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.
Originally posted by freedomwv
This is madness of the highest order. America did break up the Union once and it was a total failure. It solved nothing and created a bloody war of brother against brother and father against son. It will lead to another civil war. All these petitions will be 100% rejected by the Federal government and laughed at; for good reason.
Breaking up the Union, at this point, will lead to chaos the world over. Yeah, the American empire is a huge problem and something all Americans should work to end but breaking up the Union will not get it done. The world depends on America way too much currently for the Union to become unstable as a unified Republic. It would be better for the states to push states right harder and work to put the Federal government back under the control of the states.
Originally posted by Nephalim
Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
Originally posted by MasonicFantom
Texas already has nearly 9,000 signatures after just over a day. 16,000 more required. It's a done deal IMO.edit on 11-11-2012 by MasonicFantom because: (no reason given)
Wait what? There are millions of people in Texas -- how could 25,000 people decide such a momentous thing?
Exactly. This petition and the rest mean jack squat even with the required amount of sigs.
Originally posted by HauntWok
This article is from WND. The same people that constantly perpetrate the Birther bull, so I am less than confident that it's real.
Frankly I wouldn't mind if a few states left the union. Most of the states that seem to want to do this are a huge drain on taxpayer money anyway. So let them leave. And make sure that any people wishing to leave along with them are allowed. Of course never to return.
Then we just don't trade with the states that left the union.
The Money Order For GoldThe Money Order For Gold
The Democracy on April 5, 1933 issued an Executive Order removing the gold
from circulation as a currency. This Executive Order served the same function as a
money order to the United States People for the purchase of all the gold in society. Gold
is substance and was used in the "payment of debt." When the President wrote the
money order for all of the gold to be taken out of the system and placed with the
government, the government then removed the people's ability to "pay a debt" because
they didn't have any money to pay with. The golden rule is usually summed up in "HE
who has the gold makes the rules", well sounds mosaic to Me. Here is another part of
the golden rule they don't tell you about "He who has the gold pays the bills." They got
the money; they make the payments. The government then became indebted to the
people to pay all of the debts because the government was holding all of the money.
You ever heard the phrase "All money is loaned into existence", well that is right
because they are borrowing it from Me. The money order debited the people by
removing the gold from their possession, which in turn credited the United States
Government with all of the newly held gold in their possession. This exchange is
halfway completed because the gold was taken from the people and nothing had yet
been returned. The people now need something in this exchange to balance out the
ledger and re-credit their original holdings. To complete the exchange, the United States
Government debited them selves with a promissory note (the promise of Abraham),
which in return re-credited the people. This was the executing order from the President
killing the legal capacity of the Government to control the people. The government was
then dead/debt (phonetically it sounds similar). Here is another interesting part. The
debtor always has the money because he is the one borrowing it, so when the President
wrote the money order which took the gold, they became the borrower/debtor, and that
is why there is a Public Debt, it is because they are borrowing the money from Us, the
Owner. What must happen now is the debt must be redeemed back to the original
owner. Here is the Executive Order (money order) that killed the government and made
them the ones liable for every debt they associate to. When you see "Executive" think,
"execute" and when you see "order," think "money order."
Because all the money was taken away in an executive order (money order), the
President is holding all the money that can pay the bills. Here is an example. A national
emergency occurs and an executive order is issued and money can now be sent to the
victims. Another example is when Mexico got money from the U.S. The Congress said
no but then the President by executive order, then sent the money. Another example is
when the prisons are running out of money, an executive order can be issued and now
the prisons get all the funding the need.
Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by happykat39
I think its a Hoax. No State is self sufficient enough to pull this off...
Originally posted by twoandthree
No state would want to secede if the balance of power still existed on the federal level and if each of the states fought for their Tenth Amendment (to the U.S. Constitution) sovereignty. It's a vertical check and balance for cases where the executive, legislative, and executive branches fail to keep each other in alignment.
We have a vast majority of federally elected and appointed officials who are in office for everything other than service to country. Many of those serve (practically bow down to) many masters, including globalists enterprises and coalitions bent on destroying the republic for a so-called better, more sustainable territory within the one world government.
Wish I could say this was just fantasizing about George Orwell's 1984, but sadly news article after news article suggests the fictitious nightmare is now coming to its own reality. That is, unless, one sticks with the sanitized, state-approved main media outlets before the alternative media gets snuffed out.
At least twelve states passed resolutions in 1994 calling on Congress to reduce or eliminate unfunded federal mandates. Others are lobbying Congress to enact mandate-relief legislation, and in some instances states are simply refusing to obey intrusive federal regulations regarding gun control, voter registration, abortion, and so forth. Kansas and South Dakota have even called for a constitutional convention to initiate an amendment to the Constitution prohibiting such mandates.12
The legislatures of eight states passed resolutions last year asserting state sovereignty and demanding that the national government stop violating the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (which provides that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people"). It's expected that similar resolutions will be considered by more than twenty states during their 1995 legislative sessions.13 Several states are establishing legal-defense funds and filing lawsuits against the federal government for specific violations of the 10th Amendment.14 In the view of economics professor and columnist Walter E. Williams: "The 10th Amendment movement may be America's last chance to peacefully get Congress to obey the Constitution. [National] politicians have seriously underestimated public anger and are blind to the rebellion spreading across the land."15