by Charles Novitsky
 |
| Let My Constitution Go! |
Perhaps the alternative to being a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, is a 9/11 accuser. Whereas there is no shortage of theories as to why 9/11 happened, and how it happened, here is yet another angle to debate—The World Trade Center fell because Washington D.C. disobeyed the Constitution. Before you laugh and report me to the NSA, allow me to make my point.
According to one rumor that I cannot substantiate, 73 percent of congress would fail a written test on comprehension of the constitution. Of course, comprehension is a step above being able to simply recall the 7 constitutional articles, and 10 "Bill of Rights", but even simply reciting might be too much of a challenge, to expect from our Washington politicians. The Constitution is rarely remembered by most Americans once they graduate school, and I am sure few readers would actually be able to use its cleverly crafted rules in a persuasive argument, or conversation. The fact remains, the document called The Constitution is a contract with the States, and the Peoples, telling Washington what they are NOT allowed to do, by only giving permission for 18 tasks, or responsibilities. This was so important, our forefathers purposely wrote these 18 limitations in simple English, for anyone to understand, in the first part of the Constitution (article 1, section 8). This is known as “the enumerated powers” list. Enumerated in this case, simply means "numbered". The reason behind this enumerated limitation is Washington was created to be a sort of club organizer for the needs of the various States, but was not desired, nor intended for it to become the master of the States. In fact even the word “foederal”, the original spelling of our word “federal”, means a "league or club". The federal club, was only therefore meant to organize these few powers assigned to Washington. The limited powers that our statesmen believed the states could not as coherently organize for themselves. Here is the list (but you may want to skip these details for now)......
 |
| The eighteen permissions for Washington DC |
The Constitution can be rather dry and boring without proper commentary and context, and we will skip going into this list. A great book to read for context is, “The Politically Incorrect Guide To The Constitution”, by Gutzman.
Now that I am older, and perhaps wiser, I will argue that the Constitution is more than a set of rules for Washington—it is actually a game strategy designed to keep the United States forever free. It was designed so America could never become tyrannic, like 1700's England, or France, or Europe. Some may argue that Europe is still somewhat tyrannic, and the new European Union will make it even more so. In England, there is no right to free speech, and You can get arrested for doing so. huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/05/american-preacher-arreste_n_3549537.html
But back to the issue of blame. Lets historically retrace Washingtons past disobedience of the Constitution, and how that may have led to the 9/11 catastrophe. These will only be summaries, and those interested in knowing more than a superficial introduction, should investigate the facts for themselves, in further detail.
1) Washington & CIA Poke Sticks Into Middle East Beehive!
 |
| If anyone could believe this AJAX-CIA meddling was in USA's peace benefit, I have a nice bridge in Brooklyn, for sale. |
Where does it say in the Constitution, that Washington was authorized by us, to provoke these aggressive acts with other countries. In fact, the wording in the Constitution more or less says, Washington was created to defend the States, not to put our safety at risk. Instigating arguments and battles around the globe is most certainly a risk. Poking a stick in a beehive often has consequences, or blow-back, as the CIA calls it. In effect, Americas bad reputation in the Middle East, and elsewhere was then created, and we became perceived as The Great Satan. Fortunately, no terrorist sought revenge against us back in the 1950's, but the seeds of hate were perhaps planted way back then in the past. An unconstitutional action came back to haunt future Americans.
2) Washington & CIA Forget Who They Work For!
 |
| Children should not play with matches. |
In 1979, Washington unconstitutionally aided and trained the Afghan rebels. Any thesaurus defines “rebel”, as another name for “terrorist”. These rebels the CIA trained (the Mujaheddin), later evolved to become Osama bin Laden's Taliban. We trained them in torture and resistance techniques, as well as bombing and terror tactics. Sadly, the joke was on Washington, because these resistance fighters would eventually use the same terror techniques on us in September 11, 2001, and elsewhere. The price Americans have paid for Washington's straying outside of their constitutional mandate was not only the terror of 9/11, and the sad loss of thousands of lives, it was the destruction of our economy. This also fueled the need and growth of the NSA, and created the birth of the Homeland Security Agency, and its invasion of our privacy. I am not actually criticizing the current need or benefit of an NSA-DHS, but only commenting on the sad consequence of our past and present international meddling, for it eventually brought about their controversial necessity. This unconstitutional international meddling is at the root of these expensive wars. Wars that are bankrupting the nation, and killing our young men, or crippling them. Since 9/11, the fabric of our country has been unrecognizably changed—the no fly lists—the need to remove our shoes and belts at airports—snooping on nearly every cellphone, and email. The list of consequences is a very long one.
