Great Call on the Sovereignty Resolution, J.T.

[JTCoyoté]

Hey J.T.,

Donnay's husband here, great interview on AJ's show, and I've just re-read through this thread, great points, but...

 Nice to make your acquaintance... and thank you very much.

I understand your points re: secession, however, is that not the inevitable end anyway?

No it is not inevitable, nor was it in 1860. The exercise of the 9th and 10th amendments by the state's at the behest of their people to reign in federal power, is precisely why they were included in the Constitution, to rein in federal power by state-control. When the people realize that it was the false flag at Ft. Sumter that started the civil war... FFs started most other wars as well. Once this is realized, then that particular move by the globalists will no longer be effective.

Do you honestly think that the fedgov and it's globalist jockeys are going to just throw up their hands and say, "by all means, you are so right, we are in violation of the 10th Amendment, please, arrest us and depose us from power"?

The federal government has no 10th amendment power, nor is it its responsibility to police itself with regard to the Constitution generally... and the 9th and 10th amendments specifically. This is precisely why by constitutional design the vast majority of power is retained by the states and the people, who have the responsibility to exercise their power when the general government fails in it's duties, or oversteps its bounds...

This was precisely the argument being waged when John Adams stated...

"The government turns every contingency
into an excuse for enhancing power in itself."

 

The question should be, are the states and the people strong enough in their resolve, to do what is right and necessary to stop this Corporate/socialist global juggernaut, masquerading as our federal agent, will they stand and fight, together, remaining true, to the contract we have between us and not break and run toward the ruin of civil war?

Perhaps "secession" is the wrong word, maybe "crack up" is more what I am anticipating, much like what happened to the USSR in 1990.

This is the plan, but it isn't the plan of the founders... it is the desire of the globalists to break the Union into 10 "federal regions"... "In order to bring government closer to the people." Right?!... Not constitutional government, but a top-down globalist feudal government. This has been one plan that has been in the works by the globalist planners for decades... and out of the chaos of multiple secessions across this broad country, should they occur, would be playing right into the elitists hands. Just like the Soviets.

My point to you, and the one I just made to donnay, is the fedgov does not follow any other part of the constitution. Why would they be bound by the 10th, any more than they have been bound by any of the other parts of the bill of rights?

As I stated above, it is up to the states to follow the 9th and 10th amendments and have the testicular fortitude to stick by their guns, no matter what. As I explained in another thread, the reason why New Hampshire's resolution failed is because they were making two moves at once. Like in a game of chess, in one move, you have put the opponents claim to power in jeopardy, you must declare it by saying "check," and await his response. This is what the Sovereignty Resolution is, and must be understood and declared by majority vote of both houses of each state legislature independent of one another. Once this is done, then comes the 10th Amendment State Sovereignty Act, "checkmate!" This is the document in which you enumerate those unconstitutional federal mandates that you will not enforce, and that you will withhold funds to the federal government in those amounts, to boot until the feds cease and desist.

Most people do not realize that it is the 50 states from which the federal government gets all of its money and all of its manpower for armies and bureaucracies in such, in effect without the states the federal government has to no power.

The recent "banker bail out" and "economic stimulus" bills have given the globalists, on their face, almost $2 trillion with which to wage war against the American people. In the second phase of the sovereignty move, which is where we were with this movement back in 1995, when the Feds attacked by blowing up the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City, and then taking to the airwaves against "the vast right wing conspiracy," bringing to bear the media, the Southern poverty Law Center, the ACLU, and the president and his "wife" to demonize the Patriot movement... they successfully changed the mood toward the 10th amendment, lawful militias, Patriot groups, and the Constitution as well.

In 1994 when the first 10th amendment resolution was passed, there were lawful state sanctioned militias in 48 of the 50 states, today, there's about a dozen. It takes three quarters of the states giving 10th Amendment warning, and then implementing the Sovereignty Act, to throw the bums out, and still maintain the contract... it must be understood that all amendments to the Constitution from the 13th amendment on will be overhauled or scrapped. This includes the "changeling" amendment number 13 which in February of 1865 replaced the original fully ratified 13th amendment, that most folk don't even know about. All of these amendments, were specifically designed to increase federal power at the expense of the states and the people. Three quarters of the states can do this with nothing more than a stroke of the pen. The original 13th amendment would be then reinstated.

Each one of the later amendments, 1865 on, would be searched for any constitutionality in them. I have done much research on this over the last 15 years, and it is amazing how little constitutionality there is in them, when examined under the light of the Constitution's original intent. This will all occur when we accept our power and cease being the divided federal states of America, and truly become the Constitutional United States of America!

