Jump to content

Little Lesson In Constitutional History


Recommended Posts

My Friend William Michael (Mike) Kemp has been at fighting to try and teach folks how to make sure their lives are free from Unka Sham and the Goobers for many years.

He got me off my Republican/NRA/Be Nice To Everyone ass and has begun over the years I've had joy of knowing him.


Goobers have tried to kill, jail, imprison and RICO him. One tough son of a bitch. Research "ATF Good Ole Boy Roundup" and the late 90's messup with some racist Federal Swine, err LEO sorts that he helped uncover and bust.

Payback for an adult juvenile diabetic incarcerated from them was near deadly.


This is a LONG post with Mike's comments interspaced within. for those of you who think the State exists to give you presents and owes you something, quit reading right here.


Freedom mined and interested folks, those who want to think of a world with a bias- and religion-neutral government continue along.







Mike Kemp minutemn@gmail.com


Jimi, I have removed the IDs from the post, pasted it intact, plus the

subject line intact into a fresh post to remove header info, and am

blind-copying it far and wide. Do please feel free to do the same,

while retaining my name and email address.

And for the information of ALL, I agree wholeheartedly with the

statement by Lennon at the end of the post, your regular sig.





I take extreme exception to the conclusions reached, as expressed

herein. In my view, they are expressed by those who have not a clue of

the letter and intent of the Constitution, and therefore have not a

clue of how badly the Constitution is being violated.


And the worst of the violations are in the areas of direct

infringements into individual rights.... personal loss of sovereignty

of the individual, which is the entire theoretical basis of the

foundation of the country.


I quote from the Declaration of Independence, which is (even among the

worst of the usurpers in the occupation government in power in this

country) considered THE founding document of the nation.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created

equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable

Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of

Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted

among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the



This seems clear enough. GOVERNMENTS ARE CREATED. By people... and

creators can not and must not be inferior to their creation.


Further... the SINGLE PURPOSE OF LAWFUL GOVERNMENT is stated-- 'to

protect these rights'. That is all. There is NO other lawful purpose,

no matter how high-sounding it may be.


Continuing from the Declaration:

whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it

is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute

new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and

organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely

to effect their Safety and Happiness.


Clear? Does this not clearly establish the hierarchy, who's on top and

who's on bottom? Who's the dog, and who's the tail?



Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established

should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly

all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer,

while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the

forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses

and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design

to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is

their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards

for their future security.


Clear? Just in case King George III (or Dubya, otherwise known as

George II) didn't understand the first time it was stated.


The Constitution was written to implement these concepts into 'rules'

for government.


I could spend hours enumerating how Governments, particularly since

the time of Woodie Wilson, vastly increasing under St. Franklin of

Roosevelt and gone exponential since Johnson, specifically violate the



I will limit myself to a few well known examples-- the Federal

Reserve, which is a private corporation owned by the banksters,

largely European banksters, is specifically denied their method of

Keynesian 'money from nothing, money from thin air', 'money' which is

actually nothing more than an instrument of debt, declaring with every

dollar printed that the government owes someone something. Money is

defined in the Constitution:


Article 1, Sec 8, clause 5- (powers of congress)

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the

Standard of Weights and Measures;

(note that money is to have VALUE, not DEBT)


Article 1, Sec 10, clause 1 (powers denied the states) clarifies the above:

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters

of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but

gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;


Silver and gold coins and paper guaranteeing payment in those

commodities are MONEY. All else is NOT lawful money, it is fiat

money.. bankster money. Before St. Franklin of Roosevelt literally

stole at gunpoint the gold owned by the American people-- in 1932, the

American people, via their currency, owned ONE HALF the gold IN THE

WORLD. By 1935, that sum was ZERO. St. Franklin had given it all in

collateral to the Fed Reserve, private banksters. And no one seemed to

notice that since the establishment of the Fed Reserve in 1913-- and

which has subsequently NOT BEEN PUBLICLY AUDITED-- just twenty years

had past. And it is most interesting to note, if you trouble yourself

to go look-- go to a coin shop or the equivalent some day and ask to

see a pre-1933 Federal Reserve note of whatever denomination. On it

you will find that it states 'will pay to the bearer X dollars in GOLD



Now take a bill out of your pocket. Look at it. It claims, plainly on

its face, to in fact BE X dollars. It is a promissory note. An

instrument of debt. In 1930, gold sold for 20 dollars and 67 cents.

