Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights

27 Responses to “Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights”

1. Greg Farber on July 22nd, 2009 9:07 pm

   You see Tom this 10th Amendment issue is moot because the states are not defending their sovereignty at all, this entire event is a fabrication and nothing more, just a damn distraction to keep people from seeing the real workings in play, the global agenda and NWO..If we had honest legislators really seeking 10th amendment status, or a return to 10th amendment status then they would unload both barrels so to speak and pound the FEDs with the lies of the 14th Fraud, 16th Fraud, and Especially the 17th fraud..I’ve seen those archives Tom and I am telling you their not legal..The 17th gave congress-supposedly-the power to make treatise’s and create the FBI, IRS, BATF, The Salt and Panama Canal treaties, The United Nations Treaties, the CIA, dammit none of those agencies exist legally..None of those U.S. Senators over the last 94 years were legally voted into office, No U.S. Supreme Court Justices have been lawfully approved, None of their judicial acts have any validity…In and honest court of law of honest men, I could win this case hands down.. At the bottom of the reply is a link to what Devvy Kidd wrote concerning this info..This reality..The people are being pacified and nothing more.. Their screwing us royal, The feds have infiltrated the state legislatures, so has the CIA..Think man, those fifty states are supposed to be sovereign nations, what does the CIA specialize in.. infiltration of sovereign nations

   Esquires
   http://www.supremelaw.org/library/esquires.html
   by

   John E. Trumane

   As the story goes, there is a painting somewhere in the vast hallways of the Smithsonian museum which shows British soldiers boarding a sailing ship, muskets in hand. The ship is in an American port, and the soldiers are returning home after the War of 1812.

   There is a problem with this picture which may not be immediately apparent to the casual viewer. Our history books tell us that the British lost that war. History should also tell us that the winners in a war usually (but not always) take the guns away from the other side. So, why were these British soldiers boarding their warship, guns in hand?

   The answer to that question was provided to me by a common law judge in the California Republic. He had recently presided over a jury trial in which “titles of nobility” were the issue. The jury was presented with evidence and arguments that the “real” 13th Amendment did not ban slavery after the Civil War. That amendment was really the 14th Amendment.

   The “real” 13th Amendment was ratified by three-fourths of the Union states before the War of 1812. It placed into the U.S. Constitution a specific ban against titles of nobility, and defined a penalty for those who accepted such titles. That penalty was a loss of citizenship and a loss of eligibility for public office.

   My friend, the common law judge, explained to me that the jury had reached a unanimous verdict that the ban on titles of nobility had, indeed, been duly ratified as a lawful amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America. By banning titles of nobility and defining the penalty for using them, the original 13th Amendment was specifically intended to keep bar members out of public offices throughout America.

   You may recall that the qualifications for serving in the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives all have one thing in common: the would-be official must be a “Citizen of the United States.” Since the 14th (15th?) amendment did not appear until 1868, the term “United States” in these provisions means “States United,” and “Citizen of the United States” means “Citizen of one of the States United.”

   The U.S. Constitution thus contains a specific prohibition against titles of nobility, and a specific penalty for their use, i.e., the loss of citizenship and disability from holding public office. The loss of citizenship means that a Person who was born or naturalized a Citizen would lose that status and thereby become an “alien” with respect to the United States of America. Since the qualifications for serving in federal elective offices all require citizenship, an “alien” is, by definition, disqualified from eligibility for these offices (President, Senator, and Representative).

   In my conversation with the common law judge from California, we next considered if it was possible, under the original 13th Amendment, to restore citizenship by renouncing or rescinding a title of nobility. A close examination of the amendment’s language did not reveal any such provision. In matters of statutory construction (determining the real meaning of statutes), there is a principle that the specific mention of one thing is the specific exclusion of all things that are not mentioned. In Latin, expressio unius est exclusio alterius. In other words, what was omitted was intended to be omitted.

   The original 13th Amendment does not contain any provisions for restoring citizenship by renouncing or rescinding a title of nobility. Evidently, if the framers of that amendment had wanted citizenship to be restored to those who renounced their titles (e.g. Esquire), then the amendment would have contained language to make that possible. The absence of such language can be used to prove, under the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, that it is not possible to restore one’s citizenship after accepting a title of nobility.

   Now, the original 13th Amendment raises some very interesting questions of law, or Law, as the case may be. If a law school graduate should join the Bar in the state of his domicile, he would join the elite company of “Esquires.” In the United States of America, this is the title commonly appended after the name of an attorney (see Black’s Law Dictionary, fifth edition). If we are correct in our construction of the original 13th Amendment, then it is correct to say that “Once an Esquire, always an Esquire.”

   If our up-and-coming Esquire should develop a successful practice, it could (and often does) happen that s/he might consider running for federal office, let’s say the House of Representatives. Would s/he be eligible for that office? The Answer is NO, because the title of Esquire makes it impossible for that person ever to be eligible for the offices of President, Senator, or Representative. As a resident alien, that person is definitely NOT eligible for election to those offices, nor is that person eligible for naturalization. So, there is no chance that such a person could ever hold such an office, under the supreme Law of the Land.

   Let’s take this argument one step further. Assume, for the moment, that John Q. Esquire does get elected to the House of Representatives, by some quirk of circumstances (or intentional cover-up). Would Mr. Esquire be a lawful occupant of that office? Answer: NO. Would Mr. Esquire be capable of exercising the powers and privileges of that office? Answer: NO. Would Mr. Esquire be qualified to vote on the matters which came before that august body? Answer: NO. If Mr. Esquire did attempt to cast a vote on any of the matters which came before the House of Representatives, his vote would be null and void ab initio (from the outset). In other words, his vote would not be a vote at all, would it?

   How many Esquires does it take to nullify an act of Congress? One? Two? Fifty-one percent? How many Esquires are presently seated in Congress? Is it greater than fifty-one percent? Is it greater than a quorum? Or does it really take only one Esquire to spoil the whole barrel of apples? Maybe we should reconvene that California common law jury and put this question to them as well, because we now appear to have a really big problem on our hands.

   If the Senate and House of Representatives ever consisted of members who were disqualified from serving there by reason of their titles of nobility, then every single act of those bodies was completely null and void from the beginning. As an Illinois State Court once ruled, “it never became a law and was as much a nullity as if it had been the act or declaration of an unauthorized assemblage of individuals.” (Ryan v. Lynch, 68 Ill. 160) A House or Senate consisting of Esquires for members is an unauthorized assemblage of individuals, and ALL their legislation is completely null and void.

   Now ask yourself this question: Since the War of 1812, the approximate time at which the original 13th Amendment surely became Law, how many sessions of the House or Senate were conducted by Members who had previously accepted titles of nobility? If your answer is one hundred percent, then you are probably right.

   The shocking fact is this: Every session of the House and Senate since 1812 has consisted of members who were attorneys with the title of Esquire conveniently appended to the end of their names. This means that every session of the House and Senate since 1812 has attempted to pass legislation which was null and void from its inception. Do you have any favorite laws which come to mind?

   How about the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917? There is a magnificent collection of research by Dr. Eugene Schroder which shows how our vaulted Congress amended this Act in 1933 in order to define all Americans as enemies of the United States government. Were these acts of Congress valid, if its members were Esquires at the time of its passage? Answer: NO.

   How about the Federal Reserve Act of 1913? This Act of Congress created our vaulted Federal Reserve system, and the debt money system to which we are all shackled for life (it seems). Was this act of Congress valid, if its members were Esquires at the time of its passage? Answer: NO.

   How about the 16th amendment proposal? This Act of Congress sent the 16th Amendment out to the states for ratification in 1911. Another magnificent collection of research by Bill Benson and Red Beckman shows how the 48 states completely botched the ratification of that proposal. Now ask yourself the obvious question: Was Congress authorized to issue that proposal in the first instance, if its members were Esquires at the time of its passage? Answer: NO.

   How about the 17th Amendment proposal? This Act of Congress sent the 17th Amendment out to the states for ratification at the same time as the 16th Amendment proposal. It purported to convert the election of U.S. Senators to a popular vote. Under the “old” procedure, Senators were elected by the state legislatures (resulting in much lower campaign costs). Was the Congress authorized to issue that proposal in the first instance, if its members were Esquires at the time of its passage? Answer: NO.

   If the 17th Amendment was never properly ratified, then we surely have not had a lawfully convened U.S. Senate at least since 1917. This, then, means that all the treaties which were allegedly approved by the U.S. Senate since then are also null and void. What about GATT? NAFTA? the Genocide Treaty? the United Nations? Round and round we go; where it stops, nobody knows? On the contrary, we stop in 1812, the year of our second war with England. We have not had a lawfully convened Congress at least since the year 1812.

   Now, what about those British soldiers who were boarding their warship, guns in hand, at the end of that war? Is it possible that they were not really the vanquished, but the victors? Didn’t they just finish burning the Library of Congress? Wasn’t that where evidence of the original 13th Amendment had been kept, under the watchful eyes of our government record custodians who fled for their lives?

   What those soldiers didn’t know was that the original 13th Amendment had “leaked” out to other states, whose record custodians did not suffer the loss of their libraries. When their official versions of the U.S. Constitution show a 13th amendment which bans titles of nobility, and those very same versions do NOT show any ban against slavery (which didn’t pass until after the Civil War), you begin to suspect that something very strange is going on here.

   There has not been a single act of Congress since 1812 which has been properly enacted into law. Not a single one! So, you can throw out your Internal Revenue Code, and along with it all of your 50 United States Codes, and your Federal Reserve Act, and your Trading with the Enemy Act, and your treaties, and your federal regulations, and your resolutions and your Joint Interdepartmental delegations of authority, because they had no authority under the real Constitution for the United States of America. NONE!

   http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=28776

2. The Survivalist Forum » Blog Archive » Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights on July 24th, 2009 1:52 pm

   [...] Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights [...]

3. Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights | Republic Broadcasting Network on July 24th, 2009 2:34 pm

   [...] Online Store var addthis_pub=”otero1″; Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights (Black Bear Blog) [...]

