I don’t think I was trying to be sarcastic in anything I wrote. I’m thinking out loud, trying to sort it out.
I’m wondering if what you are describing is what military tribunals are expected to do at this point, but I don’t know what the criteria are for determining that the US government has been taken over by belligerents.
The whole issue is wearying to me because both the military and judges requiring confirmation are so easily corrupted because of their contact with the so-compromised legislative branch (which I believe is compromised because of the intel community which has no accountability because they can claim “national security” or “confidential records” and the body supposedly holding them accountable is vulnerable to their coercive tactics including bribery if they’ve engaged in questionable activity and threats of harm to their families if they’ve not.)
And the chance of passing any Constitutional Amendment in the political climate we have right now seems close to zero, even if a good hypothetical solution to the problem of good ol’ human nature and corruptability was devised.
I’m usually an optimistic person. Some might say naive or just stupid. But conversations like this leave me hopeless, to be honest.
I’ve been told that the Founders said this form of government could only work with a moral people.
It seems like only the enemies of this nation took that seriously. So they didn’t seek to take over the government using force (as the Constitution protects us from that) but by corruption of the very people of the US. There was a list of communist objectives that was read into the Congressional record at one point in the 60’s I think, and the objectives were almost all geared toward demoralizing the US public and/or making it impossible for moral people to impact the policies of government.
KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov talked about the process of overthrowing a country from within as having various steps - the first one being demoralizing the people, then destabilization where a crisis brings things to a head, then the revolution/takeover, and lastly “normalization”, i.e. the society coming to accept their new overlords.
None of that really involves the use of force, except possibly the takeover but that could just as easily be done judicially (for instance). So the Constitution does not protect us from ourselves or from enemies who use influence (finances, supposed science, education, entertainment, etc) to make us non-moral so that the whole system will fall apart - as accurately described by our very founders.
We the People were responsible to guard our own souls, and our doing so was critical for the survival of the country. We failed, miserably. We have let every imaginable (and some not even imaginable) form of corruption, theft, lies, murder, and sellout to Satan to carry the day in the USA. The churches mostly remained silent - cowed into thinking that the Ten Commandments are just religion and thus banned from society and politics.
What it comes down to is this: “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” 2 Chron 7:14
Given all the precedents and lawyerly sophistry that now carry the day, I think the only way out of this mess may be to wipe the slate clean and start over. But even that would make no difference unless we become a people with integrity. A moral people. A people that would never think to say that we have to set murderers free because if we execute real justice they might be deported. Or any other such corruption under the guise of “being nice/Christian”.
I’m amazed that God hasn’t barfed us up yet. We’re in the process of committing national suicide and “justice” is a sick joke.
I’m not smart enough to figure out a solution for the problem that we call “government”. But I know One who is smart enough to say that once you abandon justice and decency, the only hope for you is to repent and call on the One who carries the power of life and death, to rescue you from this body of death.
I’m pretty sure that is the only solution for us.
Yes to the legal architecture, but no to the guns. Enforceable by police power, but hopefully in Congressional hands.
The "wearying" attributes originate in our civic respect for university credentialing. The latter in particular is what was compromised long ago (starting in 1993 to be precise). What came with that was the subjectification of language itself.
And the chance of passing any Constitutional Amendment in the political climate we have right now seems close to zero, even if a good hypothetical solution to the problem of good ol’ human nature and corruptability was devised.
We agree there for now, but I'm not without hope.
I’m usually an optimistic person. Some might say naive or just stupid. But conversations like this leave me hopeless, to be honest.
Hence, if you are interested in discussing this further re the source of my hope, FReepmail me.