylum at least a modicum of consideration before fleeing, HK is where I would have gone had I been in his shoes.

Mysterious and worrisome is the fact that as of this writing, Snowden's current whereabouts is unknown. He has simply dropped out of sight. Did he defect, or was he swept up by the PRC or other hostile entity? We just don't know. Being so high-profile, I can't imagine how Snowden could easily remain concealed for long, unless, of course, his concealment was forced on him. We can only speculate as to his whereabouts at this time. We'll just have to  wait and see.

Finally, let's not rush to final judgement about Mr. Snowden. The NSA apologists, and there are many, will attempt to discredit him. Those who fear the worst about "our" government, which are also numerous, will applaud his nobility and courage. However, those seeking the unvarnished truth about Snowden and the NSA will give him the benefit of the doubt and await developments.

This is the stuff of spellbinding novels, for sure. But, for me, the big concern is NOT whether Snowden was a spy, which, at this juncture strikes me as fanciful at best, but whether or not "our" government was/is spying on us. Which of the two scenarios should be more concerning to an American? Hands down, I'd say the latter--in spades!

---------------------------------------------------------



Postscript, 6/13/13: If Mr. Snowden's sole purpose is to alert Americans that they are being spied upon by their own government, I am sincerely sympathetic and supportive. However, I am troubled and somewhat surprised by reports circulating on the internet today that he is determined to disclose more documents than is absolutely needed to accomplish that lofty goal. I  hope my guarded sympathy for Snowden hasn't been misplaced. If these reports are true, then it appears Snowden is fast approaching the status of "Betrayer" versus a "Paul Revere". We can only hope his judgement and sense of patriotism doesn't fail him or the American people now.

Edward Snowden--A Treasonous Villain or Champion of Freedom?

Some brief opinions and observations regarding Edward Snowden:

Is there anything more sinister to Ed Snowden's disclosure than meets the eye? And just what did Snowden disclose that was so injurious to US national security--but, more importantly, to the individual security of Americans themselves?

In my opinion, there was nothing nefarious or inexcusable about Snowden's disclosure. In fact, the disclosure--whatever that disclosure actually entailed--was most likely a valuable and timely wake-up call to those of us who are not yet brain-dead and who still value what little remains of our liberty.

Now the "poster child", if you will,  for the 1st and 4th Amendments, Snowden is "hiding" in plain sight--no unexplained "accidents" that way, they say. Understanding that he's broken the "law", he's justifiably worried about his safety, his future, his family. Said he, "I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions, but I will be satisfied if the federation of secret law, unequal pardon and irresistible powers that rule the world that I love are revealed even for an instant." Not exactly the articulation of a double-agent for China, but a young man hoping to somehow survive his lonely Davidian battle against Goliath.

And for the detractors and conspiracists, yes, he disclosed what appears to have been evidence of the NSA's unbridled and unconstitutional attack on the privacy of millions of Americans; but, the fact that he did so while China's Pres. Xi was visiting with Obama in California strikes me as purely coincidental, not a diabolical Snowden-PRC plan to embarrass the US. Enough said about that, I think.

And let's keep in mind the HUGE distinction between Snowden and PFC Bradley Manning. The latter arbitrarily DUMPED classifed documents with no regard for the harm such a callous action might cause to both national security AND individual lives. Their motivations were completely different. Asserted Snowden, "I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed [to the Guardian] to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest. There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn't turn over, because harming people isn't my goal. Transparency is." Thus, Manning was thoughtless and brash. Snowden was sensitive to individuals' safety & the republic's security, and was clearly driven by his desire to protect individual rights.

Though his choice of Hong Kong was, at first, a tad mystifying to me, on balance I think I would have done the same. First, it is geographically closer to Hawaii than Iceland. Second, if I feared for my life and wanted to reduce the risk of capture and imprisonment by US authorities, I too would have opted for Hong Kong, the best of both worlds for a whistleblower. After all is said and done, Iceland may have initially proven to be more susceptible to US pressure to extradite, while the PRC can't be so easily bullied. (That said, Iceland is now carefully mulling over the idea of granting Snowden political asylum. And if that works out, then Snowden is "home" free--not, of course, in his USA homeland, but in a western-oriented country that proudly values individual liberty, and where he might again be able to reunite with his family and friends.)