4. tawny on July 24th, 2009 3:10 pm

   One issue/question that is very important, and relevant to this and most govt. power/usurpation issues, is this — IS THE COUNTRY NOW IN AN OFFICIALLY DECLARED “STATE OF EMERGENCY”?

   I have read and been told that yes, it is, AT LEAST since 9/11/01.

   If so, THIS TOTALLY CHANGES THE JURISDICTION (AND THE ‘LAW’), GUYS!

   Under an emergency, CIVIL LAW IS SUSPENDED, SET ASIDE, and the government is run AS A MILITARY DICTATORSHIP UNDER THE PRESIDENT AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF ALL THE FORCES IN THE FIELD.

   This means THE CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN SET ASIDE, IS NOT NOW OPERATIVE/IN EFFECT: DOES NOT APPLY.

   Under these circs, the pres. has the right to make law by uttering it or by ‘edict’, essentially – just like a monarch.

   Most of us, including most of those holding public office, do not know this, or do not understanding the above effects, as the info is deemed to have the potential to DISTURB THE PUBLIC PEACE and therefore is doled out on a NEED TO KNOW basis.

5. Tom Remington on July 24th, 2009 3:42 pm

   Please provide links/facts that support the claim that in an emergency we no longer live under the guidance of the U.S. Constitution.

6. Greg Farber on July 24th, 2009 3:50 pm

   Yep you’re right Tawny, but it has been used several times and actually covers different reasons, Clinton actually reinstated Trumans- This Constitutional debate is just a pacifier to pacify the mass sheople and keep em watching sports or other dumbya down episodes of apathy…Makes me sick to my stomach, you raise the truth up for em to see and they duck for cover..

   March 9, 1933 during the run on gold. National Emergencies have since been re-declared by President Truman on December 12, 1950 and by Nixon in March of 1970 and again in August of 1971. Declaring a State of Emergency allows for the President of the United States of America to have provisions in Federal Law that give him power with out constitutional process. Some 75 years, later, America remains under A State of National Emergency as no one has rescinded them after passage. A 1973 official report –Senate Report 93-549- admits that the Emergency Powers given to President Franklin D. Roosevelt under the pretense of the National Emergency of 1933 have remained in force and that the normal function of the Federal government has been suspended. On October 29, 2003, President Bush, Sr. extended the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) that continued from Presidnet Clinton’s term for another year in Executive Order 12938, Clinton did it as well himself, and our criminal buddy G.W. Bush did it to…

   I’ve got all this stuff around here someplace..Its true..

7. Greg Farber on July 24th, 2009 4:03 pm

   The problem is as I show above this ACT of emergency powers is a fraud.. Their subverting the Supreme Law of the Land via that 17th and of course this Emergency War Powers Act…Their main problem is the ownership of property and guns are property, and when they decided to head down this path they knew it then and they know it today, they can not boldly admit this info, even though we have a population which is living duped, we still have a stand off…The cost to be bold for those Reds in their own estimations will be to high..Thus all this bantering about attempting to use the “rules of law’ to remove our arms from us versus direct confiscation attempts.. Just look to how Hitler did it, Stalin, Mao, and other insane tyrants of the 20th century, causing the willing surrender of private arms and then followed by 170 million genocided subjects.. I can prove all this, But why bother..

8. Greg Farber on July 24th, 2009 5:03 pm

   It starts out with paper work, and ends up being blood..
   It’s frightening to read all the ill-conceived rantings from anti gun people who blindly would subject others to the very possibility of history rhyming once again.. Through history time and time again ruthless dictators enforced strict gun control laws right before mass exterminations and genocide. The following videos made by the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms (jpfodotorg) tell the stories you probably have not seen or heard. Please watch all the videos very informative. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5xK4j2n0WI&feature=related Please gamble with your own life all you want.

   Their trying to do it again, here, there is no other reason for all the bantering over guns and the Second Amendment…These Congress people want kill us..It’s that simple..

9. Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights : Black Bear Blog « Bertual Reality on July 24th, 2009 11:22 pm

   [...] via Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights : Black Bear B…. [...]

10. Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights | The Ruthless Truth blog on July 25th, 2009 1:17 pm

    [...] Tom Remington Black Bear Blog July 24, 2009 [...]

11. Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights - Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum on July 25th, 2009 3:13 pm

    [...] Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights : Black Bear Bl… July 22, 2009 The several states are lining up to reclaim their sovereignty and telling the [...]

12. Ken Creamer on July 25th, 2009 3:17 pm

    State Sovereignty Alert

    First, the notion that federal law trumps state law is nonsense! Knowing the English language and a reading of the Constitution at Section IV, Clause 2, the famous supremacy clause, quickly dispels any idea that said clause has anything to do with the supremacy of the United States (the federal government. Said Clause states that “THE CONSTITUTION, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance [the process of doing something or carrying it out in the way that is expected or required] thereof; …., shall be the supreme Law of the land; … “ The first thing to recognize is that the “The Constitution” is the subject of the Clause/sentence and is therefore the thing that is being define as superior- NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!! Second, only those Laws of the United States (federal government) made under the legitimate delegated powers granted by the Constitution (in Pursuance) become valid Laws of the United States and those Laws become the supreme Laws of the Land within their legitimate jurisdiction as granted by the Constitution, and none other. For example, valid federal laws are all laws passed by congress which have applicability only in federal territory as granted by Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 and/or Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2. Consequently, all Judges sitting in any one of the 50 Union States may not take cognizance of any Union State Law which is attempting to be enforced or executed within the jurisdiction of the United States (federal territory) because within federal territory federal Law is the Supreme Law of the Land. Likewise, any Union State Law, via the 10th Amendment, being enforced or executed in the respective Union State is the supreme Law of the Land in that Union State because it is pursuant to “all powers reserved to the States respectively, or to the People.” To me, Law of the Land refers to the Land in which the relative Laws constitutionally apply.
    To add credibility to what is written above and to develop an accurate understanding the notion of Union State Sovereignty, go to pooorclydesalmanac.info and read the Article titled “Dual Sovereignty.” After that, read the Article “Gun Control” and you’ll run into and exercise to test your comprehension of the above dissertation and the first principle issue of ”Dual Sovereignty “ as laid out in the Article.
    Now, having said all that and provided some enlightenment relative to the first principle issue of Union State Sovereignty, there is however a very very serious problem that needs to be addressed before any Union State can reclaim its legitimate Constitutional protected Sovereignty notwithstanding the 10th Amendment. I am absolutely totally convinced that the solution to this very very serious problem is the single most important issue before us today and stands to be the solution to ALL of our current political and financial problems which can be solved by the one simple solution of having all 50 Union States regain their sovereignty. The first thing that must happen is that each Union State MUST ACT LIKE A SOVEREIGN! Asking the federal government (or any other sovereign) to restore a Union State’s sovereignty is like pushing on a rope or asking Russia to restore it for us. (Sound Stupid – Read the article Dual Sovereignty at poorclydesalmanac.info again). The single and absolute cause of the Union State’s lose of sovereignty is that they are acting as an instrumentality of (subservient to) the federal government (the United States), which they most certainly are not, by paying to and collecting for a federal tax (found under Chapter 21 of the IRC), better known as the FICA tax. The most interesting part of this whole issue is that when one reads and/or researches the code associated with Chapter 21, one finds that Congress, in the first placed, didn’t attempt to levy the tax on either the Union States or the Union State Citizens simply because it couldn’t. At some point in time the Union States actors voluntarily started irresponsibly paying and collecting the FICA tax thereby causing the Union State, for whom they were elected to protect, to become subservient to the United States (the federal government) and, perhaps more importantly provided federal agents with plausible deniability for attempting to enforce federal laws within the territory of the Union States. Instrumentalities lie within federal territory over which Congress was given exclusive legislative authory
    This is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FACING US TODAY, and I have been unable to generate even a murmur among the grass roots folks. All I get is a mass of “deer in the headlights.” I have a work in progress research paper titled “The Reformation of Union State Sovereignty,” which I will make available to anyone who has the necessary contacts to attract the ears of any of the pundits within the quest for Liberty movement, such as Trevor Lyman, Alex Jones, Jessie Ventura, and the like or any Union State elected official interested in having their Union State regain its sovereignty. Everyone in our Republic’s current population has been indoctrinated into believing that the federal government is our central government and that the Union States are instrumentalities thereto, ala the rest of the worlds “free” societies. Our Founders and other past legal scholars are crying from their grave for us to ditch our indoctrination and educate ourselves to the true principles of Liberty and our own inherited political system designed to protect them. The following is a quote from the Supreme Court exemplifying the point.
    Dual sovereignty is a defining feature of our Nation’s constitutional blueprint. See Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U. S. 452, 457 (1991). States, upon ratification of the Constitution, did not consent to become mere appendages of the Federal Government. Rather, they entered the Union “with their sovereignty intact.” Blatchford v. Native Village of Noatak, 501 U. S. 775, 779 (1991). An integral component of that “residuary and inviolable sovereignty,” Federal Marine Commission (FMC) v. South Carolina State Ports Authority, 535 U.S. 743 (2002).
    When the Union States regain and enforce their own sovereignty, the federal income tax AND the State income tax disappear from Union State territories, and all the Union State’s and their instrumentalities can reduce their annual budgets by 20% or more and the Citizens thereof will have an increase in their disposable revenue to bring about an atmosphere of prosperity reversing the current economic landscape of a hopeless depression with its trillions of dollars of debt created out of thin air. At common law, if there is no pro quid pro of substance to establish a debt, there is no debt, only fraud.
    FREEDOM is the absence of detention; LIBERTY is the absence of control!
    Link to Poor Clyde’s Almanac at http://www.poorclydesalmanac.info

13. Greg Farber on July 25th, 2009 4:54 pm

    Great Shot Ken…We need state governments to stop acting as serfs to the feds, and that European bank and we need the people to recognize their dual citizen status as well- Sovereign De-Jure People – OR – European Bankers suffrage slave disguised as a tax..Good luck convincing people so dumbed down via several generations now, and helping themselves to foods with approved psychotropic estrogens and other chemicals in them which make them a bunch of passive sheople more manageable by the Federal flock tender..Unfortunately their coming round a bit late..REX84 is in the waiting in the wings..

