"Secessionism, separatism, sets states afloat on a sea of disunity & Tyranny"

[donnay]

yes, I understand that much. I absolutely do not define the guard as a militia myself. But my question pertained to the use of the militia by congress in enforcing local, county, state or federal law in matters of civil policing. I'm just trying to get a state constitutional amendment passed, but before I present it for legislation or propositoin, I want it to be rick solid, buellet proof and pass constitutional muster.

My apologies for misunderstanding you...The New Hampshire Constitution talks about a militias Vs. Standing armies:

XXIV. A well regulated militia is the proper, natural, and sure defence of a state.

XXV. Standing armies are dangerous to liberty, and ought not to be raised or kept up without the consent of the legislature.

Richard Henry Lee, who drafted the Second Amendment as well as the rest of the Bill of Rights, gave us a definitive answer in 1788:

    "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves. ... The Constitution ought to secure a genuine [militia] and guard against a select militia, by providing that the militias shall always be kept well organized, armed, and disciplined, and include ... all men capable of bearing arms, and that all regulations tending to render this militia useless and defenseless, by establishing select corps of militia, or distinct bodies of military men not having permanent interests and attachments in the community [are] to be avoided. ... To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

[xfahctor]

My apologies for misunderstanding you...The New Hampshire Constitution talks about a militias Vs. Standing armies:

XXIV. A well regulated militia is the proper, natural, and sure defence of a state.

XXV. Standing armies are dangerous to liberty, and ought not to be raised or kept up without the consent of the legislature.

Richard Henry Lee, who drafted the Second Amendment as well as the rest of the Bill of Rights, gave us a definitive answer in 1788:

    "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves. ... The Constitution ought to secure a genuine [militia] and guard against a select militia, by providing that the militias shall always be kept well organized, armed, and disciplined, and include ... all men capable of bearing arms, and that all regulations tending to render this militia useless and defenseless, by establishing select corps of militia, or distinct bodies of military men not having permanent interests and attachments in the community [are] to be avoided. ... To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

Right, I just want to make sure that any militias in New Hampshire cannot be used to enforce any civil policing by the United States by drafting a new amendment to this, among a few other things.

[clearmyst]

You can make whatever choice YOU want... However, don't try to force your ignorant and suicidal tyranny upon me, or anyone else who desires to destroy the destroyers and NOT the Constitutional host...

--Oldyoti

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress
and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but
to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
--Abraham Lincoln

That's an absurd point to make considering it is the state that is forcing everyone to abide by a set of laws/walls. If someone wants to remain a slave then by all means sit around typing on your computer and waiting for the rapture to save your ass.
Whats suicidal is to be forced to remain part of a state that mandates poison water, vaccines, schools, taxes all above and beyond what the original revolutionaries got riled over.

It is you who demonstrates a dim view on history yet again, the founders were even clear on this point, once the union proved unreformed then it was time to dissolve it and break away.
I worry that people of your shortsighted opinions will revel in butchering dissidents and imposing strictausterity upon those who wish to live as separate sovereign peoples without and coercive body to rule them and this is in direct parallel in many ways to the civil war on this account.
Nowhere does it say you can force others to remain in the union or invade states/enclaves that wish to remain free.

[theexcogitator]

For those posting above about lincoln's philosophy of state, please make your own thread.  Now, lets consider some things.  There is little potential for secession.  There are a number of reasons behind this.  First, some background:

US Intelligence:

   # The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (The New York Times, Dec. 12, 2004).

   # The United States ranked 28th out of 40 countries in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).

   # One-third of our science teachers and one-half of our math teachers did not major in those subjects. (Quoted on "The West Wing," but you can trust it -- their researchers are legendary.)

   # Twenty percent of Americans think the sun orbits the Earth. Seventeen percent believe the Earth revolves around the sun once a day (The Week, Jan. 7, 2005).

   # "The International Adult Literacy Survey ... found that Americans with less than nine years of education 'score worse than virtually all of the other countries'" (Jeremy Rifkin's superbly documented book The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream, p.78).
   US average IQ = 98

US Vicariousness
   US average TV watching habit = 4 hours of TV each day
   As economy goes down, movies sales go up

US people voting for either Obama or Mccain = 124907108
Voter turnout = 130,764,743     
Eligible votes = 213,005,467     
US population  = 305,659,000

So, what should be drawn from the above?  The average US citizen is an unintelligent person who willing subjects him/her self to 4 hours of propaganda (political or social); turns to entertainment when things get bad; either votes for a candidate who's agenda is malevolent towards them, does not vote, or is not eligible to vote.

Considering we don't own even one of the channels of propaganda, getting a large enough amount of people in one state to support succession would be impossible.

You might consider having all the truthers and 'patriots' come together in one state and secede in that state.  This is a bad idea.  First of all, just because someone listens to alex jones or is a 9/11 truther does not make that person apt to accept secession.  In fact, the vast majority of the truthers I have encountered fall under the category of the average American.  They watch tv, movies, play video games.. drink kool-aid/fluoridated water and vote for obama.  And with those that don't, you will have some who's religion makes them impotent.  So, what have you?

Alex Jones' websites get ~ 330k unique IPs per month.  Of this viewership, there are only a fraction that will do something.  

You have some multiple more active military that is willing to fire on US citizens than you would have people willing to have a non peaceful secession.  

So, what are the options?  
#1: Marginally disrupt propaganda, entertainment
#2: Create competitive propaganda, entertainment (Alex jones' version of jackass, maybe?)
#3: Decapitation by way of law or violence
--Way of law:
--Sue those acting illegally, including the judges that will either not hear your case or throw it out
--Become representatives yourselves by claiming you will give the public everything they want
#4: Invade and takeover Andorra, start anew.
#5: Help me takeover Antarctica from those evil penguins.

[seadeus]

Like Colonel Craig Roberts said yesterday, the best thing for American patriots to do right now, is to learn history.

Many people here in their ignorance of history,...
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
~Abraham Lincoln

Just for the record, it was Jesus Christ that said a House divided can not stand. You may now continue with your history lecture.

[seadeus]

As for the responses that fall under "it is impossible", I would offer that the question is one of whether or not it is the right thing to do. We have come to where we are as a nation by ignoring the right v. wrong question, and instead focusing on what is "possible". Victory does not belong to the strong, it belongs to God.

My assumption would never have been that the 911 truthers or Alex Jones listeners would be the foundation for secession. The foundation would be Christians, just as in 1776. Somethings never change.

Given that this thread has been moved to "off topic", why is the discussion of solutions considered "off topic"? We should have a separate forum category for "Solutions". I get tired of hearing about the problem over and over with no talk of how to deal with the situation other than buy supplies and sit in your home.