Was the justification for training those Afghan terrorists, (to fight the invading Russians), constitutionally sufficient? Many clearly say “NO”, the Constitution does not empower Washington to legally poke a stick in someone else's war, in some other part of the world. Not even if it makes the world safer. The constitution does not give permission for Washington to make the world safer, though that may be a pretty thought, and a nice humanitarian gesture. The constitution was not designed to protect humanitarian goals. It was designed to protect Americans, and more specifically, the freedom of Americans. The federal government was enabled to protect the States from real enemies, those that take guns and weapons to our shores. Not imagined enemies. Russia was a loud mouth aggressive and annoying adversary, but was no such enemy at the time. One might argue, the entire Cold War, was just some philosophical argument among government tyrants and bureaucrats, on how they best could rule the world—democracy versus socialism. If only our political leaders could practice true democracy, as well as they preach it. And so, we now kill in the name of spreading our strange definition of democracy, perhaps just like the Crusaders killed, in the name of spreading God's word. Washington's presence and interference in 1979 Afghanistan was clearly outside of the wording, and design, and intent of Our Constitution. Again, I invite readers to see where the Constitution allows Washington to disturb and risk our peace here, on the shores of America, by instigating fights in other neighborhoods. These fights do not promote our peace, as the constitution demands, but quite the opposite, risk our peace. The constitution specifies only the duty of “defense”, whereas these war games are all offensive actions. In a court of law, I cannot legally attack my crazy neighbor just because I am concerned his actions may someday harm me in my own house. That is not defense, it is a blatant offense, and I would be arrested, and charged with a crime. However, no one is advising that we should be wimps, for the moment this crazed neighbor knocks on my door to harm me, all hell and fury should be unleashed.
Another issue with these war games, is the permissible use of our tax dollars. Since aiding other countries for their defense, or even humanitarian reasons, is compassionate, but unconstitutional, the use of even a single penny of the citizens money for this agenda is equally unconstitutional. In other words, there are not just one or two constitutional crimes taking place in Washington, but multiple violations. To those that believe American citizens should support the humanitarian goals for other nations, there is a way to do that without violating the constitution. That method would be for Washington politicians to get on their pulpits and ask Americans to voluntarily chip in and help. Or, the people can do it themselves, like we did in the 1990's with through the newspaper articles and music concerts for Bangladesh. As a further stretch of the imagination, congress could even allow people to be volunteer fighters overseas, provided its not against the USA's diplomatic interest, or our national safety, and as long as no federal funds are used. Thus, there are constitutional ways to achieve some international humanitarian goals, but as is often the case, doing things the right way, may take more effort than shortcuts. Currently Washington has convinced itself that it can legally, and morally, take away $50 billion dollars from its hard working people, and give it away as a gift to aid almost 180 nations around the planet. wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_foreign_aid
These are just two examples of how straying from the law, and constitution, have had negative consequences, and there are many many more. Part of the problem is caused by the confusion, and debate, on what the constitution means, and how to interpret it. Fortunately, there is available concrete proof, in writing, on exactly what our forefathers intended, and meant in the constitution. Many argue that this documented evidence is so strong, and so obvious, there should be almost no room for debate. One such area of confusion is the myth our constitution was intended to be a breathing, living, flexible document. In fact, this errant constitutional interpretation, was only conjured up recently, in the 1900's, by Justices Holmes and Brandeis, soon after Americas socialist "populist" phase. There is nowhere in the constitution this is written, nor even implied. By contrast, the proof our constitution means what is written on its four pages, is clearly observed in the many preserved writings and statements of our constitutional framers. These are recorded statements and writings that actually took place during passage of the constitution, by the people that were actually present, and not imaginations of some novelist like Mr Howard Lee McBain, who Wikipedia claims dreamt up the romantic idea of a "Living Document". Furthermore, nowhere in any of the 170 published explanatory articles from the time, called The Federalist, and Anti-Federalist papers, does it say or imply the constitution is transmutable, living, or breathing. Finally, the Constitution is a legal contract, and like all written contracts once agreed to and signed, it is not subject to arbitrary "living-breathing" re-interpretation. Likewise, the written contractual terms of my auto lease, and apartment lease, mean exactly just what they say, nothing else is permitted.
Whenever Washington DC politicians go astray from the permissions of the constitution, America seems to suffer. There are currently several hundred alphabet agencies created by Washington, and misdirecting our country. There are so many, it is becoming hard to even keep track ( wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabet_agencies ). With each of these unconstitutional agencies and departments, there seems to be a curse created, sort of a catch-22, where violating the oath to our founding fathers, backfires in some unintended way.
And we are suffering some of the consequences and payback now. American students are lowest on international PISA scores for the top 30 nations. Education is yet another power forbidden from Washington by the Constitution. We have 2.5 million prisoners, of which 65 percent is possession of drugs, and cumulatively have arrested since Washingtons 1960's "war on drugs" over 40 million people. Alcohol, and drug legislation is absolutely forbidden for Congress. The list of constitution transgressions goes on, and on, but few are placing the blame where it possibly belongs. Yes, we blame it on middle east unrest, we blame it on the terrorists, we blame it on the economy, some blame it on Wall Street—but perhaps we need to look deeper, and see ourselves in the mirror. I'm not looking to vilify and blame ourselves as much as I am looking to find the source of the problem—Washington's disobedience to the law of the constitution. Here is one suggestion--visit the library and start reading the constitution again, you may be very surprised how well it was written, and provided strategies that would have prevented many of our current problems.
