Comments on Pro Libertate: Casus Belli

Hi, Just wanted to point out that the 4th amendmen...

2012-04-09T18:17:33.863-06:00

Hi,
Just wanted to point out that the 4th amendment to the Constitution says that a warrant shall be issued upon Probable Cause with an oath.
I've seen bastard law enforcement come trespassing saying "probable cause" but they had no warrant by a judge or an oath before him, therefore I am pointing out this Scam that some of those use against us.

How sad is it that this conversation takes place i...

2011-02-27T14:11:59.270-07:00

How sad is it that this conversation takes place in this time and place.

Hundreds of years of human progress is being wiped out by those with no conscience or love except for the love of money and power and thus human beings will always destroy that which is good and kind and real and I weep for the unsuspecting and innocent in all of this.

It greatly saddens me that the ambitions of your so-called leading countrymen have created so much terror in, to and for the rest of the world and I have accurately predicted that sooner or later, that terror would be in turned upon you.

As a young man during the cold war, Russia did not particularly frighten me but I have always feared the US because the average person there actually seemed to believe your "God's own agents" propaganda.

The time to resist tyranny is every day and you have failed since your country, more then 170 years ago, adopted the religious idea of manifest destiny, that idea that your country was an "agent of God" in that it is the American mission to promote and defend democracy throughout the world, a fundamental religious concept [which is not now nor which has ever been limited to the then dominate US religion but is shared by all of those middle eastern religions based upon the old testament] destined to be perverted by those with enough personal greed and money to control and repeat the mantra of the message.

Mr. Grigg, I quite enjoyed your posting. You have an intellect and a talent which I greatly admire.

I wish you good fortune in the killing times coming for there was much which was good there.

Calgary

Sometimes I think that in large cities but not in ...

2010-09-14T17:18:14.928-06:00

Sometimes I think that in large cities but not in small cities, it is self defense to ambush and kill police because it seems that police in the big cities are killers.

Suppose for example, if some good person ambushed and killed a cop everytime the police murdered someone. Would that result in the police deciding the being a cold blooded killer is not fun?

Nevertheless, it is not the killer cops that action should be taken against. Instead, assuming it is justified and I don't truly believe it is, it would be far more effective if those that hired the cops and allowed them to have a license to murder were killed.

http://2012patriot.wordpress.com/2010/04/08/hutare...

2010-04-08T14:44:57.253-06:00

http://2012patriot.wordpress.com/2010/04/08/hutaree-militia-of-michigan/

http://2012patriot.wordpress.com/?s=posse

"Says who? I say you can." Well, Jes...

2010-04-08T14:11:47.821-06:00

"Says who? I say you can."

Well, Jesus Christ, who tells us to return good for evil. To love our enemies as God loves us.

"God commands us to use deadly force, if necessary, for defense"

Where? ... please point out where God "commands us to use deadly force for defense"......and remember, Christian's are called to the standard of the New Testement not the old. When Peter cut off the ear of Malchus at Gethsemene did Christ say "that's it GET 'EM BOYS!!" Or did he heal the ear of the man who had come to take him to his death and tell Peter to put up his sword? There is a simple reason why survival is not an object of the gospels -- your eternal life in Christ is already guaranteed. Those who try to save their life in this world will lose it and those that lose their life for his sake will gain it. Get it?

"Who is glorifying war? Liberty is what is glorious, as is life, and defense of both sometimes requires violence."

I was speaking of justifying agressive violence by relying on the actions of the founders.
Killing is killing no matter how noble or "glorious" sounding the justfication. All liberty comes from the way of Christ [period], and God does not require one drop of evil, not one bit of human violence to bring about his kingdom. In fact use of evil will NEVER bring about his kingdom.

"You use Christian language, but your arguments sound more like Secular Humanism"

I had to chuckle at this. Secular Humanists have no trouble at all sacrificing great numbers of people as long as it is "justified" -- see, e.g. Bill and Hillary Clinton........and ......well, apparently you. Who sounds like a secular humanist, again?

"you don't seem to see a clear cut distinction between good and evil, good people and wicked people; and therefore, you can find no justification for deadly force."

On the contrary -- there is a very clear cut disctinction between good and evil. Christ tells us what it is. Those who follow his way of the non-violent love of friends and enemies alike are good. Those who justify murder of enemies in order to accomplish some worldly goal are wicked.

This peculiar definition of secular humanist would, indeed, include God himself since he makes rain fall on the good and the wicked alike.