[JTCoyoté]

Just for the record, it was Jesus Christ that said a House divided can not stand. You may now continue with your history lecture.

Yes of course, and Lincoln often used the words of Jesus like this paraphrase, and other verses from the bible as well in his speeches and his writings. His House Divided speech was given upon his nomination by the Republicans against Douglas for the senate on June 16, 1858... But in any case, the secessionists here will not heed the words either way...

The Lincoln debate that is running inside this thread is historical with regard to the destructive nature of the secession idea. A repeat of which we must not see, but we will see if this idea isn't stopped... just because some here can't see how it relates shows how little history you know, and just how much agony you may have to repeat!

--Oldyoti

"If ever time should come, when vain and
aspiring men shall possess the highest seats
in Government, our country will stand in need
of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-- Samuel Adams

[donnay]

Yes of course, and Lincoln often used the words of Jesus like this paraphrase, and other verses from the bible as well in his speeches and his writings.

Another interesting lapse in historical clarity you have brought forth, JTCoyoté -- since Lincoln considered himself an atheist but knew the majority of voters were Christians.  Another unmasking of Lincoln's deception...

"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

- Abraham Lincoln, American president (1809-1865).


Lincoln's war destroyed the government of our founding fathers by the "might makes right" method and this method is still condoned to this day--it is really sad for humanity, as a whole, since we later learned from heroes like Smedley D. Butler just what a racket war has been from that point on.

It's clear some people continue to disregard the Declaration of Independence and how seceding from the British crown was our only hope--alas, we have come full circle once again...history is definitely repeating itself and people continue to be duped into believing Lincoln was just, to use an iron fist to preserve the union--which in actuality, Lincoln preferred to call it a "nation." His idolaters continue to regurgitate this silly notion to this day along with the belabored word--"Democracy."

The Founders did not start a Revolution with the British crown to create a "nation." They created a compact among the states that would remain sovereign to delegated to a central government a few select powers like foreign policy and a monetary policy.  Nevertheless, each state, respectively, in it's own right was separate.

[donnay]

if obama had any regaurd for what our forefathers fought for he would realize why we need the second amendment

maybe he dose realize why we need it and maybe thats why hes trying taking it away

absolutly no regaurd for the constitution at all

Do you think this is any coincidence?

http://obama.senate.gov/speech/050530-remarks_of_senator_barack_obam/

Frankly, I do not believe in coincidences...but the handlers of this puppet will use it to their advantage to deceive the people once again.

[xfahctor]

For those posting above about lincoln's philosophy of state, please make your own thread.  Now, lets consider some things.  There is little potential for secession.  There are a number of reasons behind this.  First, some background:

US Intelligence:

   # The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (The New York Times, Dec. 12, 2004).

   # The United States ranked 28th out of 40 countries in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).

   # One-third of our science teachers and one-half of our math teachers did not major in those subjects. (Quoted on "The West Wing," but you can trust it -- their researchers are legendary.)

   # Twenty percent of Americans think the sun orbits the Earth. Seventeen percent believe the Earth revolves around the sun once a day (The Week, Jan. 7, 2005).

   # "The International Adult Literacy Survey ... found that Americans with less than nine years of education 'score worse than virtually all of the other countries'" (Jeremy Rifkin's superbly documented book The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream, p.78).
   US average IQ = 98

US Vicariousness
   US average TV watching habit = 4 hours of TV each day
   As economy goes down, movies sales go up

US people voting for either Obama or Mccain = 124907108
Voter turnout = 130,764,743     
Eligible votes = 213,005,467     
US population  = 305,659,000

So, what should be drawn from the above?  The average US citizen is an unintelligent person who willing subjects him/her self to 4 hours of propaganda (political or social); turns to entertainment when things get bad; either votes for a candidate who's agenda is malevolent towards them, does not vote, or is not eligible to vote.

Considering we don't own even one of the channels of propaganda, getting a large enough amount of people in one state to support succession would be impossible.

You might consider having all the truthers and 'patriots' come together in one state and secede in that state.  This is a bad idea.  First of all, just because someone listens to alex jones or is a 9/11 truther does not make that person apt to accept secession.  In fact, the vast majority of the truthers I have encountered fall under the category of the average American.  They watch tv, movies, play video games.. drink kool-aid/fluoridated water and vote for obama.  And with those that don't, you will have some who's religion makes them impotent.  So, what have you?

Alex Jones' websites get ~ 330k unique IPs per month.  Of this viewership, there are only a fraction that will do something.  

You have some multiple more active military that is willing to fire on US citizens than you would have people willing to have a non peaceful secession.  

So, what are the options?  
#1: Marginally disrupt propaganda, entertainment
#2: Create competitive propaganda, entertainment (Alex jones' version of jackass, maybe?)
#3: Decapitation by way of law or violence
--Way of law:
--Sue those acting illegally, including the judges that will either not hear your case or throw it out
--Become representatives yourselves by claiming you will give the public everything they want
#4: Invade and takeover Andorra, start anew.
#5: Help me takeover Antarctica from those evil penguins.

ROFL @ #5

[JTCoyoté]

THE AMENDMENT DISAPPEARS
In 1829, the following note appears on p. 23, Vol. 1 of the New York

(...)

Once again the 13th Amendment was caught in the riptides of American
politics. South Carolina seceded from the Union in December of
1860, signalling the onset of the Civil War. In March, 1861,
President Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated. Later in 1861,
another proposed amendment, also numbered thirteen, was signed by
President Lincoln. This was the only proposed amendment that was
ever signed by a president. That resolve to amend read:

"ARTICLE THIRTEEN, No amendment shall be made
to the Constitution which will authorize or give to
Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within
any State, with the domestic institutions thereof,
including that of persons held to labor or service by the
laws of said State."

(In other words, President Lincoln had signed a resolve that would
have permitted slavery, and upheld states' rights.) Only one State,
Illinois, ratified this proposed amendment before the Civil War
broke out in 1861.

In the tumult of 1865, the original 13th Amendment was finally
removed from our Constitution. On January 31, another 13th
Amendment (which prohibited slavery in Sect. 1, and ended states'
rights in Sect. 2) was proposed. On April 9, the Civil War ended
with General Lee's surrender.

On April 14, President Lincoln (who, in 1861, had signed the
proposed Amendment that would have allowed slavery and states
rights) was assassinated. On December 6, the "new" 13th Amendment
loudly prohibiting slavery (and quietly surrendering states rights
to the federal government) was ratified, replacing and effectively
erasing the original 13th Amendment that had prohibited "titles of
nobility" and "honors".

SIGNIFICANCE OF REMOVAL
To create the present oligarchy (rule by lawyers) which we now
endure, the lawyers first had to remove the 13th "titles of
nobility" Amendment that might otherwise have kept them in check.
In fact, it was not until after the Civil War and after the
disappearance of this 13th Amendment, that American bar associations
began to appear and exercise political power.