    FEDERAL REGIONALISM
    The Abolishment of Local Government

    Below is the blueprint for the abolishment of state and county government by the institution of “Regionalism.”

    Centralization of power must be stopped because centralized power in the federal government, and the resulting loss of States’ rights, is the one thing necessary for the success of a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.

    REGIONAL GOVERNMENT

    UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION ARTICLE IV, SECTION 3, PARAGRAPH 1:

    “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of two or more States.; or parts of States without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as the Congress.”

    President Nixon, on March 27, 1969, through the Government Reorganization Act divided the United States into 10 Regions. To further implement this Regional Governance over the U.S.A., President Nixon signed Executive Order 11647 and entered it in the Federal Register February 12, 1972. (Vol .37, No.30) Through the authority vested in him as President of the United States, President Nixon established a Federal Regional Council for each of the 10 standard regions. It stated that, the President shall designate one member of each Council as Chairman of the Council and such Chairman shall serve at the pleasure of the President. The fact that State borders have been destroyed to create 10 REGIONS instead of 50 Union States is something your government doesn’t want you to know.

    There is no constitutional jurisdiction for the federal government to legislate for a municipal government in a Union State. The usurpation of state jurisdiction can only be achieved by conspiracy and fraud on the part of our duly elected public servants. It stands to reason that if there is no constitutional jurisdiction for the federal government to legislate for a municipal government in a Union state, there is also no jurisdiction for a federal bureaucracy to legislate for a municipal government in a Union state. As example: the EPA, the DEA, the IRS and the FBI, etc., have no Constitutional authority to legislate in a Union State. These are agencies of the Federal government, having jurisdiction only on federal territory. This is something your government doesn’t want you to know.

    Demeaning the authority of elected officials and replacement of these officials by appointed Federal “administrators” is a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to representative government posed by Federal Regional Government. Outlawed by the Supreme Court decision of January 13, 1982 (Case #80-1350, “Community Communications Co, Inc v City of Boulder, CO) the ten regional capitols were dismantled by President Reagan’s Executive Order #12407 on February 22, 1983.

    However, grant making agencies of the ten Federal Regions remain in place assuring continuity of control over all Americans and their elected representatives by the central government.

    Federal grants to state government are the fuel which make the Regional engines “go.” The individual Union States are blackmailed, through the withholding of federal funds, if federal legislation is not enacted into State law, thereby opening the door to a power base for the silent revolution of Federal Regionalism.

    There is a clear pattern of uniformity in all laws passed. On the state level, all fifty legislatures appear to become simultaneously concerned about solving a particular problem in an identical fashion. On the local level, the same thing happens in thousands of City Halls and County Seats. This strange coincidence is never publicized by the press, thereby it is rarely questioned by the public. Unknown to most of the public, all our laws are written by the Uniform Commission on State Law, also known as the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (ACIR)

    FATAL STEPS

    PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATIONS 2039 and 2040 March 6, 1933, March 9, 1933
    Declaration of National Emergency and Declaration of War against the American People by the Government of the United States.

    WAR POWERS ACT . . . March 9, 1933

    TITLE 12 USC. Section 95(a) and 95(b)
    This Act states that “During time of war or during any period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may, through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise investigate, regulate, prohibit, under such rules and regulationas as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between or payments by banking institutions as drfined by the President and export, hoarding, melting, or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currancy, by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

    FEDERAL REGISTER ACT . . . July 26, 1935
    The Federal Register Act enabled the president to create unlimited bureaucracies and empower them with the force of law. All that was needed to implement bureaucratic regulations into law was to enter or publish those regulations in the Federal Register, by-passing all constitutional oversight.

    THE BUCK ACT . . . October 9, 1940
    Congress in 1940 passed the “Buck Act” 4 U.S.C.S. 104-113. By clever legal maneuvers from 1935 to 1940, the feds entirely circumvented the U.S. Constitution. In Section 110(e), this Act allowed any department of the federal government to create a “Federal Area” for imposition of the Public Salary Tax Act of 1939, the imposition of this tax is at 4 U.S.C.S. section 111, and the rest of the taxing law is in Title 26, The Internal Revenue Code. The Social Security Board had already created an overlay of a “Federal Area.”

    As a result, the Federal Government created Federal “States” which are exactly like the Sovereign States, occupy the same territory and boundaries, but whose names are capitalized versions of the Sovereign States. (Remember that Proper Names and Proper Nouns in the English language have only the first letter Capitalized.) For example, the Federal “State” of ILLINOIS is overlaid upon the Sovereign State of Illinois. Further, it is designated by the Federal abbreviation of “IL”, instead of the Sovereign State abbreviation of “Ill.” So too is Arizona designated “AZ” instead of the lawful abbreviation of “Ariz.”, “CA” instead of “Calif.”, etc. If you use a two-letter CAPITALIZED abbreviation, you are declaring that the location is under the jurisdiction of the “federal” government instead of the powers of the “Sovereign” state.

    As a result of creating these “shadow” States, the Federal government assumes that every area is a “Federal Area,” and that the Citizens therein are “Federal” citizens.

    PUBLIC LAW 79-404 entitled “Administrative Procedures Act of 1946.”
    This act set up the procedure yielding lawmaking authority to agencies in the executive sector of government (federal bureaucracies), and provided that administrative rules and regulations be printed in the Federal Register giving these regulations the force of law.

    TITLE 3 USC Section 301, October 31, 1951: General authorization to delegate functions; publication of delegations.
    This law authorized the President of the United States to designate and empower the head of any department or agency in the executive branch, or any official thereof who is required to be appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform without approval, ratification, or other action by the President (1) any function which is vested in the President by law, or (2) any function which such officer is required or authorized by law to perform only with or subject to the approval, ratification, or other action of the President:
    Provided, That nothing contained in the act relieved the President of his responsibility in office for the acts of any such head or other official designated by him to perform such functions. Such designation and authorization would be in writing, and published in the Federal Register.

    PUBLIC LAW 86-380 and its amendment 89-733, 1959 under the Eisenhower Administration, created the Advisory Council On Intergovernmental Relations. (ACIR) This commission consists of 26 individuals, of which 14 are appointees representing groups such as the Council of State Governments, The League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, and the Governors Conference . . . all proponents and strong lobbyists for Federal grant programs that are subordinating local governments to Regional governing bodies.

    PUBLIC LAW 89-136 entitled “Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965″.
    This act is the basis for the manner in which the 10 Federal regions are to be governed by a “Multi-State Regional Commission”. It also states that the Secretary of Commerce has the power to “acquire in any lawful manner, any property (real or personal) whenever deemed necessary.”

    PUBLIC LAW 89-754. The Model Cities Act of 1966.
    Section 204 of this act requires that a broad spectra of public facilities type projects which seek federal assistance must be brought under the aegis of area wide Regional comprehensive planning agencies, the clearing house system.

    PUBLIC LAW 90-577 1968, 90th Congress, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION ACT

    “To achieve the fullest cooperation and coordination of activities among the levels of government . . . to establish coordinated intergovernmental policy and administration . . . to provide for the acquisition, use, and disposition of land within urban areas by Federal agencies.”

    PUBLIC LAW 90-577 destroyed the separation of powers which is the principle of the U.S. Constitution. By its Title IV the U.S. Congress purported to yield legislative power to the president. He, in turn, allegedly transferred that law making power to his appointed directors in the grant making agencies of the Federal Regions per section 403 of the Bill. Out of that arrangement has grown the A-95 regional clearing house review system, designed by the Office of Management and Budget. The resulting Federal Region-Sub State control system straps regional governance (control by regulation) as a way of life over all America.

    The separation of powers principle of the U.S. Constitution is destroyed by Title IV of this Regional Law in which Congress yields Legislative Power to the U.S. President. Through this act, the President was empowered to yield that lawmaking power to his appointees. (Section 403) From that arrangement has grown the controversial A-95 REGIONAL CLEARING HOUSE review system designed by the executive OMB (Office of Budget and Management). This system binds Regionalism over all of America by non-laws (administrative rules and regulations) which are not backed by LAW.

    Congress thus legislated a system of government that is not permitted by our U.S. Constitution.

    March 27, 1969, President Richard M. Nixon announced that he had divided the United States into eight (subsequently ten) Federal Regions. The President, by his act, set in motion a series of events which, unless reversed will dissolve sovereign state governments, disenfranchise the electorate, and merge the American pioneer spirit in an amorphous “world citizenship”. The American people have been moved into the orbit of a financial/industrial cabal who control their corporate world state through the United Nations, the U.S. Congress, and other front organizations.

    The fatal steps which transformed the Republic into a dictatorship of the financial elite are set out in the following Congressional statutes, executive orders, and proclamations which trace a seditious conspiracy of interlocking subversion in government departments during the period October 16, 1968 to 20 October, 1972.

    27 March, 1969
    STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ON RESTRUCTURING OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE SYSTEMS, The White House

    Quoting the Reorganization Act, signed the same day, as his authority, President Nixon divided the United States into eight (later ten) Federal Regions or provinces, each with a new provincial capitol. Coordination and control of the ten Federal Regions would be administered from Washington. Formation of such “super states” is, of course, a violation of paragraph 1, section 3, Article IV, United States Constitution.

    Objective: To transfer political power from the respective sovereign State government to appointed Federal agencies, whose controllers are the directors of the corporate world state.

    30 October, 1969
    EXECUTIVE ORDER #11490, “Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to Federal Departments and Agencies,”. . . The Federal Register

    E.O. 11490 consolidated executive orders of previous administrations into one omnibus directive, and provided for implementation of its powers “by an order or directive issued by the President in any national emergency type of situation.”

    E.O. 11490 authorizes the Office of Emergency Planning to put all controls into effect “in times of economic or financial crisis.”

    Takeover by government agencies includes: communications media; all electrical power, gas, petroleum fuels, and minerals; food resources and farms; all modes of transportation and control of highways, seaports, etc.; health, education, and welfare functions; airports and aircraft.

    Provision is also made for the mobilization of civilians into work brigades under government supervision. The order directs the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons; permits the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, and grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in E.O. 11490, and to operate penal and correctional institutions.

