*hyperlinks live at source*
This article series explains what happened when I interacted with participants of a 9/11 event to welcome home US soldiers and honor the victims of 9/11, then provides the e-mail exchange with the sponsoring group’s leadership.
Consistent with my last two years of writing articles to explain, document, and prove current US wars aren’t even close to lawful and all based on lies, nobody at this event of mostly current and former US military could defend current US wars as lawful, even in subsequent e-mails and in their consultation with the group’s “Constitutionalist.” I challenge anyone to explain, document, and prove in the comments section below that US war in Afghanistan, Iraq, and/or Iran is legal (you can put what you say in more than one comment). I will likely demand anyone making such argument to refute my longer explanation of US war law that I will reference in my comment responses from my article, “Open proposal to US higher education.”
I encourage anyone with passion to end unlawful US wars to take my article’s “emperor has no clothes” obvious explanation and documentation of US war law to act with confidence to end US wars. Our soldiers’ response to their Oath of Enlistment to support and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, is to refuse all orders of unlawful wars.
This article series’ sections:
1.Introduction, what happened at the event, and my first e-mail to the event sponsors.
2.E-mails from group leaders, who I’ll name, “Tom,” “Dick,” and “Harry” (I’ll forward them the article; they can identify themselves if they choose). Tom and Dick go on the offensive.
3.E-mail continuation: My response to Dick, their “Constitutionalist” says this issue is a waste of time. Tom responds.
4.E-mail continuation: attempting to reach Tom with reason
5.E-mail conclusion with Tom.
6.A possible addendum should event organizers wish to respond.
* * * * *
This is Part 2: for Part 1, click here.
> In a message dated 9/12/2010 9:20:16 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> (Tom) writes:
I cannot believe you had the nerve to come to our event to speak out against those very people who are keeping you and your family alive.
I feel for your ancestors. Obviously theirs were wasted on yours.
...and, of course, you teach it to those who are the most impressionable....GREAT
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 10:23 PM, wrote:
If you want to discuss how to best serve our country and soldiers at OUR community event, as I am one of our community, start with the courage to state your name. I am Carl Herman. Who are you?
I forgive the insult you place upon my ancestors and your nerve to speak for them to ask you a few simple questions, assuming you have any courage to do more than hit-and-run insults of my family and professionalism. Yes, I'm calling you out. Feel free to forward this to anyone for help in responding
to my challenge. Answer:
1. Whether you have served or not, you should know the Oath of Enlistment of our soldiers requires our soldiers to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Do you agree to support and defend the US Constitution?
2. Article 6 of the Constitution makes US treaties signed by a president and ratified by 2/3 of the US Senate as "Supreme law of the land." The UN Charter (have you even read it?) is the legal victory of WW2, designed primarily by the US, and has treaty status. It's only area of authority is to prevent wars of choice/Wars of Aggression. Limited use of war for a narrow definition of self-defense is the whole point of the UN Charter and therefore a component of US Constitutional law. Do you agree to support and defend the US Constitution, or do you prefer dictatorship: whatever a leader says rather than limited government under US Constitutional law?
3. Attacking and invading Afghanistan and Iraq are nowhere close to legal use of a nation's military under the UN Charter and thereby the US Constitution. If you disagree, explain how these wars are lawful. After two years and a million readers of my published articles, I've yet to find anyone who can make this argument. Can you? If not, then your support of US wars is unconstitutional. Supporting our soldiers in lawful combat is the best support I know to make. To make this a two-part question, how does your ignorant backing of unlawful combat support our soldiers when they signed-up to support American values of limited government under US Constitutional law?
4. Finally, if you have the courage to read and understand just one law that was created by the US to end wars of choice, will you recant your previous ignorant support of current US wars and request US soldiers to honor their Oath of Enlistment to refuse all orders associated with these Orwellian and "emperor has no clothes" obvious unlawful wars? And yes, I fully understand such soldiers will be threatened with Court Martial (although, like Lt. Ehren Watada, they probably won't be tried because the trial will publicly disclose the evidence the wars are unlawful). If not, how do you defend yourself from the charge that you are rejecting the US Constitution?
Now that I've cooled off from your insults, I want you to know that I understand your motivation to support US soldiers and honor you for your intention. I enjoyed and appreciated welcoming home our soldiers who serve
with similar honorable intentions.
And fair warning: I also will call your ignorant support of unlawful wars as anti-American by definition and complicity in murdering American soldiers who should be protected under laws, not exploited for political wars of choice. "America" is a legal definition; found in our Constitution and ideals within the Declaration of Independence. And yeah, you should find that great that I teach the US Constitution and to support our soldiers' lawful combat. Part of my family's military history that's very real in my experience, and that I would be ashamed to reject, is to uphold the law to end Wars of invasion and aggression. If you want to upgrade to an informed political position to understand war law, which is about as complicated as understanding the strike zone in baseball and far less complicated than understanding what makes a "legal" punt in football, I explain and document the conservative and crystal-clear spirit and letter of war law in two articles: "US war laws explained, why Afghanistan and Iraq wars are unlawful, how to end them" and "Open proposal to US higher education." They are here:
Well, that was a speedy and thorough response to my e-mail.