Since the unlawful deletion of the 13th Amendment, the newly
developing bar associations began working diligently to create a
system wherein lawyers took on a title of privilege and nobility as
"Esquires" and received the "honor" of offices and positions (like
district attorney or judge) that only lawyers may now hold. By
virtue of these titles, honors, and special privileges, lawyers have
assumed political and economic advantages over the majority of U.S.
citizens. Through these privileges, they have nearly established a
two-tiered citizenship in this nation where a majority may vote, but
only a minority (lawyers) may run for political office. This two-
tiered citizenship is clearly contrary to Americans' political
interests, the nation's economic welfare, and the Constitution's
egalitarian spirit.

The significance of this missing 13th Amendment and its deletion
from the Constitution is this: Since the amendment was never
lawfully nullified, it is still in full force and effect and is the
Law of the land. I public support could be awakened, this missing
Amendment might provide a legal basis to challenge many existing
laws and court decisions previously made by lawyers who were
unconstitutionally elected or appointed to their positions of power;
it might even mean the removal of lawyers from our current
government system.

At the very least, this missing 13th Amendment demonstrates that two
centuries ago, lawyers were recognized as enemies of the people and
nation. Some things never change.

Here is what New Hampshire did in 2003:

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2003/HCR0010.html

The bolded text you post above, is a twisting of actual fact... you must remember that even during the early days of the attorney conspiracy to destroy the original 13th amendment, a conspiracy which picked up considerably during the anti-Masonic period following the Morgan murder, and the creation of the anti-Mason party in the mid-1820s, there were those in the know, and then there were those I refer to by a common euphemism, as "porch attorneys".

The amendment designated as Article Thirteen that you quote above from 1861 was never signed by Lincoln, nor was it promoted by Lincoln.  This is one of many baseless Lincoln myths. There is no documentation for it but it persists.

The actual story goes like this:

This amendment is the result of the ill-fated Crittenden Proposition or compromise. Comprising Joint Resolutions to change the Constitution of the United States, the 7 section amendment, the Crittenden Proposition, was an attempt to avert secession of the Southern states. This proposition was soundly defeated in the House of Representatives just a few days before the President-elect was to take his oath of office. This was February 27, 1861, and the President-elect was Abraham Lincoln.

A large number of Crittenden's supporters in Congress devised a replacement proposal, which advocated Crittenden's constitutional changes, and was adopted at the very last hour. This was the Corwin amendment. It was sneaked past the committee in the House, which brought much complaining from the committee members. However it passed on March 2, 1861 and was signed by President James Buchanan two days before Lincoln took office. It reads exactly this way:

"Article Thirteen: No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, with any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."

It is the only amendment, to that time, ever issued by Congress which contained in its actual text a numerical designation! It was taken up by Illinois, who fumbled the thing badly, and then it was ratified by only two states before it passed into oblivion... it was a last-ditch effort by the anti-abolitionist representatives, to avert the Civil War by constitutionally protecting the laws of slavery as they existed in the 15 slaveholding states. A bizarre notion, yet signed by President James Buchanan, not a porch lawyer...

The actual resolution that Lincoln did sign, was accomplished during the last days of the war. Within the tumult of that time the original TONA 13th amendment was removed from the Constitution when a Congressional Resolve to Amend dated December 5, 1864 was initiated, and approved and signed by President Lincoln on February 1, 1865. It contains the 13th amendment we are all familiar with today, which in section 1, prohibited slavery... and in section 2, effectively ends states rights. Here is an image of that document which carries Lincoln's signature at the top of the right hand column...

Like I said, there is much undeserved Lincoln hate, as well as Lincoln adulation, out there that is pure creation and/or misrepresentation, in any case, fallacy... I want the verifiable truth, not fantasy...

JTCoyoté

"Our country's founders cherished liberty,
not democracy."
~Ron Paul

[donnay]

The Original Thirteenth Article of Amendment
To The Constitution For The United States

    "If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." [Journal of the Senate]


The Great Mr. Lincoln's Fraud
By Richard C. Green
http://www.barefootsworld.net/lincoln13th.html
___________________________________________________________

TONA on the 13th

War Dept. document from 1825 reveals critical clue to missing 13th Amendment

Source: http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20021214.htm

War Dept. document from 1825 reveals critical clue to missing 13th Amendment

By The Idaho Observer

KANSAS CITY -- The Comfort Inn here was the third stop for Freedom Drive, 2002, and the place where Titles of Nobility Amendment (TONA) researcher Suzanne Nevling of San Francisco, California produced a copy of "Military Laws of the United States to which is prefixed the Constitution of the United States."

The book, published under authority of the War Department in 1825, proves that the original 13th Amendment that prohibits Americans from holding Titles of Nobility, was part of the Constitution until it was mysteriously replaced with a new 13th Amendment that banned slavery after the Civil War. "When we found this book last September we knew that we had found that the original 13th Amendment was part of the Constitution as of 1825," Nevling said.

Previous TONA research proves that on March 12, 1819, Virginia became the 13th and final state required for ratification of the original 13th Amendment when it published in the laws of Virginia Act No. 280 as passed by its legislature.

TONA research has shown that the state of Virginia forwarded copies of its revised code to the Department of State, the Congress, the Library of Congress and the President.

There is no indication in the Congressional Record or any other official journal that the original 13th Amendment has been repealed. In the absence of a lawful explanation as to the whereabouts of the missing 13th Amendment, we have little choice but to infer that it is still the law of the land and those who hold titles of nobility or receive largesse from foreign nations are no longer American citizens. Such persons, per the Amendment, are not capable, "... of holding any office of trust or profit..."

The original 13th Amendment is found in copies of the Constitution published up to 1876. From that point on, the original 13th Amendment no longer appears and is replaced by the 13th Amendment that prohibits slavery. It is still a mystery as to how the slavery amendment, ratified under President Abraham Lincoln in 1865, replaced the title of nobility amendment of 1819 in all copies of the Constitution published since 1876.

TONA researchers have been doggedly trying to find out where a properly ratified and never repealed constitutional amendment has been hiding for the last 126 years. Though the exact political location of the missing 13th Amendment has eluded them since David Dodge began researching the issue in the early 1980s, Nevling believes that the final pieces of the TONA puzzle will reveal themselves in due course.

Now more than ever We currently live in an era where advances in communications, travel and commerce have all but dissolved the boundaries of sovereign nations. Adding to the intrigue we have the governments of what remains of sovereign nations operating under credit afforded them by multinational corporation-owned banks that hold the assets and resources of the nation as collateral on the loans. If there has ever been a period in American history where influential persons may be compelled to compromise national security in trade for titles of nobility, presents, pensions, salaries, offices or other "emoluments," it is now.