    29 December, 1970
    PUBLIC LAW 91-596 — OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OF 1970

    PUBLIC LAW 91-596 known as the “Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970″ was passed. This Act was necessary in order to gain control of private property “usage”. The Act specifically limited itself to private businesses and excluded State, County, Municipal, School District, and Conservation District governing bodies.

    It set forth that its enabling legislation must provide that the above State government and its political subdivisions must also abide by the standards set forth in the Federal Act.

    15 August, 1971 EXECUTIVE ORDER 311615, “Providing for Stabilization of Prices, Rents, Wages, and Salaries,” The Federal Register

    E.O. 11615 designated the Chairman, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System as the director of a Cost of Living Council, with authority to request the Department of Justice to bring actions for injunctions “whenever it appears to the Council that any person has engaged, is engaged, or is about to engage in any acts or practices constituting a violation of any regulation or order issued pursuant to this Order.” (See EO 11490).

    The Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board thus became czar over prices, rents, wages, and salaries, in addition to his control over money, interest rates, and the stock market, granted under the provisions of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

    15 August, 1971
    PROCLAMATION #4074, “Imposition of Supplemental Duty for Balance of Payments Purposes,” The President.

    The principal objective of Proclamation 4074 was to “declare a national emergency” and so establish stand-by authority to implement any or all of the of the provisions of Executive Order #11490 at such time as the American people had been conditioned to accept dictatorship. The people are now being brainwashed to accept, in fact demand, full government control over their lives and property.

    12 February, 1972
    EXECUTIVE ORDER #11647, “Federal Regional Councils”, The Federal Register

    E.O.#11647 established a Federal Regional Council for each of the ten standard Federal Regions” which Nixon effected by proclamation on March 27, 1969. The Office of Management and Budget was designed to be the control agency.

    By this order the ten provincial capitols were staffed by the directors of grant-making agencies: Department of Labor, Health, Education and Welfare, and Housing and Urban Development, the Secretarial Representatives of the Department of Transportation, and the directors of the regional offices of the Office of Economic Opportunity, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration.

    The President of the United States subsequently appointed a commissar for each Federal Region.

    18 October, 1972
    PUBLIC LAW 92-500 — FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972

    PUBLIC LAW 92-500, which is known as the “Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972″ was passed which set forth that States may assume pollution control enforcement on all businesses, land owners, and their equipment and land. This Act provides an effective “informer system” for citizens to squeal on their neighbors and/or employers. It also creates a body corporate to be known as the Environmental Financing Authority to have the power to acquire private property (real or personal) by whatever means and to also sell or lease said property. It also set forth that if the States desired to assume the enforcement duties of the federal government that it–the State–must enact enabling legislation which must be approved by the federal government.

    20 October, 1972
    PUBLIC LAW 95-512, 92nd Congress, H.R. 14370 — FEDERAL—STATE REVENUE SHARING

    “To . . . authorize Federal collection of State individual income taxes, and for other purposes.” The primary function of P.L. 92-512 is to provide that, “after January 1, 1974, if two or more States request it of the U.S. government, and at the option of the individual States, all State taxes may be collected and administered by the federal government.” (The decision is irreversible.) It further provides a “ceiling and floor” for State Income Taxes, and states that no State may thereafter alter its tax structure without first obtaining permission of the federal government. It further provides for the manner in which State and local “boundary changes, and government reorganization” could be handled.

    Under this Act, state and county governments will, in time, wither for lack of tax funds, representative government will die (although the trappings of a republican form of government may be retained to fool the people), and dictatorial control over people and property will be imposed upon once free Americans.

    A once free America….
    Is this the legacy you want to leave to your children?

14. Twitted by roadrun775 on July 25th, 2009 4:55 pm

    [...] This post was Twitted by roadrun775 [...]

15. Twitted by jtbdjp on July 25th, 2009 4:55 pm

    [...] This post was Twitted by jtbdjp [...]

16. Greg Farber on July 25th, 2009 5:39 pm

    It just leads us to the foundation for the 16th-17th Amendments which is the Red Communist 14th Amendment…And a few details of the War of 1812…Left out of course, this is all so huge..
    1.0 INTRODUCTION
    This treatise describes a conspiracy more evil than any other the [U]nited States of America have seen in their many years of existence. The Fourteenth Amendment is a fully orchestrated conspiracy in its most uniquely veiled form, now over 135 years old. The conspiracy is in plain sight and understood by no one who is not one of the “enlightened” or of the Holy Spirit.
    This discourse is birthed by Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Briefly, this section has to do with the public debt of the United States and slaves. Most readers in the “Freedom Movement” have probably read and heard stories and opinions on the Fourteenth Amendment. The dis/non-information on this amendment is so widespread and deeply ingrained that most people focus on Section 1; this section notwithstanding, the true evil lies in the other sections of the amendment that are truly unconscionable and wicked.
    Because this treatise is entitled The Red Amendment, it contemplates a dual reference to the Fourteenth Amendment concerning the word RED. The two things are:
    1. It was / is a vehicle for the implementation of Communism in America; 1 and,
    2. It was / is a vehicle to deliberately bring the United States into perpetual debt.

    The former is of design to achieve the latter. When these two factors are combined, it results in fundamental Involuntary Servitude.2 By the time you complete The Red Amendment, you will have no doubt in your mind that this is true. It is requested that you please keep an open mind, as Communism—or Marxism—is not what you think or you have been told it is.
    1.1 CRUX OF OUR DILEMMA
    Most Americans are aware that we had many problems with England during the birth of our unified nation.3 The two most notable problems were our War of Independence, and the War of 1812. Since we prevailed in these physical battles, covert measures taken by the money powers of Europe—i.e., the World Elite–also referred to herein as THEY—gained a veiled takeover of
    1 The Cold War (Russians) was just an orchestrated phase (bogeyman) to implement communism in America; moreover, the world. Due to our Constitution, America was the biggest challenge of the world cabalists.
    2 See book by Gerry Spence “Give me Liberty!” It goes over neo-slavery in fine detail. Recommended reading!
    3 As a matter of international law, the American Union–or federation or confederation–is not really a nation.
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 1 OF 187
    the several united states of America. This stepped destruction of the freedom of Americans has been achieved through stealthy financial terrorism.4 There are several orchestrated particulars that were required to accomplish this destruction: they will be outlined in this treatise.
    4 For more information on the New World Order, you should read the following: “Financial Terrorism” by John F. McManus; and “Global Tyranny… Step by Step” by William F. Jasper. Both Excellent! Available from: American Opinion Book Services; John Birch Society, PO Box 8040, Appleton, Wisconsin 54913 – Phone: 414/749-3783.
    5 Paganism. Read “Empower the People” by Tony Brown. It goes over this in fine detail. Recommended!
    6 The number (666) is meant “To have fullness of the works of man”. In other words: Ruled by man, not God.
    7 See the book: The New World Order Exposed, by Victor Thorn-ISBN 0-9701950-2-8 (http://69.28.73.17/)
    8 Chapter 178 of USC Title 28 – Professional and Amateur Sports Protection. A special chapter in the Judiciary is dedicated to sports. What is this all about? Protect the cabal with distractions with Bread and Circuses.
    Almost everyone has heard the expression “New World Order”. You must be aware that America is the New World, thus, it is ventured that the “Order” emits from America. This author assumes that most people have some knowledge of this subject, such that this treatise need not labor over the specifics of the “New World Order”; although it will be covered in minimal context, to prove the point of a covert takeover and its evil presence in America.5
    1.1.1 Illuminati / Masonry
    The takeover was/is done through secret societies (puppets), mainly the Masonic Orders. The upper echelons of these societies—the Illuminati—are the ones that are involved in the true conspiracy. The lower ranks of these Orders are just patsies: they are kept totally ignorant of fact and truth. Most believe they belong to a fine, charitable, social organization: some being Christian based. In truth however, the fact of the matter is the enlightened worship Lucifer.
    Because these people are into homage and symbolism, the presence of these Orders is openly displayed. Look at the back of a one-dollar “Federal Reserve Note” to see two such symbols:
    1. The pyramid with the eerie illuminated eye, and
    2. The Great Seal of the “United States”.

    Accordingly, Washington D.C. was laid out to be a giant clandestine Masonic playground, where many other symbolisms can be found. One of the most intriguing of these symbolisms is the Washington Monument. The Monument that you see is 555 feet tall. The sub-structure of the Monument is 20 percent of 555; or 111 feet. Add the two together and you get 666: the Mark of the Beast as mentioned in the Bible.6 Coincidental? Perhaps. . . but highly doubtful.
    This positions America as being Neo-Babylon: The New World Order, i.e. THE ORDER.7
    1.1.2 Patriotism Directed to Military
    To create this Babylonian New World Order, a power presence is required to be created. It is commonly known that the “United States” holds world dominance in power. This power had to be achieved by some simple mass means. Americans have been conditioned to patriotically support the United States Military Machine by taking sides in sporting events.8 This conditioning is thereupon directed to patriotism, which creates a subliminal righteousness to aggress against other sovereignties / nations. Do any of you recall similar methods used by Hitler?
    Below are the definitions of Patriot and Mercenary from American Heritage Dictionary:
    PATRIOT: One who loves, supports, and defends one’s country.
    MERCENARY: 1. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling. 2. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 2 OF 187
    9 e.g. “The Patriot” A movie that featured Mel Gibson as the patriot against the British in the Revolutionary War.
    10 Essays outlining the Constitution drafted by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay.
    11 Americans have been brainwashed that wars create a good economy. WHAT! It kills people and creates debt!
    12 In legal presence: “The People” are the State that translates to corporations controlled by the governing body at large, which eliminates PRIVATE enterprise. Moreover, corporations are controlled by the State; and generally, large ones govern the ruling policy of government. A simple formula is as follows: Corporations = State = Elite.
    13 Drafted in 1848 by Marx (Moses Mordecai Levi-a non-Christian Jew), financed by Engels – a European Elitist.
    In sense: A patriot is one that does not hire for monetary gain.9 In contraposition: How many Americans join the Service as a career? Has not the United States engaged in police actions recently, and over the past several decades? Is defending one’s country aggressing against another country or nation by reason of freeing them? Moreover, Article I of the U.S. Constitution states that Congress has the power to raise and support Armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years. However, since the Civil War the United States sustains a standing army. Why? As you will see while you are reading this treatise the United States is a foreign entity (see mercenary). For now it is asked: Is this your government?
    In light of these matters, it has been said “It takes money to make money.” In a parallel sense, to gain dominance for an American fascist state, the funding had to come from somewhere; that somewhere is from covert theft and slave labor which is procured by way of an instrumental tool: the Fourteenth Amendment. The amendment actually creates a Quiet War on Americans. The “Blueprint” used to create this dominance was—and is—entitled: COMMUNISM.
    1.2 BLUEPRINT FOR NEO-SLAVERY
    Alexander Hamilton stated the following in the Federalist Papers:10
    “. . .wars and rebellions are. . . the two most mortal diseases of society.”
    So, why are we continually involved in wars around the world? . . . Wars create tremendous debt! That is why! 11 This debt is contrived to enhance the wealth of the World Elite through loans, which are paid through a political doctrine designated as: Communism. This particular political doctrine formulates an economic slave force under the banner of “The State”.
    Communism is defined by Ballentine’s Law Dictionary as follows:
    1. COMMUNISM: In the pristine sense, is the ownership of the means of production by the community,12 each member of the community participating in production according to his ability and sharing in the products according to his need;
    2. In common usage of the present day, suggestive of the theories of Marx and Lenin and the politics and authoritarian rule.