Today's quote on gold is in the near neighborhood of 875 federal

reserve notes. Hello? Has gold gotten 42 times more valuable? Or is

'the dollar' worth 0.02 times what it was then?


The first attempt by the banksters to seize the US Treasury was in the

time of the other George of the Time, Washington. And his little

fuck-buddy, Hamilton, who had all the rich friends in the bankster

business. Jefferson abolished it. Another attempt was made, and

Jackson abolished it.


Moving on. The United States-- which was once commonly referred to in

the plural-- the United States ARE, but now, imperial Washington

holding sway, is now referred to in the singular-- the United States

IS. You may thank the tyrant Lincoln for that perversion. Go read the

Maryland state anthem

http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/01glanc...bols/lyrics.htm l,

and realize that the 'tyrant's boot' and 'tyrant's torch' it refers to

are LINCOLN'S. He sent troops to prevent the Maryland legislature's

meeting, wherein they were certain to secede and join the Confederacy.

Do you REALLY think it was about slavery?

This is what old honest Abe said:

I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way

the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I

am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of

negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with

white people ... I as much as any other man am in favor of having the

superior position assigned to the white race.


Not my words... ABE's. Not my sentiments... ABE'S. So kindly keep your

uninformed comments to yourself. That is history, not my opinion being



The United States were last at war in August of 1945. War is a

Constitutionally defined concept, as is money.


Article 1, Sec 8, clause 11- (powers of congress)

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning

Captures on Land and Water;


So.... the adventures in Afghan, Iraq, those threatened against Iran,

the first Gulf 'War' (sic), Nam, Korea, all of it are nothing but

usurpation of power. ZERO AUTHORITY, simply usurped power. The War on

Drugs is laughable, for how can a 'just power of an individual' decree

what his neighbor may own, cultivate, sell, or ingest?


Article 1, section 2, clause 3 states

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States

which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers


This means, if the US government wants money from an individual (a

direct tax), it has to go to the various state legislatures to get it.

This is reiterated by Article 1, section 9, clause 4

No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the

Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.


So the income tax is absolutely unlawful. The IRS is absolutely unlawful


Article 1, section 9, clause 3 (powers denied congress) declares

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.


The much praised (by those ignorant of the rules) Lautenberg Amendment

is CLEARLY ex post facto. It declares further punishment (loss of

right to keep and bear arms) for misdemeanor crimes already



Article 1, section 9, clause 2 (powers denied congress) states

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when

in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.


Has anyone kept up with the antics of the 'War on Terror'? No

rebellion, no invasion-- yet habeas is now suspended.


If the Constitution is to be considered a 'living document', a

'mutable document as times change', why is it specifically written,

with a specific process of amendment? Article 5, section 1 (the only

one) specifically delineates the method of amendment. Any other

deviation from the letter of the Constitution is lawless, on its

face... and our public servants are held to an oath to uphold it by

Article 6 section 1 clause 3.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of

the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial

Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall

be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no

religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office

or public Trust under the United States.


Article 1 in Amendment states

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or

prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or

of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition

the Government for a redress of grievances.


The Bible commonly used for those taking an oath states in Genesis

1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed,

which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which

is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.


This is not an endorsement of Genesis. This is to illustrate their

hypocrisy and lawlessness. The Bible is most commonly quoted by

millions of worldwide practitioners of Judaism and Christianity, and

if asked, will be endorsed by almost all our representatives.


The First Article in Amendment is further considered to protect

'academic freedom'. How do I, a chemist and engineer, practice

academic freedom in the pursuit of weaponry or high-energy chemistry--



Article 2 in Amendment states 'the right of the people to keep and

bear arms shall not be infringed'. Note that it does NOT state

'firearms'. It is ARMS. Any and everything. On April 19, 1775, the

king's governor of Massachusetts sent 1000 redcoats, the finest army

in the world, to seize crew served weapons from the non-governmentally

organized, non-governmentally controlled, not governmentally loyal

citizens' militias of Concord. THE MILITIA (that is, the armed body of

the people) shot down 300 of them in the road, and chased the

remainder back to Boston in full rout, and held them there at siege

until they ran out of powder and shot.


It was again St. Franklin and congress who abolished that right

(without Amendment) by requiring taxation and licensing of heavy

caliber weapons, automatic weapons, explosives, etc. In case you don't

know, rights are historically under law beyond regulation, taxation,

licensing, or any other restriction.