The purpose of the original 13th Amendment, which at the time of its ratification had popular support, was to add severe penalties to prohibitions against the acceptance of titles of nobility or other favors from foreign powers as found in Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution.

The Founders understood that history was replete with examples of how public servants accepted favors from foreign interests to the severe detriment of national security. The Founders concern was so great they addressed it in the first article of the Constitution.

The Founders saw that the Constitutional provision alone was not sufficient to deter influential individuals from entering into potentially disastrous relationships with representatives of foreign nations. The result was ratification of the original 13th Amendment during the administration of President James Monroe.

"This Article of Amendment is intimately connected to questions of war and national defense. It is designed to combat internal subversion and discord sowed by people who are adhering to foreign powers without stepping across the bold Constitutional line of treason," TONA researchers explain.

All attorneys and judges who claim the title "esquire," a title of English nobility beneath knighthood and extended to professional men, are incapable of holding public office under the Amendment. If enforced, nearly half the legislators in office throughout America would be removed from office and stripped of their citizenship.

A partial list of influential Americans who have been "honorarily" knighted by the Queen of England include Henry Kissinger, Norman Schwarzkopf, Colin Powell, Casper Weinberger, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Sr., Rudy Giullani and Alan Greenspan. If the real 13th Amendment were enforced those men would be stripped of their citizenship and would not be allowed to hold positions of public trust.

Sir Alan Greenspan is often referred to as the most powerful man in America because he is the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board -- the consortium of private international bankers who control the U.S. money supply.

Sir Henry Kissinger, former secretary of state under President Nixon and the man whose foreign policies have been behind nearly every genocidal event on earth since WWII (according to a 36-page report in Harper's magazine [The Making of a War Criminal, Feb. 26, 2000]) has been nominated to head an independent investigation of the 9-11 tragedy. Sir Colin Powell is the current Secretary of State.

Sir George Bush, Sr., is the father of current President George Bush, Jr., and has arguably been the real U.S. president since the Sir Ronald Reagan era began in 1980.

With so many of the queen's knights holding American public office, one has to wonder who really won the Revolutionary War. The U.S. government is comprised of men who, while entrusted with our most vital national security interests, have accepted favors from foreign interests -- the same favors which are prohibited by both the Constitution and a (missing?) constitutional amendment.

"[Enforcement of the original 13th Amendment would be] particularly applicable today in the 21st Century as government is increasingly for sale to the highest bidder, as foreign and multinational corporations and individuals compete to line the pockets of politicians and political parties to accommodate and purchase protection or privilege, i.e. honors, for their special interests," commented the TONA Research Committee.

"The law is still there," the group insists, waiting only to be publicly recognized and enforced once again to protect the Sovereignty and Interests of WE THE PEOPLE, and to force the elected representatives of the people to adhere strictly to their solemn and binding oath of office and the limitations of government imposed by the Constitution.

Those interested in the quest to find the political hiding place of the missing 13th Amendment should visit the website at <www.amendment-13.org>. The TONA Research Committee has been posting the results of its research at the site which contains both text and electronic images of documents critical to the investigation.

http://www.amendment-13.org/publications.html#mil_law

[JTCoyoté]

Now you have found the real site...(chuckle)...

I joined in '01 when I first found them... the TONA Committee are a great bunch and need funding, so join and donate if you can. Their agenda is TRUTH.

As to secession... it is a fool's errand that makes politicians and just normal folks do stupid things, and gives those with an agenda to destroy, an opportunity to do destructive things...

JTCoyoté

"Our task of creating a Socialist America can only succeed
when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
~Sarah Brady

[donnay]

Now you have found the real site...(chuckle)...

I joined in '01 when I first found them... the TONA Committee are a great bunch and need funding, so join and donate if you can. Their agenda is TRUTH.

As to secession... it is a fool's errand that makes politicians and just normal folks do stupid things, and gives those with an agenda to destroy, an opportunity to do destructive things...

JTCoyoté

"Our task of creating a Socialist America can only succeed
when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
~Sarah Brady

Back in 1989, I worked with Alfred Adask--I was sitting right next to him when he received the phone call from David Dodge with regards to finding the document.  I have supported the research for the TRUTH for a while. 

Although, I do not share your sentiment with regards to secession.  Our country, as the founders intended was set up as a compact of sovereign, independent states.  By separating ourselves from the corrupt illegitimate corporate controlled government, we may have a chance to salvage our liberty.

I believe it is a fools errand to think we can wake up a good portion of the sheeple to take a stand against the corrupt illegitimate corporate controlled government.  This corrupt bunch and the powers that back them are not going to willfully relinquish their control. 

Either way we are in for a fight.

[clearmyst]

Why is this moved this to off-topic,
Methinks the pro-Lincoln/pro-Union crowd fears contrarian thoughts and
salient view points that contrast with there own impeccable not be questioned historical folklore.
 

[theexcogitator]

My assumption would never have been that the 911 truthers or Alex Jones listeners would be the foundation for secession. The foundation would be Christians, just as in 1776. Somethings never change.

The foundation would be Christians? hahaha.  I hate to burst your bubble, but most christians pay the government to spoon feed them mercury.  "The foundation would be Christians, just as in 1776."  What christians?  Weren't they deists and other?  Not that it matters.  Didn't you see the "why obama was born" song?

[seadeus]

The founding fathers and more important the rank and file men of the colonies were Christians and viewed  events through that perspective. Christian doctrine came first and then liberty came from that doctrine. It is no accident that the decline in biblical literacy coincides with the decline in liberty.

 

[donnay]

"Where the Spirit of the Lord Is, There Is Liberty"—2 Corinthians 3:17

[xfahctor]

I still say secession is not only dangerous to the citizens of the state that seceeds, but is a danger to an republic of states that I feel is still no where near beyond repair.

[donnay]

I still say secession is not only dangerous to the citizens of the state that seceeds, but is a danger to an republic of states that I feel is still no where near beyond repair.

Oh ye of little faith...

Even Gerald Celente on the guest on Alex's show today said he see this country being broken up.

I see no other course to take--either that, or we are going to be broken up into zones anyway under the U.N.

Alex has already posted the UN take over map and how were are eventually going to be broken up as well.

[xfahctor]

Oh ye of little faith...

Even Gerald Celente on the guest on Alex's show today said he see this country being broken up.

I see no other course to take--either that, or we are going to be broken up into zones anyway under the U.N.

Alex has already posted the UN take over map and how were are eventually going to be broken up as well.

And what do you see happening to your individual seceeded state when it is on it's own? Do you see it as a safe option against the forces you believe to be ready to take the world for their own? And what if the state you seceed with is run by a tyrant just waiting to be free of what few constitutional protections still remain? A state free from those restraints can do whatever it wished to it's people. What we have right now may not be perfect and in jeapordy, but it is still far better than being alone and under a true distator or alone in the protection of a single ineffective and helpless forces of a well intended but helpless state.

