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: 3
27
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 09:15 AM
link   
It seems to me that all this really comes down to opinion at the moment. After reading the thread I see some great arguments from all sides of this debate. I'm curious if anyone on here is or can get specific information on the legalities of this issue who is qualified to do so. Such as a law professor, legal researcher etc. I'd love to see this sort of thing openly debated in the public realm and even taken on by the presidential candidates (just to see what kind of bs they spin it with for entertainment purposes).




posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by theebdk
 


Yes, this is quite certainly the meeting! Thanks for the follow-up. His first day of work after all the Inauguration celebration it seems.


[edit on 22-11-2007 by jackinthebox]



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mortified
 



Excellent point about presenting it to the current candidates. But take this out for a spin...Maybe we could "smoke out" those in the know, and those who aren't by their initial reaction. Most of them probably have no idea about this, but the ones who do, those are the ones to look at.



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 09:55 PM
link   
I find it curious that this thread started out with so many flags, yet not many people have decided to weigh in on the subject. As I stated earlier, I believe this topic is at the crux of political debate/discussion/conspiracy today. I hope that more people will expand this discussion. So far only one posting has argued against the claim as being effectively factual. Perhaps a more public inquiry is in order. But what better way to prepare for such an inquiry than right here on ATS?



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 01:48 AM
link   
People, people... Seriously.

The government is not working for us. They only work for us when they have to. They work for corporations and special interests groups... that's all!

These are basic facts here.

You people(Americans) were brought up in a world of Disneyland....

Oh forget it. You people will never understand. I'm sorry.

I think I'll just leave a link to a 1969 concert by The Doors. Jim Morrison goes on a drunken/drug induced rant about you lemmings.

This is how I feel about you cowards.
The rant comes at around the 1:45 mark







[edit on 26-11-2007 by Conundrum04]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Oof!
Jim Morrison killed my thread.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Jim Morrison is/was and always will be the drunken lizard king!


Good Night Thread!



posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Looks like this topic could eventually get us all labeled as subversive, check out the news today...
A few snips from an interesting trial...




Source
But Arango, who opened her final argument to the 12-member federal jury with a video of the suspects taking an al Qaeda oath, said Batiste was trying to build an army because he did not consider the U.S. government legitimate...
Federal agents said when the men were arrested that the group's plans were "aspirational rather than operational" and posed no real threat because they had neither al Qaeda contacts nor the means of carrying out attacks.




posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 


"aspirational rather than operational." Sounds to me like these guys were just talking Solid Human Intestinal Trash and never really had the means to do anything. Then there's the "Terrorist Doctor" in NY who was basically entrapped by the FBI who posed as al-Qaeda to recruit him for a 25 year bid.

Where are the real terrorist cells?! Either the cells are really here like they keep trying to scare us into believing, or we are now the enemy.



[edit on 30-11-2007 by jackinthebox]



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   
For the government to give itself such sweeping power, I am surely amazed that the law continues to provide citizens with as much protection as they do. I am not a lawyer, simply someone who has had a few law classes in a top ranked law school (just as electives for a graduate degree). That does not make me a lawyer or even a legal researcher, it just means I happen to have read over a lot court cases.

Take for example, the right of the government to seize property. You claim the constitution is invalid, so the constitutional amendments for just compensation and public use are invalid. That's fine, but what about the other laws that have arisen from property seizure?

Take one example. Dolan v. City of Tigard 512 U.S. 687 (1994) holds that:

(1) An essential nexus must exist between the compelling state interest of property seizure and the nature of the seizure exaction.

(2) If condition (1) is met, the government has the burden of proof to demonstrate that a rough proportionality exists between government mandated exactions and the nature of the future use of the property in question.

Meeting those standards is extraordinarily difficult. In the case of Dolan, the Supreme Court remanded the case because the city required that Dolan dedicate some of her land to a public greenway in order to get a building permit. The public greenway was to offset the impact of the new construction the permit would be used for (condition 1). However, the city did not demonstrate (condition 2) that a rough proportionality existed between their requirements and the use of the land. The majority specifically cited that the city could have mitigated the impact of the new development with a PRIVATE greenway, and forcing it to be public did not meet condition 2 as outlined above.

For there to be such a huge vast conspiracy against us where the constitution doesn't exist, the Supreme Court is surely working hard to make government action exceedingly difficult.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 04:35 AM
link   
heres somethign to consider:

if the constitution has been suspended, and IF the laws that govern the election of the president are outlined by the constitution, THEN it seems that no president in the last 75 years has been legal, no?



