Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!

Author Topic: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!  (Read 85727 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #120 on: September 05, 2009, 03:53:42 PM »
Where can I find a link to all the states that have passed the S Resolution?

Have you tried the 10th Amendment Center? They post which states have passed, introducing resolutions.

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Cywar

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,156
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #121 on: September 05, 2009, 04:09:41 PM »
Have you tried the 10th Amendment Center? They post which states have passed, introducing resolutions.

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

Yes, Thank you - it's a great site.
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."

—Albert Einstein

Offline phosphene

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,826
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #122 on: September 05, 2009, 05:34:11 PM »
Forgive me for being a Constitutional noob. But, the way I understand it is..... "The People" got together and wrote a Constitution. Then "The People" offered this Constitution to "The United States". 1 sovereign entity hands a contract to another. So, "The United States" is signatory to the contract(Constitution) provided by "The People".

We have 2 sovereign entities here..."The People" and "The United States". "The People" are sovereign above "The United States" because they wrote and offered the contract. But who, exactly are "The People". Well, we know 1st hand who "The People" are NOT....blacks, slaves, women, non-Christians, citizens, etc. So it is clear that the US Constitution was written for the elites and by the elites. They were not "being nice". They were declaring how they were gonna run the show.

My question is....
Why would a State secede on Constitutional grounds(10th amendment), when seceding is essentially renouncing the Constitution anyways?

Using the Constitution to fight the Constitution doesn't make sense to me. Ok, Ok......you are not talking about "secession"...just "state sovereignty". The State still runs into the same problem.....using the Constitution to fight the Constitution. The State cannot simultaneously "breach" and "be covered by" the contract(Constitution) at the same time.
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."--Joshua

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #123 on: September 05, 2009, 05:50:58 PM »
Go get you a copy of the tenth and bring it in here and show me where the 10Amendment has anything to do with secession.  State Sovereignty and secession are two different animals.

Show me your basis for this:
Quote
We have 2 sovereign entities here..."The People" and "The United States". "The People" are sovereign above "The United States" because they wrote and offered the contract. But who, exactly are "The People". Well, we know 1st hand who "The People" are NOT....blacks, slaves, women, non-Christians, citizens, etc. So it is clear that the US Constitution was written for the elites and by the elites. They were not "being nice". They were declaring how they were gonna run the show.

Offline phosphene

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,826
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #124 on: September 05, 2009, 06:35:49 PM »
Go get you a copy of the tenth and bring it in here and show me where the 10Amendment has anything to do with secession.  State Sovereignty and secession are two different animals.

Show me your basis for this:
Yes, I already acknowledged this point and addressed it in my post.....
"Ok, Ok......you are not talking about "secession"...just "state sovereignty". The State still runs into the same problem.....using the Constitution to fight the Constitution."


Show me your basis for this:
We have 2 sovereign entities here..."The People" and "The United States". "The People" are sovereign above "The United States" because they wrote and offered the contract. But who, exactly are "The People". Well, we know 1st hand who "The People" are NOT....blacks, slaves, women, non-Christians, citizens, etc. So it is clear that the US Constitution was written for the elites and by the elites. They were not "being nice". They were declaring how they were gonna run the show.

The founding fathers owned slaves. It doesn't get much clearer than that. It is clear that "The People" represents a certain group of human beings and excludes many others. These guys were starting a new country! Hard core stuff. Very intelligent people. They weren't messing around. They were layin' down the law.
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."--Joshua

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #125 on: September 05, 2009, 07:19:44 PM »

JTCoyoté

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #126 on: September 06, 2009, 02:15:56 AM »
Forgive me for being a Constitutional noob. But, the way I understand it is..... "The People" got together and wrote a Constitution. Then "The People" offered this Constitution to "The United States". 1 sovereign entity hands a contract to another. So, "The United States" is signatory to the contract(Constitution) provided by "The People".

We have 2 sovereign entities here..."The People" and "The United States". "The People" are sovereign above "The United States" because they wrote and offered the contract. But who, exactly are "The People". Well, we know 1st hand who "The People" are NOT....blacks, slaves, women, non-Christians, citizens, etc. So it is clear that the US Constitution was written for the elites and by the elites. They were not "being nice". They were declaring how they were gonna run the show.

My question is....
Why would a State secede on Constitutional grounds(10th amendment), when seceding is essentially renouncing the Constitution anyways?

Using the Constitution to fight the Constitution doesn't make sense to me. Ok, Ok......you are not talking about "secession"...just "state sovereignty". The State still runs into the same problem.....using the Constitution to fight the Constitution. The State cannot simultaneously "breach" and "be covered by" the contract(Constitution) at the same time.

You have a little bit of un-learning to do... some of the logic you use is correct, but because you're initial conception of who created what, and who is sovereign and who is not, is wrong, that creates a lot of your confusion. Also the idea that the Constitution was written for the elite by the elite is another misconception that is fostered in public schools today...

Since the time of its writing, who "We the people" are was determined by each individual state, most required only that the person voting in the affairs of the state was a landowner... and contrary to popular belief, more than 75% of the people owned land or property and this included widows, or women who had inherited or purchased property... property owning free slaves voted as well... It must be remembered that a large percentage of people who emigrated to America up until the Civil War, were indentured servants, a slave with a term limit... many of these people went on to become landowners as well.

Many of the presumptions that you hold, you will have to lose, because they are fallacies that have been planted in your head and unfortunately a lot of other heads by the federal socialist education system over the last 30 years... this is by globalist design, and not Constitutional design to be sure.

We the people, through our individual sovereign states, created a compact that would provide as is suggested in the preamble all of the things necessary to maintain a peaceful union of the state's while not interfering with the people's self-government, our liberty, our property, or that of our posterity. This contract creates the limited second entity... the United States federal government. It has certain specific functions that are spelled out clearly in article 1 section 8... these are the duties of the federal government... constitutionally it is not sovereign, and was never intended to be sovereign.

It is impossible to secede from the union without breaking this Constitutional contract. And as has been stated many times you cannot be protected under a contract that you break. The 10th amendment is the last article of the Constitutional contract... the idea that secession somehow involves the 10th amendment is a misconception that was fostered before and during the Civil War... it is a fallacy, but it is still used today by secessionists, to give their movement "legitimacy."

For secession to be legitimate, it would have to be unanimous, a precedent that was set by no less a group of thinkers than the founding fathers when they unanimously declared their independence from Britain on July 4, 1776... it was a unanimous succession, as it had to be, and they understood why... otherwise there would have been Civil War.

The 10th amendment sovereignty movement, is NOT a secessionist movement... it is merely the Constitutional exercising of the 10th amendment prerogative by each state, to rein-in an out of control, albeit megalomaniacal, federal agent, a government that has grown up around the Constitution by unconstitutional means wielding unconstitutional powers. the states have the power to bring it back into Constitutional shape. The rogue government knows this... but that is a whole 'nother thread.

One misconception that has been allowed to grow is the idea that you espouse in your first paragraph that the lawful constitutional federal government the United States is somehow a sovereign entity... it is not. On the other hand, the unconstitutional, created out of whole cloth, corporate government, that was incorporated on February 21, 1871 however, is. It is also a foreign corporation that by it's stealth under color of law, as well as the inattentiveness, or lack of participation by the people over the last 140 years or so, has invented itself as THE federal government... it is promulgating many misconceptions like the ones you hold... all of which push us even further away from our constitutional mooring. This unconstitutional entity must be pushed back to Britain from where it originates.

Once you realize the truth upon reading and understanding the Constitution and the body of writing that surrounds it, you will see that the only sovereigns are the people, who have united together to form the states which can exercise the people's sovereign power to provide an agency of federal protection.  All of the constitutional amendments from the present 14th amendment on, have been created to enhance and strengthen the false federal corporation's power. This " false federal government" is so far outside Constitutional bounds it is incredible... This can only be stopped if the states exercise their Constitutional power as the founding fathers intended them to use it, provided by the 9th and 10th amendments.

--Oldyoti

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

~John Adams



JTCoyoté

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #127 on: September 06, 2009, 03:53:09 AM »
Yes, I already acknowledged this point and addressed it in my post.....
"Ok, Ok......you are not talking about "secession"...just "state sovereignty". The State still runs into the same problem.....using the Constitution to fight the Constitution."


The founding fathers owned slaves. It doesn't get much clearer than that. It is clear that "The People" represents a certain group of human beings and excludes many others. These guys were starting a new country! Hard core stuff. Very intelligent people. They weren't messing around. They were layin' down the law.

 Your first statement is a fallacious presumption... the states are using their constitutional power to fight an out-of-control bloated federal agent that was created by the Constitution... the states created the federal agency... therefore the states have power over the federal agency.

The sovereignty movement is using the Constitution as the founders intended, to fight a foreign invader... how many of our founders and our presidents have warned that if this country is ever to be brought down it will be from within.

In 18th-century America, most of the white immigrants were slaves, indentured servants, with terms of indenture as long as 15 years, before they were freed of their obligation... If you're going to last any time at all here, you better put yourself in that time frame that these men and slaves lived... and remember that up until slavery was legalized with the 14th amendment by making everyone the property and therefore a slave to the "federal" state... there were actually free men. Your slavery Red Herring will not float here!

JTCoyoté

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not
as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law
and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.
 
~John Adams

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #128 on: September 06, 2009, 12:39:40 PM »
Thanks JT.  You do have a way with teaching in this topic that I don't. 

Offline phosphene

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,826
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #129 on: September 07, 2009, 05:40:33 PM »
yeah thx for the info. The Michael Badnarik videos are right-on too. Freedom is so simple, yet so complicated at the same time. I support the peaceful exercising of self-determination. And if a State can do that through the 10th amendment, then cool beans.
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."--Joshua

Offline phosphene

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,826
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #130 on: September 17, 2009, 08:15:42 AM »
US Constitution
Article 1 section 8
"To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;"

Looks like the law of nations was incorporated into the US Constitution with that clause?

Maybe there are avenues to State sovereignty through the law of nations....
http://books.google.com/books?id=z8b8rrzRc7AC&dq=Law+of+Nations&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=lCWySu_UPIvQtAO4mbSeDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."--Joshua

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #131 on: September 17, 2009, 03:25:26 PM »
Isn't wonderful when the paradigm is broken and we get to reread the constitution and learn the truth?  I got a sense of wonder.  Then I got a new sense of freedom.  Of course the actions of the government of late come crashing in and depresses me, but now I know exactly WHY we must fight, and it also help to teach others.

