"This newspaper is published under the First Amendment of the Constitution and protected by the citizens and the Second Amendment"

by Mike Crane, editor

Before reading this article let me make one point very clear. This paper and the author support the efforts to eliminate those who did and would continue to attack civilians and wage terrorist campaigns. But are we giving our liberties up too easily is a question that keeps coming up.

This article raises some questions, not on stopping the efforts to eliminate enemies of the country but on the issue of "is it required to abandon the Constitution to do so?"

Every day the President, his spokesmen and the media give reports on the "War on Terrorism." Actually after the debacles of Vietnam, Somalia and others it is refreshing to see some real effective and well executed military operations for a change. Hat’s off to President Bush and Team.

But if we are going to wage an extended and lengthy war, where is the "Declaration of War" by the Congress? There isn’t one, and in fact despite the multiple War’s that have been fought since World War II there has not been a single Declaration of War from Congress. Once this clause of the Constitution was ignored in the Korean War, it seems that using that precedence has become the norm. The Constitutional responsibility for Congress to issue a Declaration of War has been abandoned!

That is an example of why I am concerned about the current rash of ignoring the Constitution. Once we depart, once we accept, once we justify additional items of ignoring the Constitution, will we ever return to compliance? If not, this is a very serious problem. The occupants of the White House change at least every 8 years and are we giving powers to some future occupant that will be used against us or our children?

So give the following items some real thought. What new mode of government actions are we creating that may become the norm in a few years?

The first is the one mentioned above. The power to wage War has for every intent and purpose been moved from Congress to the Executive Branch. If this is the will of the States and people why hasn’t an Amendment been proposed and ratified?

Constitution Section 9, abandoned appropriations

A second item was the creation of a massive and powerful Cabinet position and agency, Homeland Security. This was initially created without enabling legislation, nor appropriated funding by Congress. Nor has the Cabinet member been confirmed by Congress. I am not sure that anyone can even track how much money has been spent by Homeland Security much less what it was spent for. Would you trust another Bill Clinton with a blank check and ability to setup entire agencies without Congressional supervision?

"NO MONEY SHALL BE DRAWN FROM THE TREASURY, BUT IN CONSEQUENCE OF APPROPRIATIONS MADE BY LAW; AND A REGULAR STATEMENT AND ACCOUNT OF THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES OF ALL PUBLIC MONEY SHALL BE PUBLISHED FROM TIME TO TIME." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION SEC 9.

Constitution Section 9, suspended Writ of Habeas Corpus

A third item is the suspension of Writ of Habeas Corpus. This is the founding principle that if one is arrested they are entitled to a list of charges, legal representation, and a timely trial. Today a large number of people are being held by a defacto suspension of the Writ. For the most part these are people who are here illegally, but if we have evidence of a crime, they should be tried and executed. If there is no evidence of a crime they should be deported along with every other person who is in the country illegally! If like the Constitutional mandate of Congress declaring War, the suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus becomes the norm, this one departure from the Constitution will in effect change the very form of government our grandchildren live under. While we have suffered an attack, a very vicious attack, we are neither in a state of Rebellion nor have we been invaded. Would you trust another Janet Reno with such powers?

"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." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION SEC 9.

Patriot Act

A fourth item is the passing of the "Patriot Act." Whether you are for or against this piece of legislation you should be concerned about the manner in which it passed Congress. They did not even read it before it was passed. A quote from Congressman Ron Paul clearly states this:

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) Said, "IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING THE BILL WASN’T PRINTED BEFORE THE VOTE - AT LEAST I COULDN’T GET IT. THEY PLAYED ALL KINDS OF GAMES, KEPT THE HOUSE IN SESSION ALL NIGHT, AND IT WAS A VERY COMPLICATED BILL. MAYBE A HANDFUL OF STAFFERS ACTUALLY READ IT, BUT THE BILL DEFINITELY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS BEFORE THE VOTE."

Once again, on the surface many will say that this was justified, and there may be merit to that point of view, but what is the risk that the "Patriot Act" contains bad legislation if it was not reviewed? Has it set a precedent of bypassing the Constitution that can have a negative long-term impact?

The following are some sections of the Constitution that are bypassed by this legislation:

"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." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 4TH AMENDMENT.

"NO PERSON SHALL BE HELD TO ANSWER FOR A CAPITAL, OR OTHERWISE

INFAMOUS CRIME, UNLESS ON A PRESENTMENT OR INDICTMENT OF A GRAND JURY, EXCEPT IN CASES ARISING IN THE LAND OR NAVAL FORCES, OR IN THE MILITIA, WHEN IN ACTUAL SERVICE IN TIME OF WAR OR PUBLIC DANGER; NOR SHALL ANY PERSON BE SUBJECT FOR THE SAME OFFENCE TO BE TWICE PUT IN JEOPARDY OF LIFE OR LIMB; NOR SHALL BE COMPELLED IN ANY CRIMINAL CASE TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF, NOR BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW; NOR SHALL PRIVATE PROPERTY BE TAKEN FOR PUBLIC USE, WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 5TH AMENDMENT.

IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL, BY AN IMPARTIAL JURY OF THE STATE AND DISTRICT WHEREIN THE CRIME SHALL HAVE BEEN COMMITTED, WHICH DISTRICT SHALL HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY ASCERTAINED BY LAW, AND TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION; TO BE CONFRONTED WITH THE WITNESSES AGAINST HIM; TO HAVE COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OBTAINING WITNESSES IN HIS FAVOR, AND TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL FOR HIS DEFENSE." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 6TH AMENDMENT.

"THE ENUMERATION IN THE CONSTITUTION, OF CERTAIN RIGHTS, SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO DENY OR DISPARAGE OTHERS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 9TH AMENDMENT.

"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." UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 10TH AMENDMENT.

This list has been put together with a very brief look at the actions since September 11. The total number of Unconstitutional items or abandoned responsibilities of the constitution would be much larger. Its interesting that a few words of First Amendment can be so tightly reviewed and analyzed that courts will dictate that a county government can not Display The Ten Commandments on one hand, while entire sections and clauses are just quietly abandoned on the other.

I think that it quite obvious that we could have defeated the Taliban and any other needed target in the world without tampering with the Constitution. Congress could have taken a few days and officially declared War, the thousands of illegal immigrants could be rounded up and either tried for crimes or deported under existing laws. Stopping immigration until the terrorists have been exterminated could have disrupted future terrorist actions. Congress could also have taken a day or so and actually waiting until copies of the Patriot Act were printed before voting. Is bypassing the Constitution required?

It’s no wonder that the words "... shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment are not heeded by the government. It’s no wonder that "Congress shall pass no ..." is construed to read " ... no county courthouse shall Display Ten Commandment" and ".. there shall be no prayer in schools..." It’s no wonder that the Supreme Corruption can declare that it is legal to murder babies in every State, regardless of what the people think. Time after time we have shown that we the People will accept twisting, re-defining and abusing the Constitution. And now we have taken major sections of the Constitution and shown that we will follow them, except when ...

Have we let the genie out of the bottle? Can we put it back before we get another Janet Reno?