It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Threat to our constitution and our individual liberty

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
There is an ongoing threat to our individual liberty and our COTUS based gov. Obama's legitimacy is just a side note and an illustration of far we've drifted from this nation's principles.

Far more important is the state of our people and how powerless that they feel they have become. This has been bred into us as a people. We have to know that the government cannot EVER stop us if we decide otherwise.


This thread is not meant as a birther thread, it has much more to do with our current state as We The People, and what we need to do to change that and realizing that the gov. does NOT get to simply state that we have no standing to determine if the constitution is to be adhered to is an important step in that.

We absolutely have standing. We are individual citizens of a nation founded on the principle that it is WE THE PEOPLE, who rule it and as such we have standing as individuals to ensure that the nation follows it's highest document.

Yes, there were checks and balances put in place to help guarantee that it remained, WE THE PEOPLE in charge, but our failure is thinking that these are the ONLY checks and balances. They are not and our founding fathers wrote many papers and made many statements regarding this. In fact, our very first original document, the Declaration of Independence addresses our final check and balance. Below is just an illustration of how the other checks and balances are failing. The COTUS is written in plain and simple english for a reason, so that the average citizen could understand it and make sure it is being adhered to. So please don't let your bias or love for social issues get in the way of critically evaluating the illustrations below.

There were mechanisms to allow for changes to the government and we are ignoring them. The COTUS is only fluid in the mechanisms included in it to allow for change. It is not fluid in allowing modern interpretations to suprcede the intentions of its' framers.

Below is a logical evaluation of the reason that Obama is not a legitimate POTUS based on constitutional principle.

Prior to the fourteenth amendment, being born in the US did NOT make you a citizen, so the argument that you only need to be born in the US to be a natural born citizen is ridiculous. You must be born to two citizen parents. The parents need not be natural born citizens, but they must be citizens.

After the fourteenth amendment, it has been interpreted that you are a citizen just by being born here. That does not mean that you are a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, that means that you are a citizen.

The question you have to ask is why the distinction? Why distinguish between being a citizen and being a natural born citizen?

The answer to that is simple, to prevent the usurpation of our government by someone who is loyal to a foreign state. The purpose was to eradicate any possiblity of duel allegiance or foreign allegiance by the holder of the highest office and the commander in chief.

I know there are people who are going to spout the nonsensical attacks of get over it, you have a black persident.

This is a ridiculous attempt at an ad hominem attack of trying to make me seem racist, when I could care less that Obama is half black.

I care that he is eroding the last shred of liberty in arguably the greatest nation (supposed to be based on liberty and principles of freedom) that we have left.

Then people will inevitibly call me a Bush lover, and why I didn't rail against the practices of Bush. I did and do think that Bush did more to erode our liberties than any president OTHER than Obama is trying to do.

We are NOT a democracy nor were we EVER supposed to be.

We are based on the greatest form of government ever conceived, a democratic REPUBLIC. We aren't one currently, nor have we been since the NEW DEAL. We are a socialist republic. ran by corruption because we started giving away control of our nation when we allowed the enactment of the 16th amendment and the federal reserve.

Some of our greatest thinking founding fathers knew that doing so would spell the doom of our democratic republic By the people Of the people and For the people and would wrest away control by promoting total and utter corruption of the state.

The downfall of the US actually started before that. It started after the civil war. It started with ensuring that the Federal government could force the states to do whatever they wanted without recourse for the states.

It was the ignoring of the 10th amendment in subsequent action and overreaching of the Federal gov. in manipulation of the interstate commerce clause that sent us down this road.

Now the inevitable, see I knew you were racist, you supported the south leaving the union and therefore you support slavery.

Nope, sorry, I do support the right of states to sucede from the union, that doesn't mean that I support slavery or that I am racist.

I support individual liberty and property rights and personal responsibility. It is not the governement's right or responsibility to take care of us, it is our own.

The government is only there to ensure that our rights to personal property are protected and our individual liberties are not infringed. They are there to enforce the constitution and pass legislation within the bounds of the constitution.

When they fail in that, as they have with ensuring that the POTUS is constitutionally eligible to BE POTUS, then it is the citizens right and responsibility to stand up and ensure that they START to follow the constitution.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots from time to time.

We are perilously close to a time that this will be necessary, if we have not long surpassed it.

I pray that we as a nation will not have to shed the blood of patriots; hoiwever, it is becoming rampantly apparent that we may have no choice, but to become as slaves ourselves or to stand up against the tyranny created by the failures of our past citizenry and the failures of our current elected representatives who are TRULY FAILING to represent We the People!!!!