Offline egypt

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,598
  • Love: A Wish to bestow the fullness of Joyous Life
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #132 on: September 17, 2009, 03:43:17 PM »
Thank you for the list!

Love, e

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #133 on: September 18, 2009, 12:48:27 PM »
Michigan Senate Affirms Sovereignty Under the 10th Amendment
http://www.globalgulag.com/?p=197
September 18th, 2009

Tenth Amendment Center
Posted on 17 September 2009

from the office of State Senator Bruce Patterson, (MI-7th)

(Lansing, MI) – Today, September 17th is Constitution Day.  In a fitting tribute, Senator Bruce Patterson’s resolutions affirming Michigan’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government were passed unanimously in Senate session today.

The United States Constitution was completed and signed at the Philadelphia Convention on September 17, 1787.  Senator Patterson’s Senate Resolution 17 and Senate Concurrent Resolution 4 are reminders that the founding fathers knew what was best when they established that our new country needed a commitment to the rule of law, limited government and the ideals of liberty, equality and justice for all.

Senator Patterson introduced these resolutions because our country is straying away from our founding fathers’ ideals.  The Senator’s resolutions specifically affirm the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution.  This part of the Bill of Rights specifies that each state should be able to decide what is best for their people.

“My reasons for so strongly stating my belief in the Tenth Amendment through these resolutions is that our federal government is becoming oppressive in size and is intruding in our lives,” Senator Patterson emphasized.

“Our founding fathers decided that the country would be established on the sovereignty of the states. Our voices need to be heard, we will not stand by while our rights are stripped away.  It was great to see that my Senate colleagues concurred. ”

Similar resolutions have been introduced in 36 other states.

Senator Patterson made an impassioned speech regarding his Senate resolutions today.  Look for the video to be posted on his website in the coming days at www.senatorbrucepatterson.com

###

Both resolutions passed by a vote of 33-0. ;D  Read the text of each below:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 4.

A concurrent resolution to affirm Michigan’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government.

Whereas, The Tenth Amendment provides that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states and to the people. The Tenth Amendment limits the scope of federal power and prescribes that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states. Currently, the states are treated as agents of the federal government; and

Whereas, Many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the United States Congress may not commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states. By this resolution Michigan claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment over all powers not granted to the federal government under the United States Constitution; and

Whereas, All government agencies and their agents and employees operating within the geographic boundaries of the state of Michigan, or whose actions have an effect on the inhabitants, lands, or water of Michigan, shall operate within the confines of the original intent of the Constitution of the United States or be subject to penalty of law as provided for now or in the future within the Constitution of the state of Michigan, the Michigan statutes, or the common law. This resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as Michigan’s agent, to cease and desist immediately all mandates that are beyond the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally delegated powers; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That we affirm Michigan’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation.

Senate Resolution No. 17.

A resolution to affirm Michigan’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government.

Whereas, The Tenth Amendment provides that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states and to the people. The Tenth Amendment limits the scope of federal power and prescribes that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states. Currently, the states are treated as agents of the federal government; and

Whereas, Many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the United States Congress may not commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states. By this resolution Michigan claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment over all powers not granted to the federal government under the United States Constitution; and

Whereas, All government agencies and their agents and employees operating within the geographic boundaries of the state of Michigan, or whose actions have an effect on the inhabitants, lands, or water of Michigan, shall operate within the confines of the original intent of the Constitution of the United States or be subject to penalty of law as provided for now or in the future within the Constitution of the state of Michigan, the Michigan statutes, or the common law. This resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as Michigan’s agent, to cease and desist immediately all mandates that are beyond the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally delegated powers; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, That we affirm Michigan’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not enumerated and granted to the federal government; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline donnay

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,364
  • Live Free Or Die Trying!
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #134 on: September 18, 2009, 12:50:04 PM »
That's great news!
"Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace." ~ Rod Serling
"Cops today are nothing but an armed tax collector" ~ Frank Serpico
"To be normal, to drink Coca-Cola and eat Kentucky Fried Chicken is to be in a conspiracy against yourself."
"People that don't want to make waves sit in stagnant waters."

JTCoyoté

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #135 on: September 20, 2009, 04:30:03 AM »
 I cannot help but to get excited every time I read those last two clauses... "Resolved by the House of Representatives..." and "Resolved by the Senate..." fill in the state... and then it goes on to say... "copies will be sent to the president of the United States Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Congressional delegation of..." fill in the state...... I just get all goose pimply and stuff... ;D

JTCoyoté

"Not long ago, America produced 96 percent of all she
consumed and was the most self-sufficient republic
in history. With statesmanship and sacrifice, we can
become so again. With leaders like we once had, we
can chuck the empire. For what good has it done us?"

~Patrick J. Buchanan

luckee1

  • Guest
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #136 on: September 20, 2009, 12:36:15 PM »
I understand JT  I too, get a bit excited.  I start snapping my fingers and chanting, "who's next?, C'mon, C'mon! Let's go, Let's go!!"

I don't know if the chant works, but I feel better.  The alternative is to go outside bellowing about it.  8)

Offline centexan

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 675
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #137 on: September 20, 2009, 08:06:45 PM »
Way to go, Michigan.  Excellent.

Offline Etoyoc

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Love and Trust
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #138 on: January 29, 2010, 03:58:44 PM »
Here is what is happening in Colorado right now... a reaffirmation of the 10th Amendment to reacquaint the Fascist Global Socialists in our State House of the "original" 10th Amendment as intended by the founders to hold federal/global power in check, as well as to remind them of the "original 10th Amendment Resolution" passed in Colorado on April 21st 1994 and was sent to the "Washington District Criminals" and Bill Clinton that year.

Here is a link to the resolution, and a link to a check list that the Libertarian Party here in Colorado is taking as their election platform.

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2009a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/413254DEB3BF5E8A8725759B005C90DD?open&file=SJM011_01.pdf

http://pledge.tenthamendmentcenter.com/the-state-pledge/

Eto

Offline lord edward coke

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,201
  • "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God"
    • sedm
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #139 on: February 23, 2010, 11:53:06 PM »
THE DECLARATION UPDATED ;)

In the Course of securing Liberty and establishing the Republic, our Forefathers Dissolved all allegiance to the British Crown and declared the American Colonies to be free and independent States. This separation from the mother country Transformed the newly established States into separate Sovereign political entities. That in order to Preserve their freedom and independence, the several States found it necessary to Unite for their common defense and general welfare.

That in 1781, the thirteen united States, Severally, entered into a league of friendship with each other for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare called the Articles of Confederation. Under this Compact, each State retained its Sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which was not expressly Delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. This limited Confederation did not consolidate the thirteen united States, or their People, into one nation.

That in 1787, twelve of the thirteen united States, Severally, sent delegates to a Federal [Constitutional] Convention for the sole and express purpose of Revising the federal system of government established by the Articles of Confederation. The delegates drafted a new Compact between the several States called the Constitution for the united States of America. When adopted by the several States, this Compact did not abolish the federal system of government established by the Articles of Confederation or consolidate the thirteen united States, or their People, into one nation.

That in ratifying the Constitution for the united States, the several States created a common agent called the federal government. They empowered their agent with the authority to perform Limited enumerated functions that would be difficult or impossible for the States to perform individually. Under the terms of this Compact, every power not Delegated by the principles, to their agent, was Retained by the several States.

That the government created by the several States was Delegated limited enumerated powers, which, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, pertain to the States “in their united or collective capacity.” None of the powers Delegated to the federal government were to operate on the American people generally because they are not a party to the Compact between the several States as enumerated in Article VII of our Constitution.

That the constitutional delineation of power between the federal and state governments, which is the Foundation of our Constitution, was stated in no uncertain terms by James Madison: [t]he powers delegated…to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments in times of peace and security.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that the federal government has refused to stay within the Confines of its constitutionally Delegated powers. The government created by the Compact is exercising powers Not granted and attempting to consolidate the Sovereign American States into a single nation. That a consolidation of Sovereign States, controlled exclusively by political parties, would institute a form of government Foreign to our Constitution and rejected by our Forefathers. That whenever the federal government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the Right of the States, as the exclusive parties to the contract between themselves, to alter or abolish their common government and institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under the absolute Despotism of a central government controlled exclusively by political parties, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of the People of these united States and such is now the necessity that compels them to Command their agent, the state governments, to alter, reform or abolish the federal government established by the several States. The recent history of the federal government is a history of Repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these Sovereign States and their People. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

The federal government has declared itself to be supreme and above the several States.

The federal government has abdicated its constitutional function as the agent of the States and declared itself to be a party to the Compact between the several States.

The federal government has made judges dependent on the Will of political parties alone, for their appointment to office and the amount of payment of their salaries.

The federal government has rendered the judiciary superior to the Sovereign powers of the States and the natural Rights of the People.

The federal government has authorized the judiciary to alter our Constitution without resorting to the amendment process Required by the express terms of the Compact.

The federal government has claimed a power Not enumerated in our Constitution to define the extent of the powers delegated to itself.

The federal government has radically Expanded its power through convoluted interpretations of various clauses of our Constitution when the intent of our Forefathers is easily ascertainable.

The federal government has Plundered the wealth of our States and left them unable to fulfill their constitutional obligations.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to disarm the People of the several States under color of law.

The federal government has Subjected our citizens to death and bodily harm in foreign countries without a formal Declaration of War as required by our Constitution.

The federal government has, under color of law, enacted laws with the stated purpose of bringing the People of the several States under its direct control when No such power is granted by our Constitution.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to exercise regulatory control over every aspect of human existence within these united States.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the General Welfare Clause of our Constitution to tax and appropriate money from our People to fund programs Not authorized by our Constitution.

The federal government has, under color of law, Compelled our citizens to appear before its legislative tribunal to be interrogated on matters Not within the scope of its delegated powers under threat of fine and imprisonment.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to erect so-called civil Rights statutes when the constitutional duty of securing the Rights of the People was Reserved to the States.

The federal government has Erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of revenue officers and bureaucrats to harass our people and eat out their substance.

The federal government has sent census workers into the several States to Invade the privacy of our People and inquire into their private affairs under threat of fine.

The federal government has Perverted various clauses of our Constitution to legitimize the theft of our land.