Article 4 in Amendment states

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and

effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and

no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or

affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the

persons or things to be seized.


Have you read Patriot? Heard of warrantless wiretapping? Sneak and

peek 'warrants'?


Article 5 in Amendment states, among other ignored aspects,

nor shall private property be

taken for public use, without just compensation.


How then is the IRS to exist?


Article 6 in Amendment states that a man or woman charged by

indictment shall have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. THEIR

choice-- not the government's choice, which is what operates now,

where 'attorneys' are required to belong and thus be loyal to their

fraternity, the Bar Associations.


Amendment 7 in Amendment requires

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty

dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a

jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than

according to the rules of the common law.


This means that the common law, whereby a man owns his land and

possessions, and in no way can the product of his cultivation or

labor-- or his simple possession of any article-- be considered a



Article 9 in Amendment is earthshattering in its clearly stated intent:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed

to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Do you have any idea what 'other rights' have been preserved by this Amendment?


Or Article 10:

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.


Article 1, section 8, clause 17 states

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District

(not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and

the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United

States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent

of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of

Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;


Otherwise, the powers of congress do not extend over the states,

except as specifically stated. So wherefore comes the myriad of

federal 'laws' aimed at the states, and their respective citizenry?


I have in no way exhausted the enumeration of the various subversions

of the Constitution, by the feds and by the states. But I have laid

out a clearly representative sample of how it is and has been

overthrown. I have stated nothing but bald fact.


Those who support Ron Paul know this already. They are maximally

concerned, since they support the Constitution, and are at a point of

despair after watching the usurpations mount up and up and up by each

and every politician you would care to parade forth as example. They

are knowledgeable people, and are following the rules in attempting to

reestablish that Constitution.


So... if you care not for the Constitution, if you know not and care

not to know of the usurpations of the rules... then shout down the

attempts to lawfully restore it.


Moan and bitch that we are attempting to impose our beliefs on others.


If you think that Ron Paul is gloating in HIS 'money' (remember, to

use that term in any way in reference to 'the United States', money is

Constitutionally defined, and NOT as 'debt'), realize that he returns

'money' to the Treasury each year, has never taken a government-funded

junket, lives simply, operates predictably on a set of stable and long

stated principles, and has never in any fashion been accused of

attempting to 'build empires', whether personally or for his country.


Am I foolish enough to think that one man can rectify these

abominations I have listed? Of course not. Am I foolish enough to

'believe' ANYthing without fact and performance? Get real. Am I

foolish enough to think that I am seeking a 'new boss'? Wake up. I'm

trying to remove ALL bosses from my life, and will not in any way be

surprised to be disappointed when Ron Paul, elected president, falls

short in some aspect or another, for he faces the entrenched, usurped

power of over a century and a half.


But for the first time in my considerably long life-- I was born in

the 1940s-- I hear someone seeking a political office state

uncategorically that he knows the rules, to which he has and will

swear allegiance, intends to require that they be followed to the

letter, and has over 20 years of track record to back it up in all



If you are so committed to having the government pay to kill children

in the womb, deny their enumerated responsibility in securing our

national borders (Article 1, sec 8), engage in research at the expense

of children who are killed in the womb (and, just for your uninformed

statement, Paul's objection to stem cell research is now moot, and I

am certain that he would say the same were he writing this-- new

methodology is now on line whereby stem cells are manufactured from

other cells, and that method in no way depends on aborted



If you think that drilling in Alaska is 'useless', perhaps you have

failed to notice the huge surge in world consumption of oil. Do you

want a world without plastics? Do you want to bicycle everywhere, cold

or wet or whatever? Do you want a Kyoto protocol founded on 'voodoo

science' which will be crippling to the developed world while

encouraging profligate pollution in the developing world, and thus

further removing the basis for our standard of living while vastly

enriching the various corporate giants who have managed to subvert and

escape any effective control by becoming 'multinational' (just by the

way, I am a degreed chemist, an engineer of long and successful

experience in water purification and safe production of power, endowed

with an IQ you can only gasp at, and father of a son now a PhD

candidate in climatology)?


I have my bona fides, as well. I have fought front line for a goodly

portion of my life for our rights, ALL of OUR rights, among others to

consume, possess, and cultivate anything I wish. Further, I have been

imprisoned rather than bend my knee to the unlawful practices by

unauthorized, usurped governmental power-- usurped from US.