    The above term has been expressed in many ways; some of them are: Democracy, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, etc. “THEY” keep altering the language to keep everyone off course and confused. However, all such language is tied to a secret cabal, which purviews through the work composed, by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels commonly entitled the “Communist Manifesto”.13 The purpose of this Blueprint is to enslave and control nations with perpetual debt while creating personal debt through materialism. Although it is believed to have been of a specific purpose to destroy Americans, its principles have been—and are being—applied throughout the world.
    1.2.1 Communist Manifesto
    The purported purpose of the Communist Manifesto is to overthrow the Middle Class, which has been—and remains—a thorn in the side of the World Elite in achieving world domination. After evaluating the tripe contained in the Manifesto, any intelligent man of God should gather that its main purpose is to put everything in the hands of the World Elite and enslave mankind.
    The corrupt dictum of the Manifesto includes some of the following:
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 3 OF 187
    14 To embellish on this, this author was at breakfast with a legal colleague one morning in which we had chance to talk to our waitress, who happened to be an immigrant from Europe. She told us she had taken extensive classes in upper education. She further stated: Our Constitution was praised in the classes she had taken overseas; however, the classes she has taken in America were pushing this Marxist tripe. This author thought to himself. . . What’s with this? Anyway, we were both dumbfounded with this statement of information.

    • Destruction of Belief in God (Religion)
    • Destruction of the Natural Family Unit
    • Elimination of Countries and Nations
    • Destruction and Erosion of Morality
    • Elimination of Private Property
    • Elimination of Eternal Truths
    • Elimination of Inheritance
    • Elimination of Freedoms
    • The Control of Commerce
    • State-Run Transportation
    • Education by the State
    • Central Bank System
    • Everyone Working
    • Labor Unions
    • Income Tax
    • Free Love
    • Confiscation of Property. . . from resistors of this great plan

    Do any of the above particulars have the stench of familiarity? Do you see the relevant parallels that have been accomplished in America as of the last century, particularly since 1933? It is asked: Do you pay Income Tax? Have you ridden on Amtrak? Do you believe that the “United States of America” is your country? Do you know about the central bank called the Federal Reserve? Does anyone you know pay inheritance tax? Do you not own property, but yet your child gets a public school education? And, were you taught the “Theory of Evolution” in school? Americans should strongly question why this rubbish is taught in public schools. Universities that profess Marxist tripe are classes such as Liberal Arts or Political Science. We should point out that the Elite generally run such Institutions and favor liberal minded people.14
    1.2.2 Controlled: Schools / Women / Debt / Religion
    It is quite interesting that the government is determined to control the public schools. Common sense dictates the question; “How can Neo-Slavery be implemented if people are not being lied to and/or their minds are not being controlled?” If you have noticed, women have been conditioned to be part of the general work force. How can “THEY” get a piece of them through Income Tax if they are home raising their children? Therefore, women must be working. To further the plot of this silent Neo-Slavery, get people hooked on materialism and overspending, which creates personal debt. Are you in debt? The media promotes free love and immorality; you then get the break-up of families. If you belong to a religious establishment in America, which undoubtedly has a “501c3 non profit status” from the Internal Revenue Service, chances are your beliefs are being covertly controlled through government laid “political speech”.
    The greatest tool used by the Elite are the people of the labor force. These people have been sucked into the plot of the Elite. They are told they are battling an enemy dubbed: Capitalists. These people are just being used as tools that are of a subversive design to harass the middle class owned businesses. This hindrance will ultimately bankrupt these businesses. The Elite thus get the employees and other ensuing gains with this subversive cabal.
    You must think outside of the “Marxist box” that has been built around you. Most people in America are working full time jobs, now middle-class husband and wife. People should not be burdened to the point where life is all work. Accordingly, this gives little time to spend with family and other pleasures of life. An immediate cause of this epidemic is over taxation, due to the system of Neo-Slavery conceived by the World Elite – COMMUNISM.
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 4 OF 187
    15 Compare to current definition in Black’s Law Dictionary—COUNTRY. The territory occupied by an independent nation or people, or the inhabitants of such territory. In the primary meaning “country” denotes the population, the nation, the state, or the government, having possession and dominion over a territory. A bit vague, is it not.
    16 No! The change of definition is not due to modernization. Further, it does get old hearing people say “Times have changed” or “The Constitution is old”. It is evident they have been programmed by Communist dicta.
    17 See Communist Manifesto, Plank 10 – Public School Education. Marxism needs to control minds.
    18 Legally, your state or country of birth is where your lawful (constitutional) allegiance is! See Title 8 USC § 1101(a)(21). The term “national” means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state. For further information on state nationalities, based on the Law of Nations, see 1984 U.S. government Style Manual, chapter 5.22/5.23.

    1.3 CONSTITUTIONAL UNION
    To set a relevant background for the premises—and to break through the Marxist lies that have been fed to you—some essential legal and historical information must be established.
    The United States government was/is not to interact or do business with peoples of the several republics. The strict limitations of the government of the Union can be found in Article I, Section 8, of the original (organic) Constitution. Furthermore, you should fully understand the premises of the Ninth and Tenth Articles in Amendment in the organic Constitution; these amendments were to protect the peoples (the several States) of America from the Union government.
    1.3.1 True Country and Nation of Americans
    Interestingly enough, most Americans are unaware that their true country and nation is not the United States of America. One’s country and nation is one of the following:
    1. Native state, which is a natural national domicile, or
    2. Chosen state, which is considered an acquired national domicile.

    Now—in actual evidence—the following pre-Civil War law definition supports this fact. Behold this uncommonly known legal truth as set forth by Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856:
    COUNTRY: By country is meant the state of which one is a member. Every man’s country is in general the state in which he happens to have been born.15
    Did you realize that your state is your true country and nation?16 Probably not. . . because you have been lied to. The truth is being subdued/hidden in Public Schools.17 Note that de jure state nationals, not United States citizens, are the sovereign power of their countries.
    Pursuant to disinformation, the Constitution does not give the several states a Democracy. The Constitution guarantees a republic government. Such a government can be evidenced in Article IV, section 4, of the Constitution. Rome became a so-called Democracy, what you live in now. The Roman Empire collapsed due to its people over indulging in sporting events, dictatorships, corruption, military aggression, sexual perversions, etc. Does this sound familiar to you?
    1.3.2 Local Control is Key to Happiness
    In 1762 Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote: “The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right,” In this particular writing he stated the following about the political rights of people:
    “…the political rights of people would be best guarded if they were kept very local, not broad.”
    The Republic political premise under the Constitution is based on the premise of local principles noted by Jean Jacques Rousseau. These principles are fundamentally noted as:
    1. The several states of America—which are American republics and/or nations, i.e. the collective are so entitled the people—are separated from each other.
    • All people of a particular state were citizens (nationals) of the particular state in which they lived (American national, e.g. Ohio national, Iowa national, etc.).18

    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 5 OF 187
    19 See the discourse by Gerald Brown entitled “Cooperative Federalism”. E-mail: jerbro@linkline.com
    20 Check into Land Patents. This is the full title under the original allodium principle.
    21 Although this principal sounds worthy, it is against Biblical principles and is feudal. This serves as prima facie evidence that this system under the Constitution was going to transfer debt to people of the states.

    2. The United States government is separate from peoples of the several republics.

    Furthermore, to continue this political curriculum, Alexander Hamilton set forth this in Federalist Paper number 9 in reference to the proposed government of the federation; it was the premise of the United States’ non-interference in the affairs of the several American republics:
    “As this government is composed of small republics, it enjoys the internal happiness of each.”
    Following the Republic political reasoning found in the Federalist Papers, the founding fathers fully outlined what a Republic Form of Government was to consist of in the Papers.
    Again, the Republican Form of Government is guaranteed to the states by the Union, i.e. via the federal government, in Article IV, Section 4, of the Constitution. Such form of government is clearly noted by the following statement by James Madison in Federalist Paper 10:
    “The two great points of difference between a Democracy and a Republic are:
    1. First, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest;
    2. Secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.”