The federal government has Given itself a new power of taxation Not authorized by our Constitution and Contrary to the intent of an Amendment to our Constitution.

The federal government has, under legislation Not authorized by our Constitution, Invaded the boundaries of our States to commandeer the education of our children.

The federal government has combined with other nations to subject the people of these States to jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution through pretended treaties unacknowledged by our laws; giving its Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.

For quartering large bodies of armed federal employees among us when No general police power was delegated to that government by our Constitution:

For protecting them, from punishment for any transgressions which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States under color of law:

For compelling our citizens, under threat of fine and imprisonment, to participate in a tax and welfare scheme masquerading as a retirement program when No such power is granted by our Constitution:

For using so-called war powers to Deprive citizens of the benefits of Trial by Jury when no Declaration of War has been formally declared as Required by our Constitution:

For transporting our citizens to federal courts to be tried for Pretended offences enacted under a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution:

For incurring debts Not authorized by our Constitution:

For imposing Taxes on us Without our Consent for the purpose of befriending foreign powers and potentates when No such power is granted by our Constitution:

For invading the privacy of our People under the illusion of securing public safety when that duty was Reserved to the several States:

For subjecting our People to jurisdiction Foreign to the common law:

For abdicating its constitutional responsibility to coin money and regulate the value thereof by transferring this function to a private banking consortium called the Federal Reserve:

For elevating the office of the president to a position of prominence Not envisioned by our Forefathers and Foreign to our Constitution.

For abusing the legislative process by unconstitutionally bestowing powers on the office of the president Contrary to the amendment process of our Constitution:

For plundering our wealth, ravaging our pocketbooks, and destroying the lives of our people:

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to enact a multitude of criminal statutes Not authorized by our Constitution.

The federal government has Assumed the power to legislate concerning the Rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights when the stated purposed of the Amendments contained therein was to Restrict the powers of the federal government.
The federal government has, through convoluted interpretations of various clauses of our Constitution, Rendered its law enforcement agencies superior to the Civil Power of the several States.

The federal government has Assumed the power to invoke so-called emergency powers when No such power is enumerated in our Constitution.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the General Welfare and Commerce Clauses to render the Tenth Amendment to our Constitution null and void.

The federal government has declared the People of these united States potential domestic enemies if they express a fidelity to our Constitution.

In every stage of these Oppressions and Usurpations of power We have petitioned for redress in the most humble and peaceful terms:

Our repeated requests that the federal government stay within bounds of its constitutionally Delegated powers have been answered only by repeated injury and usurpations. A federal government, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrannical government, is unfit to be the common agent of a Union of Sovereign States.

We, therefore, the people of the united States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, of the good People of these united States, solemnly publish and declare, That these united States, as free and Independent States; are Absolved from all undue submission to their federal government, and that all political connection between them and their federal government will be totally dissolved if that government does not return to its constitutionally enumerated powers; and that as Free and Independent States, they will have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
__________________
"Liberty has never come from government.  Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is a history  of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of limitations of government power, not the increase of it." http://sedm.org/

Offline k_illuminati

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
  • Omnis vanitas salvifico nostrum dominus Sarcalogos
Great article Written by: Skipper Kagamaster
Infowars.com

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.

Seemingly so simple, but these twenty-eight words have been constantly misconstrued, circumvented, or flat out ignored.

So what?  It’s just a bunch of old-school rhetoric spewed out by some powdered-wig sporting fundamentalists over two hundred years ago.  Move along; nothing to see here.

Or is it something more than that?  Not to hide my bias (not that I could; why else write a treatise on the 10th?), I find it horribly relevant today.

This amendment, the tenth and last of the Bill of Rights, can be seen as a conclusion to the Constitution as it was originally written; sort of a catch-all for anything not covered in the rest of the document.  To fully understand its significance, one first must understand the intent of the framers for the Constitution.  Here are a couple of quotes that might help out:

 

“A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”

-Thomas Jefferson

“A republic is the best of governments.”

-John Adams

 

“Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution.”

-James Madison

The point is, the founders were pretty united by two ideas:

1.  Rights are innate to man, not granted by the government.

2.  Local politics are the best politics, because the public has more control over them (the basis for a Republic over a Democracy).

The first point, that our rights are innate and not granted by government, is a simple notion with severe ramifications (I’ll leave the religious question out of it, for now).  If it is true, then there are things that we, as humans, have a right to; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness come to mind.  Any government infringing on these rights (no matter how cool their “Che” pictures look) is violating the very nature of mankind.  If, on the other hand, it is not true; then all rights are arbitrary and may be enforced or repressed at the will of whoever happens to be in power.  I’ll take “true” for 304 million, Alec.

The second point, that local politics are the best politics, makes all kinds of sense if you think about it (it actually makes sense even if you don’t think about it, but it’s best that you do instead of just mindlessly following along like a zombie without cool powers and a thirst for brains).  Not only does a person have more relative clout in a local election (one vote in a town of 10,000 voters is 0.01% of the vote, whereas one vote among 131,000,000 voters is only about 0.00000076%), they also hold the advantage of having lived around the person running for office.  In essence, it makes it much harder for a politician to “image build.”  Kind of like when Jesus said, “a prophet is not without honor except in his hometown” (oh no, the J-word!).  Basically, unless we’re talking about Jesus, we would know the person running for office and know that they can’t walk on water; regardless of what their PR guys tell you.

So, what does this all have to do with the 10th Amendment?  Well, once we understand that the Constitution was not meant to grant the Federal government power but to limit the scope of the Federal government’s power, we can look at it in a proper light.  In a nutshell, it says that whatever isn’t laid out in the Constitution is left in the hands of the People and their States.  Think about that for a minute.  It means that whatever rights you think you have and whatever powers you think the government ought to have, barring what’s already written down in the Constitution, are supposed to be dealt with at the State or interpersonal level.  The House of Representatives and the Senate are not supposed to be the major law-making bodies in these United States; the State and local legislatures are supposed to be.

Now, for those of us who grew up post horse-and-buggy days, this seems like a foreign concept.  We vote for President, maybe Senators, and call it a day- er, decade.  Whereas I could wax grumpy about people not getting involved locally, I won’t because I can hardly blame them.  These days, most laws are handed down from on high, while the local-yokels are there to try to bend them to suit our needs (or their own needs, if you live in California).  People don’t get involved in local politics because they don’t see the relevance; and I’m not sure that they’re wrong.  At least in practise.

But journey with me now into a magical realm, ruled by the 10th Amendment.  All taxes go to your local government first, and most of them stay in your town.  You and your neighbors decide what the rules are for schooling your children, funding your parks, police, fire, and city services.  You decide where the roads need to be improved, bridges built, and monuments erected (PM me if you need a pic of me in a Superman suit for your town square; I’ve got like a dozen of them and they’re not moving on eBay).  Want universal health care for your city or state?  Go for it!  Next to no government intervention in life and business?  You’re the boss!  But wait, where’s the Federal government?  Don’t worry; they’re busy doing the only things they’re allowed to, like having a military and managing our (limited) international role.

OK, wake up.  We’re not in dreamland anymore.  The good news is, a lot of the above is still possible even under the current paradigm (I hate using that word; let’s pretend I said “zeitgeist”).  The difference is, a lot of your tax money is going to the Federal government first and the local governments a distant second, third, or fiftieth.  It’s not that government isn’t supposed to provide for schooling, welfare, health care, and the like; it’s that the Federal government is not supposed to.  Those sorts of decisions were intended to be made on the State and local levels, where the people with the most at stake have the most control.

How do we fix it?  Repealing the 16th Amendment would be a good start (that’s a whole ‘nother article for a whole ‘nother time), but it takes something both bigger and simpler than that.  We need to change the way we think about our country and the type of government it has.  Would you call us a Democracy?  I think most Americans would.  There’s an old joke that says, “Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.”  We need to stop looking at our country as a simple majority rule system.  We were set up far better and more elegantly than that.

We are a Republic.  Our rights are our own, and the government is set up to ensure those rights do not get trampled.  We and our neighbors determine our own destiny.  We have all of the strengths of a large nation, but all of the virtues of a small town.  We flex global and act local.  Until we can get back to these concepts, America is doomed to slip from what made it great into the mediocrity epidemic throughout the rest of the world.  The choice, and the burden, is ours.
I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."  -Thomas Jefferson

"They must find it difficult.. Those who have accepted authority as truth rather than truth as the authority" -Gerald Massey

Offline Rebelitarian

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,991
THE DECLARATION UPDATED ;)

In the Course of securing Liberty and establishing the Republic, our Forefathers Dissolved all allegiance to the British Crown and declared the American Colonies to be free and independent States. This separation from the mother country Transformed the newly established States into separate Sovereign political entities. That in order to Preserve their freedom and independence, the several States found it necessary to Unite for their common defense and general welfare.

That in 1781, the thirteen united States, Severally, entered into a league of friendship with each other for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare called the Articles of Confederation. Under this Compact, each State retained its Sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which was not expressly Delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. This limited Confederation did not consolidate the thirteen united States, or their People, into one nation.

That in 1787, twelve of the thirteen united States, Severally, sent delegates to a Federal [Constitutional] Convention for the sole and express purpose of Revising the federal system of government established by the Articles of Confederation. The delegates drafted a new Compact between the several States called the Constitution for the united States of America. When adopted by the several States, this Compact did not abolish the federal system of government established by the Articles of Confederation or consolidate the thirteen united States, or their People, into one nation.

That in ratifying the Constitution for the united States, the several States created a common agent called the federal government. They empowered their agent with the authority to perform Limited enumerated functions that would be difficult or impossible for the States to perform individually. Under the terms of this Compact, every power not Delegated by the principles, to their agent, was Retained by the several States.

That the government created by the several States was Delegated limited enumerated powers, which, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, pertain to the States “in their united or collective capacity.” None of the powers Delegated to the federal government were to operate on the American people generally because they are not a party to the Compact between the several States as enumerated in Article VII of our Constitution.