And, if you care to be enlightened, google my name, William Michael

Kemp, or Mike Kemp, or Gadsden Minute Men, citizens' unorganized

militia (which I founded), with a +"Good O'Boy Roundup". You likely do

not remember... but once upon a time, for 20 years, federal police

thugs held an annual cops-and-politicians-only weekend long picnic,

indistinguishable from a Klan rally, over the entrance to which was


sign went on to declare that 'field dressed and boned nigger meat'

would be purchased at 17 cents a pound. Inside that gathering, among

other racist paraphernalia, were to be had 'Federal Nigger-hunting

Licenses', good day or night, 24/7, with or without dogs, and with no

bag limit.


This was not a militia gathering... this was a gathering of Unca

Sham's enforcers.


And I am the key force which brought that to public knowledge. A

militia ambush. I've been fighting for personal liberty for most of my

life, and I have to tell you that victories on the side of individual

rights-- which are the ONLY rights.. as are individual

responsibilities the ONLY responsibilities-- are few and far between.

But I came to the plate and hit a home run. And ended up in prison for

my efforts, the target of a raid by a platoon of SWAT with helicopter

support. And utterly without a warrant.


I will close with this-- specifically for some uninformed keyboard

commando named 'Andy' and particularly in response to his statement

"Personally, I think if anyone actually listens to all that Paul says

and genuinely agrees with them, that person is a total scumbag who

should probably be committed.

If you believe in a barbaric, animalistic world with no sense of

social unity, then you should go live on an island alone somewhere and

get the f*ck out my country. Or better yet, why don't all you fat ugly

Texans secede and start your own wacka-wacka fruity land of

illiterate, gun-toting, fetus-loving, bible-thumping, sister-humping



I shall NOT get the fuck out of 'your' country. I AM armed to the

teeth, and I invite you to come remove me from 'your' country. Best

bring plenty of help. And best bring a lunch for all. I have never had

anyone in any place or any time complain of any personal action I have

taken. NEVER. I am PROUD of what I have done, and continue to do, and

have and intend to continue publicly doing more of it.


'Social unity' and 'the social contract' can take turns kissing my

rebel ass. ALL action is individual action, ALL responsibility is

individual responsibility. And I was once bailed out of jail by an old

black lady FROM MY HOME TOWN's pledging her house to achieve my

freedom from jail.


While I am 'from' Alabama, I am proud to state that one half my family

tree is rooted in Texas. Ugly I may be. Beauty is in the eye of the

beholder. Before you assign me to the column headed 'bible thumper', I

will point out to you that while I know scripture (as I know many,

many things, most of which beyond your ken), and I know the

Constitution and law, I am personally an anarchist but also a realist.

I am outnumbered and outgunned, vastly so, by those who cling

desperately to the notion that 'somebody's got to be in charge'... and

the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is as good as 'somebody in

charge' can get. But to accept it, I demand absolutely strict

adherence to the RULES.


And I am going to further educate you, free. I would HAPPILY secede

from the occupation government, but an attempt at just that was once

put down by he most brutal war against the civilian population of a

land ever waged before the era of strategic bombing of civilian

targets, ALSO conducted by St. Franklin of Roosevelt. This, despite

the simple and indisputable fact that in no way and in no words was

secession EVER denied in the Constitution. In fact, to bring the

Constitution into being, those who wrote the Constitution violated the

rules of their then lawful government-- the Articles of Confederation

AND PERPETUAL UNION', which specifically required unanimous consent of

all the signatories in order for it to be dissolved. Founded in fraud

and usurpation, I suppose I should hardly be surprised at the

continuing and ongoing fraud committed by those allegedly sworn loyal

to it.


And, Andy, if you are anything but an uninformed, logically deficient

and loudmouthed keyboard commando, I will be happy to inform you of my

full name (which I already have done), and my physical address, and

invite you to come make your statements to my face. But be careful...

after all, by your own statements, you consider me at least a

candidate for commitment. And by my statements and documented facts

offered to you, you know that I fully believe and practice and defend

my rights-- all my rights-- my rights to self defense, and the right

to keep and bear arms of my choice specifically.


In normal and civil discourse, I maintain a purely logical and factual

demeanor. But in light of your keyboard commanding and your

unwarranted, baseless denigration of me in personal attack, I invite


Come on, BOY... come see a man, if you think you're up to it.

Or you can learn some manners, BOY, and learn to keep a civil tongue

in your head when dealing with your elders and your betters. Either

way suits me just fine.


