Okla. Joins 16 State 10th Amendment Movement Telling Rogue Feds, "Get LAWFUL!"

[JTCoyoté]

I have been thinking about this interview a lot. This Mr. Key's story is impressive. Look at it closely. He was in local government when Oklahoma was hit with controlled demolition. Spoke out and was ridiculed. Retired from public life. Discerned through prayer what to do. Came back and was reelected. Then went on to author the state's assertion of her rights against the feds. All though legal constitutional maneuvers. At the very least it should teach us that the freedom movement can come back stronger if it looses battles along the way. This guy should run for president.

Sounds very much like a Lazarus story, doesn't it... (chuckle)...

To contrast that with what happened to the father of the 10th amendment resolution here in Colorado, Senator Charles Ray Duke.... on 22 April 1995 in order to counter balance the Earth Day celebration that was going on elsewhere in the city of Denver, there was a Second Amendment rally taking place at the Capitol building... at that gathering Senator Duke, in his speech, suggested the possibility that the Oklahoma City bombing may have been a false flag... He was ridiculed in the press, and on the nightly local news... it took them three years to almost destroy him... he resigned his office in February of 1998... very much against the wishes of his staff, of which I was the longest-serving...

These men have taken much ridicule for their righteous stand against the New World Order, and I applaud you for your ability to see the tenacity and incredible courage of men like Representative Charles Key of Oklahoma...

JTCoyoté

"There are people who think that plunder loses
all its immorality as soon as it becomes legal.
Personally, I cannot imagine a more alarming
 situation." ~Frederic Bastiat

[lazarus]

Tell Senator Charles Ray Duke to join our forum or run again. To do something. Battle-hardened citizens have much more than what appears on paper. (maybe is working behind the scenes)

[Donald Baker]

Is Kentucky one of the 26 states that voted on phase I of the 10th Amendment resolution?  Oklahoma is doing the right thing.  The Civil War did establish the Federal Government as supreme over the states, but it didn't establish it to the extent it has now become since the New Deal started the slippery slope to tyranny.

[JTCoyoté]

Is Kentucky one of the 26 states that voted on phase I of the 10th Amendment resolution?  Oklahoma is doing the right thing.  The Civil War did establish the Federal Government as supreme over the states, but it didn't establish it to the extent it has now become since the New Deal started the slippery slope to tyranny.

Don...

I show that it passed in the Senate only in Kentucky... It passed there sometime between late 1994 and before September of 1995... If you find anything let me know...

JTCoyoté

"There are people who think that plunder loses
all its immorality as soon as it becomes legal.
Personally, I cannot imagine a more alarming
 situation." ~Frederic Bastiat

[Donald Baker]

Thanks at least we tried.   If I hear anything, I'll post it here.

[JTCoyoté]

Thanks at least we tried.   If I hear anything, I'll post it here.

If the House in Kentucky, is more pro American now...it can be dusted off and reintroduced... Look into that.... you are already half way there...

JTCoyoté

"Recent events have proved that the paper-money system of this country
may be used as an engine to undermine your free institutions, and that
those who desire to engross all power in the hands of the few and to
govern by corruption or force are aware of its power and prepared
to employ it. "  ~Andrew Jackson - Farewell Address, 3/4/1837

[Nailer]

I hope this starts a trend ..

Oklahoma Declares Sovereignty. HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 1089
Sun Jun 15, 2008 14:40
72.201.43.207


Oklahoma Declares Sovereignty.
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
2nd Session of the 51st Legislature (2008)
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 1089

By: Key

AS INTRODUCED

A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to
The federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; and
Directing distribution.

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Reads as follows:

"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."; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as
Being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States
And no more; and

WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that
The federal government was created by the states specifically to be an
Agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents
Of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United
States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer
The legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some
Now pending from the present administration and from Congress may
Further violate the Constitution of the United States.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE
SENATE OF THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 51ST OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not
Otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the
Constitution of the United States.

THAT this serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our
Agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are
Beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the
United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of
The United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and
The President of the Senate of each state's legislature of the United
States of America, and each member of the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.



The Alex Jones Show on Oklahoma Declaring Sovereignty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=538z_wTpUCI&eurl=http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message665440/pg1

[releasethebonds]

the appointed time is now or never

[ramallamamama]

What is the latest info?