That the constitutional delineation of power between the federal and state governments, which is the Foundation of our Constitution, was stated in no uncertain terms by James Madison: [t]he powers delegated…to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments in times of peace and security.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that the federal government has refused to stay within the Confines of its constitutionally Delegated powers. The government created by the Compact is exercising powers Not granted and attempting to consolidate the Sovereign American States into a single nation. That a consolidation of Sovereign States, controlled exclusively by political parties, would institute a form of government Foreign to our Constitution and rejected by our Forefathers. That whenever the federal government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the Right of the States, as the exclusive parties to the contract between themselves, to alter or abolish their common government and institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under the absolute Despotism of a central government controlled exclusively by political parties, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of the People of these united States and such is now the necessity that compels them to Command their agent, the state governments, to alter, reform or abolish the federal government established by the several States. The recent history of the federal government is a history of Repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these Sovereign States and their People. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

The federal government has declared itself to be supreme and above the several States.

The federal government has abdicated its constitutional function as the agent of the States and declared itself to be a party to the Compact between the several States.

The federal government has made judges dependent on the Will of political parties alone, for their appointment to office and the amount of payment of their salaries.

The federal government has rendered the judiciary superior to the Sovereign powers of the States and the natural Rights of the People.

The federal government has authorized the judiciary to alter our Constitution without resorting to the amendment process Required by the express terms of the Compact.

The federal government has claimed a power Not enumerated in our Constitution to define the extent of the powers delegated to itself.

The federal government has radically Expanded its power through convoluted interpretations of various clauses of our Constitution when the intent of our Forefathers is easily ascertainable.

The federal government has Plundered the wealth of our States and left them unable to fulfill their constitutional obligations.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to disarm the People of the several States under color of law.

The federal government has Subjected our citizens to death and bodily harm in foreign countries without a formal Declaration of War as required by our Constitution.

The federal government has, under color of law, enacted laws with the stated purpose of bringing the People of the several States under its direct control when No such power is granted by our Constitution.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to exercise regulatory control over every aspect of human existence within these united States.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the General Welfare Clause of our Constitution to tax and appropriate money from our People to fund programs Not authorized by our Constitution.

The federal government has, under color of law, Compelled our citizens to appear before its legislative tribunal to be interrogated on matters Not within the scope of its delegated powers under threat of fine and imprisonment.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to erect so-called civil Rights statutes when the constitutional duty of securing the Rights of the People was Reserved to the States.

The federal government has Erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of revenue officers and bureaucrats to harass our people and eat out their substance.

The federal government has sent census workers into the several States to Invade the privacy of our People and inquire into their private affairs under threat of fine.

The federal government has Perverted various clauses of our Constitution to legitimize the theft of our land.

The federal government has Given itself a new power of taxation Not authorized by our Constitution and Contrary to the intent of an Amendment to our Constitution.

The federal government has, under legislation Not authorized by our Constitution, Invaded the boundaries of our States to commandeer the education of our children.

The federal government has combined with other nations to subject the people of these States to jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution through pretended treaties unacknowledged by our laws; giving its Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.

For quartering large bodies of armed federal employees among us when No general police power was delegated to that government by our Constitution:

For protecting them, from punishment for any transgressions which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States under color of law:

For compelling our citizens, under threat of fine and imprisonment, to participate in a tax and welfare scheme masquerading as a retirement program when No such power is granted by our Constitution:

For using so-called war powers to Deprive citizens of the benefits of Trial by Jury when no Declaration of War has been formally declared as Required by our Constitution:

For transporting our citizens to federal courts to be tried for Pretended offences enacted under a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution:

For incurring debts Not authorized by our Constitution:

For imposing Taxes on us Without our Consent for the purpose of befriending foreign powers and potentates when No such power is granted by our Constitution:

For invading the privacy of our People under the illusion of securing public safety when that duty was Reserved to the several States:

For subjecting our People to jurisdiction Foreign to the common law:

For abdicating its constitutional responsibility to coin money and regulate the value thereof by transferring this function to a private banking consortium called the Federal Reserve:

For elevating the office of the president to a position of prominence Not envisioned by our Forefathers and Foreign to our Constitution.

For abusing the legislative process by unconstitutionally bestowing powers on the office of the president Contrary to the amendment process of our Constitution:

For plundering our wealth, ravaging our pocketbooks, and destroying the lives of our people:

The federal government has used a Perversion of the Commerce Clause of our Constitution to enact a multitude of criminal statutes Not authorized by our Constitution.

The federal government has Assumed the power to legislate concerning the Rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights when the stated purposed of the Amendments contained therein was to Restrict the powers of the federal government.
The federal government has, through convoluted interpretations of various clauses of our Constitution, Rendered its law enforcement agencies superior to the Civil Power of the several States.

The federal government has Assumed the power to invoke so-called emergency powers when No such power is enumerated in our Constitution.

The federal government has used a Perversion of the General Welfare and Commerce Clauses to render the Tenth Amendment to our Constitution null and void.

The federal government has declared the People of these united States potential domestic enemies if they express a fidelity to our Constitution.

In every stage of these Oppressions and Usurpations of power We have petitioned for redress in the most humble and peaceful terms:

Our repeated requests that the federal government stay within bounds of its constitutionally Delegated powers have been answered only by repeated injury and usurpations. A federal government, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrannical government, is unfit to be the common agent of a Union of Sovereign States.

We, therefore, the people of the united States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, of the good People of these united States, solemnly publish and declare, That these united States, as free and Independent States; are Absolved from all undue submission to their federal government, and that all political connection between them and their federal government will be totally dissolved if that government does not return to its constitutionally enumerated powers; and that as Free and Independent States, they will have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
__________________


Good information I shall make an effort to trans-post it in the future.

H0llyw00d

  • Guest
remember, G.W Bush- "Nothing but a gawdamned piece of paper"

The Constitution, or any other legacy laws made by our fore fathers, are now GARBAGE!!!
Wake up folks, they don't give a shit about past written law now....


Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #143 on: January 27, 2011, 01:47:15 PM »
Iowa

Senate Concurrent Resolution 3 - Introduced SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 3 BY SORENSON , CHELGREN , BERTRAND , FEENSTRA , BOETTGER , SEYMOUR , BARTZ , ANDERSON , BACON , HAMERLINCK , BEHN , KETTERING , JOHNSON , KAPUCIAN , GREINER , HAHN , ZAUN , McKINLEY , ERNST , DIX , SMITH , WHITVER , WARD , and HOUSER A Concurrent Resolution claiming state sovereignty 1 under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 2 United States over certain mandates imposed on the 3 states by the federal government. 4 WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of 5 the United States reads as follows: “The powers not 6 delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor 7 prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the 8 States respectively, or to the people.”; and 9 WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope 10 of federal power as being that specifically granted by 11 the Constitution of the United States and no more; and 12 WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled 13 that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative 14 and regulatory processes of the states; and 15 WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth 16 Amendment means that the federal government was created 17 by the states specifically to be an agent of the 18 states; and 19 WHEREAS, today, the states are demonstrably treated 20 as agents of the federal government; and 21 WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in 22 violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of 23 the United States; NOW THEREFORE, 24 -1- LSB 1516SS (4) 84 aw/rj 1/ 2
S.C.R. 3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE, THE HOUSE OF 25 REPRESENTATIVES CONCURRING, That the State of Iowa 26 hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment 27 to the Constitution of the United States over all 28 powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the 1 federal government by the Constitution of the United 2 States; and 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Iowa General 4 Assembly demands that the federal government, as 5 its agent, cease and desist, effective immediately, 6 enacting federal mandates that are beyond the scope of 7 these constitutionally delegated powers; and 8 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That a copy of this 9 resolution be distributed to the President of the 10 United States, the President of the United States 11 Senate, the Speaker of the United States House 12 of Representatives, and each member of Iowa’s 13 congressional delegation.

http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=Billbook&ga=84&hbill=SCR3
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #144 on: January 27, 2011, 01:53:34 PM »
Maps of Resolutions

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/10th-amendment-resolutions/

2011 Resolutions introduced in Oregon, Iowa, Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky, Indiana, Michigan and Virginia according to the google map.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #145 on: February 04, 2011, 05:30:40 PM »
REFERENCE TITLE: federal legislation; state nullification

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/1r/bills/sb1433p.htm

 
State of Arizona

Senate

Fiftieth Legislature

First Regular Session

2011

 
SB 1433

Introduced by

Senators Klein, Allen; Representatives Burges, Harper: Senator Pearce R; Representative Montenegro

 
AN ACT

Amending title 41, chapter 7, article 12, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 41‑1291; relating to the legislature.

 

(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)

 

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1.  Title 41, chapter 7, article 12, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 41-1291, to read:

START_STATUTE41-1291.  Joint legislative committee on nullification of federal laws; membership; recommendations; legislative action

A.  The joint legislative committee on nullification of federal laws is established consisting of the president of the senate or the president's designee, who serves as cochairperson, six members of the senate who are appointed by the president of the senate, the speaker of the house of representatives or the speaker's designee who serves as cochairperson and six members of the house of representatives who are appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives.  No more than four members of the senate and no more than four members of the house of representatives may be from the same political party.  Members shall serve two year terms beginning and ending on the convening of the regular session of the legislature each odd‑numbered year.

B.   A majority of the members constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.  The committee shall meet on the call of either cochairperson.

C.  the committee shall recommend, propose and call for a vote by simple majority to nullify in its entirety a specific federal law or regulation that is outside the scope of the powers delegated by the People to the federal government in the United States Constitution.  The committee shall make its recommendation within thirty days after receiving the federal legislation for consideration and process.

D.  The committee may review all existing federal statutes, mandates and Executive orders for the purpose of determining their constitutionality. The committee may recommend for nullification existing federal statutes, mandates and Executive orders enacted before the effective date of this section.

E.  On the committee's recommendation for nullification, the legislature shall vote on whether to nullify the action within sixty days after the committee's recommendation.  Until the vote, the issue in question is of no effect.  The appropriate documentation reflecting the legislature's vote shall be documented in the journals of the respective houses.

F.  If the legislature votes by simple majority to nullify any federal statute, mandate or Executive order on the grounds of constitutionality, this state and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order.

G.  The committee shall ensure that the legislature adopts and enacts all measures that may be necessary to prevent the enforcement of any federal law or regulation nullified pursuant to this section.  The committee shall ensure that the jurisdiction of any cause of action between this State and the federal government regarding nullification of any federal legislation, mandate or executive order with the Supreme Court of the United States alone, as stated in Article III, section 2, United States Constitution. END_STATUTE

Sec. 2.  Legislative intent

The legislature finds and declares:

1.  The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees and reserves to the states or their people all powers not specifically granted to the federal government elsewhere in the Constitution as they were publicly understood at the time that the amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791, subject only to modification by duly ratified subsequent amendments to the United States constitution.  The guarantee of those powers is a matter of compact between this state and the United States as of the time Arizona was admitted to statehood in 1912.