[theexcogitator]

And what do you see happening to your individual seceeded state when it is on it's own? Do you see it as a safe option against the forces you believe to be ready to take the world for their own? And what if the state you seceed with is run by a tyrant just waiting to be free of what few constitutional protections still remain? A state free from those restraints can do whatever it wished to it's people. What we have right now may not be perfect and in jeapordy, but it is still far better than being alone and under a true distator or alone in the protection of a single ineffective and helpless forces of a well intended but helpless state.

Exactly; so, who is with me?  Let us march against the marching penguins of Antarctic.  But seriously, you can't just "feel" that a secession would work or not work.  Its kind of like me saying that I feel that 1 + 1 = 2.  You need to look at the facts and ascertain the best solution, not feel it with your 6th sense, which obviously has not gotten you guys too far thus.

[JTCoyoté]

Oh ye of little faith...

Even Gerald Celente on the guest on Alex's show today said he see this country being broken up.

I see no other course to take--either that, or we are going to be broken up into zones anyway under the U.N.

Alex has already posted the UN take over map and how were are eventually going to be broken up as well.

The Constitution of the United States is a contract between the people and the states that creates the federal government as their agent... it was written at an eighth-grade level... Most of the usurpations and changes made to it under the guise of amendments from 1865 onward, are so convoluted even a law student has a hard time understanding what they mean, or how they dovetail... but many a constitutional scholar knows, including those on the side of the people.

They know that the federal government is rogue and out of control, slowly devouring the Republic and has been since the Civil War. The last time secession was seen as a solution, it ended up being the smokescreen needed for the royals and their minions to reassert power within these borders.

Secession by individuals or states, would remove them as easy pickings given today's political climate, and the dumbed down, follow the tube, understanding of the average American today... Anyone who exhibits rational intelligence and promotes such a thing as secession can only be viewed as a provocateur, a person who wittingly or unwittingly is working for the division of this country...

All of you who are interested in this... need to understand that built within the Constitution and Bill of Rights, is the legal framework for reining in a rogue federal government... all that is needed, as with any law, is that the people act on it. Anyone who wishes to know more should click on the large link in my signature block and read the entire thread.

States that breakaway are on their own... States that use the power within THE contract to fire the federal government, which has been the problem for the last 138 years, and join together in the noble effort to bring it to justice... will succeed. There is a movement to rein them in that is ongoing, but you will not hear about it in the mainstream media because anything you hear in the mainstream media is something that is being or can be used by the New World order to assist it in gaining control. They will not touch a movement like this one, not even in a slip of the tongue

Today's guest Gerald Celente stated that the division would happen, if the people did not wake up... Secessionists celebrate with glee at the idea of the breaking up of America... and I will not stand by and allow this forum to be used by these dividers to gain converts.

JTCoyoté

"This will be the best security for maintaining
our liberties. A nation of well-informed men,
who have been taught to know and prize the
rights which God has given them, cannot be
enslaved."
~Benjamin Franklin

[donnay]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ketcham10-2008sep10,0,6298381.story


The American secessionist streak
In a recent poll, one in five agreed that states have the right to peacefully secede from the Union.
By Christopher Ketcham
September 10, 2008

(...)

The thing is, it's not just residents of the Last Frontier who favor breaking away from the Union. According to a Zogby poll conducted in July, more than 20% of U.S. adults -- one in five, about the same number of American Colonists who supported revolt against England in 1775 -- agreed that "any state or region has the right to peaceably secede from the United States and become an independent republic." Some 18% "would support a secessionist effort in my state."

The motivation of these quiet revolutionaries? As many as 44% of those polled agreed that "the United States' system is broken and cannot be fixed by traditional two-party politics and elections."

Put this in stark terms: In a scientific, random sample poll of all Americans, almost half considered the current political system to be in terminal disorder. One-fifth would countenance a dissolution of the bond. This is not a hiccup of opinion. In an October 2006 poll conducted by the Opinion Research Corp. and broadcast on CNN, 71% of Americans agreed that "our system of government is broken and cannot be fixed."

No surprise that the disquiet finds a voice in popular movements. In 2007, a small group of delegates to the second North American secessionist convention -- the first was in Burlington, Vt., in 2006 -- met in Chattanooga, Tenn., to discuss how to foment the collapse and destruction of the United States of America. They came representing 11 rebel groups in 36 states, under banners such as the Republic of Cascadia (wedding Oregon and Washington), Independent California (forging the world's fifth-largest economy), the United Republic of Texas (returning the Lone Star State to its aloneness), the League of the South (uniting the secesh states of old Dixie) and the Second Vermont Republic (separating the Green Mountain State from the U.S.).

The dominant idea among the delegates was that the U.S. experiment had failed; it had become impractical, tragically ridiculous, its leaders and institutions bought off, whored out, unaccountable and unanswerable to the needs of citizens. The United States would have to be reborn smaller -- our loyalties realigned to the needs of localities -- if the American dream was to survive. The convention presented, in effect, a marriage of progressives, paleo-conservatives, libertarians, Christian separatists, Southern nationalists, all united "to put an end to the American empire and reestablish freedom and democracy on the state and regional level," as organizer Kirkpatrick Sale put it.

The delegates settled on a list of principles they called the Chattanooga Declaration. "The deepest questions of human liberty and government facing our time go beyond right and left, and in fact have made the old left-right split meaningless and dead," the declaration read. "The privileges, monopolies and powers that private corporations have won from government threaten ... health, prosperity and liberty, and have already killed American self-government by the people." The answer, it went on, was that the American states "ought to be free and self-governing."

The Declaration of Independence 250 years earlier asked for a similar dedication to self-governance: "[W]henever any form of government becomes destructive ... " wrote Thomas Jefferson, "it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.... "

It could be argued that secession is the primal American act, as old as the concept of the states themselves. What else did our founders accomplish in 1776 but secession from the tyranny of England? In other words, what the secessionists would argue is that although they are anti-United States, they are most certainly pro-American.

Secession worries the staid opinion gatekeepers of the major media. Sarah Palin's "flirtation" with the AIP should make us "uneasy," as Rosa Brooks warned in these pages. Palin's secessionist ties raise "serious questions," averred the New York Times. A more honest assessment is that the separatism of the Alaskan Independence Party is not so weird or wacky -- or out of keeping with what appears to be a sentiment rooted in that loveliest of American predilections, our crotchety contrarianism.

Christopher Ketcham contributes to GQ, Vanity Fair, Harper's and many online publications. He is writing a book on American secessionism. christopherketcham.com

[xfahctor]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ketcham10-2008sep10,0,6298381.story


The American secessionist streak
In a recent poll, one in five agreed that states have the right to peacefully secede from the Union.
By Christopher Ketcham
September 10, 2008

(...)

