Texas reaches 25,000+ Signatures

page: 11
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPECULUM
Texas does happen to have in their possession, the entire dismantled nuclear weapons arsenal. So they do actually have a bargaining chip


Keep dreaming on that. That stuff would be secured and moved a.s.a.p. with orders of shoot to kill while they are transporting part of 1st ID out of Fort Hood.




Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by caladonea
 


Well, they are now joined by people in 20 other states. This could catch on and blaze a trail of opposition to BO's centralized Nanny State. They already have their own Border Patrol and I bet the National Guard would join them.

There are lots of people who are not willing to become the United Soviet Socialist States of America.
This is why the BO admin had to put down as many militia groups as possible. It's also why he and his minions had to minimize the Tea Party opposition to his redistributionist Big Govt agenda.
edit on 13-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



Same thing keep dreaming. Even the National Guard took an oath which recognizes the POTUS as Commander and Chief. Texas is the only state that has the right to succeed from the Union so concentrate on what is in the realm of possibility. No soldier worth a damn is going to commit treason because of some disgruntled sore losers. Besides the majority of those who voted in the military voted for Obama. Do yourselves a favor and stick with what is remotely possible which is that Texas has the right to succeed from the union. I was thought that back in JR High when I lived in Texas it is one of the things we were proud of.




posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi


Originally posted by SPECULUM
Texas does happen to have in their possession, the entire dismantled nuclear weapons arsenal. So they do actually have a bargaining chip


Keep dreaming on that. That stuff would be secured and moved a.s.a.p. with orders of shoot to kill while they are transporting part of 1st ID out of Fort Hood.




Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by caladonea
 


Well, they are now joined by people in 20 other states. This could catch on and blaze a trail of opposition to BO's centralized Nanny State. They already have their own Border Patrol and I bet the National Guard would join them.

There are lots of people who are not willing to become the United Soviet Socialist States of America.
This is why the BO admin had to put down as many militia groups as possible. It's also why he and his minions had to minimize the Tea Party opposition to his redistributionist Big Govt agenda.
edit on 13-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



Same thing keep dreaming. Even the National Guard took an oath which recognizes the POTUS as Commander and Chief. Texas is the only state that has the right to succeed from the Union so concentrate on what is in the realm of possibility. No soldier worth a damn is going to commit treason because of some disgruntled sore losers. Besides the majority of those who voted in the military voted for Obama. Do yourselves a favor and stick with what is remotely possible which is that Texas has the right to succeed from the union. I was thought that back in JR High when I lived in Texas it is one of the things we were proud of.


Do you even know the oath? The oath is to ... support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same (The Constition, not the Government);

Not to the president.
edit on 13-11-2012 by Secesh because: clarity



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jcarpenter

I don't currently live in Texas, but I've spent ten years of my life there.

I was number 78,255 when I signed the petition.


Why are you signing a petition for a state in which you do not reside?

Sounds like voter fraud to me.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dreine
Texas produces too much oil,


Which is owned by oil companies.

Or are you advancing the idea of state owned oil fields?

Sounds like socialism to me.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by shaneslaughta
 



Tbh i hadent thought about that but the pieces fit in my eyes. But i only see the corruption come out from the onset of the FED.
JFK knew it and look what he got for his trouble.


Yup, the creation of the FED is when it became so apparent, but the corruption was there all along. Take the Homestead Act of 1862 ~ long before the federal reserve act was passed. Twice the amount of land sold to regular people through the HS act was given to the railroad barons and huge prime pieces of land were scooped up by wealthy speculators before the little people could scrape up enough money to buy their "fair share".

And when the people protested the result, guess what was blamed. Not enough staff and incompetence. But nothing was done to repair the damage and no one's head rolled. Does that ring any bells?

Big fat yes on JFK. He was the president and no one even knew about his silver certificates until it was too late for the people to back him on it. The media has always been our worst enemy.


Beyond that, they sent families into dangerous territories by giving land grants for homestead, like Oregon only 1 in 10 survived and then they found Grizzly's and Indians., hunger and starvation.

But once people had their land for some years the deeds were given to rich as favors and all those homes were not passed to the families that fought and died for them...this happened all over the states, politicians and rich were reallotted the land owned by the homesteaders.



Oregon was hardly a "Barren Wildness" when Americans began to settle there. Oregon for most was owned by The British Hudson Bay Company, and they formed the Government of the day in Oregon.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Also according to this Texas cannot secede: www.tsl.state.tx.us...

