Why The Hard Line?

July 12, 2009

Some people new to the militia have questioned why many in the militia for any length of time have taken a hard line regarding where things stand with the “government”. They often say that there has to be a peaceful way to resolve the issues between the People and the “government”. They say that we must try every peaceful avenue before we start talking about armed conflict. What these people new to the militia do not understand is that the militia has tried peaceful avenues in the past.

Any issue between two people or two groups can only be resolved when both parties are willing to work towards a resolution. If one party is unwilling to work towards a resolution then resolution can never be found. In the lead up to the American Revolution the colonists prepared for war with Britain at the same time that they petitioned Parliament and the King for a peaceful resolution to the issues. We all know what happened, peaceful avenues of resolution failed – Parliament and the King were not willing to work towards a peaceful resolution.

It is apparent to any who wish to see that the federal government does what it wishes and ignores the People. The latest example of this is the recent government bailout of banks and other large corporations that made poor business decisions and were on the verge of bankruptcy. An overwhelming majority of the People were against the federal government bailing out the banks and corporations, yet the federal government still went ahead with the bailout.

It is said that we should vote our elected representatives out of office if they fail to do what we instruct them to do. In a functioning electoral system this would work, however since 2000 we have seen many accusations and some proof of vote rigging and improprieties. If the vote is rigged how can the People ever hope to succeed in this peaceful avenue of resolution of taking back the federal, or any other level of, government?

In the last federal election cycle we saw Ron Paul being ridiculed by the main stream media even though in nearly every poll they took asking who won the debate Ron Paul was the clear winner. The system is set up to exclude so called “third party candidates”. Why is this if not to maintain the status quo? It seems that special interest groups have more influence with our elected representatives than we do, why is that?

Congress creates laws that they have not read. Members of congress over the years have said that they know some of the bills they are voting on are unconstitutional but it is for the courts to fix. Congress votes on bills that give up American sovereignty to foreign interests. Congress votes themselves raises whenever they want, would your employer allow you and the other employees to decide on what wage you will receive?

Bob Schulz and We The People Foundation have been trying to get the federal government to answer one very simple question via Constitutional means – redress of grievances – for some years now. The government has been non-responsive and refuses to answer the very simple question of “Where is the proof that the federal government has the right to collect income tax from average citizens?”. If the federal government has nothing to hide then why refuse to answer this one simple question?

Some people question whether Barack Obama is a naturally born citizen or not. Several court cases have been filed to demand that he prove that he is a naturally born citizen, most have been thrown out of court for one reason or another. Barack Obama has spent millions of dollars making sure that the question is not answered. He claims to have been born in Hawai'i, he claims that he proved he was born there yet what he proposed as proof does not in fact prove that he was born in Hawai'i (those certificates were issued to people born outside of Hawai'i). Some experts on documents have even declared that what was posted was a forgery. He has also hidden all of his other records, such as school records. The simplest way to resolve this issue is for him to bring forth his “long form” birth certificate and answer the question once and for all? Why the reluctance to do this?

The questions and issues raised above are given as examples. It is not so much the questions or issues themselves as much as it is the reluctance of the government to resolve what are seemingly very simple issues. If the government and people involved have nothing to hide then why all the evasive tactics, actions and misdirection? For every example concerning the federal government there are just as many, if not more, examples from state and local governments but we are concentrating on the federal government in this article.

Now that we have some examples let us move to another aspect of this.

Governments at all levels are created by the People. The People created the governments to act as referees in matters between two or more People and ensure that everyone is treated equally. There are many day to day things that the People did not want to deal with so they invested the government with certain powers to deal with those areas on behalf of the People. A business owner will hire managers and others to see to the day to day running of his or her business so that he or she can attend to other things. A group of people who own a business may do the same thing. This is exactly the case with governments, the people hired managers (elected representatives) to run the day to day business. Other employees of the business can be hired by the managers, these are the civil servants and bureaucrats from the street sweeper to the dog catcher to the local police officer – all are employees of the business owners. In the case of the Several States it is the People who these civil servants and bureaucrats work for. When was the last time that a civil servant or bureaucrat showed you the respect you are due?

If you do not believe that the People created government let me provide a few quotes from three Founding Documents that prove that the People created government.

The Declaration of Independence:
governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

The Constitution for the United States:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the 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.

The Bill of Rights
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There you have it. Three Founding Documents that say that the People created the federal government. You will find that each of the Constitutions of the Several States have similar language. Why? Because without the People to create the government there would be no government.

With all of that background it should be apparent that government at all levels should obey the will of the People in the republic form of government we have. A republic form of government is not a democracy. In a democracy 51% of the people could vote to take away the rights of people with red hair, in a republic it doesn't matter if 90% of the people vote to take away the rights of people with red hair because doing such violates the Constitution and the rights of the People who have red hair. So there are limits on what the majority can do.

Now back to the question of taking a hard line. This is not the first time that the People have been in this position – being at odds with the federal government. The last time things where close to this bad was in the 1990s. There were times before that as well, but we will deal with the 1990s since there is so much information available.

