American States Declaring Sovereignty

Myself, as a proud American, cannot believe some of your responses. If these stated do declare themselves seprate from the US, the USA would cease to exist. We'd be a small collection of 50 individual counties, with our armed forces divided between serving the nation as a whole, or fighting for their home state. Each state would be picked up by some foreign country. I can image us now, slaves under communism, dogs to Germany, rats to Russia.

I, for one, would do whatever possible to keep the union intact. To keep my state, Tennessee, in the union. Preserving the constitution means preserving the union. We need uncle Sam just as much as Uncle Sam needs us. Don't be so quick to through away your home, just because you have to pay a few extra cents to buy a pack of gum.

reply to post by Frankidealist35


It's not my impression that these states have officially succeeded from the Union but rather have reaffirmed their state rights under the existing constitution in an attempt to reign in the Federal government which has overstepped it's Constitutional authority for a long time. The question that I haven't seen answered yet, is what these states will do if the Federal government doesn't 'cease and desist'.

I really hate say this since I am a proud US citizen and I do love this country, but we really have to get into reality on what will happen to the US.

The US will implode and become a poverty driven country pretty much like Zimbabwe or Miramar (or Burma)...Yes, its true. And it will take the Dollar down the drain with it too.



[edit on 9-2-2009 by infocon_delta]

reply to post by lordtyp0
Show me which government powers the Obama is willingly giving up? Name one. In fact, name one time any government gave up powers they'd already acquired, unless forced to do so.

reply to post by WISHADOW


Ok, I am officially confused.

What I've seen about the NWO theory (if that's what it is, it could just as easily be a load of rich freaks THINKING they can change the world while having regular parties!) is that they want ever increasing unions or government. So how is a breaking up of the states meeting that objective?

Surely this would be a step in the opposite direction?

I can almost see that it's going to be said that "that's what they want, so they can force the states to join the NAU!" but where does this second-guessing end?

What if they know that we know that they know that we know. There comes a point where it's impossible to be a reality. It's no longer practical.

It would be in their interest to prevent a breaking up of the states, and then just impose another false-flag attack to convince everyone that a bigger union is a good idea.

There is nothing illegal about both declaring ones independance or succeding from the state or the united states or any other country. The fact that states have done it isnt really a surprise its just a little to little to late.

Before my 30th birthday I succeded from the united states I never thought I would have to succed from the country I was born in but bush and clinton made this happen at least on my end. This isnt to say I wont fight for the state of montana or one of the other states that have succeded when or if they do.

Thats my 2 cents for now

Falcon

The OP states that "States are declaring sovereignty." I assume that is the essential statement that started this thread...but...

a) I'd like to know how "sovereignty" is defined for the purpose of this discussion.
b) I'd like to know if you think a "declaration of sovereignty" equals a "seccession."

Oh, also, I'd like to see a citation from a credible outside source...

But, I'm afraid I'm asking for WAY too much here...in fact, I doubt anyone here can give a working definition of "sovereignty." But I'll hold out hope for a little while...

"Before my 30th birthday I succeded from the united states I never thought I would have to succed from the country I was born in but bush and clinton made this happen at least on my end. This isnt to say I wont fight for the state of montana or one of the other states that have succeded when or if they do."

This might be the most delusional statement I've read in months...
(btw, "Succeeded" and "seceded" are 2 different words. I doubt you've done either).

This has nothing to do with secession or revolt.

It has to do with the increasing effort on the part of the corporate federal government to delegate federal authority to politically relevant corporations and 'contracted' agencies in their place.

The successful implementation of the emergency response contract in New Orleans should have served as a warning to us all. New Orleans was prepared for a disaster and the Federal government by way of Homeland Security and FEMA forced them to scrap their plans and go with a Federally-approved 'contracted' agencies plan (which never existed) - we all saw how well that went.

That was just on example. The Federal government is 'moving in' on many states, telling them what they can and cannot do with their own land, what rules they must or must not 'over-rule' locally, and worse. NAFTA was among the first blatant and egregious assaults on State's rights.

In California, State sanctioned (legal) Medical Marijuana use was directly - and violently - disrupted by FEDERAL agents (and some 'security contractors' of note).

