NEW PRODUCTS! .... 625+ Page
Reprint of Blacks & Pomeroy on Water Rights 1897 !!! - Learn Validity
of Common Law Water Right Laws Prior to, During Transition and Relevance
as States Begin to Arrogate Powers over Water Rights and Private Property.
Cites Historical Common Law Cases. Color Page Separation for Easy Reference;
A MUST READ!!!.
Compare Differences between the American Patriot Party and other political
parties.
American Patriot Party Endorsements:
The American Patriot Party Endorses
Candidates outside it's own party that most closely follows our aims and
goals for a free country.
In 2004, the Patriot Party gave Limited Candidate Endorsement for President
Michael Peroutka of the Constitutional
Party, for President. Note: The Oregon Patriot Party had abstained
from that endorsement. In 2008, Ron Paul was endorsed by a number of states
through the primaries; Upon endorsement of Chuck Baldwin by Ron Paul, some
states members followed with their votes.
Our endorsement for 2012 is again Ron Paul.
Review the National American Patriot Party website Candidates Page and see who, why, and what American
Patriot Party members are voting for.
See the Patriot Party solution to the two party monopoly, The American
Patriot Party is made up of registered Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats
who wish to see the true intent of the founding fathers of this country
realized.
The two candidate voting system:
This system allows the voter to
vote for the candidate he believes will be the best person for the job;
If that person does not get enough votes, his second choice is recorded.
This allows the voter to vote his conscience first without throwing
away a crucial vote.
An example would be, if you believed Ron Paul was the best person for
the job as president but did not want to loose a vote to another Republican
Candidate that may or may be more popular You would simply vote Ron
Paul as your first choice and the more popular candidate for second choice;
If Ron Paul did not carry the votes necessary to be a contender, you
would not loose anything;
This is because the second choice vote would automatically
engage and be counted that candidate.
This innovative voting system allows for greater options to vote your
conscience.
------------
Taxes
The American Patriot Party and Oregon
Patriot Party, Championing the "No Names No Numbers Tax";
The States Liberty Bill, Federal Government Patriot Tax
System Reform Bill, Zoning Abolishment Bill; The Private Person and Property
Security Bill and the Freedom Responsibility Bill which places the
responsibility on every court and government agency at every level to have
the power to refuse laws that it deems contrary to the Inalienable Rights
guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence as intended by the founders
letters and constitution of this country without reprimand by federal, state,
county or other entity, thereby empowering the responsibility defined in
the Declaration of Independence wherein it states clearly:
"That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among
men, deriving their just powers from the CONSENT of the governed;
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
a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and
organizing its powers in such form, as to
them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness...
--------------
Note, that when this was written, it did not mean within the constraints
of the existing law or within the constraint of a government procedure such
as a voting system; As they stood outside and apart from their own present
government at that time, and had no "legal" government.
They were individuals making a stand.
This imposed a power of a people, any group of people; not of a, or
any, government.
1.) a free individual his first right and duty and;
2.) 40 Definitions of a Tyrannical government in which to impose your
first right and duty upon.
The Constitution's purpose is to fully, in compliance with the
Declaration of Independence's foundation, limit the powers of the Federal
Government.
This is the sole purpose of the
Constitution; and it does not, in any way, overwrite the foundations and
duties laid out by the Declaration of Independence.
Clearly as written in the Constitution
Article VI, that the Constitution
is bound by prior Oaths which are Engagements of the People, declared in
The Declaration of Independence, and all agreements set forth in the Confederation;
All those and future laws subject ultimately to those oaths which are
"Engagements" of and with the People presented in the Declaration of Independence,
"Not Withstanding".
Constitution: Article VI:
All Debts contracted "and "Engagements" entered into (Oaths and
Declarations), before the adoption of this Constitution, shall
be as validagainst the United States under this Constitutionas under the
"Confederation". This Constitution, and the Laws of
the United States which shall be "made" in >>>"pursuance
thereof" ;and all Treaties (Oaths and Declarations) "made",
or which shall be "made", under the Authority of the United
States, shall be supreme Law of the Land ...."
Note that any law made under
the Constitution is limited to laws within the
"DELEGATED" Powers; Further,
the Supremacy Clause was limited to those delegated powers and restricted
the federal government from arrogating ANY new power. The federal
legislature - federal government cannot create laws outside those
very limiteddelegated
powers, nor can they "arrogate" ANY new powers.