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 05:25 AM
link   
Hi There,

I posted the following thoughts on another thread in response to the following statement...


The Constitution was suspended in 1933 and has never been reinstated.


www.abovetopsecret.com...'


I would suggest that the 'legality' for why the Constitution was suspended, lasted only as long as the cause for its suspension. If the 'cause' is no longer apparent, and has not been so for a certain length of time, the Supreme Court would have no moral justification in establishing the merit of the continuance of the suspension. Other causes that may have appeared over the years after the initial cause cannot qualify for the merit in continuing suspension, as it is necessary to reinstate the Constitution in order to use the other causes against it. In other words, have there been applications to continue the suspension based upon other causes? I would think there hasn't. Logically, the suspension ought now to be null and void, and if that is the case, it opens up a whole new can of worms.


Best wishes



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   
If the constitution is, and has been basically null and void since FDR's Presidency, then the amendments don't mean anything either. The 22nd amendment, which was passed after FDR died, set a term limit on the President. This would mean that there is nothing constitutional stopping G. W. Bush from staying in office for as long as he wants.


[edit on 18-12-2007 by webpirate]



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Meatclown
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


I'm not going to offer you legal advice as this is just about the worst possible place i could do that. I am familiar with some of the anti income tax arguments and yes, to a large extent, they are frivolous. My only bullet-proof argument, if you seriously don't want to pay income tax, is to rescind your social security number (i.e your taxpayer identification number), without this, DC courts, aka maritime admiralty courts have zero jurisdiction to enforce their "code," period. Any tax on a sovereign individual, be it his person, trade, or labor, constitutes a violation of property and amounts to theft.


Is there any chance you can expand on this? I think I kind of understand what you're saying. You're stating that basically in order for the govt. to force people to pay for income tax. They had to create a corporate entity called "american citizen" correct? and the only way for us to free ourselves from this is to resign our SS# therefore, in a sense, resigning our "citizenship" correct? But won't we basically be facing a catch 22 considering that the SS# has basically infiltrated the livelihood of americans to where we can't even get a job without it?

Is there a way we can escape this and still be able to actually survive "off the grid"?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
It's been a while since I started this thread, and I've learned some important things. The suspension of the Constitution is really only one piece of a much bigger puzzle, as one might expect. So I will follow up now with how this fits into the bigger picture. By doing this, I also hope to show that the suspension of the Constitution is not some meaningless hair-brained half-cooked conspiracy theory...The NWO is upon us.

The suspension of the Constitution is all about money. That old root of all evil.

More to follow...

[edit on 1/10/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:29 AM
link   
[edit on 1/10/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
The bankruptcy of a nation and the end of the U.S. Constitution.

Let us move on now to the Great Depression and the Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In less than twenty years, the Federal Reserve System managed to drive the American economy into the ground, and took most of the economies of the industrialized world with it. Congressman Louis T. McFadden openly blamed the Federal Reserve, run by Wall Street banks and their European affiliates, for deliberately causing the Great Depression. The Congressman had been chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency for more than a decade, but was no longer Chairman when he stated on June 10, 1932:

“Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government board, has cheated the Government of the United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions...The people have a valid claim against the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks”

But why would the Fed want to run the economy into the ground? Again it was another grab for power. This time, unlimited power. Not only would the elites seize substanatial swaths of real property that had been purposely driven into default by the lenders, but they would get rid of the U.S. Constitution as a practical instrument of law as well.

With the nation bankrupt and insolvent, the U.S. Constitution was suspended in 1933 with Congressional approval and by the Executive Order of President Frankiln D. Roosevelt when he asked for,"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."

Constitutional authority has never been reinstated. The emergency has never been declared over. Speaking to Congress, US Rep. James Traficant declared the following:

“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. HJR 192, 73rd Congress session of June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution to Suspend the Gold Standard and Abrogate the Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States governmental offices and departments and is further evidence that the United States Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States offices, officials and departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the constitutional Republican form of government now dissolved, the receivers of the bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of the Treasury to that of the Governor of the international Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section 13955 reads in part: "The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States.""
But it is even worse than this. It was not only the Federal government that became the private property of the elite international bankers. State government as well, having already relinquished their sovereignty to the Federal Government in the Civil War, are included as default payment. Where states were once sovereign republics, they are now designated as Federal Districts superimposed on the pre-existing borders. For example, the republic of Arizona (Ariz.) has been designated as the federal STATE OF ARIZONA (AZ). Note the all capital print in the latter. In an even clearer example, if you were to file a federal court case in Colorado, the heading would read “IN THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO” not “in the state of…” And even this is not the worst of it.