2.  As a matter of compact between this state and the United States as of the time Arizona was admitted to statehood in 1912, the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees to this state that, other than the enumerated powers expressly granted to the United States under Article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution, Congress and the federal government will not exercise any purported additional control over or commandeer rights belonging to this state or its people.

3.  Under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the people and this state retain their exclusive power to regulate this state subject only to the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee that the people and the state of Arizona exercise those sovereign powers pursuant to each citizen's lawful privileges or immunities and in compliance with the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law.

4.  The ninth amendment to the United States Constitution secures and reserves to the people of Arizona as against the federal government their natural rights to life, liberty and property as entailed by the traditional Anglo-American concept of ordered liberty and as secured by state law, including their rights as they were understood and secured by the law at the time the amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791, as well as their rights as they were understood and secured by the law in this state at the time the Arizona Constitution was adopted.  The guarantee of those rights is a matter of compact between this state and the United States as of the time Arizona was admitted to statehood in 1912.

5.  At the time the United States Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788, the sole and sovereign power to regulate the state business and affairs rested in the state legislature and has always been a compelling state concern and central to state sovereignty.  Accordingly, the public meaning and understanding of Article I, section 8, the "establishment clause" of the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, is a matter of compact between this state and the United States as of the time Arizona was admitted to statehood in 1912.  Further, the power to regulate commerce among the several states as delegated to the Congress in Article I, section 8, clause 3, United States Constitution, as understood at the time of the founding, was meant to empower Congress to regulate the buying and selling of products made by others, and sometimes land, associated finance and financial instruments and navigation and other carriage across state jurisdictional lines.  This power to regulate commerce does not include agriculture, manufacturing, mining, major crimes or land use, and does not include activities that merely substantially affect commerce.

6.  At the time the United States Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788, the commerce clause was not meant or understood to authorize Congress or the federal judiciary to regulate the state courts in the matter of state substantive law or state judicial procedure.  This meaning and understanding of Article I, section 8, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, as they pertain to the validity of religious sectarian or foreign law as being controlling or influential precedent, has never been modified by any duly ratified amendment to the United States Constitution.  Accordingly, the public meaning and understanding of Article I, section 8 and the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution is a matter of compact between this state and the United States as of the time Arizona was admitted to statehood in 1912.  Additionally, Article I, section 8, clause 18 of the United States Constitution, the "necessary and proper clause," is not a blank check that empowers the federal government to do anything it deems necessary or proper.  It is instead a limitation of power under the common law doctrine of principals and incidents that allows the Congress to exercise incidental powers.  There are two main conditions required for something to be incidental, and therefore, "necessary and proper", the law or power exercised must be directly applicable to the main, enumerated power and it must be "lesser" than the main power.

7.  At the time the United States Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788, Article I, section 8, clause 1 of the United States Constitution, the "general welfare clause," did not empower the federal government with the ability to do anything it deems good.  It is instead a general introduction explaining the exercise of the enumerated powers of Congress that are prescribed in Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States. When James Madison was asked if this clause was a grant of power, he replied, "If not only the means but the objects are unlimited, the parchment (the Constitution) should be thrown into the fire at once."  Thus, this clause is a limitation on the power of the federal government to act in the welfare of all when passing laws in pursuance of the powers delegated to the United States.  The Commerce Clause was not meant or understood to authorize Congress or the federal judiciary to establish religious sectarian or foreign statute or case law as controlling or influential precedent.  This meaning and understanding of Article I, section 8, the establishment clause of the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, as they pertain to controlling or influential legal authority, has never been modified by any duly ratified amendment to the United States constitution.  Accordingly, the public meaning and understanding of Article I, section 8, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, is a matter of compact between this state and the United States as of the time Arizona was admitted to statehood in  1912.

8.  Accordingly, we affirm that neither the "Commerce Clause," the "general welfare clause" or the "necessary and proper clause" of the United States Constitution have ever been expanded, modified or amended and therefore, this state specifically rejects and denies any expanded authority that the federal government may attempt to enforce.

9.  The Congress and the federal government are denied the power to establish laws within this state that are repugnant and obtrusive to state law and to the people in this state.  They are restrained and confined in authority by the eighteen items as prescribed in Article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution.

10.  Congress and the federal government are denied the power to bind the states under foreign statute or case law other than those provisions duly ratified by the Congress as a treaty, so long as the treaty does not violate this state or the United States Constitution.

11.  Further, no authority has ever been given to the legislative branch, the executive branch or the judicial branch of the federal government to preempt state legislation.

12.  This act serves as a notice and demand to the Congress and the federal government to cease and desist all activities outside the scope of their constitutionally designated powers.

Sec. 3.  Secretary of state; transmission of act to others

A.  The Secretary of State shall transmit copies of this act to the legislatures of the several states to assure that this state continues in the same esteem and friendship as currently exists and that this state considers union for specific national purposes and particularly those enumerated in the Constitution of the United States to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the states.

B.  The Secretary of State shall transmit copies of this act to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona with the request that this act be officially entered into the congressional record.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline pac522

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,821
  • Peace sells, but who's buying?
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #146 on: November 14, 2012, 09:12:33 PM »
Bump for all the recent talk of secession.
This country did not achieve greatness with the mindset of "safety first" but rather "live free or die".

Truth is the currency of love. R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution!

We are all running on Gods laptop.
The problem is the virus called the Illuminati.  ~EvadingGrid

The answer to 1984 is 1776.

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #147 on: January 14, 2013, 03:17:38 PM »
How to Track Nullification Efforts Across the Country
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/01/13/how-to-track-nullification-efforts-across-the-country/

For Immediate Release: Jan. 14, 2013

Across U.S., states consider nullifying unconstitutional acts

While politicians in Washington D.C. continue to expand federal power far beyond its constitutional limits at a dizzying pace, lawmakers in state capitols across the U.S. will consider bills to stop encroachment and protect the basic rights of their citizens during the 2013 legislative season.

Across America, nearly every state will consider legislation to nullify federal power, dealing with a wide range of political issues.

Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin says the sheer number of bills coming up this year surprised him.

“With Mitt losing, we expected a lot of states to look at nullifying the health care act this year, but we’ve seen more than anyone would have expected – and most state legislative sessions are yet to get underway. It’s not just one issue. From guns, to weed, to federal kidnapping, states are stepping up to say, ‘No!’”

The movement crosses party and ideological lines, touching on issues important to both the left and the right. The Kentucky legislature and New York Assembly will consider legalizing medical marijuana, with other states expected to join their efforts.

In Indiana, South Carolina and numerous other states, lawmakers will take up bills nullifying the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Six state legislatures already have bills filed that would prohibit cooperation with any attempts to indefinitely detain people without due process under provisions in the NDAA. Several states, including Wyoming, will consider stepping in to block any federal actions violating the Second Amendment. Florida, Indiana and Missouri will look at legislation prohibiting spying by domestic drones.

“A lot of people want to paint this as some kind of Republican movement to stop Obama. It’s not about party politics. It’s about freedom, liberty and controlling power. A wide coalition from left to right is supporting efforts to oppose indefinite detention in the NDAA. Heck, we expect four more states to consider weed legalization. Not exactly part of the Republican platform.” Boldin said. “It’s simple. Americans are saying, ‘We want to make decisions on issues at the local level. We don’t want mandates and dictates slammed down our throats from D.C. And we will not let the federal government spy on, grope and kidnap people with impunity.’”

To keep up with the crush of legislation, the Tenth Amendment Center has developed a legislative tracking page. You will find legislation organized by issue, with easy to read maps and links to the actual bills.You can access the page at tracking.tenthamendmentcenter.com.

Contact: Mike Maharrey
Communications director
O: 213.935.0553
media@tenthamendmentcenter.com
www.tenthamendmentcenter.com
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Iganinja007

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Hello Mr. Jones and the members,
I hope it's clear to everyone... Regardless of how the Constitution and Bill of Rights are worded and originally created, over the course of time, the judicial branch in concert with the legislative and executive branch  under the guise of "good" have been reducing all rights to privileges, amending amendments to be lean and unconstitutional. All the laws in place aren't clear, misinterpreted and illegally enforced.  Most laws in place do nothing for the good of humans. The local judicial branches have empowered themselves to dictate how they will impose law. The population has been brainwashed to agree that we are a nation of laws and to choose not be a law abiding citizen is criminal and will suffer the consequences. We are NOT to oppose or challenge authority. THAT is the biggest hurdle to get around... We may be "waking" up, but we have a big fear of authority to get over. That wont be easy. To go to jail or be killed, is a hard idea to consider...  We are still being conditioned to NOT oppose police although I've seen police corruption and brutality, those videos may show people invoking there rights, BUT they still get arrested, go to jail and incur bail, attorney and other costs.  WHY? Why be passive? Why be cordial? Why be composed? If in the first few minutes you can determine that an LEO isn't "smart", constitutionally aware or respectful of your rights, then you have every right to defend the illegal arrest, detention or the fear for your life, that he/she is representing.

I think we need to start from scratch... all laws that have been created since the Bill of rights & ACLU can determine that are "unconstitutional" repealed. Police re-trained, Federal Government all branches (except military, who need retraining too) Need to be disbanded... (Idealistic dreaming) Another revolution is inevitable I fear...  Peace to all, Do unto others as you would have done to you, but damn if I'm going to take any form of disrespect or government tyranny to impede my freedoms...   nuff said

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,516
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #149 on: September 18, 2015, 12:03:16 PM »
I thought this exchange of comments may be of value here... since the previous post unwittingly seeks to set us on a course away from liberty with peace back to the darkness of the cave.

Con-Con vs. Nullification(Video)

The New American Magazine 
By Joe Wolverton, II, J.D. 06 July 2015

Comments   

Quote from: billwalker • 06 July 2015

The problem with nullification is there is not one word authorizing states being able to "nullify" federal statute. True many will jump to quote one part or another but doesn't it stand to reason given the fact the Founders were quite explicit in their document that if they had desired (or in the amendment proposals that followed) nullification power for the states, it would have been in the Constitution in clear and unmistakable language? As to the convention, the position of the JBS is well known. The fact is the Founders did place that in clear and unmistakable language. So consider: which method do you think the Founders favored?