Imagine having a license to drive in your home state, but a Federal agent can arrest you because your driving without a 'federally approved' license? It's along those lines. The Federal government has been successfully recasting it's role in the country as that of "Ruler" as opposed to the "Servant" it is Constitutionally meant to be. These state's proposed legislation are a direct challenge to that effort.

We were warned about it, the history books are full of admonitions about it, and yet, because the same transnational corporations who own the media, Wallstreet and our political party system are better at propaganda than we are, we will be 'indoctrinated' to see this as a threat of some kind. It's not.

The people are simply telling the Federal government that they are not at liberty to assume control of the nation. That prerogative belongs to the people of the states that form our union. Not them and their pseudo-political corporate crap.

[edit on 9-2-2009 by Maxmars]

allot of us in the "community" know about the suspending of the constitution during martial law from William Cooper's readings and David Icke's reading and others. Just wanted to say that this is not something that has NOT been mentioned. it's actually been mentioned a lot over the years.

ever heard of executive orders? ever heard of FEMA and the real reason it was created? ever heard of Mount Weather and the fact that its hollowed out? ever heard of "camps"/bases across the USA with barbed wire facing inwards to keep us in? ever hear of subway cars with handcuff poles being made by steel companies in the midwest??

yea. its been mentioned before.

[edit on 01/19/2009 by enir nabu]

For some of us, the First Civil War was never won or lost, the North just occupied several states, and Martial Law was never rescinded

Yep, for some of you... indeed.

Yet for the majority of Americans (practically all the population), the 1st Civil war was won by the North. Anybody that questions that fact, is merely a poor loser who still wraps himself with the confederate flag every night and cries bitterly.

Then gets up and reads the Bible and believes that dinosaurs walked with men ala The Flintstones.

Oh and the people that are afraid of Obama...... cut the crap and just admit that you're afraid of him because he's black.

Heck, was it any wonder that in the South so many people got the vapors, went yellow and bought guns in mass? Talk about chicken-hearted fellas!

BTW, those secessionists should've voted for Palin (probably did)... she was married to a guy who actively wanted to make Alaska a separate country or moved it to Russia for all we know. There's even a youtube video where she goes to a meeting with those nutjobs. I mean, with Palin we would have nothin' to worry about (pfft!).

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by lordtyp0
I just don't get it. Why didn't they do this when martial law was an actual threat? Under the bushies.

They are scaling back the patriot act and similar laws.

Why now?

And heres an unrelated random link for the sake of doing it.. link

Scaling back the patriot act? Please show me how you think they are doing this.

Well..... in the approx, sixty years that I've been alive I have NEVER seen the congress, senate, executive branch, government in general "scale back" control - NEVER - so good luck waiting for that to happen....

Originally posted by realshanti
Well..... in the approx, sixty years that I've been alive I have NEVER seen the congress, senate, executive branch, government in general "scale back" control - NEVER - so good luck waiting for that to happen....

No argument here. Such powers are never 'volunteered' away by ANY government, let alone one which we could half-jokingly say was overthrown by the transnational financial corporate empire nearly a century ago.

The States, via honest representation, are the only hope for a restoration of the Constitutional guidelines. Somehow I don't see that forthcoming either. Our political parties are very nearly corporate "tools".

[edit on 9-2-2009 by Maxmars]

Originally posted by Odessy

Originally posted by TheOracle
Big government has just grown too big and does not respect the Constitution and sooner or later people will rise and it is not going to be pretty.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-Abraham Lincoln

That came from Abraham Lincoln? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is a liar! (As his actions very well show)

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by Odessy

Originally posted by TheOracle
Big government has just grown too big and does not respect the Constitution and sooner or later people will rise and it is not going to be pretty.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-Abraham Lincoln

That came from Abraham Lincoln? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He is a liar! (As his actions very well show)

I disagree. He was a politician. There is a subtle difference.

Nonsense

These States have passed simple resolutions, reinforcing the Rights they already have. None of them are Succeeding and the only talk of Civil War is a tiny number of radicals on the Internet. The number of people interested in Civil War would probably not even make a good crowd at an NFL Game.

My guess is they are responding to the Democratic Party having complete control of Government. The Democratic Platform has leaned towards Big Government and less State Rights for many decades now. It is hardly a secret.