The thing is, it's not just residents of the Last Frontier who favor breaking away from the Union. According to a Zogby poll conducted in July, more than 20% of U.S. adults -- one in five, about the same number of American Colonists who supported revolt against England in 1775 -- agreed that "any state or region has the right to peaceably secede from the United States and become an independent republic." Some 18% "would support a secessionist effort in my state."

The motivation of these quiet revolutionaries? As many as 44% of those polled agreed that "the United States' system is broken and cannot be fixed by traditional two-party politics and elections."

Put this in stark terms: In a scientific, random sample poll of all Americans, almost half considered the current political system to be in terminal disorder. One-fifth would countenance a dissolution of the bond. This is not a hiccup of opinion. In an October 2006 poll conducted by the Opinion Research Corp. and broadcast on CNN, 71% of Americans agreed that "our system of government is broken and cannot be fixed."

No surprise that the disquiet finds a voice in popular movements. In 2007, a small group of delegates to the second North American secessionist convention -- the first was in Burlington, Vt., in 2006 -- met in Chattanooga, Tenn., to discuss how to foment the collapse and destruction of the United States of America. They came representing 11 rebel groups in 36 states, under banners such as the Republic of Cascadia (wedding Oregon and Washington), Independent California (forging the world's fifth-largest economy), the United Republic of Texas (returning the Lone Star State to its aloneness), the League of the South (uniting the secesh states of old Dixie) and the Second Vermont Republic (separating the Green Mountain State from the U.S.).

The dominant idea among the delegates was that the U.S. experiment had failed; it had become impractical, tragically ridiculous, its leaders and institutions bought off, whored out, unaccountable and unanswerable to the needs of citizens. The United States would have to be reborn smaller -- our loyalties realigned to the needs of localities -- if the American dream was to survive. The convention presented, in effect, a marriage of progressives, paleo-conservatives, libertarians, Christian separatists, Southern nationalists, all united "to put an end to the American empire and reestablish freedom and democracy on the state and regional level," as organizer Kirkpatrick Sale put it.

The delegates settled on a list of principles they called the Chattanooga Declaration. "The deepest questions of human liberty and government facing our time go beyond right and left, and in fact have made the old left-right split meaningless and dead," the declaration read. "The privileges, monopolies and powers that private corporations have won from government threaten ... health, prosperity and liberty, and have already killed American self-government by the people." The answer, it went on, was that the American states "ought to be free and self-governing."

The Declaration of Independence 250 years earlier asked for a similar dedication to self-governance: "[W]henever any form of government becomes destructive ... " wrote Thomas Jefferson, "it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.... "

It could be argued that secession is the primal American act, as old as the concept of the states themselves. What else did our founders accomplish in 1776 but secession from the tyranny of England? In other words, what the secessionists would argue is that although they are anti-United States, they are most certainly pro-American.

Secession worries the staid opinion gatekeepers of the major media. Sarah Palin's "flirtation" with the AIP should make us "uneasy," as Rosa Brooks warned in these pages. Palin's secessionist ties raise "serious questions," averred the New York Times. A more honest assessment is that the separatism of the Alaskan Independence Party is not so weird or wacky -- or out of keeping with what appears to be a sentiment rooted in that loveliest of American predilections, our crotchety contrarianism.

Christopher Ketcham contributes to GQ, Vanity Fair, Harper's and many online publications. He is writing a book on American secessionism. christopherketcham.com

Palin was never a member of the AIP. her husband was. and the articla fails to mention that the AIP is now actualy the Alaska branch of the constitution party and no longer a secessionist movement.

[donnay]

Palin was never a member of the AIP. her husband was. and the articla fails to mention that the AIP is now actualy the Alaska branch of the constitution party and no longer a secessionist movement.

Hmm...I looked it up and it doesn't appear they abandoned the idea of secession.

http://www.akip.org/platform.html

[xfahctor]

Hmm...I looked it up and it doesn't appear they abandoned the idea of secession.

http://www.akip.org/platform.html

My understanding was they had evolved and became alaska's constitutoin party. heres what I found.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/view_states.php?state=AK
perhaps I sit corrected

[Volitzar]

If a Secession were to happen would Chuck Baldwin and Darell Castle be willing to be the new nation's Prez and VP throwing in Ron Paul as Secretary of Treasury.

 

[JTCoyoté]

The secessionist movement has been around in it's present incarnation now for about 12 years, it was resurrected to directly take on and defeat the 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement by stealth... it is a provocateur movement, a movement of division, initiated by the New World order. Anything that divides the people or the states, and keeps them from uniting under the Constitution... is the globalists friend.

The 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement, has been around now for over 15 years... the first shot across our bow from the globalists came with the bombing of Oklahoma City, which was used to demonize LAWFUL militias and the constitutional patriot groups, who are the driving force behind the movement ... Shortly thereafter the secessionist movement appeared on the scene... divisive subterfuge by the globies, and enemies of a Constitutional America.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

--Oldyoti

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government
to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to
restrain the government -- lest it, [the government] come
to dominate our lives and interests."
~Patrick Henry

[JTCoyoté]

If a Secession were to happen would Chuck Baldwin and Darell Castle be willing to be the new nation's Prez and VP throwing in Ron Paul as Secretary of Treasury.

 

Absolutely not! The three men that you mention here, DO understand history, they also know what secession means... it is the breaking of a contract ultimately and blatantly... none of these men would want to be president of a separatist nation, that openly violates the Constitution... even the globalists have not openly violated it... they still pay lip service to it. I don't think Chuck Baldwin would want to be seen as the new Jefferson Davis.

Read my last several posts please. We have the power, the lawful power, and all this secessionist energy should be redirected toward exercising that LAWFUL power, rather than the divisive, separatist, and chaotic ends, that play directly into the NWO's "Order out of Chaos" plan, the perfect dovetail promised by secession.

Secessionism my ass.

--Oldyoti

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government
to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to
restrain the government -- lest it, [the government] come
to dominate our lives and interests."
~Patrick Henry

[donnay]

The secessionist movement has been around in it's present incarnation now for about 12 years, it was resurrected to directly take on and defeat the 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement by stealth... it is a provocateur movement, a movement of division, initiated by the New World order. Anything that divides the people or the states, and keeps them from uniting under the Constitution... is the globalists friend.

The 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement, has been around now for over 15 years... the first shot across our bow from the globalists came with the bombing of Oklahoma City, which was used to demonize LAWFUL militias and the constitutional patriot groups, who are the driving force behind the movement ... Shortly thereafter the secessionist movement appeared on the scene... divisive subterfuge by the globies, and enemies of a Constitutional America.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

--Oldyoti

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government
to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to
restrain the government -- lest it, [the government] come
to dominate our lives and interests."
~Patrick Henry

My bovine meter just tilted with your above comments.    Holy cow!