Now, therefore,
I, Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare that the insurrection which heretofore existed in the State of Texas is at an end, and is to be henceforth so regarded in that State, as in the other States before named, in which the said insurrection was proclaimed to be at an end, by the aforesaid proclamation of the second day of April, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six.

And I do further proclaim that the said insurrection is at an end, and that peace, order, tranquillity and civil authority now exist in and throughout the whole of the United States of America.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington this twentieth day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the ninety-first.


So the seal of the US is affixed to all states thanks to Andrew Johnson.
affixed:
Stick, attach, or fasten (something) to something else.
edit on 13-11-2012 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Umm -- here is the response I would like to see.



Thank you for taking the time to participate in the "We the People" petition process. As President of the United States, I am happy to respond personally to the petitioners.

The US Constitution does not provide the President with any power to assist with the secession of a Sovereign State from our Union. Article V of the US Constitution specifically excludes participation by the President, Executive Branch, or Judicial Branch in the amendment process. The authority to amend the Constitution, such as to revoke a signature of that document, resides only with State Governments and the US Congress. The President does not sign Constitutional amendments, and has no ability to veto amendments. The power to reject or amend the Constitution exists solely with the people.

Therefore, it is not possible for me to consider this petition, since it is outside the jurisdiction of my office. Petitioners who wish to continue this discussion should contact their respective State and Federal representatives.

With that understanding, the President can advocate strongly for or against any amendment to our Constitution, as is the right of all US citizens. In this case, I forcefully argue against this idea of secession.

We should appreciate our unique position in the world. Our unity has made us immensely strong, permitting us to face with confidence the many challenges of our complex world and the uncertainties of our future. In our great union, no State needs to stand alone. We are all owners of a great instrument for the betterment of ourselves, our children, and all mankind. This invention spans all US States, and is applied to all Americans equally. Each generation of Americans is tasked with preserving and enhancing this gift, which exists only because of the devotion and sacrifice of all those who have preceded us.

To consider dismantling this Great Union is not something I can facilitate in any manner.

Finally, please note that our Constitution guarantees the petitioners full rights to freedom of speech. Although I do not agree with the goals of the petition, it is my duty and honor to defend your rights to this freedom, at it is my duty to defend all parts of the Constitution and the great nation it has established.

Thank you once again for signing the online petition.


petitions.whitehouse.gov...

I am sure that there will be one response or another. As I obsess** over this issue, I can see that the above response (or something similar) is the best way to go. Hopefully we will see soon.


**EDIT: You don't go through 11 pages of this thread without being a little obsessed with this idea. My goal above was to post something reasonable -- something that might actually be a response. I know it is not very radical or exciting, but it is what I predict the response to actually be.


edit on 13-11-2012 by Axial Leader because: See above.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Ill admit it....im obsessed.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by alldaylong

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by shaneslaughta
 



Tbh i hadent thought about that but the pieces fit in my eyes. But i only see the corruption come out from the onset of the FED.
JFK knew it and look what he got for his trouble.


Yup, the creation of the FED is when it became so apparent, but the corruption was there all along. Take the Homestead Act of 1862 ~ long before the federal reserve act was passed. Twice the amount of land sold to regular people through the HS act was given to the railroad barons and huge prime pieces of land were scooped up by wealthy speculators before the little people could scrape up enough money to buy their "fair share".

And when the people protested the result, guess what was blamed. Not enough staff and incompetence. But nothing was done to repair the damage and no one's head rolled. Does that ring any bells?

Big fat yes on JFK. He was the president and no one even knew about his silver certificates until it was too late for the people to back him on it. The media has always been our worst enemy.


Beyond that, they sent families into dangerous territories by giving land grants for homestead, like Oregon only 1 in 10 survived and then they found Grizzly's and Indians., hunger and starvation.

But once people had their land for some years the deeds were given to rich as favors and all those homes were not passed to the families that fought and died for them...this happened all over the states, politicians and rich were reallotted the land owned by the homesteaders.



Oregon was hardly a "Barren Wildness" when Americans began to settle there. Oregon for most was owned by The British Hudson Bay Company, and they formed the Government of the day in Oregon.


yeah the ones that lived through the disease and accidents and starvation of the trail had it really nice in a Holiday Inn because there was already British Hudson Bay Company.

Elizabeth Dixon Smith in 1847, stated that they were so crowded in their leaky little shack that "you could have stirred us with a stick". Those who were already sick from the hardships of the trail often died due to the winter conditions that took the final toll.
www.oregonpioneers.com...

I was able to enter actives off limits to the public, and read original letters by the setters because I traveled the whole of the USA with a history teacher who was writing a book.