Having thrice viewed the Guardian's interview of Mr. Snowden, there's something remarkably inspiring about this young man's sincerity, composure, acuity, and audacity--qualities and character strengths American patriots must draw upon if we are to successfully restore constitutional order in America and to prevent a police state taking hold. A GED graduate, and, obviously, a well-spoken and highly intelligent young man, I think we all need to give him the benefit of the doubt until such time that it is proven that self-serving and treasonous motives alone may have motivated him.

Let's understand what Mr. Snowden apparently did. He courageously sounded the alarm in a singularly unpretentious manner which characterized a man refreshingly at ease with having made a monumentally difficult, lonely and yet highly principled life-changing choice. No small feat for the best of us. For me, his unaffected and forthright manner confer much credibility to both him and to his story.

And isn't it ironic--indeed sickening--how upset Obama is over this and other leaks--unless, of course, he is the one doing the leaking for personal political gain. Selective indignation and shameless hypocrisy yet again. For Obama, par for the course.

And to our "representatives" who defend NSA's overreach and what is likely their expansive and faulty interpretation of the Patriot Act, they have much to answer for. In the name of all that's holy, I urge them to uphold their oath of office, and, at long last, to provide intensive OVERSIGHT not only of the NSA, but of the entire runaway bureaucratic Leviathan in DC. Oh, yes. And I urge them to read the Constitution they have sworn to uphold!

My friends, we are truly at a tipping point. Our 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th and 10th Amendments are under assault as never before in our nation's history. Trite though it might sound, I don't think it's hyperbole to suggest that our very liberties genuinely hang in the balance. Like never before, I sense that we as a nation are perilously close to dissolution and/or upheavel, and that only We the People, most of whom remain effectively disengaged, are able to stop it. So, I thank you, Mr. Snowden, for showing us all how very close to disaster we Americans really are. We've been forewarned yet again. This time, let's hope enough of us in Congress and at the grassroots level take heed.

"Those who sacrifice Liberty for security deserve neither. He who would trade Liberty for some temporary security deserves neither Liberty nor security." Benjamin Franklin, 1755

Reflection: Is This the Beginning of the End of the Progressive Conspiracy?

I have been repeatedly reminded that the prolificity of my Opinerlog posts has mysteriously diminished over the past several months.

No, as yet, I haven't been threatened with an IRS audit. Being a small fish to fry, such an effort would simply be a terrible waste of IRS resources. Not to say "waste" isn't a cold reality in the federal leviathan, but I suspect IRS locusts would much rather continue their ravenous assaults on more well-heeled patriotic organizations, individuals and businesses where more painful political and economic damages can be inflicted. (And, let's face it. At 71, jail time is of no real consequence to me anyway. Prison certainly wouldn't shut me up, and maybe they know that.)

So, why the paucity of posts of late on my part?

Well, after recently publishing A Patriot's Call to Action which profiles the economic and constitutional threats posed by a ruthless Progressive contagion which, for years, has brazenly flouted American values/traditions and dangerously weakened the very fabric of our republic, there is really little else TO say at this juncture. My needlessly spouting steam at this time makes little sense. Armed with information, it's now really up to the body politic to challenge the Progressive menace.

At long last, disinfecting sunlight has finally penetrated the septicity of the Progressive contagion and its metastasis now stands a better of chance than ever of being reversed. In short, many folks have finally been shaken out of their stupors--no small feat. But, the question is, have enough people been awakened? And are enough folks sufficiently scared and incensed to push back? We shall see...