In the 1990s the federal government was out of control. Many of the People where afraid of what was going to happen next so they joined militias. The government of course feared the militias because an armed and motivated populace could change the government – something mentioned and provided for in the Founding Documents.

A little research will turn up a lot of information about this time period and the PR campaign the government waged against the militias. Many of us have heard about Ruby Ridge, Waco and the Freemen of Montana. If you have not then you should do a bit of research to bring yourself up to speed, look at all sides not just the government and media side – you owe it to yourself to have as much information as possible.

This isn't a research paper on the 1990s, and I am not going tell you what to think. I am simply going to point out a few things, one of which is The Knob Creek Declaration. In essence The Knob Creek Declaration was the final communique from the militias to the federal government. It speaks for itself well and can be read below.

The Knob Creek Declaration:

DECLARATION

Our respect for the opinions of the Citizens of the several States demands that we state the reasons for our actions. Our governments have deprived the Citizens of the several states of their God given rights by ignoring the letter and spirit of our Constitutions, as written by our forefathers and given to us in trust.

We have warned the People, from time to time, of attempts by legislators to take unlawful control of our lives. Some have listened, some have not.

Our grievances have fallen on deaf ears of legislators, and the voice of justice is silent in our courts. Bureaucrats, representatives, senators, judges, and our executive officers have no respect for the Constitution which defines the role and limits of government.

The Declaration of Independence of 1776 clearly states the terms and reasons why we, the People, have the right, and duty, to restore our lawful Constitutional Government.

Therefore:

We, the People, acting in accordance with the Second Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, hereby declare and affirm the following:

While endorsing no position concerning their beliefs, we DEMAND that the sovereign Citizens of Justus Township, Montana stand before a Constitutional Grand Jury, convened and conducted in strict accordance with Articles of Amendment (commonly known as the Bill of Rights) V, VI, and VII to the Constitution of the United States of America, to answer the complaints against them. We demand that all the facts of their case be examined without prejudice, with due process, in an open and public manner. The Citizens of Justus Township have given their pledge to abide by the decisions of this Grand Jury.

During the current unlawful activity of federal officers in Justus Township, and in numerous previous atrocities we have witnessed, we have restrained our brethren who would halt this string of abuses by force of arms. With each abuse by unlawful authority, we have found this more difficult. This has also been more troubling to our own consciences.

Should any citizen be injured, or suffer loss of life, now or in the future, by unlawful authority, and/or without due process, or if any action is taken against any signer, their families, or any supporter of this Declaration, it will be considered an act of war against all the Citizens of all the States. We will then no longer restrain our brethren from the use of whatever lawful force is necessary to eliminate the threat of unlawful federal enforcement authority. These Rules of Engagement will continue until such authority has returned to its Constitutional jurisdiction.

Our efforts are for the restoration of Constitutional government. We do not threaten violence to our fellow Americans, nor will we tolerate indiscriminate destruction of lives and property. If we are to restore the Constitutional guarantees for our children, we must use the lawful means available to us. We will depend on our Creator for judgement of our actions.

THIS DECLARATION IS NON-NEGOTIABLE.

Signed,

Lucky Kountz, Montana State Republic
Jeff Randall, Alabama
William Michael Kemp, Alabama
Kevin Terrell, Kentucky
Richard A Underwood Sr., Missouri
Thomas E Schnitz, Missouri
Franklin Plew, Indiana
Leonard M Grummell, Indiana
James N Wade, Indiana
Shawn M Tharp, Indiana
Robert J Crowe, Colorado
David E Rydel, Michigan
Harry Bibee, Tennessee
Mike Perrin, Tennessee
John Mason, Tennessee
Drew Allen Rayner, Mississippi
Jeff Absher, Mississippi
Joseph Alan Hill, Michigan Republic
Arthur Bean, Michigan

The Year of our Lord 1996, April 14

After this communique the federal government backed off. Over time some folks became less active in the militias, perhaps they felt that they had won the battle and other means should be used to win the war. These hopes have proven to be wishful for things have gotten worse.

It is not just those in the militia that see this. State Representative Sam Rohrer of Pennsylvania sees it as well and wrote an open letter to Barack Obama earlier this month, you can read it here.

Once you have done some research you will better understand why those who have been in the militia for some time are taking a hard line. We have tried peaceful avenues in the past and are even now trying them. To date they have failed because the federal government does not want them to succeed for that would mean a return to limited Constitutional government and they would lose a great deal of the power they have stolen. We do not want another revolution and the bloodshed involved with it, but we are prepared for revolution and bloodshed if that is the route the federal government chooses to take.

Many feel that the decades spent to date working on a peaceful resolution has been enough time. It is obvious the federal government does not want a peaceful resolution and it is just about time for the armed conflict to begin. We did not choose this path but it is before us and we will not shy from it. Like punishing an errant child, we do not relish or look forward to it but we want it done and over so we can move on to life as it should be.