The AJ/Bermas clip was from 10/22 has there been any developments?

[peepnklown]

Who would have thought, Oklahoma!?

[Pheonix Renewed]

Who would have thought, Oklahoma!?

ditto that.

I think I'll mail this to our Representative. I have a feeling she's starting to wake up, and she's been reinstated, so... maybe it will tickle her ears a bit.

[larsonstdoc]

It's been 115 years since the OK land Rush.  The Okies have decided that 115 years is enough. 

Who would have thought, Oklahoma!?

Oklahomans are very independent people.  They are a lot like Texans (real Texans) that don't take BS from people.  I hope they get it done.  If they do it will be the 3rd OK Land Rush.  People will all want to live there away from Obamaland!  I will seriously think about it.  When Russell Means and the Lakota Indians wanted to take parts of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Wyoming we were going to go out there and live in their new country.  But Means, like an old man without Viagra, had no staying power or vigor to fight the US government.  Too bad, he had a good idea.

[Capt. Obvious]

This isn't one of those things where one or two legislators introduce a bill that never get debated, never gets voted on, is it?

[Devotional Soul]

Hawaii has been trying to get sovereignty for years now with no success, mostly because of the military bases.  I hope Oklahoma has better luck! 

[donnay]

It's been 115 years since the OK land Rush.  The Okies have decided that 115 years is enough. 


Oklahomans are very independent people.  They are a lot like Texans (real Texans) that don't take BS from people.  I hope they get it done.  If they do it will be the 3rd OK Land Rush.  People will all want to live there away from Obamaland!  I will seriously think about it.  When Russell Means and the Lakota Indians wanted to take parts of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Wyoming we were going to go out there and live in their new country.  But Means, like an old man without Viagra, had no staying power or vigor to fight the US government.  Too bad, he had a good idea.

Do you ever think the reason you do not hear much about the Lakota"s is for obvious reasons...it might just start a trend?

Right now they are having some hard times because of the blizzard that hit the Dakotas last week:  http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/weather/11/06/wintry.weather.ap/

http://www.republicoflakotah.com/

[Optimus]

This isn't one of those things where one or two legislators introduce a bill that never get debated, never gets voted on, is it?

I heard awhile back that this resolution has passed in an overwhelming 92 - 3 majority vote. There are other states that have similar resolutions as well.

[Optimus]

Here are some great threads discussing what Oklahoma's 10th Amendment resolution means.

OKLAHOMA DECLARES SOVEREIGNTY from the rogue federal government
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=45408.0

The Info-War to halt the NWO... a 10th Amendment struggle, here's how we WIN!
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4199.0

Alex Jones Interview wCharles Key of OK on OK sovereignty p1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svaQcUl42aU

Alex Jones Interview wCharles Key of OK on OK sovereignty p2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNsY2rQwUZE

Alex Jones Interview wCharles Key of OK on OK sovereignty p3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAmH2ZYDmFQ

Alex Jones Interview wCharles Key of OK on OK sovereignty p4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOG3eHMNfP4

[peepnklown]

I’d like to see California follow.

[Kilika]

Oklahoma is not seperating from the US to be an independent country! All they did was officially restate their position that they have a constitutional right to make their own decisions on some issues, and that they are officially telling the federal government to back off. Call it an official complaint for the record.

[Optimus]

Oklahoma is not seperating from the US to be an independent country! All they did was officially restate their position that they have a constitutional right to make their own decisions on some issues, and that they are officially telling the federal government to back off. Call it an official complaint for the record.

The resolution also serves notice to the federal government to cease and desist all it's activities that go beyond the powers granted to it in the Constitution. It is the states and the people that granted the federal government its powers as outlined in the Constitution, not the other way around. As LeftyLeo has stated, declaring sovereignty is not secession. Read the resolution carefully, it says absolutely nothing about leaving the Union.

[xfahctor]

I'm taking steps already to get New Hampshire to do the same thing. Once thatis done, I have a very sweeping amendment to add to our states constitution that defines a number of constitutional violations by the federal government as a violation of state law. but this is the first step.We have a citizen legislature here so it's not beyond saving. We got it started once a while ago but this time, they have me driving it and I'm a pretty determined lil bastard when i get fired up abut something, it helps 2 that I know 3 out of 4 of my district reps personaly. I may bring in the big guns too,  .....ya still with me Oh great coyotius one?