Here where I live we have many histories and monuments to these brave settlers who died or lost children to settle the area.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by alldaylong
 



Oregon was hardly a "Barren Wildness" when Americans began to settle there. Oregon for most was owned by The British Hudson Bay Company, and they formed the Government of the day in Oregon.


Chronology of Oregon Events

1811

British trader and explorer David Thompson completes a survey of the Columbia River. The Pacific Fur Company, founded by American financier John Jacob Astor, establishes a string of trading posts along the lower Columbia.

gesswhoto.com...

By the way, in a one hand washes the other sort of way, John Jacob Astor was good buddies with Thomas Jefferson and Astor made a bloody fortune on his monopolistic enterprise.

blogs.loc.gov...
edit on 13-11-2012 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by alldaylong

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by shaneslaughta
 



Tbh i hadent thought about that but the pieces fit in my eyes. But i only see the corruption come out from the onset of the FED.
JFK knew it and look what he got for his trouble.


Yup, the creation of the FED is when it became so apparent, but the corruption was there all along. Take the Homestead Act of 1862 ~ long before the federal reserve act was passed. Twice the amount of land sold to regular people through the HS act was given to the railroad barons and huge prime pieces of land were scooped up by wealthy speculators before the little people could scrape up enough money to buy their "fair share".

And when the people protested the result, guess what was blamed. Not enough staff and incompetence. But nothing was done to repair the damage and no one's head rolled. Does that ring any bells?

Big fat yes on JFK. He was the president and no one even knew about his silver certificates until it was too late for the people to back him on it. The media has always been our worst enemy.


Beyond that, they sent families into dangerous territories by giving land grants for homestead, like Oregon only 1 in 10 survived and then they found Grizzly's and Indians., hunger and starvation.

But once people had their land for some years the deeds were given to rich as favors and all those homes were not passed to the families that fought and died for them...this happened all over the states, politicians and rich were reallotted the land owned by the homesteaders.



Oregon was hardly a "Barren Wildness" when Americans began to settle there. Oregon for most was owned by The British Hudson Bay Company, and they formed the Government of the day in Oregon.


yeah the ones that lived through the disease and accidents and starvation of the trail had it really nice in a Holiday Inn because there was already British Hudson Bay Company.

Elizabeth Dixon Smith in 1847, stated that they were so crowded in their leaky little shack that "you could have stirred us with a stick". Those who were already sick from the hardships of the trail often died due to the winter conditions that took the final toll.
www.oregonpioneers.com...

I was able to enter actives off limits to the public, and read original letters by the setters because I traveled the whole of the USA with a history teacher who was writing a book.

Here where I live we have many histories and monuments to these brave settlers who died or lost children to settle the area.



And you think this only happened to Americans? How about the Pioneers of other nations who went before them? I am talking about the "Original" British Pioneers etc. Or had you forgotten about those?



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Secesh
 


Yeah I seem to remember it the 5 times I re-enlisted. As for this thread can you find the part in the oath where Texas is mentioned? Now where this thread has been diverted and those that are talking about other states aside from Texas seceding if that did happen those states would no longer be considered part of the US government now would they. So the oath taken by all those fine men and women would not be to those states because those states would be considered foreign now wouldn’t they.

Can you please find the part of the constitution it states a fringe group that is upset with who was elected and are acting like children that want to leave home are to be considered the government which I am supposed to jump sides and defend.

If you don’t like the way the government is being run then use the legal means to change it. Here is a thought try getting the millions of people who didn’t vote this election that sent a clear message to the government that they are happy with the status Quo and are fine with others choosing their leaders for them to get off the couch next time and vote if they are not happy with how things turned out otherwise please do not assume you speak for the 300 plus million citizens of the United States of America.


Enlisted: The first oath, voted on 14 June 1775 as part of the act creating the Continental Army, read: "I _____ have, this day, voluntarily enlisted myself, as a soldier, in the American continental army, for one year, unless sooner discharged: And I do bind myself to conform, in all instances, to such rules and regulations, as are, or shall be, established for the government of the said Army." The original wording was effectively replaced by Section 3, Article 1, of the Articles of War approved by Congress on 20 September 1776, which specified that the oath of enlistment read: "I _____ swear (or affirm as the case may be) to be trued to the United States of America, and to serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies opposers whatsoever; and to observe and obey the orders of the Continental Congress, and the orders of the Generals and officers set over me by them."






the orders of the Generals and officers set over me by them."



Now did you know that the highest position in the military is Commander and Chief?

