It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Constitution invalid for nearly 75 years

page: 1
27
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:31 AM
link   
On March 9, 1933 Congress granted President Franklin Delano Roosevelt his request of "Broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe."

The emergency was a shortage of gold reserves (with the Great Depression underway.)

Vast un-Constitutional powers are granted by emergency power rules and remain in effect until the President declares the emergency over. (Property seizure, military deployment and martial law, travel restrictions and censorship etc. are granted without further Congressional approval.)

Neither FDR nor any of his succesors have declared the emergency over.

In 1973 Senate report 92549 admitted, "Since 1933 the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency..."

Presidents Truman, Nixon, and George W. Bush have added further declarations.

These declarations must be anulled and the emrgency declared over by the U.S. President for the Constitution to be effectively reinstated.

[edit on 19-11-2007 by jackinthebox]




posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 02:18 AM
link   


"It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy. I love the Republic. I am mild by nature, and I do not desire to see the destruction of democracy. The power you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated, I promise you. And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a Grand Army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the Separatists. "
―Palpatine, accepting his emergency powers


Source

I think the above quote illustrates the crux of this ideal; all who have power crave it, and will hold it as long as they can. They will also amass as much of it as possible so that they don't have to relinquish it to anyone.

Even though this is a fictional example of such a statement, we can see the very same things going on all around us all of the time. We need to remain vigilant, so that something like this doesn't happen to us in reality. We're close to it now, but we can still prevent it by "being mindful" of what's going on around us, and acting on problems as they come up.

Ever Vigilant,
TheBorg



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Fantastic quote "TheBorg." I see so many similarities between the fictitios Empire and the real world. I hope that this thread will be viewed and discussed by many. The facts are there, but very few pay attention. I fear we may have already crossed the point of no return. Considering that the Constitution has been suspended for 75 years without anyone paying attention, I have little hope for Democracy.

I decided to post this thread after seeing so many people here arguing over Constitutional rights that they don't even realize they no longer have.



[edit on 19-11-2007 by jackinthebox]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 02:38 AM
link   
I guess Bush was right when he said the constitution is just a piece of damn paper.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 03:24 AM
link   
"...it is not enough to overthrow the old state, but that the new state must previously have been built up and be ready to one's hand... In 1933 it was no longer a question of overthrowing a state by an act of violence; meanwhile the new state had been built up and all that remained to do was to destroy the last remnants of the old state - and that took but a few hours." -Adolf Hitler, 1936



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
The Senate Committee on Government Operations held a hearing on H.R. 3884 on February 25, 1976,53 The bill was subsequently reported on August 26 with one substantive and several technical amendments.54 The following day, the amended bill was passed and returned to the House.55 On August 31, the House agreed to the CRS-12

As enacted, the National Emergencies Act consisted of five titles. The first of these generally returned all standby statutory delegations of emergency power, activated by an outstanding declaration of national emergency, to a dormant state two years after the statute’s approval. However, the act did not cancel the 1933, 1950, 1970, and 1971 national emergency proclamations because these were issued by the
President pursuant to his Article II constitutional authority. Nevertheless, it did render them ineffective by returning to dormancy the statutory authorities they had had activated, thereby necessitating a new declaration to activate standby statutory emergency authorities.

Title II provided a procedure for future declarations of national emergency by the President and prescribed arrangements for their congressional regulation. The statute established an exclusive means for declaring a national emergency. Furthermore, emergency declarations were to terminate automatically after one year unless formally continued for another year by the President, but could be terminated
earlier by either the President or Congress.


56 Ibid., Aug. 31, 1976, p. 28466.
57 90 Stat. 1255; 50 U.S.C. 1601-1651 (1988); see U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on
Government Operations and Special Committee on National Emergencies and Delegated
Emergency Powers, The National Emergencies Act (Public Law 94-412). Source Book:
Legislative History, Texts, and Other Documents, committee print, 94th Cong., 2nd sess.
(Washington: GPO, 1976).
58 See Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983).
59 See 99 Stat. 405, 448.
Senate amendments,56 clearing the proposal for President Gerald Ford’s signature on
September 14.57


[edit on 19/11/07 by Hanslune]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Does this refer to the "Emergency Banking Act"? This is the only one i can find for the date you gave. Could you be a little more specific what act/law you are saying gaving emergency powers, and what powers exactly they are (you give some, but i'd like some sources for that please)? I'm having trouble with google/library searchs to find info based on the details you gave.

EDIT:

thanks Hanslune, that gives me more to go on

[edit on 19-11-2007 by bobafett]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   
cute, eh?



Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens."



www.barefootsworld.net/war_ep1.html



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


This is kindof correct. Technically, your status as "united states citizen" a voluntary corporation that was created with the illegal ratification of the 14th amendment, grants you no rights under the constitution, but only privledges and franchises in a federal court, should you chose to accept its conditions (SS#, birth certificate, drivers license, business license) and its "benefits" (welfare, student loans, social security, income tax, ect)



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I am not an expert on this subject so I am am hoping that everyone will continue adding their input and data so that the issue may be thoroughly investigated. I have heard of this several times but read an entry recently in a book published by Barnes & Noble written by David Southwell. I feel this issue is of the utmost importance considering that it is the crux of so many other arguments in the "conspiracy" field, and in politics in general.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I've immediately hit a stone wall. All searches produce the same handful of clearly biased sites who seem to be parroting each other. They give no access to a source or text of the Senate Report.