All that really remains in the coming weeks and months is for the details and breadth of this tentacular anti-American Progressive conspiracy to be fully disclosed and arrested. And from all indications, it appears that the Congressional investigations are finally shedding light on this cancerous infestation and causing Progressive cockroaches to scurry for cover. And that, of course, has always been my fervent hope and my blog's raison d'etre from the very beginning.

In short, many erstwhile somnabulant patriots--and, now, even some myopic useful idiots on the left--have finally been awakened to the Progressive threat to their personal freedoms and way of life. Nothing like the sting of personal vulnerability to stir even the most radical ideologues and sycophants among us.

As can be seen, a sufficient number of our "representatives" are finally understanding that the systemic corruption of this tyrannical Administration can no longer be benignly ignored nor tolerated; that it is, in fact, a "clear and present danger" to us all. With each passing day and disclosure, Congress and its teams of seasoned investigators are faithfully and rigorously taking on the conspirators. They instinctively know that this contagion must be fully exposed and destroyed.

Lingering questions: Will the trails clearly lead all the way up to the proverbial fish-head? And will Congress be undeterred no matter where the paths may lead them? My view is that the trails ALL lead to the fish-head and his Progressive apparatchiks in the White House. To believe otherwise is willfully delusional. Obama is either a disengaged incompetent boob and witless puppet or an accomplished self-serving ideologue. Clearly, he's not a stupid man--mendacious, smooth-talking, calculating, reckless, and driven by failed ideological theories, yes. But not IN CONTROL? Please.....

So, while Congress and a small cadre of responsible journalists soberly and fearlessly develop the details of the predictable IRS, AP, EPA, DHHS, NLRB, Homeland Security, Benghazi, et. al. scandals and tyranny, I've opted to cool my heels. Afterall, with so many aggressive and well-oiled investigations underway, all I could reasonably hope to do is to repeat what is already known or in the process of being disclosed.  And that's just not my game or interest, nor do I think it would be educational or a useful expenditure of my time. Others can more enthusiastically serve the purpose of monitoring and reporting on developments than I.

That said, I still plan more posts specifically profiling constitutional issues, and continue to work toward that end. I believe that's the most constructive contribution my Opinerlog blog can provide. I will also follow-up on reports and concerns which, in my opinion,  may have escaped adequate public scrutiny, like the Democratic Senators who formally requested the IRS to go after patriotic organizations in the first place!  Will these Progressive hacks be asked to testify, or will the political ruling class protectively circle the wagons yet again? How Congress handles this nettlesome matter will be the true test of its mettle, integrity and seriousness. So, please stay tuned. I'm not out to pasture yet.

In any event, now is NOT the time for patriots to retire from the field of battle. Being validated is one thing, but complacently throwing in the towel before the job is done would be the heigth of stupidity and short-sightedness. Much serious work remains undone. If we are to fully restore constitutional order and revitalize American values and traditions throughout this nation, we must remain vigilant and both fearlessly and actively engaged.

And while civil disobedience, state nullification, secession and rebellion remain time-honored and thoroughly legitimate constitutional remedies to the tyranny which currently grips our "republic", I am now at least cautiously optimistic that, for the moment anyway, these God-given natural rights of resistance may be unnecessary; that given the tenacity and vigor of these investigations there may truly be light at the end of the tunnel.

That isn't to say that disunion can be altogether avoided. Drawing upon our founders' wisdom, and from a purely historical standpoint, I still believe that disunion--or a more sensible re-ordering of the union within a more classical federal framework--is, most likely, unavoidable and, in the final analysis, is, in the longer term, in the best political and economic interests of all Americans.

"Whenever the legislators endeavor 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 further obedience." John Locke, 1690

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." Edward Abbey

"People who fight may lose. People who do not fight have already lost." Bertold Brecht

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance." Thomas Jefferson

Cuomo's "Secret Gun Confiscation Task Force" Exposed!

