Yar-El Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Article - 25 States Considering Sovereignty Legislation Quote These are some of the reasons cited by some of these states and their proposed legislation: I. Declaring Involuntary Martial Law over any of the 50 States II. Any kind of "domestic Draft" (Obama's Service Corps) III. Any kind of required service of Minors (Youth Brigades) IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government. (UN Millenium Declaration, which Obama supports. North American Union/SPP agreement. UN Carbon Taxes) V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press. (Fairness Doctrine) VI. Any attempt to further restrict the the Right to Bear Arms Quote Legal Declaration Documents: These are government [state] websites with the motions. They are legit. Click Here for the complete list of all the documents in motion. Just a sample - AZ: http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/1r/bills/hcr2024p.htm CA: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/93-94/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sjr_44_bill_940829_chaptered GA: http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/1995_96/leg/fulltext/sr308.htm HI: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/07-1372.htm MO: http://www.house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills091/bills/HR212.HTM MT: http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm NH: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html OK: http://www.ok-safe.com/files/documents/1/HJR1089_int.pdf WA: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?year=2009&bill=4009 Quote States That Already Are Sovereign / Passed 10th Amendement Restatement Legislature: - California (CA) - Hawaii (HI) - Texas (TX) States Claiming Sovereignty: - Arizona (AZ) - Arkansas (AR) - Georgia (GA) - Kansas (KS) - Indiana (IN) - Iowa (IA) - Michigan (MI) - Minnesota (MN) - Missouri (MO) - Montana (MT) - New Hampshire (NH) - Oklahoma (OK) - South Carolina (SC) - Tennessee (TN) - Washington (WA) States Planning / Motioning Toward Claiming Sovereignty: - Alabama (AL) - Alaska (AK) - Colorado (CO) - Idaho (ID) - Maine (ME) - Nevada (NV) - Ohio (OH) - Pennsylvania (PA) - West Virginia (WV) I cleaned up the post. I'm also going to look for some mainstream media reports. Each of the listed states have actual bills in motions, and you can download or read them directly from each of the state's websites. They are legit. Most sites have a .gov web address.
Yar-El Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Has anything like this happened before? In the last 100 years?
GarfieldJL Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Yar-El said: Has anything like this happened before? In the last 100 years? Not to my knowledge, and this is downright scary.
Yar-El Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Someone can argue that Ron Paul is a nut; however, those links and documents are legit. No one can honestly argue against their credibility. Each link directly comes from the states' websites in question. I see a mess of .gov links.
jrrtoken Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Funny, why haven't I heard of this on the news? Or on Fox? Hm. Seeing as a possible secession should at least get a Breaking News spot, then why haven't I heard of this yet? Until I get some proof from almost every news organization on the planet, I'm thinking that this a small clause being blown by anti-Obamaites to scaremongering proportions.
GarfieldJL Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 PastramiX said: Funny, why haven't I heard of this on the news? Or on Fox? Hm. Seeing as a possible secession should at least get a Breaking News spot, then why haven't I heard of this yet? Until I get some proof from almost every news organization on the planet, I'm thinking that this a small clause being blown by anti-Obamaites to scaremongering proportions. The state government websites are the sources, that's kinda hard to argue as far as validity, barring all the states having their government websites hacked.
jrrtoken Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 GarfieldJL said: The state government websites are the sources, that's kinda hard to argue as far as validity, barring all the states having their government websites hacked.I'm not saying that it's not valid, but interpreting this as a sort of secessionist statement is completely ridiculous. All of the bills that Yar-El provided claim state sovereignty over the tenth amendment. No where does it say seceding from the Union, overthrowing the federal government, or other nonsense. The Ron Paul article is full of complete warmongering and willful ignorance.
GarfieldJL Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Well still it is a cause of concern for those states to be saying it is they that are sovereign.
jrrtoken Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 GarfieldJL said: Well still it is a cause of concern for those states to be saying it is they that are sovereign.The claim is being sovereign only over the tenth amendment, which is more exclusively, the right to bear arms. That does not include complete autonomy within each state, nor does it imply secession from the U.S. The notion that the status quo is being overthrown by the current administration is pretty baseless, and undoubtedly alarmist.
GarfieldJL Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 The second amendment is the right to bear arms, not the 10th amendment.
jrrtoken Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 GarfieldJL said: The second amendment is the right to bear arms, not the 10th amendment.D'oh. Nevermind. Either way, this does not declare complete freedom, just a reinstatement of the federal system's guarantees to partial soverignty of the states.
Yar-El Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Quote U.S. Constitution - Amendment 10 Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People 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. Whow! Uh...
Astor Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Yar-El said: Whow! Uh... If those aren't powers controlled by the Federal Government, what is the problem with the State Legislature, or it's people from controlling them?
Yar-El Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Astor Kaine said: If those aren't powers controlled by the Federal Government, what is the problem with the State Legislature, or it's people from controlling them? I should have put a question mark at the end. Old English can sometimes be a little tricky. I get it now due to your question.
Tommycat Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 noted from the original article ron paul said: This type of behavior begins whenever there is uncertainty, and likely won’t amount to much. The fact, however, that this is a time of economic uncertainty and political divisions with many legislators involved in the initiation of these bills should make the movement of particular concern. Even Ron doesn't think it'll go anywhere, so I don't think it's too much to worry about.
