Friday, March 23, 2007

Well Regulated State Militias = Constitutional Homeland Security


Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
May 6, 2005

What is the fundamental constitutional institution for "homeland security"? On the answer to this question may depend the continued independence and freedom of the United States.

In addition, the Constitution provides that "[n]o State shall, without the Consent of Congress, * * * keep Troops, or Ships of War, in time of Peace". Article I, Section 10, Clause 3. So, nowhere in the federal system does the supreme law of the land treat an army or navy as an inevitable, indispensable, permanent, or perpetual institution.

Where, then, should Americans look for constitutional "homeland security"? The Second Amendment to the Constitution provides the first giant steps towards the answer:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Click here for more.


Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
March 8, 2005

Why do so many Americans think that "homeland security" means what they think it means?

If the "homeland" is the United States of America, then obviously her "security" is defined by her Constitution, because there cannot be security without law, and the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Just as obviously, those who are to benefit from that security are the authors of the Constitution and their descendants: We the People.


The essentials of America’s true, historic "homeland security" are to be found in the Preamble to the Constitution:

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.

Click here for more.


Blogger KOSMIC said...

Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement,
and Government Officials Question
the 9/11 Commission Report

Many well known and respected senior U.S. military officers, intelligence services and law enforcement veterans, and government officials have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report or have made public statements that contradict the Report. Several even allege government complicity in the terrible acts of 9/11. This website is a collection of their public statements. It is not an organization and it should be made clear that none of these individuals is affiliated with this website.

Listed below are statements by more than 90 of these senior officials. Their collective voices give credibility to the claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is tragically flawed. These individuals cannot be simply dismissed as irresponsible believers in some 9/11 conspiracy theory. Their sincere concern, backed by their decades of service to their country, demonstrate that criticism of the Report is not irresponsible, illogical, nor disloyal, per se. In fact, it can be just the opposite. (continued below)

Demand a New 9/11 Investigation!

11:10 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home