William Michael Kemp


On Jan 9, 2008 5:59 AM, XXXXXXXXX@someplace.com wrote:




> a close friend sent me these rants this morning...

> the bottom line on Ron Paul sums up my feelings perfectly:

> <snip>


> "@NH_GOP, you want to discuss the issues? Ok. Ron Paul is a libertarian who

> believes in every man for themselves. No healthcare, no social security, no

> government benefits of any sort to speak of. But he also likes to push his

> beliefs on other people. Anti-abortion, anti-immigration, anti-stem cell

> research. He's also atrocious on the environment, supporting useless

> drilling in Alaska and against the Kyoto Protocol." <snip>


> and i have other issues besides that even.,

> the point is, as this guy rides to his ever growing banbk account with a

> smile on his face,

> i, for one, won;t be having that low down "won;t get fooled again" look on

> my face as i greet the new boss...


> same as the old boss.

> you wanna vote for this guy?

> all the power.

> i won't . and that is my right under the constitution as surely as it is

> yours to denigrate yourselves by voting for this guy who is misleading and

> deluding ya.

> so stop giving me grief for refusing to support the same old boss, hoss.

> jimi



> "My position; I don't give rat's ass about RP - that hormonal hysteria

> squeezer don't stand a chance in Hell, but the trend for people to pile on

> his bandwagon is certainly a trend worth watching.

> RP followers have identified themselves as cult minded followers who have

> found their Savior & Messiah that's gonna 'fix' everything that ails them.

> Aging wannabe preppy crowd has-beens, dreaming pie-in-the-sky delusions.

> Bright as appliance bulbs, dense as shit hole rats. . . . Whoa, that's the

> same requirements to be a Politician, too. ;-)))


> 1st - When they say "RP is actually Libertarian."


> AND, When they say "RP is a Constitutionalist."


> They reply; "Oh but that amendment was never ratified."

> So, RP wants to CHANGE it & he's found a loophole? Will it work? What then?

> Do they REALLY believe RP will be THE ONE to get it done? (I doubt all of

> it.)


> WTF is it with these addicts??? How do they spin their own brains to see

> only what they WANT to believe? Are these people taking medications that

> over-rides their ability to think beyond one subject? OBCESSED & Crazy? Yep.

> But hey, I learned about "Stormfront.org" - whoa, arrogant stuff, even more

> crazy.


> I'm kinda sick of it all, but the media is trying to spread some screen time

> on all candidates lately, giving each their minute in the sun, even RP got

> half a second tonight. Kinda looks like Huckster is getting shoved up our

> ass, huh? I wonder if TPTB figure he's palatable to the public but still

> very manipulable to the PTB? You said, "Whipped Chihuahua" ??? LOL So true.

> And there's plenty of dirt under HIS RUGS TOO. The games have only just

> begun! ;-)"




> "If you support Ron Paul, you are a fanatical cultist."

> http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message484648/pg1


> http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message484648/pg2


> Thread started by registered member of "Stormfront.org"

> http://stormfront.org/forum/

> "Stormfront White Nationalist Community"



> "Ron Paul Zombies Are Actually Ron Paul Robots"

> http://www.jwharrison.com/blog/2007/11/01/...on-paul-robots/

> Too many favorite comment quotes, but this one brought a grin of

> satisfaction;

> "


> Wow, Ron Paul supporters are crazier than I thought. You know, this post

> actually didn't say anything about who was behind the SPAM, and as Manila

> pointed out he clearly wasn't trying to blame Ron Paul.

> @NH_GOP, you want to discuss the issues? Ok. Ron Paul is a libertarian who

> believes in every man for themselves. No healthcare, no social security, no

> government benefits of any sort to speak of. But he also likes to push his

> beliefs on other people. Anti-abortion, anti-immigration, anti-stem cell

> research. He's also atrocious on the environment, supporting useless

> drilling in Alaska and against the Kyoto Protocol.

> Personally, I think if anyone actually listens to all that Paul says and

> genuinely agrees with them, that person is a total scumbag who should

> probably be committed.

> If you believe in a barbaric, animalistic world with no sense of social

> unity, then you should go live on an island alone somewhere and get the f*ck

> out my country. Or better yet, why don't all you fat ugly Texans secede and

> start your own wacka-wacka fruity land of illiterate, gun-toting,

> fetus-loving, bible-thumping, sister-humping hillbillies?

> Andy

> 11/2/07 at 12:52 am"





> "Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think

> we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to

> be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about

> it."


> John Lennon (1940 - 1980)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.