"A truely Christian perspective is that God has authorized the good and the righteous to use deadly force in limited circumstances against the wicked."

Again, please point to me the section of the Gospels which contains this purportedly "truely Christian perspective". It is a lie [period]. Militarized Christianity is a lie [period].

One of the most important biblical scholars of the 20th century, John L. McKenzie, said that "if we cannot know that Christ was non-violent from reading the Gospels, we can know nothing at all of the Gospels. It is the clearest of teachings." Truth. Hard truth but truth nontheless.

"I prefer Christ's method: turn the other cheek, but carry a sword in case you need it." Again, you are perverting what the Gospels actually say. Christ says no such thing. Please be very, very careful here, brother.

Admitedly, it's a hard, hard road to travel. And that is precisely why so few can actually do it. Can I actually adhere to this way when the chips are down? I pray that I can but the truth is that I don't know if I have the courage. Following Christ is no place for the chicken hearted -- that's for sure.

No matter what, taking up the cross (as we are called to do) can not possibly mean killing others you deem your enemy even to save your life. Christ (our model) went to his death not lashing out, not calling down curses on his tormentors, but rather loving them and asking his father to forgive them. Hard indeed.

Please visit: http://www.centerforchristiannonviolence.org/

May god bless you and grant you grace and peace.

""I am disturbed when groups like the Hu...

2010-04-08T11:44:42.853-06:00

""I am disturbed when groups like the Hutaree target law enforcement and the military with violence.

Like most groups, police vary from very good-hearted people to petty tyrants to outright thugs.

But for the most part, they follow their orders. They have jobs, families, and pensions to think about, and so they toe the line.

So, save your real rage for the elites who pull their strings.

Paul Mendez @ 11:45 AM""

Nope. Sorry. No can do. You see, it's not the elite who pull the trigger. They give the orders, yes, but they don't pull the trigger.

While I'm not advocating aggression against anyone, deserving or otherwise, I do advocate properly identifying those who make themselves your enemy.

Cops aren't pre-programmed machines operating according to ones and zeros written on magnetic material and translated into actions. They can say "no" to orders. They can earn their livings and pensions some other way. They can treat passive or even upset people with the dignity and respect due to any creature made in the image of God, so long as said creature isn't objectively trying to kill them and capable of doing so. They can choose not to harrass people who are minding their own business and not endagering others.

So, the elites are certainly deserving of our rage, but they are absolutely powerless to enforce their injustices without the direct cooperation of their armed loyalists: cops, soldiers, code enforcers, dog catchers, etc. ad nauseum. Addressing one's rage to the persons who actually cause real damage is quite appropriate.

""I am disturbed when groups like the Hu...

2010-04-08T11:41:05.972-06:00

I am disturbed when groups like the Hutaree target...

2010-04-07T12:45:05.740-06:00

I am disturbed when groups like the Hutaree target law enforcement and the military with violence.

Like most groups, police vary from very good-hearted people to petty tyrants to outright thugs.

But for the most part, they follow their orders. They have jobs, families, and pensions to think about, and so they toe the line.

So, save your real rage for the elites who pull their strings.

I went to the Hutaree website immediately upon hea...

2010-04-07T06:35:35.497-06:00

I went to the Hutaree website immediately upon hearing the story break. What they had on their webpage was pretty banal; survivalist considerations about not using MREs as 'bug-out' staples, as they will bind you up; discussing how government infringed on their rights to worship, even scintillations of fear of being attacked for being white, Christian, and having families.

What I noticed from the news reports is that the troops attacked people in trailers - they were poor, they had stockpiled food and armaments for what they believed was a coming attack on their way of life. When they WERE attacked, they found out just how useless and ineffective those preparations were.

To me, their biggest mistake was in telling outsiders what they had - and didn't have. On the internet they posted for all to see just what they believed, hoped, and feared. They invited trojan horses into their midst to see and share whatever they had, from their idealism to their ammo. Then they were stunned because they were attacked.

Does no one realize that Waco and Ruby Ridge were mere practice? An attempt to see how far the militarized local, state, and federal officers could go with media sanction? When they found out, they lay in wait, and encouraged Bush to pass all of those "Executive Orders" that basically gave the next (and the next, and the next) President the right and authority to suspend law and usurp justice, to attack willfully and without proof or provocation, ANY one who stands against whatever the current government and media claim as 'righteousness'?

The mainstream media as well as those employed in the justice system will come down firmly on the side of those who abuse government power and the Constitution, because it is in that abuse where their own profits (and permissions to continue) lie.