Another term for Commander and Chief is also President of the United States

edit on 13-11-2012 by Grimpachi because: refrase



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi


Originally posted by SPECULUM
Texas does happen to have in their possession, the entire dismantled nuclear weapons arsenal. So they do actually have a bargaining chip


Keep dreaming on that. That stuff would be secured and moved a.s.a.p. with orders of shoot to kill while they are transporting part of 1st ID out of Fort Hood.




Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by caladonea
 


Well, they are now joined by people in 20 other states. This could catch on and blaze a trail of opposition to BO's centralized Nanny State. They already have their own Border Patrol and I bet the National Guard would join them.

There are lots of people who are not willing to become the United Soviet Socialist States of America.
This is why the BO admin had to put down as many militia groups as possible. It's also why he and his minions had to minimize the Tea Party opposition to his redistributionist Big Govt agenda.
edit on 13-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



Same thing keep dreaming. Even the National Guard took an oath which recognizes the POTUS as Commander and Chief. Texas is the only state that has the right to succeed from the Union so concentrate on what is in the realm of possibility. No soldier worth a damn is going to commit treason because of some disgruntled sore losers. Besides the majority of those who voted in the military voted for Obama. Do yourselves a favor and stick with what is remotely possible which is that Texas has the right to succeed from the union. I was thought that back in JR High when I lived in Texas it is one of the things we were proud of.


apparently, you've never heard of "the oath keepers.", and obviously you have little to no experience with the military.

fact: the military votes 70% republican

fact: the vast majority of military comes from the south.

do not take this # lightly.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by HootMcVie
 


Sure bud whatever. You run into all types on here.

I swear if ignorance was gold I would have hit the mother load on here.

I know the oath keepers is full of veterans and I like some of the things they do but can you show me where exactly the Oathkeepers tab is to placed on the BDUs or dress greens? Probably goes right next to the NRA tab
or the VFW sticker on my truck.

Thanks for playing.
edit on 13-11-2012 by Grimpachi because:




posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Secesh
 


...

Can you please find the part of the constitution it states a fringe group that is upset with who was elected and are acting like children that want to leave home are to be considered the government which I am supposed to jump sides and defend.

If you don’t like the way the government is being run then use the legal means to change it. Here is a thought try getting the millions of people who didn’t vote this election that sent a clear message to the government that they are happy with the status Quo and are fine with others choosing their leaders for them to get off the couch next time and vote if they are not happy with how things turned out otherwise please do not assume you speak for the 300 plus million citizens of the United States of America. ...


You are not supposed to defend the government at all, but the constitution.

As for the legal means to change it, since the United States violated the constitution by enacting the 17th amendment and direct election of U.S. senators. The STATES no longer have a republican form of government as guaranteed under Article 4 Section 4. So there is the legal hook to get out of the 'union.'



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Secesh


As for the legal means to change it, since the United States violated the constitution by enacting the 17th amendment and direct election of U.S. senators. The STATES no longer have a republican form of government as guaranteed under Article 4 Section 4. So there is the legal hook to get out of the 'union.'


Dude, you can't "violate the constitution" by amending it. That's the WHOLE damn purpose of ammending it, to change it.
They could remove the bill of rights if they so desired, and if it went through the proper procedure, it would be PERFECTLY constitutional.
edit on 13-11-2012 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I was looking over the petitions and when I clicked on the one for California it said that "You have already signed this petition."

I did not.

It's only the California one, all others say that I'm not logged in. Shady....

I think if they want, all the red states can secede and have Romney be their President.

I would be OK with that. They however, would suffer greatly methinks.

This is ridiculous, and very foolish. Face it without the blue states to support them the reds wouldn't be half of what they are now, aside from Texas the reds are a drag on the union.

You wana go? Peace out, Best of Luck!



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


You can't amend a contract without addressing all parts of the contract that are affected by it, to do so would make the contract and/or the amendment invalid.
edit on 13-11-2012 by Secesh because: clarity



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Secesh
reply to post by Ghost375
 


You can't amend a contract without addressing all parts of the contract that are affected by it, to do so would make the contract and/or the amendment invalid.
edit on 13-11-2012 by Secesh because: clarity


The second amendment. "The right of the People ... shall not be infringed." Right?

Beginning shortly after the Civil War and up until now congress has altered the terms of the second amendment over 20,000 times with various gun control laws. Does that make the whole second amendment invalid? Well yeah, it probably does in their eyes because WE, as individuals, are not now and have never been parties to that contract.



posted on Nov, 13 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
I don't think the USA govt is going to let Texas leave and give up being the 2nd largest country in the world. Texas makes too much money for us to just let them walk away.





top topics
 
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join