Quote from:  lakeside227 in reply to billwalker • 07 July 2015
The Constitution delegates powers to the federal government, not state governments. Of course nullification isn't in the Constitution, other state powers aren't listed either. States have the power to do anything the Constitution doesn't specifically delegate to the federal government and specifically prohibit the states from doing.

Madison in Federalist 45:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."

Hamilton in Federalist 33:

"But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such. Hence we perceive that the clause which declares the supremacy of the laws of the Union, like the one we have just before considered, only declares a truth, which flows immediately and necessarily from the institution of a federal government. It will not, I presume, have escaped observation, that it EXPRESSLY confines this supremacy to laws made PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION; which I mention merely as an instance of caution in the convention; since that limitation would have been to be understood, though it had not been expressed." (emphasis in original)

Please note:
"These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such."

This is Hamilton saying that unconstitutional laws should be nullified, ignored, not obeyed.


Quote from:  JTCoyoté in reply to lakeside227 • 08 July 2015
The Court in Marbury v Madison concluded the same thing with regard to unconstitutional "laws" reinforcing the States power to nullify...

Where Marbury failed was in declaring the SCOTUS as the final arbitrator of what is or is not Constitutional.

The final analysis of constitutionality, the final arbitration is held as protected by the 10th Amendment, through a vote of 3/4 the states up or down... In other words, it takes 3/4 of the states to approve any federal measure... the states and the people are the final arbitrator.

Why change the Constitution by convention when all we need do to "Right the Ship" is to adhere to Constitution we have right NOW.

From Marbury vs Madison

"Certainly all those who have framed written Constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be that an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void.

This theory is essentially attached to a written Constitution, and is consequently to be considered by this Court as one of the fundamental principles of our society. It is not, therefore, to be lost sight of in the further consideration of this subject.

If an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the Courts and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory, and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on."


JT


Quote from: JTCoyoté in reply to billwalker •08 July 2015
The few necessary powers surrendered by the states to the federal agent are enumerated in Article 1 Section 8... the rest within are rules of procedure, governmental structure and absolutes for lawful process... all else falls under the jurisdiction of 9th and 10th Amendments... this includes the power to dissolve the federal government, which is referred to in the enabling document for the Constitution and therefore part and parcel of our foundation law, the Declaration of Independence.

JT



Quote from: billwalker in reply to JTCoyoté •09 July 2015

I'm sorry but you are incorrect regarding the powers of the states to dissolve the federal government. Obviously you haven't read the Declaration of Independence. Allow me to quote, "...that when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of THE PEOPLE [emphasis added] to alter or abolish it..." The power you refer is a power of the people NOT the states, hence if nullification were an authority it would require the consent of the people and they have already established how such power is to be wielded, by use of the amendment process. Thank you for presenting the final and conclusive argument that proves nullification, unless sanctioned by amendment, is unconstitutional by show such power is a power of the people not the states. By the terms of the Tenth Amendment therefore this power is denied the states.

Quote from: JTCoyoté in reply to billwalker • 09 July 2015

I cannot help but chuckle at your response here. You would have the people crawl all the way to Washington to change the federal government, when in fact they need only to walk over to their State House to get the job done. The vehicle of the state is the people's to constitutionally command..

You forget that the Declaration of Independence enabled the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Which is to say, it set forth the reasons and the essential prospectus by the people for its institution

The rights of the people are innumerable and the powers of the states are set by the people within the state constitutions, as prescribed by the parameters set in the Constitution at Article 4 Section 4.

You are fundamentally deficient in the understanding of how the Constitution actually works. And until you do know how it operates, you will always be trying to change it instead of adhering more closely to it.

if a majority of the people would take the small amount of time it would take to grasp the essential understanding within the documents, they would see all of the nefarious plug-ins the globalist have subsequently inserted into it (poison pills if you will) over the past 160 years to subvert it. They would also see how easy, using the LAW itself, it would be to right it once again.

The answer to your comment in a nutshell is this, the Declaration of Independence recognizes the people are the basis of all rights and the resulting power that accompanies these rights (ultimately protected by the 9th Amendment.) At the time of the framing of the Declaration of Independence, the form of government that would eventually emerge wasn't exactly clear. As it turns out the people, through their states, created a republic with a ladder of power complete with built-in checks and balances. In other words, the power of the people is wielded through the states, and is protected by the 10th Amendment.

JT

Quote from: billwalker in reply to JTCoyoté • 10 July 2015

Then sir I put it to you. Please quote me one LAW state or federal that exists today which specifically states that the state has the right to nullify federal law. You speak of "if" all the time. If the people would or If someone would read, if a convention is held it will be a runaway (forget the fact Congress addressed this one and officially declared it was not). The only if that matters is this fact: IF you were right it would have already happened.

Quote from: JTCoyoté in reply to billwalker • 10 July 2015

I will put it back to you... show me the LAW that mandates the States to accept and follow any and all federal enactments?

I suggest you read the 10th Article of Amendment until you understand what it says and what it means.

"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."

Then read the preamble to The Bill of Rights which states the purpose for the Bill of Rights, and subsequent amendments.

"Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution."
--The Preamble to the Bill of Rights, fully Ratified with the first 10 Amendments on Dec. 15, 1791 (underlining for emphasis)

Over time, (specifically in the 160 years since the end of the civil war) the meanings of these clauses have been changed and perverted away from the benefit of the free people to the benefit of the corporate global bankers, the funders of communism and fascism, in the guise of socialism under the control of the anti-liberty monopolists and monarchs -- a return to the condition of the world prior to the American Revolution.

There is your LAW, sir -- time the people start enforcing it against "our" rouge federal agent.

"The American war is over; but this is far from being the case
with the American revolution. On the contrary, nothing but
the first act of the drama is closed."
~Benjamin Rush,
signer on the Declaration of Independence,
spoken at the end of British hostilities in the
American war for Independence, 1783


JT


Quote from:  billwalker in reply to JTCoyoté •11 July 2015
First of all the quote you underlined simply means the states wanted amendments to the Constitution. Now as the Articles of Confederation still exist in force in this country and such authorization is contained in the Constitution, I will end this now: there is nothing in the Articles granting nullification to the states, nothing in the Constitution granting nullification to the states. In short, the only example you can find in the history of the United States of nullification is found in the Declaration of Independence. Problem is, that reads, "For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments" hence nullification--by the KING. This action was OPPOSED by the then colonies, later states. Thus it has always been the position of the colonies, later the states and still later the federal government, that nullification of laws is opposed, not supported. Even the idea of a convention of states has been opposed because any power of nullification resides not with the states but the people as expressed officially by the state of Delaware: http://foa5c.org/file.php/1/Amendments/Delaware_response.jpg

Quote from:  JTCoyoté in reply to billwalker •11 July 2015
Ah, shucks, BW...

You cannot show me a delegated federal power in the existing LAW where the states are prohibited the power of nullification, granted by the people of the several states and protected by the 9th and 10th Amendments. Yet as I and others here have shown clearly the power of nullification without doubt falls squarely within the states lawful powers under the Constitution.

Instead of showing proof of your assertion you harken back to the Articles of Confederation stating that there were no such powers to the states under the Articles, forgetting that the federal government under the Articles was essentially non existent with no legislative power over the states at all. In truth, the Articles are only referential in specific clauses and retained to some degree in the Constitution. Search as you may, you will find no twisting of the LAW that can convolve into being the federal prohibition you seek against state nullification from the well crafted verbiage that is the Constitution.

Your reference that the Articles of Confederation are still in force is misleading since virtually all preceding charters of law were used as precedent and reference in some small part in the crafting of our existing Constitution. Used to point out areas within the older law that support and are in agreement with the our existing LAW. Yet in no way do these references give the pre-existing law a priority of power over the Constitution. Most provisions of the Articles of Confederation were challenged, altered, and or removed from effect through the creation of the Constitution itself, and thereby nullified and cannot be used to alter the meaning of the Constitution in any way.

The fact that the Declaration of Independence is the enabling law for the Constitution (as it was also for the Articles of Confederation which the Constitution replaced) the same power of nullification resides in both documents in the hands of the people who created the individual states, and thereby created the Confederation. In 1787the Articles were dissolved and we created the Constitution and Bill of Rights fully ratified in December of 1791. Within this Constitution a tightly controlled federal government was initialized. This federal department serves as the agent of the several states on the international stage. Make no mistake about it, in all cases it was the people doing the creating through the vehicle of the states. The people have the reins to the Constitution, all we need do is reach down and pick them up.

Finally, your red herring regarding the "Conference of States" being rejected in Delaware (as it has been in dozens of other states twice in the last 25 years) is exactly the vehicle needed for the whole Conference of States affair to undergo a metamorphosis in mid convention and transform into a full-blown republic killing constitutional convention.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments in the Bill of Rights sets the parameters of natural right and power held by the people as well as the ceded or invested power the people lend to their state. Nullification of any federal mandate, or even constitutional amendments are fully within the peoples' right and controlling state power to nullify. I have shown you at least three clauses that emphatically support my position, and if motivated through their state legislatures the peoples' right and power would preclude and thus nullify any need for a dangerous Article V Constitutional Convention.

Arming the people with this knowledge, since you seem emphatic regarding it being the people's right, so the people understand and use the knowledge of the remedies to nullify unconstitutional "laws" as well as the nullification and elimination of the post civil war imperial subterfuge planted within the Constitution by our traditional Imperial global enemy (who we booted from our shores 240 years ago) have installed through infiltration, should be high on your list.

Remember, nowhere in the Article V of the Constitution, even in the portion governing constitutional conventions, does the word "people" appear. You may want to keep that in mind should you desire to take your argument elsewhere since it has been exposed here and found lacking.

Here is Article V:

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

The bolded portion of the above article was negated by the 17th Amendment which terminated all state governments suffrage by prohibiting the state legislatures from electing their representation in Washington, the federal senators. This is but one of the Globalists' usurpation amendments instituted between 1865 and our entry into the First World War. There were three prior usurpation amendments, can you name them? ... (chuckle) ...