When forums and blogs become vacant or vacuous, when people are in so much fear that they stop posting about violations of the Constitution and civil rights, when the rebellious are quashed to nothing and become silent, then will those in power think they have won. They will be wrong - because the ones who post their rantings on the Internet are mere cannon fodder, used by both those who would rip up the Constitution and those who would defend it as media distractions.

Davidand/orwendy Ballou, Tolstoy, Ghandi,and Kin...

2010-04-06T21:43:22.819-06:00

Davidand/orwendy
Ballou, Tolstoy, Ghandi,and King were all followers of Jesus Christ , two were ministers of the Gospel, all dedicated their lives to actively trying to follow Jesus example,and to lead others to lead a moral life, two were martyred for their faith. Where does Jesus say turn the other cheek but carry a sword just in case?
As for the Bad Elk case- subsequent decisions form the precedent that forms case law, without looking at the history of realted legal opinions since that case, you can misunderstand the law.There are many other decisions about self defense.You may disagree with the courts , but that's how the law works.
The left gets treated to this federal destruction of fringe groups just as much as the right, and has rathervsimar discussions at times, just look at how the Feds treated the, Black Panthers, Pine Ridge Reservation, the Move inPhiladelphia-same stuff.

Todd said... "Then where does that put t...

2010-04-06T16:06:14.084-06:00

Todd said...

"Then where does that put the Founders and the Declaration of Independence ad-nauseum?..." -- MoT

It puts them the same place as every other human being -- initiating agression is wrong. To the extent that they did this, they were wrong. You cannot reconcile loving your enemy with putting a bullet through his head....

Says who?
I say you can.

First, assuming your actions are in the right, and you are giving someone a bullet in an act of defense, you show love to those around the one receiving the bullet--protecting them from further depredations and destruction.

Second, from a Christian perspective, you are showing love to the one receiving the bullet from God's perspective, by this reasoning. God commands us to use deadly force, if necessary, for defense; there is nothing that God does or commands us to do that is unloving; therefore, we can accept (by faith, if nothing else) that it is a loving act to give someone a bullet, as long as it is truly justified.

I am forever done gloriying war and brutality no matter how pretty sounding the justification.

Who is glorifying war? Liberty is what is glorious, as is life, and defense of both sometimes requires violence.

You use Christian language, but your arguments sound more like Secular Humanism--you don't seem to see a clear cut distinction between good and evil, good people and wicked people; and therefore, you can find no justification for deadly force.
A truely Christian perspective is that God has authorized the good and the righteous to use deadly force in limited circumstances against the wicked.

There's a better way. Adin Ballou, Tolstoy, Gandhi and MLK had it right (as did the guy they all followed).

I prefer Christ's method: turn the other cheek, but carry a sword in case you need it.

www.godandguncontrol.com

wow really these white christian people are insane...

2010-04-06T14:54:35.470-06:00

wow really these white christian people are insane and dangerous but all of you bend over backwards watching blacks destroy this country and teach everyone how to get over and attack authority everyday....you clowns and your kids are being raised in this pseudo black society of broken families and rap gangsta garbage....It's OK for your boy in Texas to massacre American White soldiers and Obama all he says every time there is some Muslim militant asshole killing ....the first thing Obama says is "DON'T JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS" my ass.....I'm done with all this garbage....you just don't see it do you...Obama gets in and all of a sudden everything is about race and religion LMFAO!! brilliant....

Looks like we've been here before: "Gove...

2010-04-06T14:52:26.464-06:00

Looks like we've been here before:

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." -George Washington

Couldn't have said it better today.

what would the founding fathers do if they back am...

2010-04-06T13:06:37.616-06:00

what would the founding fathers do
if they back among US today?Given
that our fed govt has equalled or
far surpassed anything England did
to cause the American Revolution
they would either have to revolt now or apologize to King George
& the British.DC has been poking
its finger in the chest of We the Sheeple for decades folks.Samuel
Adams was the father of the Am.
Revolution.I can imagine what he
would be doing now.Tar & feathers
anyone?

It appears the question is who is really being sub...

2010-04-06T12:54:15.547-06:00

It appears the question is who is really being subversive here?

Hutaree indictment Let's examine the indictm...

2010-04-06T11:48:59.027-06:00

Hutaree indictment

Let's examine the indictment in detail from a constitutional standpoint.

1. The "general allegations" are inflammatory rhetoric that does not belong in an indictment. It is an attempt to make mere organization and training seem to be a crime, but it is not, even for the unconstitutional provisions of the U.S.C.