First of all, I would like to make one thing perfectly clear: My intent was never to insult any of your relatives--I honor them. I challenge YOU to point out one example where I insulted them.
Quite clearly, my intent was to insult YOU. You who harbors such a disdain for the American Service person that you feel it necessary to insult them every chance you get--even at an event that was intended to honor them. Sure, you are part of a community--just not mine. Let me make it clear, I will do everything in my power to support our Service persons and to make sure they know people like you do not represent "Our Community"
I do not pretend to be as smart as you. I have not studied as much as you have. I have not spent as much time reading books, reading on-line articles, and preaching to impressionable kids and young adults. I have spent time in the real world.
I do support the constitution. I do NOT support the UN. I fail to see how they have accomplished anything that could not have otherwise been accomplished for far less money. In fact, I believe the UN has been hi-jacked for individual gain. Perhaps I should trust the UN and you with my life and our society, but I choose not to. How did they do with that whole invasion of Tibet thing? Or the situations in so many African Nations? Perhaps they excell at smaller tasks, like preventing planes from crashing into office buildings, I don't know.
Let me ask you this, Would you have supported an attack on Hitler's Germany prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor?
By the way: My e-mail address IS my name. Did you think I chose a random name?
For clarification: Tom (deleted)
I am not a coward. I will be happy to exchange home addresses with you. I can do more than just criticise those who choose to defend me--I can also defend myself and others. Another reason why I honor your ancestors. I pray for more like them.
After all is said and done, I do appreciate your response. Most people who spend their time degrading the efforts of others (instead of making their own sacrifice) run from debate.
I will carry through on my promises. First, I appreciate the time, thought, and prayers you dedicate for our soldiers; thank you, Tom.
With all respect, you argue from ignorance. What you have is trust in political leadership without understanding the inalienable rights, promises, and purpose of the US Constitution. Can you appreciate the irony that a man in your position would have rejected the Founding Fathers from ignorant and naïve trust in British government?
You say the UN has been hi-jacked for individual gain. I agree. In history, the English Bill of Rights was hi-jacked from American colonials for individual gain of the British Empire’s “leadership.” People like me pointed it out, educated Americans, and Americans stood for their rights. In the present, both political parties’ “leadership” has been hi-jacked for individual gain, and they strip the US Constitution while killing American soldiers in their unlawful wars. People like me are pointing it out now, educating Americans, and asking, “Will you stand for your rights, or die on your knees as slaves to lawless empire?” The UN Charter is the international legal structure to prevent Wars of Aggression; what people see as "hi-jacked" are corrupt voluntary programs that have also been hi-jacked for profit. The action we need is to reclaim the Constitution and rule of law (UN Charter or otherwise) to end wars of invasion, aggression, and empire.
Tom, I’m asking you to understand just one law that I’ve told you all my male predecessors served to win for all Americans and all people: an end to unlawful Wars of Aggression. My challenge to you stands. Take your time, share this e-mail with anyone you choose:
Answer all four questions below.
Until such time you show your understanding of what the US Constitution says and is for, as a person whose professional attention is to teach, support, and defend the US Constitution, I say this to you: your ignorance is “supporting” our soldiers’ unlawful engagement and getting them killed. Your ignorance has you blindly supporting dictatorship in the most important area of limited government under US law: war. Your gullibility is irresponsible, literally murderous, and you should devote the one damn hour it takes to read my article to understand war law: "US war laws explained, why Afghanistan and Iraq wars are unlawful, how to end them".
Finally, you insulted my family by speaking for them, by stating you “feel for” my ancestors and their military service in two world wars to secure the blessings of liberty upon ourselves and our posterity is wasted upon me. In addition to answering the four questions to prove that you really are an American rather than a blind follower of the dictates from a “leader” (Fuhrer in German), tell me one example where I, as you say, “degrade the efforts of others.” I’ve been perfectly clear that my sense is that the people at the event, and our men and women in uniform serve in good faith; they don’t yet recognize they’re being lied to and used by a political oligarchy’s propaganda.
Tom, because the facts and law are so clear, once you understand what’s right in front of your eyes, you will join the millions of Americans who have repositioned themselves away from the dictates of government and restand with inalienable rights under law.
Answer all four questions, citizen.
From Dick, event emcee:
Carl, The bottom line is there is a few people like yourself that are willing to lose this beautiful country for your UN rules of war, fortunately there are far more people like Tom, that willing to defend her at any cost,if a majority of people thought like you, America would have been destroyed a long, long, time ago, Thank God, there aren't! The same ratio was at that event that you wanted to speak at, a majority of those folks would have removed you. Dick
Part 3 tomorrow: My response to Dick, their “Constitutionalist” says this issue is a waste of time. Tom responds.