Tom Bauerle of Western New York's WBEN reported on Friday, April 12th, that at the behest of Homeland Security, earlier this week Governor Cuomo convened the NYS Police and one representative from the NYS Criminal Justice Department for the purpose of forming a "clandestine task force" whose nefarious goal is to circumvent NY citizens' 4th Amendment rights as well as HIPAA privacy rules in an aggressive effort to confiscate the guns and to pull the pistol permits of any NYS citizen who, over the past 10 years, has visited a mental health provider or been prescribed anti-depressant or anti-anxiety medication during that period.

Make no mistake, folks. IF TRUE, Cuomo, the NYS Police Superintendent and the CJD participant, among other Cuomo accomplices yet unidentified, have clearly violated our civil rights and, by law, should be 1) removed from office, and 2) tried for their criminal behavior.

And to make matters worse--if that's even possible--through a friend of Mr. Bauerle, one Doug Hagman, a Homeland Security informant reported that this lawlessness was sanctioned and encouraged by VP Biden and the White House! In short, and according to the Homeland Security informant, the Obama Adminstration intended that this "task force" test the efficacy of Obama's systematic gun confiscation policies in NYS.

Unfortunately for these statist thugs, it looks like they may have blown it big time.

Their first target, one David Lewis, a librarian in Erie County whose guns had been reportedly taken from him, didn't fold. He retained counsel and is fighting back, a level of resistance the "secret task force" had not at all anticipated. The State Police response? "We got the wrong man." What? So, who was the right man and how did they obtain the "right man's" mental health records? Prevaricating, ruthless dunderheads! This time, our shameless Progressive overseers may have gone a tad too far--even for them.

My guess is that Cuomo, New York State's resident Progressive-in-Chief, can kiss his presidential bid good-bye. We can only hope that he and his thuggish co-conspirators end up in jail as well. They don't belong on the streets much less in public office.

I urge all New Yorkers to contact their State representatives and to insist upon a swift and thorough investigation. Absolutely nothing less should be tolerated. And let the chips fall where they may.

Sobering Postscript: it's important to note that the Assembly's Judiciary Committee is controlled by Progressives (odious apparachik Sheldon Silvers), thus appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate this lawlessness is, at best, doubtful. And, of course, we can't expect any help from the US Justice Department. Both our 2nd and 4th Amendment protections hang in the balance. Only a concerted grassroots effort will nip this tyranny in the bud. PUSH your reps to fully investigate and, if the wealth of reports are incontrovertible, we must all urge Cuomo to resign.

Did Our Founders Foresee Our Republic's Demise?

Did our Founders foresee our Republic's demise or dissolution? In a word, unequivocally.

When in 1787 Dr. Benjamin Franklin stepped outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia wherein delegates from the various States had fashioned our Constitution, he was met by a woman who eagerly asked if we had a monarchy or a Republic, to which Dr. Franklin famously replied, "You have a Republic, madam, if you can keep it." And as it turns out, keeping our Republic has been a very tall order-- indeed, an abject failure.

From that point forward, our Republic's unraveling began for all the reasons our Founders had wisely anticipated.

Today, in what conservative Mark Levin has insightfully characterized as America's "post-constitutional period",  it should be both sobering and, indeed, alarming to realize that 3/4 of our federal laws have been promulgated, not by our elected representatives, but by a faceless, heavy-handed and essentially unaccountable bureaucracy, effectively supplanting bedrock republican principles of governance with imperious bureaucratic rule.

Alien ideology, self-serving party politics, cynical political pandering, a destructive squandering of our national wealth to provide bread and circuses to nurture dependency, the dumbing down of a politically correct population, relentless attempts to legitimize immoral behavior, a calculated effort to destroy our  religious foundations and the traditional nuclear family, and widespread ignorance of or hostility toward our foundational constitutional principles, have conspired to bring this country to a tipping point of economic collapse and political suicide.