JTCoyoté

"If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms
renounce or give up any natural right... The right to freedom
being the gift of God -- it is not in the power of man to alienate
this gift and voluntarily become a slave." ~Samuel Adams
--The Father of the American Rebellion
and War for Independence

[Anti Federalist]

Nice to make your acquaintance... and thank you very much.

You're very welcome and the same here.

When the people realize that it was the false flag at Ft. Sumter that started the civil war... FFs started most other wars as well. Once this is realized, then that particular move by the globalists will no longer be effective.

Yes, quite right, this was the move that doomed the Confederacy.

The question should be, are the states and the people strong enough in their resolve, to do what is right and necessary to stop this Corporate/socialist global juggernaut, masquerading as our federal agent, will they stand and fight, together, remaining true, to the contract we have between us and not break and run toward the ruin of civil war?

Perhaps some states do, and some of the population within those states, but certainly not all the states.

This where I look to a "separation", a "divorce", as being the only viable option.

As much as I would like to think that all 50 states would rise up and assert their rightful place and powers, taking back from the fedgov the power that has been stolen, I just don't see it happening. I can look at the attitudes and general sense of people from places like my old home state of New Jersey for instance. The general sense that I get, is, far from wanting freedom, they want control, to be controlled, they are quite happy in granting more power to governmet, at all levels, rather than trying to restrain it. Through years of conditioning or fluoridated brain soup or what have you, the concepts of freedom that we are talking about here is as foriegn to them as Olmac glyphs would be to you or I. I suspect that California, New York, Illinois and more than few others would be the same.

As dangerous as a separation could be, and again, I do understand your points against it, I still maintain that, at some point, the only option is, much like a divorce from an abusive spouse, is a separation from a vile and loathsome entity.

This is the plan, but it isn't the plan of the founders... it is the desire of the globalists to break the Union into 10 "federal regions"... "In order to bring government closer to the people." Right?!... Not constitutional government, but a top-down globalist feudal government. This has been one plan that has been in the works by the globalist planners for decades... and out of the chaos of multiple secessions across this broad country, would be playing right into their hands. Just like the Soviets.

I don't see it that way. I think in the case of the USSR, the globalists "stepped on their d**k". Western intel was taken by complete surprise when the USSR fell apart, and I believe that is the case and not subterfuge. After all the globalists set up the Soviets, funded the Bolshevik revolution and propped up Lenin and Stalin. Why would they want to destroy their creation? Not only that, but I see the globalist plan not including small autonomous, sovereign nations, but "mega states", the NAU and the EU for example. I am of the mindest that smaller nation states are a thorn in the side of the NWO.

As I explained in another thread, the reason why New Hampshire's resolution failed is because they were making two moves at once.

I missed that, but I can say that HCR 6 is not dead, it was voted "Inexpedient to Legislate" (which is polite way of saying that it was "punted") by the Committee, but it has been forced out of committee to a full House vote that should be sometime next month. Keep in mind, in NH we have to deal quite a few Mass. transplants (Mass-holes) in Concord, so these things are not easy. That's not to say that the neo-cons on the "other side of the aisle" are not just as much of problem. The anti REAL ID legislation was butchered in the NH Senate when it first came up, by neo-cons, and we had to go back the following year to get it passed.

Rest assured though, donnay and I will be doing all we can to make HCR 6 a reality here in NH.

All that being said, my points here are just discussion, I agree, in the main, with what you are saying, and applaud your efforts back in the 90s for getting this ball rolling.

No matter what happens, it provides a legal basis, a moral "high ground" from which anything is possible.

[Jackson Holly]

I heard Thom Hartmann on Airhead America dismiss the whole movement outright this week as a purely partisan Republican shenanigan.

Para-phrasing: They are just upset about gun rights, abortion, a black president and such ... I wouldn't take them too seriously.

How can someone supposedly all THAT smart be THAT damn dumb?

But, we must, if this is to succeed, get reasonable Dems on board in those States like Anti Federalist mentioned. No doubt, even level-headed Dems have drunk the Obama Koolaid, bigtime ... and propagandists like Thom Hartmann are now sealing their fate.

[Cywar]

Thanks JT

[Elvis]

JTCoyoté:
"Secession, BAD..!
10th Amendment Constitutional reaffirmation, GOOD!!!!!"


To a point... http://www.law.indiana.edu/uslawdocs/declaration.html

I'm not taking away from the need to exhaust every possible road to keep secession out of the picture. I was speaking specifically about the legality of the first bailout - namely, I don't think it is legal.

