The Inherent Right of ALL People to Alter or Reform Government.
The Right Upon Which All Other Rights Depend
in South Dakota 2006
MOCKERY MADE OF SOUTH DAKOTA CONSTITUTION:
ARTICLE VI §26 - Right to Alter or Reform Government
ARTICLE VII §1 - Right to Vote
By Barbie, National J.A.I.L.
Edited and approved by Ron Branson
Taken from: "Of the Dissolution of Government" Chapter XIX, ¶220
... But the state of mankind is not so miserable that they are not capable
of using this remedy till it be too late to look for any. To tell people
they may provide for themselves, by erecting a new legislative,
when by oppression, artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power,
their old one is gone, is only to tell them, they may expect relief
when it is too late, and the evil is past cure. This is in effect
no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care
of their liberty; and when their chains are on, tell them,
they may act like freemen. This, if barely so, is rather mockery
than relief; and men can never be secure from tyranny,
if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under it:
and therefore it is, that they have not only a right to get out of it,
but to prevent it. --John Locke (1632-1704)
For the State of South Dakota, through its Constitution, to (1) acknowledge that the People have the right to alter or reform their government (Art. VI §26), and further, (2) officially recognize their right to vote in order to carry out the former right, stating that government shall not interfere "to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage" (Art. VII §1), AND THEN INDEED INTERFERE is rather a mockery than a constitutional provision.
Even more basic election fraud than rigging the vote count is concealing vital information from the electorate on an important issue facing the South Dakota voters in 2006. We, of course, are referring to Amendment E, the South Dakota J.A.I.L. Amendment. J.A.I.L. cannot begin to compare with the large corporations, the entire South Dakota government, and the media regarding financial and advertising resources for this campaign. Nevertheless, we were confident that this lop-sided advantage would not deter the voters from seeing through the propaganda, character assassination, voter intimidation, and various other nefarious activities including CRIME to defeat Amendment E.
Although confident that Amendment E would not only pass, but would pass handsomely because of its 3-to-1 favorable rating throughout the year-and-a-half campaign, we nevertheless sent out warning signals with ample documentation to everyone on our mailing lists, with dozens of J.A.I.L. News Journals. Mr. Branson also set up a special South Dakota website, shown in the heading above, containing intense reporting on the election fraud occurring in South Dakota. The pre-election reporting on that site is still there, undisturbed, for anyone to read.
All eyes across the nation are now poised on the South Dakota 2006 election, just two days away, and particularly the J.A.I.L. Amendment (Amendment E). The American People are relying on The People of South Dakota to carry out their responsibility to amend their government pursuant to §26 of the South Dakota Constitution in order "to provide new guards for their future security" as instructed in the Declaration of Independence.
South Dakota was the first state to have the initiative process; and now it is the first state, through this process, for The People to be able to do something about out-of-control government that they have been complaining about for decades all over the country. We now see that, even with the initiative process, the entire South Dakota government has managed to interfere with that process through fraud and deceit on its People. The question is, will The People of South Dakota withstand this election fraud by their State government? These events will shine the light for other states to be prepared to deal with this problem of voter intimidation through government fraud and deceit. No matter what, J.A.I.L. is still the "Achilles' heel" to curbing a tyrannical government. The message of J.A.I.L. has gotten out and it will not go away!
Besides the entire South Dakota State Legislature criminally committing election fraud on the People of South Dakota, as we have exposed on February 21st in a J.A.I.L. News Journal "South Dakota Legislature Forfeits Their Public Trust," as well as March 5th, "Rogue Miscreant Legislators," below is part of an expose` of South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long taken from the Home Page of the South Dakota website giving details about the fraudulent misrepresentations regarding Amendment E appearing in the "Attorney General Explanation" on the South Dakota 2006 ballot.
* * * *
While the State of South Dakota allowed the voters to read the "Attorney General Explanation," which was a fraudulent misrepresentation of Amendment E on the ballot written as an editorial against the Amendment, the State did not provide an equal opportunity for the voters to also read for themselves the official text of Amendment E so that they would be properly informed of what the Amendment actually did provide in order to make an intelligent choice when casting their vote.