    In other words: The several republics make up the federal government; many local controlled governments extending outward from the counties of each republic; not inward as it is now. Currently, money is taken from each republic, then is distributed amongst the several States as the federal government sees fit. The federal government uses such power as leverage against the States to dictate “ITS” policies to them. These measures destroy the fundamental purpose of the Ninth and Tenth Articles in Amendment, which protected the states.
    Moreover, a nation which does not contribute as much as another takes from one that is more productive, thus destroying the internal happiness of each republic as originally outlined by the founding fathers. The non-productive have no incentive to become more productive, and the productive have less incentive to remain productive to benefit its society.19
    1.3.3 Land Ownership and Suffrage
    To guarantee political control to peoples of America, state suffrage had originally come from the ownership of land.20 Each republic established its own dictates in regard. These premises were established in Federalist Paper 35 by Alexander Hamilton. See the logic behind his premise:
    “Nothing remains but the landed interest; and this, in a political view, and particularly in relation to taxes, I take to be perfectly united, from the wealthiest landlord down to the poorest tenant. No tax can be laid on land that will not affect the proprietor of millions of acres as well as the proprietor of a single acre. Every landholder will therefore have a common interest to keep the taxes on land as low as possible; and common interest may always be reckoned upon as the surest bond of sympathy.” . . .21
    Hamilton further stated in Federalist Paper 35:
    “It is said to be necessary, that all classes of citizens should have some of their own number in the representative body, in order that their feelings and interests may be the better understood and attended to. . . Will not the landholder know and feel whatever
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 6 OF 187
    22 Jean Jacques Rousseau stated in: The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right: “Under bad governments, this equality is only apparent and illusory: it serves only to keep the pauper in his poverty and the rich man in the position he has usurped. In fact, laws are always of use to those who possess and harmful to those who have nothing: from which it follows that the social state is advantageous to men only when all have something and none too much.” In other words, what Mr. Rousseau was saying is: Socialism (that is—a Socialist State) is of purpose to steal from “the people” to benefit the Elite under guise of the State. In parallel sense-Roman Senator Publius Cornelius Tacitus (50c-115c AD) stated: “The more corrupt the State, the more numerous the laws.”
    23 Whiners, such as Warren Beatty, who want back their adult baby-sitting government (socialism/FDR era) do not have a clue. What is now in place was the ultimate plan. Russia, China and Cuba were/are just bogeymen, and socialism was just a phase to get everyone suckered into Corporate Servitude (American Communism). Hence, some advice to socialists: Such people should research the legacy of FDR; they would find out you do not get something for nothing; we are still paying for FDR’s handouts! See “Bretton Woods Agreements Act”.

    will promote or insure the interest of landed property? And will he not, from his own interest in that species of property, be sufficiently prone to resist every attempt to prejudice or encumber it?. . . There is no part of the administration of government that requires extensive information and a thorough knowledge of the principles of political economy, so much as the business of taxation. The man who understands those principles best will be least likely to resort to oppressive expedients, or sacrifice any particular class of citizens to the procurement of revenue.”
    1.3.4 Socialism Promotes Irresponsibility
    The current bastardized government—instituted just after the so-called Civil War—is based on Socialism and/or Communism. Maybe you have heard the Marxist expression: “Pay Your Fair Share”. A common sense consensus of paying your fair share is not that of taking from “haves” and “contributors” and giving it to “have nots” and “non-contributors”, hence, raising taxes for welfare to maintain shiftless people who care not to truly contribute to the peoples of a specific American republic. This tacit political formula is simply a plot to destroy—or bring down—people of the middle class, hence creating a nation of serfs, i.e. servitude. Accordingly, these measures transfer all land and wealth to the control of the World Elite for their benefit.22
    These matters are in parallel to what Thomas Jefferson once said:
    “If we can prevent the government from wasting the labours of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.”
    Americans are being subversively and intentionally over taxed. It can be stated with conviction that not too many Americans are happy about what has transpired. This secretly imposed adult baby-sitting service has cost Americans their freedom, and accordingly their true sovereignty.23 Without question such losses are primarily caused by the Fourteenth Amendment.
    1.4 INSURGENT DEMOCRACY
    This author has personally read several cases on the Fourteenth Amendment ranging from the Dred Scott to the Slaughterhouse cases. As both stated cases are quite extensive, this author is convinced that all such case law was orchestrated drivel to substantiate the necessity for the existence—and the passage of—the Fourteenth Amendment, which is fallout from the Civil War. The so-called Civil War is commonly said to be over the issue of slavery. This author concurs; however, as you will see herein the slaves were transferred over to the control of the United States. You may believe that reference is being made to people of African descent owned by Southern plantation owners; as those persons’ Civil Rights were to be guarded by the United States legislation. On the contrary! . . . Reference is actually being made to all Americans being tacitly enslaved by the purported government of the Union: the “United States”.
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 7 OF 187
    24 Slavery is/was a tool used to sell the purpose of the Civil War. You must realize that slavery was a common law (custom) of England which was brought to America. If fingers should point to anyone, let it be them.
    25 Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition Deluxe.
    26 See definition of “in fact.” Also see definition of “government de facto.” The use of ‘in fact’ in the definition of “de facto” is misleading. It should say “of fact” as parenthesized above. Intentional?. . . you be the judge.
    27 The de facto “United States” became a sovereign power. In reference thereof, a passage out of Tony Brown’s Book “Empower the People”, although Mr. Brown did not go into legal detail (as we have), made reference to secret societies being pleased about the re-colonization of the republics after the Civil War, which stands to reason, as these political subdivisions are referred to as: Colonies, under the color of law (14th Amendment).
    28 NATURALIZATION CLAUSE. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Section 1, provides that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and of the State wherein they reside. Black’s Law. See also Title 8 USC § 1101(a)(22). Definitions. The

    1.4.1 Hegelian Dialectic
    In reality, the slavery issue was just a mechanism used to implement the Civil War;24 this was accomplished by using a thing called the Hegelian Dialectic. This technique is named after the German philosopher, Hegel. A perpetrator uses the Hegelian process to bring about a desired result by using mob psychology. The process is in three parts and is illustrated as follows:
    1. Thesis: A problem is intentionally created: The immorality of slavery.
    2. Antithesis: Opposition to the problem is created: The Civil War.
    3. Synthesis: The desired result is the “solution”: The Fourteenth Amendment,
    i.e. the “Reconstruction Amendments”, the 13th,14th,15th.

    The Great Depression of the 1930’s was an incident orchestrated according to the Hegelian Dialectic. But note that the Hegelian Dialectic is not just confined to America. The anti-terrorist legislation of Adolf Hitler in 1930’s Germany is a perfect example. Hitler wanted the capability to detain people without question and hold them in custody without a court hearing. The people of Germany desired no such thing; so Hitler’s minions burned the Reichstag building to the ground. He blamed terrorists for the incident. The media portrayed the event to be a danger to society and the well being of the German people. They demanded that something be done, so Hitler introduced his anti-terrorist legislation with the enthusiastic consent of the people. Does such incident sound familiar to you? That is to say, have any comparable incidents—like the Reichtag incident—happened recently in America that brought about any terrorist legislation?
    1.4.2 De Facto and De Jure
    Now that it has been established how a planned societal change is brought about, we can better address the issue of the unlawful governments that are now present in the republics. First, you must understand the precise difference between de facto and de jure. Simply put: de facto is not according to law; and, de jure is according to law. The legal definitions 25 are as follows:
    DE FACTO: In fact (of fact),26 as distinguished from “de jure,” by right.
    DE JURE: By right; by lawful right; rightfully; complying with the law in all respects; valid in law. (i.e. constitutional; in conformity with the law of nations)
    To apply the above definitions of de facto and de jure, you must first be aware that after the Civil War (so-called) the federal government gained dominion (it conquered and controlled) over all states in guise of the Union. A governmental system de facto was then created by the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment. The amendment stealthily and politically fabricates all several States in the Union to be quasi-political subdivisions of the “United States”.27
    The crucial factor is that the Fourteenth Amendment naturalizes all Americans to be citizens and nationals of the United States at birth.28 Under the stealthy operations of law, the Fourteenth Amendment—in essence—negates all state nationalities de jure.
    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 8 OF 187
    term “” means: (A) A , or (B) A person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. [ Latter, (B), relates that a citizen of the United States owes permanent allegiance to the United States too. Does not mean a person as defined by 1101(a)(21). See Title 8 USC § 1408 for a person as described in (B) ] National of the U.S. = Communist. national of the United Statescitizen of the United States
    29 “The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State. The fact that citizens, at a given time may prefer specie to currency, or vice versa, cannot prevent Congress from enacting those laws which it deems necessary to the maintenance of a proper monetary system.” From: Contracts Payable in Gold. Senate Resolution No. 62 (April 24, 1933)
    30 See “Fee Simple” and “Property Tax.” Constitutional land ownership is under freehold, thus not taxable.
    31 IN FACT. Actual, real; as distinguished from implied or inferred. Resulting from the acts of parties, instead of from the act or intendment of law (i.e. the de jure Constitution). Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition Deluxe
    32 BELLIGERENTS. A body of insurgents who by reason of their temporary organized government are regarded as conducting lawful hostilities. Ballentine’s Law Dictionary. See state governments defined in Title 18 USC § 11.
    33 From the case Thorington v Smith, 75 US 1 (1868), the definition found in Black’s Law Dictionary, now removed.
    34 Government “of fact” not “in fact” Definition source: Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition Deluxe

    The following is what transpired with the implementation of the Fourteenth Amendment:
    1. It usurps the political sovereignty of all the republics, which translates into:
    2. The nations or countries of America, as secured by the original constitutional premises, are ultimately destroyed,
    • It has stolen the political allegiance of people and assigns it to a de facto federal government (the United States), and installs them by stealth into a political Democracy, verses a Republic government in fact; and,
    3. It puts the land of people in quasi-joint tenancy with the government (feudalism).29

    SIMPLY PUT: This is all dicta which is established by the Communist Manifesto. The Manifesto mandates the elimination of nationalities, countries and ownership of property.30
    De facto government[s] will be further discussed later herein; but for now take notice that:
    1. The federal and state governments are not your “constitutional” governments.
    2. As a matter of law they are not governments “IN FACT”; 31
    3. They are, as a matter of law INSURGENT.32 In other words: An Insurgent Democracy.

    Actually, they are military style governments, which will be described in more detail later.
    1.4.3 Insurgent Governments
    As defined by the United States Supreme Court,33 the legal description that is attached to the insurgents’ governmental system under the Fourteenth Amendment is as follows:
    GOVERNMENT DE FACTO: A government of fact.34
    1. A government actually exercising power and control, as opposed to the true and lawful government; a government not established according to the constitution of the nation, or not lawfully entitled to recognition or supremacy, but which has nevertheless supplanted or displaced the government de jure.
    2. A government deemed unlawful, or deemed wrongful or unjust, which, nevertheless, receives presently habitual obedience from the bulk of the community.
    3. There are several degrees of what is called “de facto government”. Such a government, in its highest degree, assumes a character very closely resembling that of a lawful government.