JT

JTCoyoté

"...the State of Colorado hereby claims sovereignty, under the 10th
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, over all powers
not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by
the United States Constitution."
~From HJR-94-1035, the First
10th Amendment State Sovereignty Resolution, 1994

Offline stymo1

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,890
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #150 on: October 10, 2015, 12:13:45 AM »
^^^^ Good stuff JT ;)
" It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,516
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #151 on: January 11, 2016, 07:29:30 PM »
Thanks Stymo... here's another tasty bit

Here is James Madison's letter mentioned early on in the last post... well worth the read.

James Madison's letter to Thomas Jefferson, October 17, 1788
On the Bill of Rights

Dear Sir,--The little pamphlet herewith inclosed will give you a collective view of the alterations which have been proposed for the new Constitution. Various and numerous as they appear, they certainly omit many of the true grounds of opposition. The articles relating to Treaties, to paper money, and to contracts, created more enemies than all the errors in the system, positive and negative, put together.

It is true, nevertheless, that not a few, particularly in Virginia, have contended for the proposed alterations from the most honorable and patriotic motives; and that among the advocates for the Constitution there are some who wish for further guards to public liberty and individual rights. As far as these may consist of a constitutional declaration of the most essential rights, it is probable they will be added; though there are many who think such addition unnecessary, and not a few who think it misplaced in such a Constitution. There is scarce any point on which the party in opposition is so much divided as to its importance and its propriety. My own opinion has always been in favor of a bill of rights, provided it be so framed as not to imply powers not meant to be included in the enumeration. At the same time, I have never thought the omission a material defect, nor been anxious to supply it even by subsequent amendment, for any other reason than that it is anxiously desired by others. I have favored it because I supposed it might be of use, and, if properly executed, could not be of disservice.

I have not viewed it in an important light--1. Because I conceive that in a certain degree, though not in the extent argued by Mr. Wilson, the rights in question are reserved by the manner in which the federal powers are granted. 2. Because there is great reason to fear that a positive declaration of some of the most essential rights could not be obtained in the requisite latitude. I am sure that the rights of conscience in particular, if submitted to public definition, would be narrowed much more than they are likely ever to be by an assumed power. One of the objections in New England was, that the Constitution, by prohibiting religious tests, opened a door for Jews, Turks, and infidels. 3. Because the limited powers of the federal Government, and the jealousy of the subordinate Governments, afford a security which has not existed in the case of the State Governments, and exists in no other. 4. Because experience proves the inefficacy of a bill of rights on those occasions when its controul is most needed. Repeated violations of these parchment barriers have been committed by overbearing majorities in every State.

In Virginia, I have seen the bill of rights violated in every instance where it has been opposed to a popular current. Notwithstanding the explicit provision contained in that instrument for the rights of conscience, it is well known that a religious establishment would have taken place in that State, if the Legislative majority had found, as they expected, a majority of the people in favor of the measure; and I am persuaded that if a majority of the people were now of one sect, the measure would still take place, and on narrower ground than was then proposed, notwithstanding the additional obstacle which the law has since created.

Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the Constituents. This is a truth of great importance, but not yet sufficiently attended to; and is probably more strongly impressed on my mind by facts and reflections suggested by them than on yours, which has contemplated abuses of power issuing from a very different quarter. Wherever there is an interest and power to do wrong, wrong will generally be done, and not less readily by a powerful and interested party than by a powerful and interested prince. The difference, so far as it relates to the superiority of republics over monarchies, lies in the less degree of probability that interest may prompt abuses of power in the former than in the latter; and in the security in the former against an oppression of more than the smaller part of the Society, whereas, in the latter, it may be extended in a manner to the whole.

The difference, so far as it relates to the point in question--the efficacy of a bill of rights in controuling abuses of power--lies in this: that in a monarchy the latent force of the nation is superior to that of the Sovereign, and a solemn charter of popular rights must have a great effect as a standard for trying the validity of public acts, and a signal for rousing and uniting the superior force of the community; whereas, in a popular Government, the political and physical power may be considered as vested in the same hands, that is, in a majority of the people, and, consequently, the tyrannical will of the Sovereign is not to be controuled by the dread of an appeal to any other force within the community.

What use, then, it may be asked, can a bill of rights serve in popular Governments? I answer, the two following, which, though less essential than in other Governments, sufficiently recommend the precaution: 1. The political truths declared in that solemn manner acquire by degrees the character of fundamental maxims of free Government, and as they become incorporated with the National sentiment, counteract the impulses of interest and passion. 2. Although it be generally true, as above stated, that the danger of oppression lies in the interested majorities of the people rather than in usurped acts of the Government, yet there may be occasions on which the evil may spring from the latter source; and on such, a bill of rights will be a good ground for an appeal to the sense of the community. Perhaps, too, there may be a certain degree of danger that a succession of artful and ambitious rulers may, by gradual and well-timed advances, finally erect an independent Government on the subversion of liberty. Should this danger exist at all, it is prudent to guard against it, especially when the precaution can do no injury.

Governments to danger on that side. It has been remarked that there is a tendency in all Governments to an augmentation of power at the expense of liberty. But the remark, as usually understood, does not appear to me well founded. Power, when it has attained a certain degree of energy and independence, goes on generally to further degrees. But when below that degree, the direct tendency is to further degrees of relaxation, until the abuses of liberty beget a sudden transition to an undue degree of power. With this explanation the remark may be true; and in the latter sense only is it, in my opinion, applicable to the existing Governments in America. It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the Government have too much or too little power, and that the line which divides these extremes should be so inaccurately defined by experience.

Supposing a bill of rights to be proper, the articles which ought to compose it admit of much discussion. I am inclined to think that absolute restrictions in cases that are doubtful, or where emergencies may overrule them, ought to be avoided. The restrictions, however strongly marked on paper, will never be regarded when opposed to the decided sense of the public; and after repeated violations, in extraordinary cases will lose even their ordinary efficacy. Should a Rebellion or insurrection alarm the people as well as the Government, and a suspension of the Habeas Corpus be dictated by the alarm, no written prohibitions on earth would prevent the measure. Should an army in time of peace be gradually established in our neighborhood by Britain or Spain, declarations on paper would have as little effect in preventing a standing force for the public safety. The best security against these evils is to remove the pretext for them.

With regard to Monopolies, they are justly classed among the greatest nuisances in Government. But is it clear that, as encouragements to literary works and ingenious discoveries, they are not too valuable to be wholly renounced? Would it not suffice to reserve in all cases a right to the public to abolish the privilege, at a price to be specified in the grant of it? Is there not, also, infinitely less danger of this abuse in our Governments than in most others? Monopolies are sacrifices of the many to the few. Where the power is in the few, it is natural for them to sacrifice the many to their own partialities and corruptions. Where the power, as with us, is in the many, not in the few, the danger cannot be very great that the few will be thus favored. It is much more to be dreaded that the few will be unnecessarily sacrificed to the many. . . . James Madison

Oldyoti

"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance;
and a people who mean to be their own
governors must arm themselves with the
power which knowledge gives."
~James Madison

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,516
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #152 on: January 11, 2016, 07:30:32 PM »
Texas Governor Introduces Groundbreaking Plan to Override Obama’s Tyranny
Outspoken governor calls for Constitutional Convention to restore Rule of Law, take back states' rights


Adan Salazar 
Infowars.com 
January 8, 2016
2160 Comments

Texas Governor Introduces Groundbreaking Plan to Override Obama's Tyranny


"Texas Governor Greg Abbott made good on his promise to challenge President Obama’s gun control initiatives Friday, calling for a Constitutional Convention of US states to create several new amendments aimed at reasserting states’ rights.

Among nine proposed amendments, “The Texas Plan” aims to prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state. Another amendment requires Congress to balance its budget, and another allows a two-thirds majority of states to override a US Supreme Court decision.

“Congress is unable to control itself. So the people must impose control,” Governor Abbott said during a speech before the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Abbott explained that federal lawmakers were out of step with the “Constitutional principles” our Founders put in place, and urged other states to join Texas in helping to “fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

“The increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the Rule of Law foundation on which this country was built,” Abbott said, specifically citing President Obama’s recent executive authorizations infringing on the Second Amendment.

“We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our Founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way. To do that I am adding another item to the agenda next session. I want legislation authorizing Texas to join other states in calling for a Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

Abbott’s declaration and 92-page proposal follows an appearance by the president in a televised town hall-style meeting hosted by CNN, in which the Commander-in-Chief attempted to convince Americans that executive orders infringing on the Second Amendment were a good idea.

Responding to the announcement, Abbott – a strong advocate for gun rights – promised, “Texas will take every action to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

“The Bill of Rights was added as a specific safeguard to prevent the federal government from denying Americans those guaranteed rights,” Abbott said in a press release Tuesday. “Today, the President trampled the purpose and substance of the Bill of Rights by unilaterally imposing Second Amendment restrictions.”

The outspoken Republican governor made his intent to disobey executive orders imposed by the president clear over the weekend in a pointed tweet, challenging Obama to “Come and take it.” [...]

**********************


After a quick skimming over of Abbott's proposal: Abbott's premise is FLAWED.

It is clear from the very first sentence of the governor's proposal, attached to the above article that he does not understand the real problem.  He states that the Constitution is being eroded with each passing year.  This is not true.  The Constitution is as strong today as it ever was.  Where the problem lies is in the hundreds of thousands of unconstitutional external enactments in the form of bureaucratic rules, regulations, policies, directives, signing statements, enacted unconstitutional statutes, amendments, court opinions and rulings, executive orders, presidential policy directives, and the list goes on. 

These unconstitutional miss-steps are mirrored in the states as well by legislators and governors who have either lost sight of the Constitution as the litmus test for any legislation they may enact or policy they would put forth, or they are deliberate in their constitutional neglect for the purpose of power or control side-stepping the Constitution. 

This kind of governing by edict and fiat deluge IS the problem. The Constitution is not the problem, otherwise there wouldn't be so many trying to open it up for change. As it stands today it's strong enough to weather even this monumental attempt to change it to fit their program rather than wiping away the freedom limiting warehouses full of unconstitutional "color of law" by the processes the founders designed into the Constitution.

The founding fathers placed the 9th and the 10th Amendments at the end of the Bill of Rights as the re-enforcing statements defining where the true governing power resides - the People and the States.  These two Articles of amendment are the power and process the people and the states need for "Taking out the trash" to use an appropriate phrase for what needs to be done here.  Remember, the Constitution cannot be amended, altered, or weakened by any external color of law. 