It was incredible to me that this unfairness by the State would actually occur, especially in light of its Constitution that states under Article VII §1, "Elections shall be free and equal" and "no power... shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage," so I wrote in South Dakota 2006 Ballot Contaminated:
We are receiving reports about the misrepresentations made by South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long; and that subject is covered at length on the Home Page of our South Dakota website, www.sd-jail4judges.org. However, I wasn't sure if that misrepresentation actually appeared on the South Dakota ballot itself, under an explanation of Amendment E, to "aid" the South Dakota voters in understanding what they were voting for. And so I decided to check it out on a Google search, and found the following: Taken from a sample 2006 ballot for South Dakota
http://www.newscenter1.com/Voter_info/November_2006_Sample_Ballot.pdf I was shocked to find out that only Long's negative write-up about Amendment E appeared on the ballot. The matter was taken to court in an attempt to clear up that fraud, which is reported in JNJ 12/29/06 The South Dakota Election Re J.A.I.L. Was Fraudulent and Should Be Declared Null & Void. You can read the snide remarks made by Circuit Judge Gors right on the Order itself, particularly ¶53:
"The attorney general could have said with a straight face that the real purpose and effect of the proposed JAIL amendment is to destroy justice in South Dakota..."
The above is all said and done officially on behalf of the State of South Dakota.
Where Are We Now??
I'm wondering what John Locke means when he says (quoted in the above introduction) But the state of mankind is not so miserable that they are not capable of using this remedy till it be too late to look for any. I believe he's referring to the right of mankind to reform their government when they deem it necessary, but some of "mankind" is also "government." As we can see from the South Dakota fiasco, there is certainly a difference between "mankind" within government (the government), and "mankind" outside of government (the People). As can be seen, government --at least in South Dakota-- has usurped its power and is not serving the People, but is operating against the People. Locke certainly recognized this difference. In fact he says that when government has usurped its power, it's no longer "government" but a "foreign power" - their old one is gone.
Referring to "this remedy" Locke described it in the preceding portion as the people are at liberty to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative differing from the other by the change of persons, or form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good. The South Dakota Constitution (Art. VI §26) describes it as "they have the right in lawful and constituted methods to alter or reform their forms of government in such manner as they may think proper." The sentence But the state of mankind is not so miserable that they are not capable of using this remedy till it be too late to look for any apparently indicates that the political state of the People is not so bad that they won't be able to reform their government according to law before it's too late to find a remedy. I know there's a "maxim of law" that says "For every wrong, there's a remedy." It all turns on that word "remedy."
We are still convinced that SDC Art.VI §26, and similar provisions in other initiative states, IS THE REMEDY NEEDED FOR THE PEOPLE TODAY-- AND J.A.I.L. IS THE ONLY MEANS AVAILABLE OF IMPLEMENTING THAT REMEDY. The "event" in South Dakota called an "election" in November 2006 hasn't changed that fact; rather, it has strengthened it!
What was really conducted by the State of South Dakota last November was a "Show-Election," described as an extreme example of electoral fraud where an election is held purely for show. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_election. The only purpose of the show-election was to defeat J.A.I.L. (Amendment E); and it was carried out by nefarious means in violation of state law. "The 'results' of a show-election are frequently one-sided to the point of absurdity, with leaders claiming mandates of 90 percent or higher; this rarely occurs in a free democratic election."
There is not an ounce of credibility in the reported outcome of 89% against the Amendment, and 11% in favor of it. South Dakotans we have communicated with told us that the voters weren't even provided the wording of Amendment E so they could read it before voting on it, although an official opinion against the Amendment appeared right on the ballot itself which was backed up by South Dakota courts. The Amendment carried a 3-to-1 favorable polling for a year-and-a-half before allegedly "plummeting" on the day of election. The show-election "showed" what the State of South Dakota wanted, but we know that TRUTH was not in the picture being shown.
The question that must be contemplated now is, What happens when the constitutional remedy to reform government by the People is blocked by the very government sought to be reformed? That's the crossroad at which the People have now arrived, and it's up to the People to decide how to get through it. The State Constitution authorized the remedy for the People, and yet the State was able to make a mockery of that Constitution. Will it be with impunity? That will determine the future of this country. Will other states be able to overcome this dilemma?
We will continue to pray about this serious crossroads in the life of America.