In checking for available digital files from the Governments sites, they do not go back that far at this time. It would probably take a visit to the source library. Anyone in D.C.?

I suspect this is a Chicken Little style issue. I highly doubt the Constitution is or has been "invalid". The Supreme Court probably would have noticed. My guess is that this is like the Tax Resistors phony rant about Maritime Law in that it is a case of misleading the public for shock value to manipulate opinion.

Anyone here believe the ACLU would not have been all over this if it were true? I would not worry about it based on what can be found.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Yes thanks for bringing that up, we have talked about it in AP US History. The powers have never been declared over and a vast majority of Americans do not even know this. Question is why has it not been declared over? NWO?



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I've immediately hit a stone wall. All searches produce the same handful of clearly biased sites who seem to be parroting each other. They give no access to a source or text of the Senate Report.

In checking for available digital files from the Governments sites, they do not go back that far at this time. It would probably take a visit to the source library. Anyone in D.C.?

I suspect this is a Chicken Little style issue. I highly doubt the Constitution is or has been "invalid". The Supreme Court probably would have noticed. My guess is that this is like the Tax Resistors phony rant about Maritime Law in that it is a case of misleading the public for shock value to manipulate opinion.

I've heard of this long before now and researched it, and my findings mirror Blaine's precisely.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


Its not a phony rant, they just misargue it. There are no more common law courts in the true sense, because only a VERY small percentage of the population has no guardian-ward contracts with the federal government, and as such are strictly liable for their actions, this is a fact.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Man oh Man, I can't believe I forgot about this. I remember this also had to do with Income Tax and we not having to pay it. People in the last year started not paying there taxes saying they didn't have to. There was something just on it where some people held up in there home.

Now it makes sense when Georgie with his smirky child like expression said, The Constitution is nothing but a God-damned piece of paper. No one made a fuss over him saying that, why?

I ask what are we going to do about it.
1.) E-Mail all the News Stations
2.) Spread the words on the net and stand as one.
3.) Nothing

I bet nothing (3)



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Presidents Truman, Nixon, and George W. Bush have added further declarations.

These declarations must be anulled and the emrgency declared over by the U.S. President for the Constitution to be effectively reinstated.

[edit on 19-11-2007 by jackinthebox]

Actually, the Constitution was never ratified either, so in effect even FDR was a complete fraud and was acting illegally to begin with.

Our forefathers were extremely smart- its the government that is and has been acting illegally and treasonous for a very long time. The Constitution is intact- because the declaration of emergency did not receive the proper legal process required to call a legal state of emergency!

Thats the truth!



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


so if the president of the day is always having an emergency then he might not care to take the time to return to the constitution?i'm surprised jimmy carter didnt realize what was going on while he was president---surely if he knew about this he would have surrendered his extra powers ?



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I've immediately hit a stone wall. All searches produce the same handful of clearly biased sites who seem to be parroting each other. They give no access to a source or text of the Senate Report.

In checking for available digital files from the Governments sites, they do not go back that far at this time. It would probably take a visit to the source library. Anyone in D.C.?

I suspect this is a Chicken Little style issue. I highly doubt the Constitution is or has been "invalid". The Supreme Court probably would have noticed. My guess is that this is like the Tax Resistors phony rant about Maritime Law in that it is a case of misleading the public for shock value to manipulate opinion.

I've heard of this long before now and researched it, and my findings mirror Blaine's precisely.


It is not invalid- it is being illegally and blatantly disregarded- because it was created to keep all this $hit from happening in the first place!



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by yahn goodey
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


so if the president of the day is always having an emergency then he might not care to take the time to return to the constitution?i'm surprised jimmy carter didnt realize what was going on while he was president---surely if he knew about this he would have surrendered his extra powers ?


Mr. Carter knew exactly what was going on at the time and made sure his predecessors could go about in blatant disregard. THEY are all a bunch of stupid greedy automatons desperately trying to save their own pathetic arses and get as much out of it as they can while they can for themselves and screw the rest of us.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by dk3000
 


The constitution can't be ratified because it wasn't a legitimate representation of the will of the people, because the people never signed it. In other words, the federal government NEVER got consent of the governed. The constitution really doesn't have any legal power, but represents whats known as "the law of the land," (i.e the common law) as it was understood and accepted in America at the time.

What does this mean?

It means nomatter what law you might add to the constitution, it does NOT make it lawfull if it is not in accord with the common law.

How then does the government get away with stripping us as our rights?

Simple: they created a legal fiction, or a corporation, called united states citizen, which is attached to you via the SS#, Birth certificate, and various licenses, that doesn't have any RIGHTS, but rather privileges and franchises under their phony jurisdiction.

It is this legal fiction that the "united states" acts upon when they abridge your "rights," NOT you, as a human being. They cannot try this legal fiction in a court of common law because it is a matter of equity (the legal fiction is tried, not yourself) and therefor they had to create a whole new set of DC courts (thus the gold fridged flag).

Make sense?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join