The Democrats, for the next two years will have the power to do a lot of damage. They could reinvent and reconstitute the Welfare Programs that took us so long to get rid of and bury the States in Mandated Big Government Programs.

The States are struggling and don't need to be hit with things like Socialized Medical Care mandated by a out of control Far, Far, Left Pelosi driven Congress.

Even if Obama wanted a Bi-Partisan Government that served the people, he will never get it. Pelosi runs the country now from her mini-Air Force One that her and her friends fly around in.

Obama will likely find himself either having to Veto the Bills written by his own Party or he will have to cede control to Pelosi whom I've lovingly come to think of as, the "Wicked Witch of the Far Left". I don't think a bucket of water will work with her however Obama will need a full arsenal. A Cross, Holy Water, Garlic, Wooden Stakes, Silver Bullets and bushels of Sage burning in the White House Fireplace.

Obama is a figurehead at this point and he can only do what the DNC and Pelosi allow him to do. Not his fault. It is just the way it is. Letting one Party have this much power is madness at best. To bad people did not think of that when they were voting. We replaced one mess with a new different mess.

I believe these acts are a step in the right direction and showing awareness of the real issues. The next step if for state "Governments" to acknowledge they are not Governments ie governing or managing over people but are servants of the people. Unlikely of course but it would be great to see a city, county, state move to be funded by donations from it's citizens and sales taxes and commercial licensing. After they they can abolish the statues/regulations and acts such as property tax, income tax, and all non-commercial licensing such as drivers licenses and tickets. Even before that they can make sure the living humans in their state know they have no obligation to pay federal income tax. They can also reclaim from federal theft the BLM land, national parts, etc..

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Myself, as a proud American, cannot believe some of your responses. If these stated do declare themselves seprate from the US, the USA would cease to exist. We'd be a small collection of 50 individual counties, with our armed forces divided between serving the nation as a whole, or fighting for their home state. Each state would be picked up by some foreign country. I can image us now, slaves under communism, dogs to Germany, rats to Russia.

I, for one, would do whatever possible to keep the union intact. To keep my state, Tennessee, in the union. Preserving the constitution means preserving the union. We need uncle Sam just as much as Uncle Sam needs us. Don't be so quick to through away your home, just because you have to pay a few extra cents to buy a pack of gum.

Poor guy. The States are not seceeding from the nation, they are reminding the feds that they ARE the "S" in "US". Keep on kowtowing to the American Federal Empire, and let us grownups worry about little issues like "freedom" and "sovereignty".

nenothtu out

Originally posted by enir nabu
allot of us in the "community" know about the suspending of the constitution during martial law from William Cooper's readings and David Icke's reading and others. Just wanted to say that this is not something that has NOT been mentioned. it's actually been mentioned a lot over the years.

ever heard of executive orders? ever heard of FEMA and the real reason it was created? ever heard of Mount Weather and the fact that its hollowed out? ever heard of "camps"/bases across the USA with barbed wire facing inwards to keep us in? ever hear of subway cars with handcuff poles being made by steel companies in the midwest??

yea. its been mentioned before.

[edit on 01/19/2009 by enir nabu]

If the Constitution is suspended, does that not mean that the instrument granting the federal government any right to exist at all is suspended, nullifying the legitimacy of said entity? Would suspension of the constitution not be tantamount to suicide of the federal government?

Of course, that would all be contingent on the will of the people to enforce the contract represented by the Constitution.

nenothtu out

Wow, some of the opinions on this thread are truly baffling, I don't even know where to start. I'm a Canadian so I confess I'm in no position to judge the political climate down in the States right now since I'm not there talking to ordinary Americans etc... That being said I have to be honest in saying I find the notion of a "civil war" extremely unlikely given the lack of ANY talk of it outside of this forum or others like it. One thing I do feel the need to comment on that I have some experience with is this fear of "Leftism" and how it will lead to communism as certain individuals have expressed. Firstly, despite the fact that Obama is leftist by American political standards I can assure you he is NOT a socialist by any stretch of the imagination. This preoccupation with any sort of leftist thinking leading to "socialism" is a ridiculous notion that's largely a product of Cold War fear-mongering, America is a fairly right-wing country by and large and some moves towards the left will not lead you into some kind of Communist state. I promise. By the way, Canada's more left than you and even we're not Communists.
From here in Saskatchewan (that's a province) Allar