Jaden




posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Let me stop you right there, it doesn't matter what the law was before the 14th Amendment, Obama was born well after it was enacted so it applies to him. By your argument I could say that women shouldn't vote because the Constitution didn't always say that they could. As for the definition of Natural Born, traditionally it has been interpreted as being born on US soil regardless of parentage or if born in a foreign nation one parent must be a US citizen.

I don't feel the need to respond to the rest of your post.
edit on 5/26/2011 by SG-17 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by SG-17
 



Are you stupid???? Yes the fourteenth amendment DOES apply to OBAMA, the fourteenth amendment DOES NOT indicate NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP!!!!@!!!!!!!!@@!!@!!!@

Only citizenship.... Which is the EXACT same as the GOVERNATOR and he is not eligible to be president either.

The fourteenth amendment conveys CITIZENSHIP upon birth, not NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP!!!!!


I don't see how this is difficult to understand.

Jaden



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   
You don't understand the wording.. you are taking talking points from Birther Blogs that purposely confuse legalese to grasp at straws.

Here is why you are WRONG-

OBAMA's FATHER DID NOT OWE ALLEGIANCE TO A FOREIGN POWER and he would be UNDER JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES while here.

REPEAT- Obama's father IS NOT: Royalty, diplomat, agent of an enemy nation. IF Obama's father was "King of Nigeria" you might have a point, but he's not, so you don't.. It's rather simple when you understand, Owing allegiance to a foreign power DOES NOT mean foreign national.

If Obama wasn't a natural born citizen, he would have to go through the naturalization process.. Please, show some proof of this.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by SG-17
 



Are you stupid???? Yes the fourteenth amendment DOES apply to OBAMA, the fourteenth amendment DOES NOT indicate NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP!!!!@!!!!!!!!@@!!@!!!@

Only citizenship.... Which is the EXACT same as the GOVERNATOR and he is not eligible to be president either.

The fourteenth amendment conveys CITIZENSHIP upon birth, not NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP!!!!!


I don't see how this is difficult to understand.

Jaden


And I explained what natural born citizenship means too in my post.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
Prior to the fourteenth amendment, being born in the US did NOT make you a citizen, so the argument that you only need to be born in the US to be a natural born citizen is ridiculous.
Prior to the 14th Amendment, Congress had not been delegated power to make anyone a citizen of a state. Everyone was defined as a citizen of some state, based on that state law. A citizen of a state was then a citizen of the United States.

But since it was up to the states to define who qualified for citizenship, the 14th Amendment was necessary in order to prevent some states from abridging the rights and privileges, including citizenship of the United States, of some classes of people.


You must be born to two citizen parents.
Your opinion has no basis in US law.


This is a ridiculous attempt at an ad hominem attack
Don’t look now, but you have just engaged in ad hominem attacks.



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



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
1) You're wrong about what natural born citizen means

2) Bush did more to damage the US than Obama could do if he tried all day long.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
as i stated in another tread few seconds ago,ii read we are not considered (we the people)more like peasants,animals,cattle.blacks law,so if that is correct,there is no,(our constitution,or liberty. that would explain a lot of current affairs.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by damwel
 


Then tell me what the difference is???????? What's the difference between natural born citizen and citizen and why was there any distinction??????

Jaden

Wake up and think and stop regurgitating what best suits your current interests......

Liberty is best for all. Our form of government is best when left to itself. I am not a communist and I pity anyone who tries to turn my government into one.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by bumpufirst
 


This is the problem, it is the perception that this is the case, it is not the reality. Our founding fathers proved it when they overpowered the most powerful nation on Earth at the time in their bid for freedom.

The best part now is that we have the basis and foundation for the best form of government already in place.

We just have to force our representatives to follow it.

Jaden



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
What's the difference between natural born citizen and citizen
Natural born citizen means someone who was born a citizen, and citizen means every kind of citizen, including naturalized.

Got any more hard questions?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


Some people will never get it. When all of your rights are completely gone and the COTUS is completely ignored and interpreted in any way the current paradigm sees fit, I won't feel sorry for you...


The above won't happen because people like me won't let it happen...People like you just make it hard to do peacefully...

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



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
It will be interesting to see what happens when someone or group decides enough is enough. When they are put on trial, what will the jury do? Will they protect the right of the people, or say them selves? or will they ignore the reason why the defendant did what they did. I think people should prepare them self for this. It is going to shocking to the system and bloody, but the focus has to be on the cause.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 02:33 AM
link   
...pure genius insight... starred flagged and friended...


It appears truth is not very popular

ETA...you probably should have stayed off the "birther" hot topic, the rest of the post needed a voice


edit on 23-5-2012 by rival because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join