[donnay]

The resolution also serves notice to the federal government to cease and desist all it's activities that go beyond the powers granted to it in the Constitution. It is the states and the people that granted the federal government its powers as outlined in the Constitution, not the other way around. As LeftyLeo has stated, declaring sovereignty is not secession. Read the resolution carefully, it says absolutely nothing about leaving the Union.

It is definitely a start.  Hopefully other's will follow.

[Freeski]

This is my favourite part:

"WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that The federal government was created by the states specifically to be an Agent of the states."

That is so important. The feds aren't anybody's boss. The States created the Federal Government to serve the States, and the feds now have it backwards. They're nothing but a bunch of evil, oppressive and illegal bullies.

They "served notice" - which is a legal term as I understand it - to give themselves more legal clout when the feds do something else that annoys them. Plus, they can use this "notice" to support the reversal of some federal dictates. With a 90% vote in favour, I'm beginning to like the Oklahomans!

[TheCaliKid]

This issue was already settled in the 1860's during a period in American history known simply as - "the Civil War"

It is ludicrous to think Oklahoma would or could ever be autonomous from the Federal Government. This is merely a token effort. It means nothing.

[Freeski]

This issue was already settled in the 1860's during a period in American history known simply as - "the Civil War"

It is ludicrous to think Oklahoma would or could ever be autonomous from the Federal Government. This is merely a token effort. It means nothing.

It only 'means nothing' if they choose NOT to make a stand with respect to their notice. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, is it not?

[ES]

they are not declaring independence from the Us,  it's just declaring their rights under the tenth amendment.

[plantop14]

Sovereignty, declaring that would be the same as seceding right, from the union? Just trying to clarify something.

[Freeski]

Sovereignty, declaring that would be the same as seceding right, from the union? Just trying to clarify something.

Sovereignty is a tricky word, but I think the essence of this is that Oklahoma has told the federal government that they've drawn their line in the sand... something all States should have done decades ago. A notice of claim and intent is a serious legalism that challenges the other party to either back off or up the ante. How far they'll push it is another story.

[ES]

Sovereignty, declaring that would be the same as seceding right, from the union? Just trying to clarify something.

States have the sovereignty from the federal government that they are entitled to under the constitution but not total sovereignty as in complete independence. Oklahoma is not asserting the right to have its own army of coin their own money. They are just declaring what rights they are entitled to by the tenth amendment.

[TheCaliKid]

It only 'means nothing' if they choose NOT to make a stand with respect to their notice. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, is it not?

Yes. We all believe and feel strongly about that. However, those who "work" for us do not.

As we have seen in the last few decades, their blatant disregard for the Constitution has only grown steadily worse.

[Freeski]

States have the sovereignty from the federal government that they are entitled to under the constitution but not total sovereignty as in complete independence. Oklahoma is not asserting the right to have its own army of coin their own money. They are just declaring what rights they are entitled to by the tenth amendment.

But doesn't the 10th also give them the right to secede from the union if the feds don't live up to their part of the deal? They went into it voluntarily and NEVER agreed to give up ownership of themselves. Same goes for all states, as I understand it.

[donnay]

But doesn't the 10th also give them the right to secede from the union if the feds don't live up to their part of the deal? They went into it voluntarily and NEVER agreed to give up ownership of themselves. Same goes for all states, as I understand it.

It's a push towards trying to decentralize the federal government.  The problem is our the federal government has been hijacked.

It's kind of like gun control when you outlaw guns the criminals we have them.  Well, the criminals are running the country.

[ES]

But doesn't the 10th also give them the right to secede from the union if the feds don't live up to their part of the deal? They went into it voluntarily and NEVER agreed to give up ownership of themselves. Same goes for all states, as I understand it.

it doesn't say that in the amendment. The amendment reads, "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."
So basically anything not included in article 1 section eight is reserved to the states or the people unless it can be shown that a  particular power is needed to regulate interstate commerce.
If there is a dispute between the states and the federal government it should be settled by the courts.

[Freeski]

it doesn't say that in the amendment. The amendment reads, "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."
So basically anything not included in article 1 section eight is reserved to the states or the people unless it can be shown that a  particular power is needed to regulate interstate commerce.
If there is a dispute between the states and the federal government it should be settled by the courts.

