It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Obama fearing a revolution against him by the states, has moved swiftly by nationalizing nearly all National Guard Forces in multiple states; Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina – to name a few. The Governors of the Great States of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia still have under their Command-and-Control the State Defense Forces to go against U.S. Federal forces should the need arise. Also important to note: There are NO U.S. laws prohibiting National Guard troops from also joining their State’s Defense Forces. This dilemma occurred during the Civil War with many “citizen soldiers” choosing to serve their states instead of the Federal Government.
The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas.
A chilling report from the Foreign Military Intelligence Directorate (GRU) prepared for Prime Minister Putin warns today that United States President Barack Obama has had served on 14 US Governors National Security Letters (NSLs) warning that if their actions in attempting to form what are called State Defense Forces are not halted they will face "immediate" arrest for the crime of treason.
A National Security Letter (NSL) is a form of administrative subpoena used by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and reportedly by other U.S. Government Agencies including the Central Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense. It is a demand letter issued to a particular entity or organization to turn over various record and data pertaining to individuals.
Originally posted by PerfectPerception
Apologize if the source is not credible or the information has been covered before.Ijust now found it and the source article today.Thanks in advance.
t's 1,017 pages long, and apparently nobody has read all of it, but here are some tidbits. For anyone over 50, it's gets scarier the farther down you go (I'd really like to know what government employee with a God-complex wrote this):
Pg 22 of the HC Bill mandates the Government will audit books of all employers that self insure. Small businesses will abandon self insurance and go on Government insurance. So although proponents say that there will still be private health care, it’s simply a lie: this mandate will force employers to abandon their private plans.
Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill ? a Government committee will decide what treatments/benefits a person may receive.
Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - Your20healthcare will be rationed (as it is in Canada and Britain).
Pg 42 of HC Bill ? The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you. You will have no choice.
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise. Citizens and legal residents will pay.
Pg 58 HC Bill ? Government will have real-time access to individual’s finances and a National ID Healthcard will be issued.
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your bank accts for funds transfer.
PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community organizations (read: ACORN).
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Government will create an Health Care Exchange to bring private Health Care plans under Government control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private Health Care plans in the Exchange.
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Government will ration your Healthcare.
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Government mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example - Translate into English for illegal aliens.
A movement to reclaim for states all rights not specifically designated to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution is exploding across the nation, with 35 states already acting or at least considering such proposals – and one state lawmaker estimating the nation as a whole could save $11 trillion in coming years if it would succeed. WND reported not long ago when the number of states with lawmakers considering such sovereignty efforts reached 20. Now, according to the Tenth Amendment Center, such provisions have been launched in at least 35 states.
"If Washington doesn't wake up and our economy keeps going the way it is going, I don't think we'll have to dissolve the union," he says. "It won't be able to stand."
Political revolts against federal laws are nearly as old as the nation itself. From trading to slavery to civil rights, states have felt put-upon by Washington's mandates. But it was a political standoff on Charleston's shores in 1832 that framed the argument leading to the Civil War.
It was a stand for state's rights that applied similar language to what we're seeing in the present-day debates over sovereignty, says Civil War historian W. Scott Poole, an associate history professor at the College of Charleston.
"I was fairly horrified actually," Poole says upon reading Pitt's House bill. "It clearly harkens back to nullification."
A chilling report from the Foreign Military Intelligence Directorate (GRU) prepared for Prime Minister Putin warns today...
Originally posted by Yellow Ledbetter
I've always thought that a confederated America, where states didn't follow a federal law system, would be a better solution for freedom and democracy than a united America under leadership from a federal government. The position of POTUS needs to be abolished.
Can you cite your sources?
Edit: Most of what you posted was originally from April, 2010. Has anything new developed? I'm not quite sure what your motive is by making this seem new... Although, it's surprising that this is 8 months old and this being the first time I've heard of it.edit on 18-12-2010 by Yellow Ledbetteredit on 18-12-2010 by Yellow Ledbetter because: (no reason given)
Yeah it is called the Articles of Confederation (AC). When the constitution was created they met to amend the AC. They had no authority to create a new central governing body and steal the fruits of peoples labor etc. A good start would be getting back to the AC. it had no power to tax or restrict commerce and the Statists didn' lt like that hence we got a constitution that gave them the authority to eventually morph into what we have today.edit on 18-12-2010 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)extra DIV