And, as you said in an earlier post: "Like Colonel Craig Roberts said yesterday, the best thing for American patriots to do right now, is to learn history."

In this regard, that is certainly good advice...

http://www.riflewarrior.com/okc.html

However, I would like to add that each state has a Constitution-- some states, their Constitution is more explicit in it's wording than that of the U.S. Constitution--with regards to the Federal government over stepping their bounds.

With that being said, your argument holds no merit.  Each State's Constitution would then, be the acting measure of the individual state's sovereignty.

Also adding the measure that the U.S. Constitution would work in the defense of the state if the federal government tried any action upon the State(s) that chose to secede from the Union---9th & 10th amendments respectively.

Not only that, a move to secede from the tyrannical union sends a resounding message to any foes of the now, U.S. illegitimate government, that we will not be party to anymore criminal actions on their behalf.

[donnay]

Absolutely not! The three men [Chuck Baldwin, Darell Castle and Ron Paul--donnay] that you mention here, DO understand history, they also know what secession means... it is the breaking of a contract ultimately and blatantly... none of these men would want to be president of a separatist nation, that openly violates the Constitution... even the globalists have not openly violated it... they still pay lip service to it. I don't think Chuck Baldwin would want to be seen as the new Jefferson Davis.

Read my last several posts please. We have the power, the lawful power, and all this secessionist energy should be redirected toward exercising that LAWFUL power, rather than the divisive, separatist, and chaotic ends, that play directly into the NWO's "Order out of Chaos" plan, the perfect dovetail promised by secession.

Secessionism my ass.

--Oldyoti

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government
to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to
restrain the government -- lest it, [the government] come
to dominate our lives and interests."
~Patrick Henry

I cannot speak for Darell Castle and Ron Paul but as far as Chuck Baldwin is concerned you must be thinking of another Chuck Baldwin or you don't know what you are talking about here.

Baldwin has made several eyebrow-raising statements during his time in the public spotlight. He called President Abraham Lincoln "one of the worst presidents we've ever had." And he also asserted that "the South was right in the war between the states."

Lincoln draws Baldwin's ire because the 16th president "acted without conscience in the way he was willing to violate constitutional government," Baldwin says. The Pensacola, Fla., minister says Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, imprisoned a state legislature in Maryland and paved the way for future presidents to disobey the Constitution when they see fit.

As for his kind words toward the Confederacy, Baldwin says all states have the constitutional right to secede from the union. "Even today, I think states should be allowed to secede," Baldwin says.

http://www.alibi.com/index.php?story=24887&scn=news

[JTCoyoté]

Baldwin is definately misinformed on this point if what you quote is true... He needs to be educated ASAP... Secession doesn't work, never has and it never will! 

By definition it is separation, it destroys the Constitutional protections in that state...and in the eyes of a majority of the people today, it demonizes at state, or any that join it... giving the feds the power to squash that state.

The only way is to force constitutional compliance by the federal government, that can only be done by the United force of the states, that are working within the existing contract we made to create the federal government...

The federal government is like a lawyer hired, we formed a contract, and it was signed and sealed... over the last 230 years, the lawyer has been slowly making himself the principle i.e. the people and the states...

To secede, would be like the lawyer is now in opening your refrigerator, he is eating your food, sleeping on your couch, while you are at work... He is slowly convincing your wife that he is you... and you decide to leave? to secede? instead of killing the bastard...

Chuck Baldwin needs to be educated about the 10th amendment sovereignty resolution...NOW!! Secession is suicide!


"The contemporary 21st-century definition of
"attention span" is the average time it takes
for a network television commercial break"
~Anonymous

 

[JTCoyoté]

My bovine meter just tilted with your above comments.    Holy cow!

And what are you referring to here...? AND Do be specific...

--Oldyoti

"If ever time should come, when vain and
aspiring men shall possess the highest seats
in Government, our country will stand in need
of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-- Samuel Adams

[donnay]

And what are you referring to here...? AND Do be specific...

--Oldyoti

"If ever time should come, when vain and
aspiring men shall possess the highest seats
in Government, our country will stand in need
of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-- Samuel Adams

By this very statement:

"The 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement, has been around now for over 15 years... the first shot across our bow from the globalists came with the bombing of Oklahoma City, which was used to demonize LAWFUL militias and the constitutional patriot groups, who are the driving force behind the movement ... Shortly thereafter the secessionist movement appeared on the scene... divisive subterfuge by the globies, and enemies of a Constitutional America."

Colonel Craig Roberts laid it all out here:

http://www.riflewarrior.com/okc.html


"The investigation should not stop, or even slow down, with the apprehension of McVeigh and Nichols as the only suspects. With leads into the Right Wing, Christian, Constitutionalist, Militia, Patriot, NRA, Conservative, and other groups not developing anything of substance, it is now time to explore the other side of the political spectrum."

[donnay]

Baldwin is definately misinformed on this point if what you quote is true... He needs to be educated ASAP... Secession doesn't work, never has and it never will! 

By definition it is separation, it destroys the Constitutional protections in that state...and in the eyes of a majority of the people today, it demonizes at state, or any that join it... giving the feds the power to squash that state.

The only way is to force constitutional compliance by the federal government, that can only be done by the United force of the states, that are working within the existing contract we made to create the federal government...

The federal government is like a lawyer hired, we formed a contract, and it was signed and sealed... over the last 230 years, the lawyer has been slowly making himself the principle i.e. the people and the states...

To secede, would be like the lawyer is now in opening your refrigerator, he is eating your food, sleeping on your couch, while you are at work... He is slowly convincing your wife that he is you... and you decide to leave? to secede? instead of killing the bastard...

Chuck Baldwin needs to be educated about the 10th amendment sovereignty resolution...NOW!! Secession is suicide!


"The contemporary 21st-century definition of
"attention span" is the average time it takes
for a network television commercial break"
~Anonymous

 

What makes you so sure it is Chuck Baldwin who is the one that is misinformed and uneducated?  That is such a sanctimonious statement to say the very least--that seems to be the pattern of your thinking throughout this thread--everyone is stupid and too busy playing video games than to study history--etc...  Lincoln was able to pave the road to tyranny by disregarding the Constitution--Baldwin knows that even, Ron Paul knows it.

In March 2005, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox met in Waco, Texas without any congressional oversight or any awareness from the citizens, they agreed upon a North American Union.  Are you started to see where Lincoln helped pave the way to tyranny?

So here we are once again; an unconstitutional Union is being forced upon all sovereign citizens and five years have come and gone and I do not see any relief in sight.  How do you force a Constitutional compliance when we cannot even repeal NAFTA?