Astrotoy7 Posted March 8, 2009 Posted March 8, 2009 Ah, what a noble 25 indeed Were they to sink into the earth, the US would be ready to join the world as a more cosmopilitan nation What I'd like someone to do next is draw a graph comparing that 25 to the top 25 states by KKK membership estimates mtfbwya
Darth Avlectus Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 PastramiX said: Funny, why haven't I heard of this on the news? Or on Fox? Hm. Seeing as a possible secession should at least get a Breaking News spot, then why haven't I heard of this yet? Until I get some proof from almost every news organization on the planet, I'm thinking that this a small clause being blown by anti-Obamaites to scaremongering proportions. Hmm? Must have been something implicit ya pulled outta there somewhaere...Though it has since been edited and I'm going off of memory, I don't seem to recall anything about secession...Oklahoma? They did it about mid 2008. Why would it mean secession? In all seriousness, where did you get that? --I'm trying to be as fair and objective as I can here. VM or PM me if it makes you less comfortable saying it here. GarfieldJL said: The state government websites are the sources, that's kinda hard to argue as far as validity, barring all the states having their government websites hacked. Good point. PastramiX said: I'm not saying that it's not valid, but interpreting this as a sort of secessionist statement is completely ridiculous. Again...where did that (secession thought) come from? Quote All of the bills that Yar-El provided claim state sovereignty over the tenth amendment. No where does it say seceding from the Union, overthrowing the federal government, or other nonsense. If they were planning it--do you really believe the underground for that sort of thing would t.e.l.e.c.a.s.t their plans on the internet or out in the mainstream press where everyone could see it? ........That would be kind of ...stupid.. of them, don't you think? Quote The Ron Paul article is full of complete warmongering and willful ignorance. Interesting. He opposed the war in Iraq. Tommycat said: noted from the original article Even Ron doesn't think it'll go anywhere, so I don't think it's too much to worry about. ........Hmm........... Well, this past weekend (03/6,7,8/2009), since prospects have recently picked up for me, I did a damage appraisal for a $*** heap apartment to assess because the nimrod owner (now foreclosing as a result) decided to shut off heat in the middle of winter and pipes went kaboom. Smooth move, IDIOT The interesting relevance here? LOCAL laws there are now in accordance with international laws ...according to the condemnation paper posted there. So at the very least, if I had to take a wild guess: national/federal laws downward are now (and have been since 2006) allowing themselves to be superseded by international laws on some levels. I have no idea how widespread this actually is, but I don't ever remember anything ever said/asked about it on a national level of attention in 2006 or prior. It completely slipped under my radar. Not that it necessarily means anything... does it?
Yar-El Posted March 9, 2009 Author Posted March 9, 2009 Article - 30 States already are, are now claiming, or are planning for declaration of sovereignty. We have some more news. 30 states are now or are in the process of claiming sovereignty. Talk about making some progress. I hope this goes somewhere.
jrrtoken Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 GTA:SWcity said: Why would it mean secession? In all seriousness, where did you get that? --I'm trying to be as fair and objective as I can here. The way that people are treating it, it sounds like some sort of uprising. IMO, this whole thing is sort of pointless, it's not like anything major will happen. If Oklahoma has had this for awhile, and there is no sort of controversy about it, then I doubt that the impact will be large enough to change anything.
GarfieldJL Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 PastramiX said: The way that people are treating it, it sounds like some sort of uprising. IMO, this whole thing is sort of pointless, it's not like anything major will happen. If Oklahoma has had this for awhile, and there is no sort of controversy about it, then I doubt that the impact will be large enough to change anything. Actually, if it were just Texas this wouldn't be an issue because if I remember correctly they are the only state in the United States to have been it's own country.
Yar-El Posted March 9, 2009 Author Posted March 9, 2009 Too bad mainstream media hasn't taken notice. It would be a good story to dig into. GarfieldJL said: Actually, if it were just Texas this wouldn't be an issue because if I remember correctly they are the only state in the United States to have been it's own country. The article said Texas had already declared sovereignty many years ago.
GarfieldJL Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 Yar-El said: Too bad mainstream media hasn't taken notice. It would be a good story to dig into. Well they are also deliberately ignoring the tea party style protests as well. What do you expect from news sources whose reporters want to have Obama's babies.
jrrtoken Posted March 9, 2009 Posted March 9, 2009 GarfieldJL said: Actually, if it were just Texas this wouldn't be an issue because if I remember correctly they are the only state in the United States to have been it's own country.Then you can say the same with Hawaii, California, and the original thirteen colonies, plus many others.
Yar-El Posted March 9, 2009 Author Posted March 9, 2009 GarfieldJL said: Well they are also deliberately ignoring the tea party style protests as well. What do you expect from news sources whose reporters want to have Obama's babies. Obamanation all the way! Serious tone - I don't think the states are doing this to become seperated from the union, but they are trying to send a message to the executive branch. Their reasons are concerns for a large group of people. Manipulation and drafting of the young.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.