Astute historians and students of human behavior, the Founders well-understood and apprehended the age-old tendency of human nature to corrupt the best laid and loftiest plans of man. Below is but a sampling of some very astute observations and warnings offered up by our Founders and other historical figures which should give us all pause:

"I agree to the Constitution...and I believe, further, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other." Benjamin Franklin

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

"Our government is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit, by consolidation first, and then corruption...The engine of consolidation will be the federal judiciary; the two other branches the corrupting instruments." Thomas Jefferson

"The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create...a real despotism." George Washington

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely, for the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county, municipality...and pay them out of the public treasury; they may assume the provision of the poor...Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government establishment by the people of America." James Madison

If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freeman, we must live through all time or die by suicide." A. Lincoln

On the matter of "soft tyranny”, this: "The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided--men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till the nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which government is the shepherd." Alexis De Tocqueville, "Democracy in America" (1830)

Do we accept the awful reality of our situation and soberly prepare for peaceful and orderly dissolution, or do we, at our own peril, accommodate and embrace the Godless Progressive agenda and their authoritarian reordering of our lives? This is the critical question before us.

And when you hear Progressives proclaim the virtues of democracy over and over again, remember these sinister quotes:

“Democracy is the road to Socialism”: Karl Marx

“Socialism is the road to Communism.” Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

Got it?

In the throes of wishful thinking, complacency, confusion, fear, anxiety, anger and uncertainty, with one voice patriots have yet to define a clear remedial course of action going forward. But, time is running out, and seizing upon a practicable remedy to our political and economic miasma cannot be far off.

Whatever form that remedial course of action may take, when faced with the looming threat of political oppression and economic self-destruction let us always rely on the wise counsel of our Founders.

Let us never surrender to the utopian assault. In the end, bullies are bullies, and always back down. Standing up in unity to these soulless vermin must be our sacred mission.

“Never give in—never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force, never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.” Winston Churchill

Et Tu, Colonel West?

My sense is that the crap is about to hit the proverbial fan--head-on!

First off, let me disabuse you of any delusions about where I stand on the issue of Obama's constitutional ineligibility and of the massive documentary fraud perpetrated either by him or on his behalf over the past five years: I am an unabashed "birther", and I believe that the mountain of evidence already presented by credible investigative sources is unassailable. And, just to be clear, to those of you who aren't thinking my way on this monumentally crucial issue, either you haven't been paying attention, or you are either diehard ideologues, pollyannas, racists, traitors, or utterly brain dead.

With that behind us, let's move on.

Despite the aggressive disinformation campaign by Obama's apologists, useful idiots, and starry-eyed fans over the last five years, it is now crystal clear to all but the ideologically blind that the preponderance of evidence clearly indicates that Obama's birth certificate released by the White House last year is an embarrassingly obvious computer-generated forgery and that both his social security and selective service cards are also fraudulent. (And this doesn't even get into the critical constitutional question as to whether or not he satisfies the "natural born citizenship" requirement to be President.)

Though I've deliberately reserved final judgement on this matter, in light of the unimpeachable evidence presented so far, my reserving judgement is no longer a rationale option. Whether Obama himself committed these frauds or was knowingly complicit in their commission, these crimes rise to the level of felonies. Most importantly, this fraud obfuscates Obama's real identity and places in serious doubt his constitutional eligibility to serve as President.

That said, even my hero, Col. Allen West, former Tea Party congressmen from Florida, when recently presented the evidence of fraud in Florida, cavalierly dodged the issue. Why? Because, by his own admission, his personal political ambitions trump Principle, the Constitution and the TRUTH. But, he's in notable company--O'Reilly, Beck, among other media talking heads, and ALL the political elites on both sides of the aisle are also complicit.

Upshot: we have an imposter occupying our White House, a mole, this with the knowledge and tacit consent of the media elites and political establishment.

While it's too much to get into here, and bearing in mind that Sheriff Arpaio launched his investigation for the sole purpose of discrediting--not proving--the rumors of Obama's ineligibility and fraud, I urge everyone to get up to speed on the shattering findings of the Arpaio Cold Case Posse's investigation NOW. No sense being blind-sided.