[xfahctor]

Hey JT. I want first to thank you for being instrumental in this movement. The people have you, among very few, to thank and consider personaly responsable for this peacefull revolution. It seems now that more states than ever and with more fervor than ever and doing this in one shape or another. I was pleased to see my dream of New Hampshire attempting to adopt this realized this month. It hasn't passed yet but there seems to be a lot of support for it and I am keeping no end of preasure on my regional reps to support it. 1 is unwavering in support, 2 don't really understand it and one is in support of it but has a built in fear of big daddy fed, but they are beginning to get the idea and it's importance.
 I don't know if you have read The resolution submitted for my state but when you get a moment, take a good look at it. It is probably one with some of the strongest language and purpose I have seen in ths movement, even going as far as to place along with it a remedy and consiquence for this not being adhered to by the federal government.
 We may still have hope for remaining one of the last vastions of true conservatism in the country and indeed remain the land of "live free or die".

[xfahctor]

Also want to add my own thoughts on sessesion. It is a fools road for a state to take. To seperate from the union is to seperate from the constitution and the protections under it. You would essentialy become a state under the rule of a state government no longer bound by the limits of the constitution, or the bill of rights. You would become a nation state with the potential for a full on dictatorship subject to the whim and will of that state's government.

[JTCoyoté]

Hey JT. I want first to thank you for being instrumental in this movement. The people have you, among very few, to thank and consider personaly responsable for this peacefull revolution. It seems now that more states than ever and with more fervor than ever and doing this in one shape or another. I was pleased to see my dream of New Hampshire attempting to adopt this realized this month. It hasn't passed yet but there seems to be a lot of support for it and I am keeping no end of preasure on my regional reps to support it. 1 is unwavering in support, 2 don't really understand it and one is in support of it but has a built in fear of big daddy fed, but they are beginning to get the idea and it's importance.
 I don't know if you have read The resolution submitted for my state but when you get a moment, take a good look at it. It is probably one with some of the strongest language and purpose I have seen in ths movement, even going as far as to place along with it a remedy and consiquence for this not being adhered to by the federal government.
 We may still have hope for remaining one of the last vastions of true conservatism in the country and indeed remain the land of "live free or die".

Also want to add my own thoughts on sessesion. It is a fools road for a state to take. To seperate from the union is to seperate from the constitution and the protections under it. You would essentialy become a state under the rule of a state government no longer bound by the limits of the constitution, or the bill of rights. You would become a nation state with the potential for a full on dictatorship subject to the whim and will of that state's government.

xfahctor,

Exactly, because when you sever the relationship between the states, that is held together by the glue of the Constitution, that state no longer is protected by the other 49 states or by the Constitution. It would be a disaster to say the least. What the state governments need to understand... what everybody needs to understand, is that the Constitution does not belong to EVEN our "lawful" federal government.  It belongs to the People and the States... It is a contract between the state governments by the people of that state, that creates the federal government.

The enemy is a rogue federal government which constituted itself as a separate corporation, commandeering the "unratified 1787 Constitution" into articles of incorporation instituted by Congress, on February 21, 1871... this was the "legal" beginning of the unlawful rogue government!!

I have discussed this at length on other threads, and I will put it together with the sovereignty info I've posted in a chronology of these posts that I have placed here on the PP forum. This will serve to put all of this information into one thread that can be easily read and hopefully as easily understood.

Thank you for your kind words, xfah....

--Oldyoti

"The NRA, behind the scenes, has brokered, compromised,
and then endorsed every major anti Second Amendment
federal law passed for the last 30 years..."
C.E. Lovell, NRA Board Member 1980-93

[Elvis]

Consideration means you can't be held to a contract in which you receive nothing. Until it is proven that the American taxpayer received some benefit, it is illegal.

[JTCoyoté]

Consideration means you can't be held to a contract in which you receive nothing. Until it is proven that the American taxpayer received some benefit, it is illegal.

The term American taxpayer, is a recent innovation relative to the individual citizen. Even though the supreme court says otherwise, the 16th amendment did change the taxing clause in article 1 section 9. But there is a lot more in the contract called the Constitution, than just taxation, or more appropriately in its original form, the lack of individual taxation.

As long as the criminals are being allowed to mass great fortunes, things are peaceful... they are satiated so to speak. Right now is where the benefit from the Constitution will be seen... because they now want absolute power, and if we remain together we will defeat them, and return their fortunes to the rightful owners, we the people of the United States of America!

--Oldyoti

"If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom;
and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more,
it will lose that, too."
~Somerset Maugham

[Elvis]

As long as the criminals are being allowed to mass great fortunes, things are peaceful... they are satiated so to speak. Right now is where the benefit from the Constitution will be seen... because they now want absolute power, and if we remain together we will defeat them, and return their fortunes to the rightful owners, we the people of the United States of America!

It would appear that they are implementing their "Scourched Treasury Policy" for the timely introduction and coercive acceptance of the amero .

Let's hope the states are waking up to the urgency of the situation.