2. Count 1. "Seditious Conspiracy". The key statement is:

... acting as a militia group know as the HUTAREE, did knowingly conspire, confederate, and agree with each other and other persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to levy war against the United States, to oppose by force the authority of the Government of the United States, and to prevent, hinder, and delay by force the execution of any United States law.

The only provision of the Constitution for the United States that might provide authority for any part of this is the Treason Clause, Art. III Sec. 3 Cl. 1:

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

In the 10th Congress, First Session, Senate, 1808 Feb 11, 24, Mar 1; Annals 17:108-27, 135-49, 159-50, a proposal was moved, debated, and rejected on constitutional grounds, to make conspiracy to commit treason a crime:

Conspiracy is an offence no where mentioned in the Constitution. ... This Constitution being a special grant of power, those acting under its authority cannot claim the exercise of any power not delegated or vested in them, except such incidental powers as may be requisite to carry the specified powers into effect or result from the exercise of them. The power to punish conspiracy cannot be included with the class of incidental or resulting powers. ... This crime called conspiracy, however odious, is in its nature so vague and indefinite, and liable to be proved by testimony of so suspicious a character, that I fear it would be dangerous to give it a place in our criminal code. Conspirators, when their guilt is well ascertained, will generally be punished with sufficient severity by that great censor, public opinion. It does not appear to be entirely congenial with either the genius or practice of the American Government to punish a man for his wicked intentions, until they have eventuated in the perpetration of some unlawful act.

So by this original understanding, the Constitution really does require the crime of treason actually be carried out, and not just be planned or directed. One may argue this is impractical, that it would make the Constitution a "suicide pact", but the Constitution says what it says and until it is amended we are bound to its limits, no matter what apparent necessities might emerge.

Similar arguments can be made against the charges in the indictment, "to oppose by force the authority of the Government of the United States, and to prevent, hinder, and delay by force the execution of any United States law." There is no constitutional authority to make those things a crime, or any authority to make anything a crime under the Necessary and Proper Clause. For further discussion of why sedition is not a crime under the Constitution see the original draft and adopted version of the Kentucky Resolution of 1798:

That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, and no other crimes whatsoever

For more see http://constitutionalism.blogspot.com/2010/03/hutaree-indictment.html

The one thing that is becoming clear in my mind is...

2010-04-05T23:26:19.221-06:00

The one thing that is becoming clear in my mind is that we are entering an era where we will discover first hand the real power of the bought and paid for media.
Fact is the media in concert with Homeland Security is much more powerful than any of our courts, yes even the "supreme". Fact is that court, if not now, will soon be a laughable lopsided group of libs that are so steeped in dialectical narcissism that real accounting of any kind is but a pluralistic joke.
One will likely never know the real story here in full but if Waco was any indication of what is left of religious freedom I think we will (not?) be seeing many such rebellions where the "job" is to stir the pot before it can boil and spring the element of surprise likely based on circumstantial evidences that could only be used by a government bent on building mock cases to protect its move to flatten everything and anything that made this land great,
like the constitution. This is a very sad thing to watch and a sad time to be alive as we watch our sovereignty and just about every other meaningful distinction being wiped out by those who value power and stuff over people and ethics.

And jon, you may not like them very much, but they...

2010-04-04T07:44:27.469-06:00

And jon, you may not like them very much, but they were not doing anything wrong, and if you believe that they must justify their very existence, maybe you need to do likewise.

i don't call myself a soldier while not having been in the military.

and i do not take pride in my sins.

now, it could be a misunderstanding.

can you show that they have only ever used "warrior," and not "soldier," to portray themselves?

nor am i judging them whatsoever based on the government's portrayal.

do you know another so-called group of "christian soldiers" which does not stand accused of peacefully going about the business of researching explosives technology? or peacefully going about the business of plotting to murder a police officer? i would like this other group to answer the same questions.

subsequent to that are the questions of service to the governor, or otherwise fulfilling the duty of a militia. only once you show me that are they relevant. do not put the cart before the horse so you can win an argument.

I would however gently rebuke the idea that Christ...

2010-04-04T07:33:26.616-06:00

I would however gently rebuke the idea that Christians cannot be soldiers.

1) why is everyone taking this position an anonymous commenter?

2) laurence vance asks you just the other day,

"Who would nail the Son of God to a cross and crucify him?

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. (John 19:23)

Of all the horrible things that soldiers have done throughout history, this is certainly the most reprehensible.