Over the last 240 years the local, state, and federal governments have enacted mountains of legislation much of which is unconstitutional. It is time to take out the trash people! The Constitution lays out the method whereby this trash is removed.  This Legislative weeding process is done at the state level which is where the lion's share of the governing power actually exists when the Constitution is followed.  State 10th Amendment pruning by delegislation based on strict Constitutionality and necessity is only one of the methods suggested. Also Remember, we didn't get in this predicament overnight and just like a bodily detoxification take some time, this process will keep legislators busy for quite awhile.


Some of the trash that needs to be removed are in the form of unconstitutional and questionable power grabbing amendments to the Constitution itself.  None of these questionable amendments are found within the body of the Constitution or Bill of Rights however.  Therefore a constitutional convention which would be needed to open up the fully Ratified 1791 Constitution and Bill of Rights to outright change, is not unnecessary since the Constitution and Bill of Rights are NOT the problem. 

As is indicated elsewhere in this thread the methods for accomplishing the task of cleansing are simple but require resolve on the part of the people in hold our state legislators feet to the fire and to apprise ourselves of what our legislators are doing and what they should not be doing.  After all not adhering to this last part is how we got into this mess in the first place. 

I will re-post the reply I posted into another thread when I first found out about this move by Texas Governor Abbott ... I think it appropriate and it is way on topic.


This is ridiculous. The Constitution already lays out the rule of law the federal government has to follow. All we have to do is hold them to it. Calling a Constitutional Convention will open the door for the globalists to destroy the Constitution once and for all. What we need to do is abolish the federal government and create a new one that follows the Constitution we have. I don't like it, not one bit, I'm going to wait for JT to respond, in the meantime I'm going to do a search to find the multiple threads where JT shot down Conventions.


This was dangerous enough even when we had Madison, Jefferson, Mason, Adams, Washington, and Hamilton conducting the process. God Almighty Forbid this madness, I pray! What we have government wide, local, state, and federal today doesn't amount to the dirt under the fingernails of Jefferson on a bad day.

All the power we need is already there in the fully ratified Constitution of 1791. Anything that contradicts it in any federal, state, or local statute, any Amendment, any regulation, any policy, any bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo, any executive order, or any other color of law can be swept away by the state legislatures using the 10th Amendment power of the individual states and the righteous and rightful 9th Amendment will of the people... all without calling a convention.

It doesn't take a Constitutional Convention to accomplish Abbott's objective... A Con Con would be a distraction and a time waster, a very dangerous one to boot.

We had the NWO on the ropes in the year leading up to the OKC bombing using the 9th and 10th Amendments as the framers designed them to be used against a usurpation government going tyrannical... we do not need to open up the organic 1791 Constitution to get this done today either. Why waste the time when we have all the power we need right now!! Folks must wake up to it and push there Reps and other "officials" to get on the same page or the fire will surely burn the hell out of their feet.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4199.msg17079#msg17079

JTCoyoté


"...the State of Colorado hereby claims sovereignty, under the 10th
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, over all powers
not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by
the United States Constitution."
~From HJR-94-1035, the First
10th Amendment State Sovereignty Resolution, 1994



JTCoyoté

"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

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,516
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #153 on: January 11, 2016, 07:32:31 PM »
You can see how the internet provides a look at our true history and our true government on sites like this working to save our Constitution and Republic. We are winning the infowar and educating folks far more efficiently than any Constitutional Convention or Conference of States ever could... truth is, their purpose is quite the opposite actually.

We do not need a Con Con to defuse the weaponized federal government. Abbott has access to the state governors... if we would've had the governors with us in '94 and '95 instead of against us as they were, a 10th amendment push to downsize the feds would have succeeded in months. Abbott can accomplish easily this using the methods we employed then without a Con-Con, and there would be no need for what I see as his senseless 9 new amendments. Also, State's Rights is a misnomer... People have Rights which they transmit and lend to the States as Powers... States then have Powers given through the Rights of the People.... (thought I would clear that up)...


With that said, the second paragraph of Gov. Abbott's 92 page Constitutional convention call hits close to the main root of the problem, which is not a short coming of the Constitution, but is actually a fraud committed by the globalists against the country's original time honored decentralized education system. He states...

Quote
But today, most Americans have no idea what our Constitution says. According to a recent poll, one-third of Americans cannot name the three branches of government; one-third cannot name any branch; and one-third thinks that the President has the “final say” about the government’s powers. Obviously, the American people cannot hold their government accountable if they do not know what the source of that accountability says.


This is of course true and is a big problem, a by-design "Department of Education" bureaucratic problem.  A problem created by an unconstitutional bureaucracy that is the product of the idea that if the Constitution doesn't specifically prohibit the federal government from engaging in a specific activity the Constitution must then allow the federal government to engage in that activity.  This is a sleight of hand federal fallacy, a direct violation of the 9th and 10th Articles of the Bill of Rights. A fallacy that has created dozens of unconstitutional federal bureaucracies and a plethora of unconstitutional usurpations of state and individual Power and Right.

In this case the National Education Association and the Department of Education under the executive branch of the federal government, has no interest in teaching American students in the US government schools anything at all about our rightful, free, and unique American system of self-government. No, that would run contrary to their "plantation" model where being a slave is to be seen as the revered mark of excellence, at least according to Melisa Harris-Perry...(sic)

Prior to late 1963 all education was under state and local control with the curriculum being assembled and adjusted by the local associations of parents and teachers, the PTA.  Up until that time this system created the most politically astute, creative, and educated people in the world. 

Conversely, the federal "educational" bureaucracy in its close to 50 year history has produced one of the most politically unaware, dumbed down, uneducated electorates in the world.  All controlled unconstitutionally at the federal level... the result is today the government "indoctrinated" people along with their government "educated" and selected representatives are totally in the dark regarding what the Constitution actually says and means, even though it is written at an eighth grade grammar and comprehension level.

This Executive Branch "department" was to be one of the first dismantled by the states once the 10th Amendment State Sovereignty Movement reached the ratifying majority of 38 states back in 1995... but then the OKC false flag put a quick halt to the movement. A false flag of this sort could not be pulled off so easily today, you can bet their methods 20 years hence are much more sophisticated. Thus, honest and truthful education is one of the keys to foil their efforts, and to enliven the Constitution in the minds and hearts of our young people.

(More to come here as we tackle each amendment Governor Abbott seeks to add to the Constitution by Con-Con, one by one and show how the people and the states already hold the Rights and Powers in his list of  "nine." Some of the amendments he lists are in reaction to federal "law" that isn't Law under the Constitution which makes the so-called federal law as well as his proposed amendment a nullity on it's face. However, by passing the amendment and making it part of the Constitution it gives power to the federal non-law it seeks to control. Burdening the Constitution with more amendments that are based on "non-law" as has been ongoing since the civil war, is to create the situation described by Charles de Montesquieu when he stated, "Useless laws weaken necessary laws."...JT)

Quote
"We the People” can reign in the federal government and restore the balance of power between the States and the United States. The Texas Plan accomplishes this by offering nine constitutional amendments:

I. Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one State.

II. Require Congress to balance its budget.

III. Prohibit administrative agencies and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them from creating federal law.

IV. Prohibit administrative agencies and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them from preempting state law. 

V. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision. 

VI. Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law. 

VII. Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution. 

VIII. Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.

IX. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a federal law or regulation.

JTCoyoté

"[The purpose of a written constitution] is to bind up
the several branches of government by certain laws,
which, when they transgress, their acts shall become
nullities; to render unnecessary an appeal to the people,
 or in other words a rebellion, on every infraction of
their rights, on the peril that their acquiescence shall
be construed into an intention to surrender those rights."

~Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia 1782

Offline pac522

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,821
  • Peace sells, but who's buying?
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #154 on: January 11, 2016, 09:24:40 PM »
You can see how the internet provides a look at our true history and our true government on sites like this working to save our Constitution and Republic. We are winning the infowar and educating folks far more efficiently than any Constitutional Convention or Conference of States ever could... truth is, their purpose is quite the opposite actually.


JTCoyoté

"[The purpose of a written constitution] is to bind up
the several branches of government by certain laws,
which, when they transgress, their acts shall become
nullities; to render unnecessary an appeal to the people,
 or in other words a rebellion, on every infraction of
their rights, on the peril that their acquiescence shall
be construed into an intention to surrender those rights."

~Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia 1782


You got that right JT. I've learned far more about the Constitution from you than any of my high school teachers. Although they laid the foundation it has been you who has opened my eyes to the actual power we hold as American People.
This country did not achieve greatness with the mindset of "safety first" but rather "live free or die".

Truth is the currency of love. R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution!

We are all running on Gods laptop.
The problem is the virus called the Illuminati.  ~EvadingGrid

The answer to 1984 is 1776.

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,516
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!
« Reply #155 on: January 13, 2016, 10:33:56 AM »
Before I continue with my breakdown of Abbott's "redundant and futile" proposed amendments here are a few facts that everyone should research for themselves so all are on the same page in understanding what must be dismantled before we can start adding anything which would in fact be nothing more than additional strands of webbing to that which now imprisons our Constitution.

Here goes...

The fully ratified original 13th Amendment, which suddenly disappeared during the civil war to the delight of the British Accredited Registry, needs to be reinstalled in it's rightful place of power.

The Present 13th Amendment (which is actually the 14th Amendment as it appears in the 1866 Laws of Colorado) needs the 2nd section expunged. The entire amendment list of Federal Power Grabbing Amendments from the present 14th through the 27th all must be repealed... I believe that takes care of the 17th Amendment as well, which incidentally took equal suffrage or representation within the federal government away from the States. Wonder how that might effect a Con-Con?

All of this house cleaning and trash removal is accomplished with 9th and 10th Amendment nullification by at least 38 states independently through Joint Resolution, and or with bills passed by a veto proof majority within each state's legislature... then the problem will be resolved quickly... Oh and there must be a repealing of the DC Organic Act of 1871 which was given equal power to the Constitution when it was passed in February of that year by Congress. This act set into landslide motion the landmark destruction of our republic and will have to be exorcised to a nullity. All of this can be accomplished within the states by nullification bypassing the danger of a Con-Con.

Chew on these facts for a while... it seems Queen Vic may have won the civil war... don't ya know...

JTCoyoté

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that
property is not as sacred as the law of God, and
that there is not a force of law and public justice
to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence"
.
 
~John Adams