The Necessity for Guerrilla Law in the Nation of Laws

In 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Webster Bivens could sue the government. Bivens, a man whose family was terrorized by "Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents" who made a "warrantless" (that's criminal, but in the Land of the Lie, there is always a way to say things in a less masculine manner) took umbrage at having his door kicked in, his wife and daughter man-handled and humiliated, all at the hands of a government too stupid to get the right address. When he sued, a Federal District Court (the court that ruled my 1988 FOI suit was for evidence that "would irreparably damage the tax collection system of the U.S.") ruled Bivens had no legal way to sue the government for a thing like that and that the government can do whatever the hell it likes to its citizens. Of course, the language was far more niminy-piminy than that, but that was what it said, what was done, and what is BEING done.

The other day, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that the government can kick in the door without knocking, that on the premise of a warrant. You and I both know - witness a host of "precedents" in the form of actual attacks on the citizen and his rights - that kicking in the door will one day soon NOT require a warrant. They had reasonable suspicion - all in their minds - that you are a terrorist (for instance), and they kicked in the door. Oops - wrong address. Tough, but the price we pay for democracy.

Like signing up for the military in order to get a college education as promised, then being fed into the Iraq meat grinder. Tough. Price of democracy. Like I said. What don't you understand?

But Bivens sued, and in order to keep up the front - perpetuate the myths - he won (that's on the record - you don't know the rest of the story).

Anyway, I intend to sue the government again. I trust there will be those smart enough to look at what I do, and do the obvious. I can't be responsible - can I? - for what you do on your own volition. Otherwise, I'm practising law, and the government would love to be able to argue that I did that. Then they could kick in the door, huh?

Oh, to anyone who might ever intend to do that, remind yourself that I wear my .45 all the time, at home or otherwise. The first guy though the door will die, his brains splattering the guy behind him. That guy may die, too, unless you're all better than you usually are. After that, The first two guys and I will have what we wanted. As for me, I'll hear the Valkurie; as for the other two, well, that was up to them, wasn't it? Thanks.

So, today it begins. Rita and I have taken her grandkids back to their folks in Lubbock, having enjoyed immensely their being here, taking them for a sail on the sloop "Monkey Business," visiting a 242' long "tall ship" - i.e., the sailing ship bark A.R.C. Gloria - giving grandson Aidan an airplane ride - and movies, swimming, judo practice (where "Grandpa Hal" showed off), and all the stuff grandkids like to do. Three kids can give you a workout tougher than any I ever got on a judo mat. Two weeks, and the kids' visit, of course, was preceded by the latest cyber-duel with the government. I'm calling it all a warm-up. For this.

Having discussed at great and detailed length with Son-in-Law Steve and Daughter-in-Law Kathleen the book Letters to Aaron, the Hal Luebbert Story" and the case against the United States it represents, I begin reading the mountain of law necessary for a suit against the sovereign. That, in itself, is a somewhat whimsical thing. Not only is the idea of suing the judge in his own court a logically nonsensical thing, a suit based upon a legal fiction, it is at this particular time even more nonsensical. This, after all, and as we all know and see, is a time when the government of the United States, in all its Constitutional branches, holds the law constraining it in utter contempt. To sue the United States and argue on Constitutional grounds is to fight an enemy on ground he controls, by rules he has made, using tactics and weapons he has supplied, and commanded by generals he has employed. Absurd.

But I'm reminded of that quote on my home page here. "There is no teacher but the enemy," Orson Scott Car wrote. "No one but the enemy will ever tell you what the enemy is going to do . . . . Only the enemy shows you where you are weak. Only the enemy tells you where he is strong. And the rules of the game are what you can do to him and what you can stop him from doing to you." That's how I beat the government last time, and it's how I'll beat him this time.

I like quotes, as you know, and another explains that last. "Of old," Chinese General Sun Tsu said, "warriors first made themselves invulnerable, then waited for their enemy's moment of weakness." I've done that, and I think the time is now.

First, though, I have to read the law. Starting with Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), I will research until I have read every word that has been written the matter of suing the government. I will have to read all the case law resulting from all the suits brought under the several Federal Tort Claims Acts. Then I will file my suit. The government will answer with what is called "boiler plate," a canned, already-in-the-computers argument, and a motion to dismiss. I will have learned the very latest law. As the case progresses - assuming the court rules in my favor (not likely) - we'll learn more. I will publish it all here. The court will be furious at that, of course, and may even dismiss on that grounds. "Frivolous," they like to call such blatantly Constitutional use of Constitutional right.

Even if – when – my lawsuit is dismissed by the sycophant court, we will have learned a great deal, as I said; and it will be incontrovertible - straight from the horse's mouth. The government's Department of Justice, as I say here, has already answered thousands of suits brought by persons whose rights were utterly ignored by their government. They have, in fact, answered so many suits brought by persons abused and brutalized by their government, and the rights in question are so few in number, that government courts and attorneys have reduced their rulings and answers to a canned litany. The U.S. Constitution, in short, is far more honored in the breach than the observance. That each Bivens or Federal Tort Claims Act suit in the law library - literally hundred of volumes - represents a violation by government of the Constitution the government and its minions are sworn to uphold, and that no public rebellion results speaks also to the futility of both action against government based on law and the fecklessness of the U.S. public. The king does not restrain or punish himself, and you do not expect help from the public against their government.

A republic form of government, you see, requires one thing sine qua non - a citizenry with courage. Governments obey the people only when they are FORCED to obey.

That we are become what we are thunders so loudly that no statement seeking to excuse our cowardice will be audible historically. Neither will history fail to note that the United States’ decline paralleled growing female influence upon law and the national character - refusal, in short, to heed warnings like that of J.S. Mill (""A State which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes -- will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish.").

We are a nation of pussy-whipped cowards. So it is that I begin my lawsuit with only one purpose in mind, to show - one, last time; incontrovertibly and inexcusably - both what we are and what the government knows we are. That is what history will record, too – that male “Americans” were too yellow to keep what their fathers and grandfathers gave them.

"Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."