Your individual sovereignty as an American, became and remains the private property of people like the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. It is no exaggeration to say that you are indeed a slave, in the most literal sense of the word. Your U.S. Citizenship identifies you as the private property of receivers of the U.S. bankruptcy, and as a private corporation designated numerically by Social Security and otherwise as your given name printed in all capital letters. (Look at your driver’s license, your credit card, etc. All caps.) American persons were once afforded that which is designated as inalienable by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These sovereign individual rights now remain suspended and superseded, by the privileges and immunities of the incorporated U.S. Citizen, as a matter of public policy, as designated under the 14th Amendment.

Note that I said public policy, not law. What’s the difference you ask? Let’s turn to the 6th Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary:

“Public law. That branch or department of law which is concerned with the state in its political or sovereign capacity, including constitutional and administrative law, and with the definition, regulation, and enforcement of rights where the state is regarded as the subject of the right or object of the duty, . . . That portion of law which is concerned with political conditions; that is to say, with the powers, rights, duties, capacities, and incapacities which are peculiar to political superiors, supreme and subordinate.

Public policy. Community common sense and common conscience, extended and applied throughout the state to matters of public morals, health, safety, welfare, and the like; it is that general and well-settled public opinion relating to man's plain, palpable duty to his fellow men, having due regard to all circumstances of each particular relation and situation.”

Basically what you are reading here is that ever since 1933, the courts can make up the laws as they see fit on an ongoing basis. Whatever they see as being in the interest of the public, or in accordance with general public opinion at any given time, becomes policy to the detriment of the designated rights once enjoyed by American individuals. They simply make up the law as they go. And it doesn’t end there either.

The courts today are operated exclusively by members of the BAR, and under military authority. Military authority is represented in the gold fringe border of the national flag on display in courts. The American BAR Association is a private corporation, operating for profit. The courts are there to bring in revenue. Every member of the BAR is obligated to uphold the principle of the court, even to the detriment of their own client. In other words, you can go into court arguing for your Constitutionally protected rights, but it will be dismissed as frivolous without any objection by your own lawyer, as a matter of public policy.

Continued...



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Army Regulation 840-10, 2.3(b) (1979) states:
b. National flags listed below are for indoor displays and for use in ceremonies and parades. For these purposes the United States flag will be rayon banner cloth, trimmed on three sides with golden yellow fringe, 2 1/2 inches wide.
Army Regulation 840-10, 2.3(c) states:
c. Authorization for indoor display. The flag of the United States is authorized for indoor display for:
(1) each office, headquarters, and organization authorized a positional color, distinguishing flag, or organizational color;
(2) each organization of battalion size or larger, temporary or permanent, not otherwise authorized a flag of the United States;
(3) each military installation not otherwise authorized an indoor flag of the United States, for the purpose of administering oaths of office;

(4) each military courtroom;

(5) each US Army element of joint commands, military groups, and missions. One flag is authorized for any one headquarters operating in a dual capacity;
(6) each subordinate element of the US Army Recruiting Command;
(7) each ROTC unit, including those at satellited schools;
(8) each reception station.

From the Civil War through the establishment of the Federal Reserve and into the Great Depression, all of the pieces were carefully put into place for the coup d’etat, der staatsstreich, against the sovereign authority of the United States of America in its entirety.

“...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

So now we see what the bankers gained by deliberately bankrupting the United States. Just about everything that made us Americans. And that was all the way back before the Second World War even started. Imagine what’s in store for us the next time they burst the deliberately inflated bubble.

This information was taken from my new thread A Bigger Picture (Rise of the NWO)



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Here is a link to an outside page with some interesting facts on the subject:

Senate Report 93-549



posted on Feb, 26 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Here is an updated debate on the subject, with more facts presented according to my ever-growing understanding.

The following link is to a debate regarding the US Constitution, and its validity in the present day. The OP sets out to disprove the claim that the US Constitution has been suspended, but is unable to do so. Another ATS member joins the conversation allied to the opinion of the OP, but again, I am able to show more thorough evidence, proving once again that the US Constitution is no longer valid.

Our Constitution Has Been SUSPENDED...oh, has it now?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join