Okay, not in the tenth (I should have said that), but in the Constitution itself, the whole idea is based on the feds being subservient to the states - is it not?

[Freeski]

It's a push towards trying to decentralize the federal government.  The problem is our the federal government has been hijacked.

It's kind of like gun control when you outlaw guns the criminals we have them.  Well, the criminals are running the country.

Exactly, criminals don't give a hoot for the law - so most laws (criminal laws esp.) are actually a detriment to good people. As for gun laws, disarm the good: no change with the bad. Makes no sense at all.

[ES]

Okay, not in the tenth (I should have said that), but in the Constitution itself, the whole idea is based on the feds being subservient to the states - is it not?

Well not subservient as much as having a defined role and the states having another. The feds should not be able to make states do certain things and visa versa. This is why the feds threatened to withhold federal highway funds from states unless they raised their drinking age, because they had no legal right to dictate the drinking age to the states. So they basically threaten and bribe them to get what they want.

[Freeski]

Well not subservient as much as having a defined role and the states having another. The feds should not be able to make states do certain things and visa versa. This is why the feds threatened to withhold federal highway funds from states unless they raised their drinking age, because they had no legal right to dictate the drinking age to the states. So they basically threaten and bribe them to get what they want.

But the States never intended to give up their autonomy, right? The idea of the Union was to pool resources in a couple of very well defined areas, most notably defense... but that was it.

[JTCoyoté]

This thread is about Oklahoma declaring sovereignty under the 10th amendment... they are not seceding from the Union... and this thread will not turn into a secession thread.

Secession involves absolving the state of any connection with any other state, and the federal government... it means dissolving the Constitution. Loss of all Constitutional right!

The 10th amendment resolution that Oklahoma has put forth, is one identical to what at least 26 other states have put forth in the last 15 years... this is an ongoing movement, it has taken a lot of time and has been under fire since it began in April of 1994. yet has never been broached in the MSM... NEVER once in 15 years!

It was started by state militias, local patriot groups, and constitutionally savvy state legislators... the idea began in Colorado in late 1993 in the mind of a then state representative named Charles R. Duke. It was House Joint Resolution 1035 and was signed on April 21, 1994 and began a groundswell that by early 1995 had been passed in both houses of a dozen states.

The Feds saw that the states had developed a method whereby they could legally compact using the Constitution and the 10th amendment to force the federal government to cease, and reverse its interminable federal mandating and usurping of state power.

It was then April 19th 1995, that the provocateured bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City took place, on the 2nd anniversary of WACO... it was a shot across the bow for all of us who had banded together in half the states by fax machine and telephone, talk radio and letter... this was before the Internet was big... Two days after OKC, Bill Clinton comes on the television and elucidates his "fatwa against the patriot community", demonizing militias and patriot groups, as terrorists... along with his wife screaming of the "vast right wing conspiracy"... and then came the secessionists to infiltrate, after everyone in the patriot had dummied up, fled to regroup, or had been rounded up and resoundingly grilled over the coals offered up by the Southern Poverty Law Center...

If you want to know more, click on the large link in my signature block.

JTCoyoté

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country
against his government."
~Edward Abbey

[ES]

But the States never intended to give up their autonomy, right? The idea of the Union was to pool resources in a couple of very well defined areas, most notably defense... but that was it.

Well yes they did pool resources but in adopting the new constitution they agreed that certain powers were in the domain of the federal government and that they would have to enforce the laws passed by congress in the area in which congress had authority to pass laws. For example if congress passed a tax on some import, then all the states that had ports that dealt with the particular item would be responsible for collecting the tax and giving it to the federal government.

[donnay]

Well not subservient as much as having a defined role and the states having another. The feds should not be able to make states do certain things and visa versa. This is why the feds threatened to withhold federal highway funds from states unless they raised their drinking age, because they had no legal right to dictate the drinking age to the states. So they basically threaten and bribe them to get what they want.

This is unconstitutional yet the Supreme Court interpreted it and rules that it complies under the Constitution's Commerce Clause.

It's a country ruled by Tony Soprano--it turned out to be a protection racket and the judges and juries are all paid off.  They pay no mind to the Constitution.