9 States+ Tell Government to Stand Down , page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 47 times
Topic started on 9-2-2009 @ 11:56 AM by Realtruth
It looks like things are heating up all over and the politicians are starting to CYA or covering their collective butts. The smart ones are seeing the writing on the wall and know that the people are waking up, if everything fails they don't want to be strung up, so they are trying to pass legislation that will give them an excuse to say they tried.

I don't think this is a declaration of sovereignty like everyone is claiming, but it's a start in the right direction.

IMO it is a little to late in the game for this to make a difference 180 politically, but at least they are making a statement.

iraqwar.mirror-world.ru...

community.marketwatch.com...




9+ States have now declared sovereignty, now add Washington to the list.


Arizona State Legislature for formulating a bill that declares their state sovereignty. That same bill further details their right during martial law to call back servicemen to protect the state:

"…if the President or any other federal entity attempts to institute martial law or its equivalent without an official declaration in one or more of the states without the consent of that state … individual members of the military return to their respective states and report to the Governor until a new President is elected…"


In case you didn't hear about it on the mainstream media (which you haven't because they want to keep us asleep), numerous states are currently declaring or have already declared sovereignty, including:

Washington
apps.leg.wa.gov...

New Hampshire
www.gencourt.state.nh.us...

Arizona
www.azleg.gov.../legtext/49leg/1r/bills/hcr2024p.htm

Montana
data.opi.mt.gov...

Michigan
legislature.mi.gov...

Missouri
www.house.mo.gov.../bills091/bills/HR212.HTM

Oklahoma
axiomamuse.wordpress.com...

California
www.leginfo.ca.gov...

Georgia
www.legis.state.ga.us...

Possibly: Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, Illinois.

"The Tenth Amendment was intended to confirm the understanding of the people at the time the Constitution was adopted, that powers not granted to the United States were reserved to the States or to the people. It added nothing to the instrument as originally ratified." — United States v. Sprague, 282 U.S. 716, 733 (1931).




[edit on 9-2-2009 by Realtruth]


reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 03:40 PM by Keyhole
I like what they are doing!

Essentially, what I believe these bills/resolutions that states are passing (or trying to pass) is really just to remind the federal government who THEIR boss is, why the federal government was formed, and to reiterate the powers that were actually given to the Federal Government by the states.

State legislator Charles Key Tenth Amendment Resolution

Key, R-Oklahoma City, said he thinks many federal laws violate the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states the powers not delegated to the federal government “are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution lists about 20 duties required of the federal government.

“We, the people in the states, created the federal government,” Key said. “They act like they created us and we’re under their authority, and that’s really not the case.”

What’s proposed?

Key’s resolution states the federal government should “cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.” A resolution is a formal expression of opinion, will or intention voted by legislators.

“It’s to help try to get us back to following the Constitution and try to preserve our constitutional form of government,” Key said. “The federal government continues to violate it more and more. It’s gotten so bad that they pretty much do whatever they want and get away with just about anything they want to get away with.”



I must say I pretty much agree with this guy!


reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:16 PM by Realtruth
Originally posted by antar
Thank you for posting the full list of States involved, I went through the whole other thread and couldn't find a list. Wow, this really hits home for me. How possible is this? Would it have to be after martial law is called?

Could we actually see the time when States fight one another? And what of the military? Who's are they if the US breaks up? Too many questions I know but my head is reeling on this.

How on earth could I go to war with any state in this Union, as I have friends and family in almost every state.


Antar, I am sure your aware that martial law was hung over the heads of everyone in congress during the first bail out. Basically, since the first attempt did not work, congress was told that martial law would be declared if it was not passed.

I think most of the reps that have any type of backbone saw right through the BS and now you are seeing the result.

As for states fighting each other I highly doubt it since they are seeing through the BS that is getting fed to them by a select few. I don't believe we will see civil war, but more of a restructuring of the political system and our entire financial system.

Here is a link to what was said.



During his speaking time on Thurs, Congressman Sherman stated explicitly, "Many of us were told in private conversations, that if we didn't pass this bill on Monday, the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points, another couple thousand the second day, and a few members were even told that there would be Martial Law in America if we voted no(to the bail out bill)."



Martial law if Bailout is not passed


[edit on 9-2-2009 by Realtruth]


reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:30 PM by Realtruth
reply to post by mrsdudara




For the most part yes, but they are in the process of drafting the resolutions, then I am sure they will introduce them.

We'll keep an eye out for more of them and post them as they surface, I don't think this is the end of it.




[edit on 9-2-2009 by Realtruth]


reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:49 PM by antar
reply to post by Realtruth



Thank you and that is what I suspected happened with President Obama. For all of his great speeches it is never his true responsibility to enact these laws, you are right we are waking up and aware, but it changes nothing when we see a new President come in with good intentions only to watch as their entire demeanor changes after a few closed door meetings.

I suspect that he knows his hands are tied and it is the sovereignty of the US and the future of our people that are at stake so he complies rather than watch us wither away into a complete depression, but for how long will it be held off? The other bailout is resent history, the checks have not even been completely spent, and now this one too?

Are we simply bailing out the banks like we did the mortgage brokers last time? Is it the final send off or are we going to see one more bailout to the insurance companies after some major catastrophe first?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^