    The RED Amendment || 14th Amendment in Law Exposé Page 9 OF 187

    • This is when the usurping government expels the regular authorities from their customary seats and functions, and establishes itself in their place, and so becomes the actual government of a country.
    • The distinguishing characteristic of such a government is that adherents to it in war against the government de jure do not incur the penalties of treason; and, under certain limitations, obligations assumed by it in behalf of the country or otherwise will, in general, be respected by the government de jure when restored.
    4. Such a government might be more aptly denominated a “government of paramount force,” being maintained by active military power against the rightful authority of an established and lawful government; and obeyed in civil matters by private citizens.
    5. They are usually administered directly by military authority, but they may be administered, also, by civil authority, supported more or less by military force.

    The above is not just a general definition. In its dictum, the court silently described the current insurgent governmental system. It is recommended that you study the content of its dissertation and compare it with what will be put forth in explanatory fact in this treatise. Legal evidence will be set forth later on that supports that the Fourteenth Amendment actually creates Quiet Wars within the several republics of America; this having people act in treason to their countries.
    To understand the truth about the constitutional government, you should again reference the section on the CONSTITUTIONAL UNION. For your integral understanding, it is advised you read the Federalist Papers; that will provide you additional understanding of the constitutional governmental system. Our de jure system is not a so-called Democracy; such imputes a system of insurgents placed unwittingly by peoples of the American republics in the Union.

    The Depth of the DECEPTION is MASSIVE and the Bottom line is this, you better know Christ, that is your only hope…Saving America is not Gods plan, Saving you always has been his plan…This war we are in is about YOU, nothing else… NOW WAKE UP !

17. Obama Moves to Oppose State Sovereignty « No Fluff News on July 26th, 2009 1:55 am

    [...] “The several states are lining up to reclaim their sovereignty and telling the federal government to butt out. This is being done in myriad ways but all are related in that most claim that the Tenth Amendment protects the states from federal tyranny. States are passing resolutions, memorials and two states have passed laws and they intend to apply those laws for their citizens. The two states are Montana and Tennessee.It was expected that at some point these laws would be challenged and it appears actions to do such has begun. The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has published open letters to federal firearms license holders in Montana and Tennessee explaining that federal law trumps state law when it comes to gun laws…”via black bear blog [...]

18. Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights at RevolutionRadio.org on July 26th, 2009 11:20 am

    [...] BlackBearBlog.com [...]

19. Paul Streitz on July 26th, 2009 11:22 am

    We are beginning a movement to stop Soto from the Supreme Court.

    Got to our website at http://www.ctimmigration.com and you can see what we are doing. As soon as it clears the internet, the website will be http://www.stopsotonow.com.

    The Stop Soto Strategy::

    1: Send thousands of emails, calls and letters to reject Soto.
    2. Force Republican Senators to filibuster her nomination.
    3. Force Democratic Senators in key Sportsman states not to vote to close the debate. (NRA is invaluable here. The NRA and Sportsmen from all over the country can stop this.)
    4. The nomination never goes to the floor of the Senate.
    5. Obama withdraws the nomination.

    Hope you will assist in this. We have time, but we have to rally the support.

    paul streitz

20. Greg Farber on July 26th, 2009 9:13 pm

    A Constitution in FULL Crisis

    By JB Williams Thursday, July 23, 2009
    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13119

    America’s extreme left tricked American moderates into supporting their candidate last November by campaigning on post-partisan cooperation and transparency in government. Six months after the election of a freshman senator with a blank résumé, a laundry list of evil associates and a life more secret than your average CIA agent, Obama’s entire history remains a mystery and his administration is the most hardcore partisan dictatorship ever experienced in the USA.

    Washington DC partisanship has turned into outright Obama-Pelosi dictatorship. The so-called “Commander-in-Chief” is fast losing control of his military, which is increasingly and viciously divided between those who are refusing to take orders from an overt enemy of the Constitution, and those who foolishly defend Obama’s right to destroy that which they took an oath to protect and preserve.

    Obama should have ended the divisions over his ineligibility long before it reached the ranks of American fighting forces. He chose not to, and instead to allow the issue to fester into a powder keg that even Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod are ill-prepared to extinguish.

    The US Constitution is in FULL Crisis

    The US Constitution is the contract between the people and their respective states, and the federal government established by it. The document was written to form a representative republic limited in power and scope to the matters and authority delegated and ratified in the Constitution. That contract has been breached by a runaway Fed…

    Decades of outright destruction of the Constitution have left the nation on the brink of economic, political and social collapse. The 2006 and 2008 election cycles placed the Constitution in full crisis and the people are growing increasingly desperate for a peaceful means to restore their Constitutional Republic.

    An administration which does not meet constitutional standards is expected to protect and defend a contract which it does not even recognize, much less respect. The contract either stands, or it doesn’t. Based on the 2008 election, and every policy put in place since, the contract does not stand at present. If the Constitution no longer stands, then the federal government which it established, no longer stands in authority. Tyranny reigns…
    The States Take Action

    Ignored by federal public servants and cut off from any access to peaceful means of redress in congress or the courts, the people and their states are forced to take matters into their own hands.

    A “constitutional” interpretation of the Constitution is in order, as the people begin to demand that a runaway Fed blatantly acting against the best interest of its people, return to a constitutional foundation, or risk being stripped of all power and abolished.

    The federal government is the product of the Constitution, the contract between the people and their states which established and assigned specific limited powers to the federal government, which is to serve at the pleasure of the states and the people.

    If the Constitution no longer stands, then there is NO federal government. The federal government exists only as a result of the Constitution. A very real crisis is at hand…

    As a result, more than 32 states are rushing to pass Tenth Amendment legislation intended to remind the federal government of this reality. But the Obama regime is not listening.

    Many of those states are also passing Second Amendment protections for their citizens, making it illegal for the Fed to threaten private gun rights, even in cases of “Martial Law.” But the Fed has rejected all such state bills, claiming that “federal laws supersede state laws.”

    Reacting to an “unconstitutional” letter from Obama’s ATF, which puts Tennessee on notice that the Fed will not recognize laws passed by the individual states under Tenth Amendment rights, Tennessee State Rep. Matthew Hill points out, –“Montana, Tennessee and all others, are SOVEREIGN states not subservient to the federal government. The Fed can send us letters all day long and it doesn’t change the fact that we are allowed to govern ourselves, under the 10th amendment of the US Constitution.”
    A “constitutional” interpretation of the Constitution

    All constitutional text must be read within the context of Amendment Ten… which clearly states, “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.”

    Does the Constitution delegate the power to “confiscate and redistribute private wealth” to the federal government?

    Does it delegate power to force “Cap and Trade” or so-called “Universal Health Care” upon the people and the states?

    Does it delegate the power over private industry, such as banking, auto manufacturing, energy and the likes? – Or the power to disarm American citizens under any set of circumstances, real or imaginary?

    No such powers were delegated to the federal government under the US Constitution. Unlike many ill-informed US citizens, Obama & Co. knows it. But they don’t care…

    Since no clause exists in the Constitution which specifically assigns any of these powers to the Fed, Amendment Ten applies… “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.”
    The Second Amendment Example

    Each clause of the Constitution must be read within the context of the Tenth Amendment. Power and authority is either specifically delegated to the Fed in the text of the Constitution, specifically withheld from the Fed by way of the Bill of Rights, or in the absence of any such reference to power and authority, the Tenth Amendment applies.

    In the case of gun rights, the Founders specifically denied the Fed any power via the Bill of Rights, specifically prohibiting the Fed from playing around with the people’s right to keep and bear arms.

    “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” –

    Yet, operating in direct contradiction to this Second Amendment language, the federal government has assumed a power not assigned to it by the states, to regulate the right of the people to keep and bear arms. A case of the people’s past silence, being intentionally misinterpreted as their consent, which allowed the fed to step across boundaries it is specifically prohibited from crossing in the Bill of Rights.

    As a result, the states have been forced to restate their border sovereignty and state rights in new state sponsored legislation, including Second Amendment protections for their citizens who wish to keep and bear arms, whether anti-second amendment leftists in Washington DC like it or not.

    “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.”

    My home state of Tennessee passed both Tenth Amendment and Second Amendment legislation, supported in such number as to override our Democrat governor’s attempts to veto.

    But Obama’s Fed responded by issuing a letter, under his Justice Department headed by Obama buddy Eric Holder, on the letterhead of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms signed by Assistant Director Carson Carroll, advising the state that “federal laws supersede states laws.”

    Like hell they do!

    The states DO NOT serve at the pleasure of the Fed. The Fed exists and serves at the pleasure of the states, a FACT that most states seem in a rush to point out to Obamanation.

    The US Constitution supersedes both state and federal laws. Don’t confuse the US Constitution with federal laws, passed by congress or passed by judicial fiat via the courts. Federal laws take precedent over state laws ONLY in matters specifically delegated to the federal government in the Constitution. If no such authority is assigned to the Fed, then no such power exists at the Fed.

    When the federal government makes laws pertaining to matters NOT assigned to it under the US Constitution, which it has had a habit of doing for decades now, both in congress and in the judicial branch, the states are in NO WAY bound by those laws. Those laws are by definition, unconstitutional, no matter how they were passed.

    As the Second Amendment makes it quite clear that the federal government has NO power to regulate the people’s right to keep and bear arms, and the Tenth Amendment clearly states 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.”- Obama’s Fed, Justice Department and ATF, have NO constitutional authority over the states in the matter…

    Tennessee State Rep. Matthew Hill is exactly right. They (the Fed) can send threatening letters all day long and those letters are completely irrelevant, as they are at odds with the Constitution. The ATF letter relates to federal laws written on matters NOT assigned to the federal government to begin with, matters therefore reserved to the states and the people under the Tenth Amendment.

