Feds Issue Threat: No Fly Zone for Texas

reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN


So if they can't search then how do you expect them to find the bombs? How are they supposed to insure our safety?

If they didn't search there would be people demanding these searches especially after a a few more 9/11's.

If anyone has any other alternative idea to these searches that would be just as effective, then please be my guest and post your idea here in this thread. If not then your whining about it is pointless.

-Alien

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

Originally posted by relpobre000
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

Most of what you just said doesn't make any sense whatsoever. CT, NJ, etc. are all a part of the Union. It's the same principle. The Civil War was, largely, a political power struggle between the federal government and the sovereignty of the South. I think you need to hit the history books because it's true what they say: It tends to repeat itself.

You are too simple minded to understand something as complex as this and should not be participating in a convo of this proportion. You've proven my point with, "Southern Sovereignty" as the South has no right to sovereignty when it violated the basic human rights of African Americans. states do retain sovereign rights yes, but when it interferes or threatens to tear the nation apart the only soveriegnty that matters is that of The United States Of America and that is that.

you are being rather disingenuous. Lincoln made it very clear while running for office and re-expressed it in his first inaguarl address that he

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that—

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

First Address

Second, no slave was freed until the Emancipation Proclamation, which only "freed" the slaves in southern control territories

"That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.
...........
and in accordance with my purpose so to do publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days, from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

Emancipation Proclamation

The entire mantra of the Confederacy was to keep slaves and that was that and when The US Federal Government outlawed slavery and criminalized owning slaves a bunch of rich, white southern plantation owners got together and got a bunch of poor, disinfranchised Southerners to fight their war for them. They used the backwoods people the same way they did the slaves as that would mean that they'd have to start paying their slaves which by orders of the law reclassified them from slaves to employees and that cut into their pocketbooks who treated and saw them both like second class citizens. I know my history it is you who does not so suggest you reread yours.

True, Lincoln did not believe in the right of a State to secede from the Union, however the men who actually WROTE the document did. If they didn't then the whole notion of a Deceleration of Independence was hogwash.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
....

Don't really think a link is required for that bit

Lincolns argument that the Union was established before the Constitution and as such made it somehow unbreakable is not logical.

Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union."

First Address
Even while making the argument that it is unbreakable he uses the Declaration of Independence to show how it was improved upon

[quote
If they do pop off on some yipyap make no mistake everything will fall on Austin and have every other state looking at them asking "What's good?". We will not target DC or any other state for that matter as you engage the cause for Martial law in America.

edit on 26-5-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Alien Abduct


If I remember correctly 9/11 had nothing to do with any variety of bombing. Place metal detectors , lock the cock pit doors and give the pilots guns. That would have taken care of the problem. The non-sequitur argument about finding bombs is asinine.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


Where does it say i claim i have no rights , if you are going to rebut, read what i said, don't make stuff up, and excuse me for putting FED , i'm referring to federal government excuse me again for not being clearer.

reply to post by Alien Abduct


They have equipment that can detect explosives from within the surrounding air. there is no need to frisk a 6 year old girl. They are called EDS [explosive detection systems]

www.smithsdetection.com...

reply to post by Alien Abduct


As I have illustrated here: www.abovetopsecret.com... the threat of Terrorism on airplanes is and always has been so miniscule as to be a non-issue.

People need to stop living in fear.

News for today:

Governor Perry is still taking calls regarding this issue.

He is currently debating on either calling a special session for this bill, or issuing an executive order to all law enforcement to actively protect the people's Constitutionally protected rights under Article 1, Section 9 of the Texas Constitution.

Sec. 9. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions, from all unreasonable seizures or searches, and no warrant to search any place, or to seize any person or thing, shall issue without describing them as near as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.


512-463-2000

Kind of related: TSA to store passenger data for 15 years
www.guardian.co.uk...

I read thru the comments of this article and was just totally surprised how others from different countrys feel about our blantant disregard for privacy.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


I don't think Perry has the nads to issue an executive order, but it sure would give him a touch of street cred.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


He should take a hint from today's Supreme Court decision which shockingly (yeah) has actually backed one state's rights. Thread is here: "Supreme Court Backs Arizona Immigration Law That Punishes Businesses"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN

 

So if they can't search then how do you expect them to find the bombs? How are they supposed to insure our safety?

If they didn't sea?rch there would be people demanding these searches especially after a a few more 9/11's.

If anyone has any other alternative idea to these searches that would be just as effective, then please be my guest and post your idea here in this thread. If not then your whining about it is pointless.

-Alien

We survived for a long time without the TSA and their intrusive searches. How many terrorists have they caught or detered since the organizations inception? Do you honestly believe that the TSA will stop 9/11 type of incidents? Think about it, there are many different ways for a determined terrorist to accomplish their mission besides using aircraft. Just saying.

Between this and the Obama administration suing the state of Arizona for SB 1070, it has become clear that the states have lost their sovereignty. They are using gestapo tactics, bullying and manipulating.

It is clear Obama is a communist with a dictatorship mindset. Anybody who can't see the direction we are going in isn't looking very close...

reply to post by tvtexan


Heard it on Fox 26 this morning

reply to post by Alien Abduct


It doesn't matter, there is no valid alternative.... If they get evidence of a specific crime being commited, then they can get a warrant conduct a search. Anything else is constitutionally illegal and violates the fourth amendment.

If you're afraid to fly in the US under the restrictions placed on the government by the COTUS, then follow our nations prescribed method of changing the COTUS to allow for it. 2/3rds of both houses ratified by 3/4ths of the states.... Otherwise, DO NOT ATTEMPT TO USURP MY LIBERTY!!!!!

Jaden

Whining about it may be pointless but continued ignoring of the COTUS by the gov will result in much more than whining....lol

Please do not whine about fascist America and legislation until you are ready to take necessary actions to remedy the problem.
Those actions follow along the lines of that police brutality thread here on ATS where the crowd served up justice.

This is only found on one very questionable website..

Originally posted by aceto
This is only found on one very questionable website..

What exactly are you talking about?

Texas-sized Fail. No guts, no glory.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN

 

I certainly hope that the Texas legislators vote from a Texas standpoint and don't let the feds coerce them.

States rights mean nothing anymore... and it sucks.

S&F!

Bump

Any news on what is happening with this, so far the mainstream news outlets have been silenced on this matter.
which is pretty shocking but not surprising.