Oh, but they were just following orders."

look, i have no problem with truly honest christians calling themselves "a soldier", or "a militia-man", or almost anything, really, because that is entirely between them and the Lord.

but when you act in reality and you are taking the king's coin to "serve" then that makes you a soldier no matter what you call yourself, and one who then professes to be christian is serving two gods unless they're even lying about that.

that is the truth, which the God-fearing man ought to learn how to speak, even if he is in violation of it. that is the whole point of christianity, no? know first that you are a sinner, and see the ways in which it is true. whether or not you correct this is, again, a point between you and the Lord.

how i mean this applies to the hutaree, in terms of justifying it, is just the question: "it is reported that you call yourselves both 'christian' and 'soldiers'. what do you really mean by that? how will you justify that to christians and to soldiers?"

John Bad Elk v. The United States seems like a goo...

2010-04-04T01:26:39.609-06:00

John Bad Elk v. The United States seems like a good precedent for defending oneself against unlawful arrest, but there is one hitch—John Bad Elk killed John Kills Back. How could the Supreme Court (sic) be expected to rule any other way, when for several decades prior to that case it had been the official policy of the US government to exterminate the native population? It was just one Injun killing another Injun, so no big deal. In fact, that was the goal all along. But if Bad Elk had defended himself against, say, Andrew Arena, he may well have been executed.

Just a thought.

As the Fedthugs have a well worn pattern of doing,...

2010-04-02T08:39:32.759-06:00

As the Fedthugs have a well worn pattern of doing, they had an "informant" embedded in the Hutaree organization, that was the most vocal instigator of violent and illegal activities.

When is the public going to wake up and realize that the Alphabet Soup Agency's, are a major part of the corrupt band of criminals in the satanic city in the District of Columbia? They are the instigators of terrorism and criminal activities both here and abroad.

Oh, that's right, they have most of the public dumbed down by brainwashing them with the lame stream media. Silly me.

And jon, you may not like them very much, but they were not doing anything wrong, and if you believe that they must justify their very existence, maybe you need to do likewise. Whaddathink??

Bob
III

They say the plan was to lure a cop somewhere via ...

2010-04-02T02:10:47.928-06:00

They say the plan was to lure a cop somewhere via a false 911 call, then kill him. Now, you're saying that killing him would be an act of self defence.

Actually, what I wrote was exactly the opposite:

"Plotting to murder another human being is a crime, of course, as is preparing to murder others who would assemble for a funeral."

I should also make it clear that I have no idea whether the description of the alleged Hutaree plot was accurate. On past performance, federal snitches don't strike me as reliable or credible witnesses.

I don't get it. They say the plan was to lure ...

2010-04-02T01:48:33.743-06:00

I don't get it. They say the plan was to lure a cop somewhere via a false 911 call, then kill him. Now, you're saying that killing him would be an act of self defence. What? Killing a cop who is coming to respond to your 911 call is self defense? Or did they assume there's a great chance that the cop sent out would be a maniac killer who would start shootin' around randomly with blank eyes?
So I just don't get this.

Stevie

Mr. Grigg, I stumbled upon a link to your blog ...

2010-04-02T00:43:33.001-06:00

Mr. Grigg,
I stumbled upon a link to your blog and must say that I am very appreciative of the manner in which you bring to to the surface of this story how easily that speculation of intent turns into a crime depending on the origin of said speculation. If a criminal intent is manufactured due to specific acts of coercion enacted on citizens by any government agency would imply that the owner of that crime is that government agency. A law enforcement agent that brings to the table of a person or group, weapons, plans for the implementation of criminal activity and any other means to facilitate, aid and or further encourage criminal activity then that agency is primarily the guilty party. A crime becomes a crime upon doing the act deemed illegal.

We the people of the United States .[ Yes we the P...

2010-04-01T10:36:44.036-06:00

We the people of the United States .[ Yes we the People created the Government . An when your creation rots and is no longer functional . Then ii is time to trash the old and create a new one .]
In order to form a more perfect union . establish Justice , insure Domestic Tranquility , Provide for the common defense , promote the general general Welfare , and secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and our Posterity . do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America .

This is the opening paragraph of the Constitution for the United States of America . Where dose it state that the government usurps it's creator ?

I believe We the people do not know the history of this Government we argue about so much . What we see and have today is not what We the people created . It is a deformed aberration of the original government created under the Constitution for the United States .

No wonder that the Creator struggles to rid it self of this rot . How will this struggle end ? Only God knows .