The U.N. is quite unconstitutional but that has not stop politicians from entering our union into unconstitutional treaties--these are just some examples of what is being done to this country as a whole. 

Our country is being systematically fractured--all done by design.  Soon we will be asked to pay back our debts, in full.  When we cannot, the country will be auctioned off in a fire sale.  Why not stand up now and exonerate ourselves, as individual states, from this corrupt federal  government now, before it is too late?  I think it will cause a positive reaction and will encourage other states to follow suit.

[JTCoyoté]

By this very statement:

"The 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement, has been around now for over 15 years... the first shot across our bow from the globalists came with the bombing of Oklahoma City, which was used to demonize LAWFUL militias and the constitutional patriot groups, who are the driving force behind the movement ... Shortly thereafter the secessionist movement appeared on the scene... divisive subterfuge by the globies, and enemies of a Constitutional America."

Colonel Craig Roberts laid it all out here:

http://www.riflewarrior.com/okc.html


"The investigation should not stop, or even slow down, with the apprehension of McVeigh and Nichols as the only suspects. With leads into the Right Wing, Christian, Constitutionalist, Militia, Patriot, NRA, Conservative, and other groups not developing anything of substance, it is now time to explore the other side of the political spectrum."

Okay, so where is bull-Sh!t???   Of course after five years of investigating everybody, the Trial, they weren't going to find anything... even though they investigativly pillaged lawful state militias, 48 at the time about a dozen now... The government and NGO's terrorizing constitutionalists, forcing legislators from state houses to resign because of investigation... that was my point.

Colonel Craig Roberts assessment has nothing to do with what I am saying... we knew we weren't involved, all of us, the militias, constitutional groups, state legislative assemblies, all who were gathered around the 10th amendment, I was in the nerve center of it all... We used lawful means in going after and hitting a nerve of the federal government, WE got a shot across the bow with Oklahoma City they did it to blame it on us. Then that bald-faced ugly son of a bitch Bill Clinton came on the news 2 days later vilifying state militias, and his wife screaming about a vast right-wing conspiracy... it was in the shadow of all this, when they brought in the underground... the subterfuge of the secessionist movement.

Now go back and read my original post, and read it right this time.

JTCoyoté

"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these:
First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; 'thirdly,
to property; together with the right to support
and defend them in the best manner they can."
~Samuel Adams,
'Rights of the Colonists,"
Nov. 1772

[plantop14]

If he is for state sucession then he IS mis-informed... no thinking about it... the union IS constitutional, the usurpers thos that have control of that union are not...and any state that won't stand with the rest of us against the usurpers is in league with the usurpers...

-Oldyoti

"It is natural for men, who wish to hasten the adoption of a measure,
to tell us, now is the crisis-now is the critical moment which must
be seized, or all will be lost: and to shut the door against free enquiry,
whenever conscious the thing presented has defects in it, which time
and investigation will probably discover. This has been the custom of
tyrants and their dependents in all ages."
~Federal Farmer, 1787,
The Federalist Papers

JT, first of all I always respect your views and agree most of the time on most but if I lived in a state like I do I would have no problem seceding if it ever came to that! This state is and was the only state in the union that ever was a republic by itself and I'm sure everyone knows what state that is! In all reality though we do need to stick together because if we do not defeat the enemy as a whole then the states that could survive as a republic would still have to deal with the enemy and those states would be up against a formidable foe!

[JTCoyoté]

JT, first of all I always respect your views and agree most of the time on most but if I lived in a state like I do I would have no problem seceding if it ever came to that! This state is and was the only state in the union that ever was a republic by itself and I'm sure everyone knows what state that is! In all reality though we do need to stick together because if we do not defeat the enemy as a whole then the states that could survive as a republic would still have to deal with the enemy and those states would be up against a formidable foe!

Texas is the only one that lawfully can...

-Oldyoti

"It is natural for men, who wish to hasten the adoption of a measure,
to tell us, now is the crisis-now is the critical moment which must
be seized, or all will be lost: and to shut the door against free enquiry,
whenever conscious the thing presented has defects in it, which time
and investigation will probably discover. This has been the custom of
tyrants and their dependents in all ages."
~Federal Farmer, 1787,
The Federalist Papers

[JTCoyoté]

What makes you so sure it is Chuck Baldwin who is the one that is misinformed and uneducated?  That is such a sanctimonious statement to say the very least--that seems to be the pattern of your thinking throughout this thread--everyone is stupid and too busy playing video games than to study history--etc...  Lincoln was able to pave the road to tyranny by disregarding the Constitution--Baldwin knows that even, Ron Paul knows it.

In March 2005, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox met in Waco, Texas without any congressional oversight or any awareness from the citizens, they agreed upon a North American Union.  Are you started to see where Lincoln helped pave the way to tyranny?

So here we are once again; an unconstitutional Union is being forced upon all sovereign citizens and five years have come and gone and I do not see any relief in sight.  How do you force a Constitutional compliance when we cannot even repeal NAFTA?

The U.N. is quite unconstitutional but that has not stop politicians from entering our union into unconstitutional treaties--these are just some examples of what is being done to this country as a whole. 

Our country is being systematically fractured--all done by design.  Soon we will be asked to pay back our debts, in full.  When we cannot, the country will be auctioned off in a fire sale.  Why not stand up now and exonerate ourselves, as individual states, from this corrupt federal  government now, before it is too late?  I think it will cause a positive reaction and will encourage other states to follow suit.

 Unconstitutional Union??? Your ignorance of fact and your impatience betray you... Lincoln was only part of the beginning of the problem, but it all rests now on the awareness and will of the lawful states, and a united people.

This whole thing took over 140 years for them to create... and you want it fixed in five years... secessionists are dividers... they do not believe in the Constitution, 12 years ago when I had to let my home go, lost my wife, and had to start again because of the aftermath of Oklahoma City, the media damnation, the scrutiny by the SPLC and the infusion into the movement by secessionists... well you do not hold a high place in my opinion... in order to stop them we must unite as a people, not divide as separate states.

If Baldwin is for state secession then he IS mis-informed... no thinking about it... the Union IS Constitutional, the usurpers, those that have control of that union now, are not... and any state that won't stand with the rest of us around the Constitution and Bill of Rights, against the usurpers, is in league with the usurpers...

-Oldyoti

"It is natural for men, who wish to hasten the adoption of a measure,
to tell us, now is the crisis-now is the critical moment which must
be seized, or all will be lost: and to shut the door against free enquiry,
whenever conscious the thing presented has defects in it, which time
and investigation will probably discover. This has been the custom of
tyrants and their dependents in all ages."
~Federal Farmer, 1787,
The Federalist Papers