|
|
Topic started on 9-2-2009 @ 11:56 AM by Realtruth
|
 +18 more
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Breaking Political News topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
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!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 03:48 PM by mpriebe81
|
thanks for the post! good to see some more states jumping aboard, hopefully something productive will come of this.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 04:03 PM by Anonymous ATS
|
Missouri's actually didn't go anywhere. So please remove it. It got combined with another resolution on abortion and essentially wiped out. Also
resolutions in Missouri don't really carry any water.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 04:55 PM by kawz1
|
Who would've thought that a resolution needs to be introduced stating that the federal government is bound by the Constitution. What a day we live
in! Hopefully this will be used to rein in the fed govt and not as an excuse to label States as terrorist organizations 
On a side note, I hope this means that the DEA will stop busting Cannabis Clubs in California. Plenty of meth labs and rock houses for them to go
after!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 05:09 PM by N3krostatic
|
Very good post. Too bad Utah isn't in there yet. Things seem to be heating up for sure. I am hoping for the best.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 05:12 PM by stikkinikki
|
Oh Boy this is awesome! My state is considering it. I think there is a lot more going on that we have yet to hear about. A lot more good people in
government finally getting the stones to do what will serve their legacy well.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 05:15 PM by free_form
|
I don't think I'll ever see Virginia up there.
Hopefully I'm wrong.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 05:23 PM 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.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 05:30 PM by questioningall
|
My question is, why was this not done during Bush's Presidency?
He wrote so many dictorial type executive orders, so why didn't they do it when the states were more at the edge of a dictatorship?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 05:36 PM by mystiq
|
I'm starting to see a possible manipulation taking place. All this worry about martial law, and concerns brought up time and time again. Then more
recently, threads about someone in Russia showing a map of the US in a year or so, carved up, with California going to China, and the South going to
Mexico, Canada getting the wheat portion, and Russia getting Alaska, etc. This is not a situation anyone wishes to see, thats sane in anycase. It
would mean the dismantling of the US, as has been foretold in other threads.
Now, what if this is a carefully played chess game, with all that information being leaked deliberately ahead of time to make it look like this is a
good thing. Then a crisis, martial law, the break up of the US and the takeover.
People need to really seek answers right now, and find out how to reinstate their collective will before the US goes through any of this. I may not
like the leaders and the puppet masters behind them, but love you guys.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:20 PM by marg6043
|
Excuse me but why now?, why not when the nations was been raped by the disastrous bad policies during the Bush administration.
Why now. itsn't kind of late now, most states are bankrupted, unemployment is high and the many states are running out of funds.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:25 PM by Realtruth
|
Originally posted by marg6043
Excuse me but why now?, why not when the nations was been raped by the disastrous bad policies during the Bush administration.
Why now. itsn't kind of late now, most states are bankrupted, unemployment is high and the many states are running out of funds.
Hey Marg,
Here is how it is. In order for a society to rebuild on a solid foundation, the old one must be taken down. Just like in building a wall of a house,
no sense in starting a new building on a weak foundation. It only makes sense to clear the slate and start from a new one.
Sometimes when your up to your ass in alligators, you need to drain the swamp first.
Things are going to be ok, we have so many smart, talented, loyal and ethical people here in the USA.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:27 PM by mrsdudara
|
Im taking the time to read over all these. In New Hampshire's, I noticed this..
Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia, included an
identical or similar recommended change
Does that mean those states are in as well?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:38 PM by stevegmu
|
Originally posted by free_form
I don't think I'll ever see Virginia up there.
Hopefully I'm wrong.
Not a chance, considering N. Virginia has the largest concentration of federal employees in the US.
Funny, these states still submitted wish lists for the porculous bill. Guess they aren't quite as independent as they preach.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:49 PM by Reaper106
|
Originally posted by N3krostatic
Very good post. Too bad Utah isn't in there yet. Things seem to be heating up for sure. I am hoping for the best.
I hear ya, I would have thought that Utah would be one of the first. I have emailed the Utah Governor's office as well as state reps, so far I have
heard nothing back on this. 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
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?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:56 PM by Mr. Suave
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