Bear in mind too that these investigators are not wild-eyed right wingnuts or conspiracy theorists, but sober, well-respected civic-minded patriots and volunteer professional law enforcement officers and attorneys. To be clear, responding to repeated requests from patriotic organizations to investigate the rumors of fraud, these volunteers undertook the investigation to objectively disprove and dismiss the rumors--NOT to substantiate those rumors. Tragically, the facts spoke for themselves, and the Posse no longer harbors any doubts whatsoever as to the validity and verifiability of their disturbing findings.

No amount of ridicule, dismissiveness, wishful thinking, marginalization, disinformation, ad hominen can alter the FACT that an insidious fraud has been perpetrated on the American people, and culpability extends to many high profile political leaders. We're talking TREASON here, folks. Plain and simple.

I urge detractors to get beyond the name-calling and carefully review the evidence already uncovered. And if you are so inclined, I urge you to expose the Arpaio Cold Case Posse's findings for the lies you'd like to believe they are.  In any event, ridicule alone neither proves nor disproves anything. Only due diligence and objective analysis can do the job of proving or disproving the evidence. So, trash the rose-colored glasses and get busy. I'm not summarizing the research for you here only to be attacked as a conspiracist. IF you care about pursuing the truth, then YOU do the vetting and research.

It is more than obvious that this putative Chief Executive has deliberately, and at enormous cost, concealed his documentation from  public scrutiny for years. Why? Well, now we know why. In his words, "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." Couldn't have said it better, Barry.

Once the evidence is vividly and cogently presented to the public in the coming months, the folks will listen, and my guess is that many heads will roll. Oh, we'll survive the political tumult occasioned by disclosure of this elaborate and reprehensible hoax, and my sense is that there won't be the rioting in the streets which so many lilly-livered "leaders" have quietly and fearfully predicted. Why? Because folks, whether they be white, black, indigo, pink or chartreuse, liberal or conservative, simply don't like being lied to. Who does the lying is irrelevant. Period.

Stay tuned, folks. It promises to be one helluva ride in the months ahead.

And to my erstwhile hero, Mr. West, shame on you, sir. If you were the last man standing, I wouldn't support you for dog-catcher. Dogs deserve better. You either walk the walk or you're no better than the rest of them.

Obama cheerleaders, the ball's in your court. Prove the Posse dead wrong, horribly misguided or, at the very least, insane. For starters, check out link below.

https://usjf.net/2013/04/stunning-new-revelations-from-lt-mike-zullo-obama-fraud-case/

Doctrine of Incorporation, Due Process, the 2nd Amendment & NYS

Always fascinated, albeit troubled, by the intriguing and often corrupting twists and turns of constitutional development, I happened upon the seemingly esoteric “doctrine of incorporation” which should be of more than passing interest to those of us who honor the Constitution and extoll the virtues of the 2^nd Amendment.

Unknown to most is the fact that at the Republic’s inception the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, was ratified by the States to limit the powers of the federal government—NOT the powers of the States. This founding principle was reaffirmed by the Marshall Court’s unanimous ruling in Barron v Baltimore in 1833. However, because the States were so closely invested in and supportive of the foundational principles and liberties enshrined in the Constitution, States had routinely applied the Bill of Rights within their jurisdictions without federal judicial intervention or congressional interference.

 All that changed with“ratification” of the 14^th Amendment in 1868 when States were suddenly and gratuitously prohibited by the federal government from depriving any of its citizens of life, liberty or property without due process. This would be fine and entirely lawful were it not for the glaring historical realities that 1) the 14^thwas improperly ratified, thus in violation of the Constitution itself, meaning that the 14^th is simply and categorically unlawful, and 2) that, as said, the Bill of Rights was originally intended to limit federal—not State powers.

To wit, despite the 14th's lofty intention to protect the civil rights of emancipated slaves in all states, as constitutional scholar Dr. Gutzman noted,“The Fourteenth Amendment was never constitutionally proposed to the States by Congress and never constitutionally ratified by the States”. (Without getting into the nitty-gritty here, for an instructive and detailed analysis of the 14th's rigged ratification process, I refer you to pages 128-133 of Dr. Gutzman’s “The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution”. It’s a sobering eye-opener.)