    Even the overly politicized US Supreme Court has recently defended Second and Tenth Amendment rights in its related rulings.

    The Question of Enforcement

    Clearly, Obama and Co. think they won the right to run roughshod over the states and the people last fall. If our Founders had given us a pure democracy, they would be right. But in a Constitutional Representative Republic, they are dead wrong!

    Still, it’s also clear that they intend to force their will upon the masses, regardless of public or state dissent, or constitutional limitations. The “silent majority” has been silent for so long, that modern leftist think that they are now the new majority, free to run roughshod over the new “silent minority.”

    Under this fantasy, they proclaim the right to ram their leftist agenda down everyone else’s throat. “We won – you lost—so shut up and take it!”… is the general sentiment displayed by O-bots on message boards across the blogosphere…

    That sentiment has now reached within the ranks of the US Military, where a growing number of soldiers are beginning to challenge Obama’s right to issue orders and Obama minions are publicly attacking them with a vengeance. The heated chatter got so vicious on Military.com last week, that the publication removed ALL comments on the subject from its web site before the discussion could spin out of control.

    Active duty soldiers are refusing Obama orders. Reservists are refusing recall and deployment orders. Retired Navy Commander Walter Fitzpatrick has filed criminal “treason” charges against Obama. Flight Surgeon, Lt. Col. Dr. David Earl-Graeff has sent a letter to Sec. of Defense Gates, stating the following…

    “Enough is enough! You must be aware at this point of the tempest brewing among the Rank and File. I am writing you in an effort to appeal to your sense of concern for the Military; a concern we share not only for the Military as a whole but for each and every individual who wears the Uniform in the Service of our Country. I am in this regard specifically asking you for your help. I implore you to not wait until the “pot boils over” and we find ourselves in total disarray. –

    I am convinced, beyond any doubt, that the moral well being and efficiency of our fighting forces to defend our Country is soon to be hanging in a precarious balance if not already. In my humble estimation this is NOT a theoretical possibility to construct a thesis or a contingency plan about. It is a reality and is happening right now. Resolution of this issue must be accomplished in the most expeditious manner available at your disposal to gain immediate relief to those of us who are struggling to fully comply with our sworn Oath to the Constitution while being conflicted by questions relating to the qualifications of the POTUS to hold the office in full and absolute compliance with the Natural Born Citizen Clause.”

    So, how does Obama plan to enforce his global vision upon the masses when the US Constitution which provides for a federal government, delegates no such authority and an increasing number of soldiers and law enforcement are taking a stand against a “potential domestic enemy” in an effort to uphold their oath to protect and defend the US Constitution?
    Once Silent running out of Tolerance

    Convinced that the Constitution is under constant threat from within today, Americans normally happy to avoid the subject of politics altogether are building a head of steam to thwart the current constitutional crisis. They are erecting lines of defense at the state borders before Obama can capitalize on one of his many manufactured disasters by removing the people’s right to stand opposed.

    His Department of Homeland Security has already redefined “domestic terrorist” to include anyone who disagrees with Obama. His minions have already labeled anyone concerned with the Constitution, “birthers,” in a childish name-calling effort to silence the dissent. His left-wing press has affixed the title of “racist” to anyone who dare doubt Obama’s anti-American Marxist agenda, or his mystery messiah status.

    Pelosi has made certain that Republicans have no voice in congress and Holder has made certain that the people will not find a legal forum to resolve Obama’s overt agenda or hidden past in any court.

    Growing increasingly desperate to restore the Constitution and fast running out of peaceful means of doing so, the people find themselves in a very real Constitutional Crisis.
    Peacefully Forcing the Fed to Reverse Course

    With a tone deaf Fed, the people are turning to their state legislators and the states are moving to close down the Fed. Led by the Tenth Amendment Center, state legislators are rushing to reclaim freedom and liberty on behalf of their citizens.

    Step One – Tenth Amendment Affirmation

    Step Two – Second Amendment Affirmation

    Step Three – Kicking the Fed out of the States

    Step Four – Shutting down the Fed by cutting off 97% of Fed funding by repeal of the 16th Amendment

    Step Five – Repeal of the 17th Amendment, removing every current member of the senate and sending new representatives of states right to establish a new constitutional senate.

    Step Six – cleaning house in Washington DC and establishing a constitutional limited government which will once again serve at the pleasure and benefit of the states and the people

    Unlike drug rehab, it doesn’t take twelve steps to reinstate a constitutional Fed, although it could take a twelve step program to break many modern Democrats addiction to free-stuff from the public trough.

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

    If the people fail to quickly alter a Fed run wild, via their state legislatures, they will be left with no option but to abolish and start over from scratch.

    Republicans in Washington DC have either lost their way or lost their nerve. As a result, they have lost all power.

    But Republicans, Independents and even Blue Dog Democrats across the nation in state legislatures, are acting in defense of their citizens and the Constitution, and the people MUST take a stand with those state legislators, immediately.

    Visit the Tenth Amendment Center for an up-to-date picture of where your state stands in the march to reclaim states rights and reign in the runaway Fed.

    Contact your state legislators and get behind their efforts to affirm state sovereignty and rights. Even Obama does not have the power to force his will upon fifty states who stand united and opposed!

21. Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights : Federal Jack on July 27th, 2009 2:16 pm

    [...] http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2009/07/22/obama-administration-begins-opposition-to-states-claimin... [...]

22. Diana on July 29th, 2009 4:28 pm

    Executive Order # 12938 http://www.disastercenter.com/laworder/12938.htm
    State of National Emergency was signed into effect By then president Clinton in 1994. This was 7 years before 9/11. Still in effect according to this website….http://www.conservativeusa.org/execorderinfo.htm So it seems we have no rights

23. Tom Remington on July 29th, 2009 8:38 pm

    Diana – While I have little, if any, trust in our government, this “Executive Order” signed by Bill Clinton would be a stretch to apply it to lawful citizens. However, I am all ears to hear how, if there are instances, that this EO has infringed upon the rights of law abiding citizens here in this country.

    I fully believe that if the opportunity presented itself, this administration and probably several others, would gladly tread on me and you in their struggle for power.

24. Ken Creamer on July 29th, 2009 9:13 pm

    if you have a federal license for anyting, you’ve requested some sort of “privilege” from the federal government and thus have been granted permision to use it. That is, in fact, a case where federal law does trumps State Law, notwithstanding those Union States who have taken their sovereignty back. I suppose that the sovereign Union States through their Senators could in fact and law negate ALL federal licenses to Union State citizens thereby unhooking the intrusion of federal law in any of the Sovereign Union States. However, until the Union States unhook themselves from being subordinate to the federal government and do in fact reestablish their sovereignty by acting like a sovereign, the above idea of unhooking State citizens from their federal licenses is just another pipe dream or simply a wish that can never come to be.

    Sorry.

    Cheers.

25. Greg Farber on July 29th, 2009 9:36 pm

    Presidential Executive Orders have been around since the time of Abraham Lincoln. The legality of such unilateral decisions (without the consent of Congress, the Supreme Court, or anyone else) is based on the idea that in times of crisis (wars, invasions, attacks, and so forth), Emergency War Powers may need be assumed, giving the President of the United States dictatorial powers. In times of real crisis, it’s not a good idea to have a lot of discussion or debate on actions to be taken. A single commander is the only effective means with which to combat the emergency.

    The United States has legally been under a state of national emergency since 1933. The relevant legislation has never been repealed, thus leaving the president with instant powers to suspend the Constitution. Most legal scholars and legislators who have studied the matter concur that subsequent Presidents have already suspended the Constitution since the moment the first legislation was signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt. The actual suspension of those constitutional rights awaits only the impetus of a national emergency requiring it.

    Maybe a flu pandemic, dirty bomb, false flag Iranian bomb on our soil, financial collapse as in currency failure, or civil unrest due to Obamanation going to far..

    And as Ken mentions above under several contractual agreements the people of this nation have in fact given up their Constitutional Rights themselves..

    Different Rights of course in varying degrees.. Mostly the 4th – 5th – 9th – and states surrender of the 10th is self explanatory…

    What a web they weave… The document is hanging by a thread Remington, deny it all you want to.. The massive evidence is just to large to dump here, and I don’t believe you would bother to read it..

    We are in a helluva lot of trouble and I know you get that…All this crap the communist needs in place but is not enforcing with and iron hand YET !!

26. Ken Creamer on July 30th, 2009 10:26 am

    Greg Farber

    I agree with everything you say except that there’s a fly in the ointment. When you wrote “Reacting to an “unconstitutional” letter from Obama’s ATF, which puts Tennessee on notice that the Fed will not recognize laws passed by the individual states under Tenth Amendment rights, Tennessee State Rep. Matthew Hill points out, –“Montana, Tennessee and all others, are SOVEREIGN states not subservient to the federal government. The Fed can send us letters all day long and it doesn’t change the fact that we are allowed to govern ourselves, under the 10th amendment of the US Constitution.”
    A “constitutional” interpretation of the Constitution.”

    Mr. Hill in incorrect due to the fact that the above mentioned fly can be found in each and every Union State budget. In there you will find that Union States (all) are accepting money from the Federal government, creating dependence and thus the subservience stemming therefrom. Additionally the Union States are paying and collecting the Chapter 21 taxes know as FICA taxes. First, such action, the paying of taxes, on its very own, creates an absolute subservient relationship with the federal government. Second, it creates a jurisdictional conduit into the total body of the federal income tax laws (and all federal laws for that matter) through out the entire State because such an act creates prima facie evidence that the Union State is in fact a Federal State and thus within the situs of the territory over which Congress was granted the exclusive power to legislate.

    Rather than post redundant information, go to http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/28/wyoming-governor-calls-for-10th-amendment-resolution/ and read the text of the proposed Wyoming 10the Amendment Resolution and then my comment pasted below it.

    If you would like a copy of the manuscript mention therein, send me a request at kcreamer@stny.rr.com. I look forward to hearing from you.

    Cheers,
    Ken

27. Tom Remington on July 30th, 2009 12:44 pm

    “The document is hanging by a thread Remington”

    Which document are you speaking of here, Greg?

Got something to say?