In effect, with "ratification" of the 14th the Bill of Rights was, by fiat and for purposes of political expediency, incorporated against the States. Whether a good thing or bad thing, it is still unconstitutional and the result has been an unbroken stream of errant and intrusive judicial rulings which, over the years, has piled one violative ruling atop another—we fondly dub that stare decisis—effectively nullifying original intent and rendering the foundational doctrine of State sovereignty increasingly irrelevant.

Rather than relying upon the will of the citizens of the various States to determine what does and does not violate the Constitution within their sovereign territories, the federal judiciary has successfully, albeit illegally, usurped State jurisdiction and authority. This has resulted in our having permissively elevated the standing of the Supreme Court to that of an arbitrary modern day Delphic Oracle whose infallible--and often tragically unintelligible--pronouncements are routinely deified by an ignorant and disengaged citizenry. In effect, the Supreme Court has eclipsed the constitutional authority of the States, but, in many ways, of Congress and the Executive as well. NOT AT ALL what the framers had envisioned!

As Thomas Jefferson warned in 1820, “to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [would be] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of a [judicial] oligarchy”. And that’s precisely where we find ourselves today. And permitting Congress broad authority to dictate gun rights throughout the country is nothing short of insane.

 

With particular respect to the 2^nd Amendment, and despite the National Rifle Association's best intentions to protect a citizen's right to keep and bear arms, NRA’s relentlessly pushing the federal government to impose conceal-carry reciprocity agreements among the States or to extend blanket protection to all American citizens of their right to keep and bear arms serves little more than to invite the ravenous fox into the proverbial chicken coop.

So, yes, while the Supreme Court’s McDonald v Chicago ruling (which extended the right of all citizens to keep and bear arms) is hailed by 2^nd Amendment advocates, we should also be mindful that what we permit the feds to give can also be taken away.

In short, if the State is sovereign, and the 2^nd Amendment is intended to restrain the federal government, then by what stretch of logic and commonsense should we entrust the federal government to faithfully uphold the rights of citizens in all the States to keep and bear arms? Obviously, we can’t! As can be seen, Feingold and Company are already attempting a mindless curtailment of gun ownership in each and every State. So much for States restraining the federal government from infringing our gun-bearing rights, huh?

 And, finally, there’s the disturbing issue of Gov. Cuomo’s assault on our inherent right to keep and bear arms.

While 44 State Constitutions specifically uphold a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms, NY’s Constitution does not. Strictly speaking then, since, from the originalist standpoint, the feds have no constitutional authority to dictate gun control in NYS, and since there is no specific right to keep and bear arms in the NYS Constitution, decisions regarding gun ownership and any limitations thereto in NYS remain the sole province of the citizens of NYS. Thus, though self-defense is, in my humble opinion, a God-given right which trumps both State and federal law, I still strongly suggest that NYS citizens insist that the NYS Constitution be amended to include a provision which specifically prohibits the State from in any way infringing a NYS citizen’s right to keep and bear arms. (And while they're at it, they would do well to ensure that the 10th Amendment language is adopted as well.)

As this "doctrine of incorporation" illustrates, we’ve certainly made mincemeat of the Constitution, and in the process we’ve created mountains of needless uncertainty, contradiction and jurisdictional confusion, all of which serve only to either obliterate or erode individual liberties. My advice: we’d best get back on solid constitutional footing—and soon--or the vacuum of lawlessness created by this jurisdictional muddle may well be filled by political opportunists driven by motives other than purely republican.

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” Richard Henry Lee, Letters From The Federal Farmer, # 18 (January 25, 1788)

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

 "No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress ... to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.... " Samuel Adams

“The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them.” Samuel Adams, Debates & Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (February 6, 1788)

“Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms under our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” George Mason

“The rights of conscience, of bearing arms, of changing the government, are declared to be inherent in the people.” Fisher Ames in letter to F.R. Minoe (June 12, 1789)