The True Patriots Party, The American
Patriot Party. Educating Patriots and Defending Freedom, one Patriot at
a time. See also Special Reports at far right>
Why waste your time and money with modern publications, ignorant
authors, organizations, talk show hosts and others, that distort the Founders
documents, our rights, laws and Constitution; When access to the true
and factual documents are right here...
American
Patriot Party,
State Parties Organizations.
The American Patriot Party, State
Organization Map:
Welcome to the new National
American Patriot Party web site. The American Patriot Party has taken on
some changes. The Oregon Patriot Party has assumed the National American
Patriot Party role in guiding states to develop their states parties.
For Election Information See
Candidates Section.
Previously active states:
(green) need to voice reactivation (blue). Several states so far are under
organization.
Organization
of State Parties
New Organizers: may
request interest in establishing state parties in green or gray states.
People interested in establishing or reestablishing their state parties
should review this web site and become educated in the Declaration of Independence
and Originating Founders Letters prior to 1776 that defined the intent of
freedom;
Further, to become versed in your own state's elections laws prior to
making a commitment with this party in starting a state party.
Each state is responsible for developing their own party.
Be realistic. Understand this will be a lifetime process, do not expect
too much too soon. Development of your particular state party may take
many years. 100% of establishing a party is believing in its goals and
always being there when necessary.
If you choose simply to be a member, your commitment will be the same.
"Statesmanship", as
defined by this party, is first defending certain inalienable rights as
defined by the Declaration of Independence and it's Originating Founding
Fathers of and prior to 1776; Then to the concerns, that are within these
parameters, of their constituents of their state.
This sets the solid foundation for this party's establishments and goals.
This also limits change from outside forces that water down the true
intents of those who fought to give us the freedoms we have.
Our candidates will follow the party, the party follows and reestablishes
the true intent of a free community, state, and country as defined in the
Declaration of Independence and letters of the Originating Founders of Freedom.
CONSTITUTIONAL
COFFEE
Constitutional Debates
- June 14, 1788 -
Virginia Ratifying Convention.
James Madison:
"...The Constitution has taken a medium between the two extremes,
and perhaps with more wisdom than either the British or the state
governments, with respect to their "ELIGIBILITY" to office.
They can "FILL"
"NO" new "offices" created by themselves,
>
> > "NOR" > > >
(***APP-WAKE
UP!***)
>
> > "OLD ONES" > > >
of which they
"INCREASED
THE SALARIES"."
------------
***APP CONSTITUTIONAL
CAFFEINE:
Would this not
keep LEGISLATORS from being reelected
"back" into their office...
if they had
RAISED THEIR
SALARIES
IN THE PREVIOUS TERM???
Clearly it would.
Madison Continued:"... After
having heard a variety of principles developed, I thought that on which
it is established the least exceptionable, and it appears to me "sufficiently
well guarded".
APP Wake Up:
Apparently not... They simply stepped outside the "delegated" powers of the
"Original Compact" which they have NO AUTHORITY (see link) to do.
This was warned by Patrick Henry.
Also see
link to Rights of the
Colonists that establish that Governors
have "NO RIGHT" to "seek what
they please" in salaries, as it makes
way for them to become TYRANTS and DESPOTS, instead of
servants of society.
Mr. GRAYSON:
"Mr. Chairman, I acknowledge that the honorable gentleman has "REPRESENTED
THE CLAUSE RIGHTLY" as to their exclusion from new offices;"
APP Wake Up:
This establishes James Madison's intent was correct and that "NEW OFFICES"also means,
by the definitions given here "NOR Filling Old Ones", as reelection
to the same office for a "NEW TERM" of Office
for which the salaries were increased by the person seeking reelection to
it.
-------------------
WARNING * WARNING
* WARNING
WARNING TO
TEA PARTY GOERS
Warning;DO NOT be taken in by the attempts
to establish a NATIONAL FLAT TAX, FLAT PERCENTAGE TAX, FAIR TAX, FLAT PURCHASE
TAX or other ARBITRARYUNENUMERATEDTAXSCHEMES!
These are INDIRECTTAXES,UNENUMERATED Styled taxes; The ARBITRARY
flat percentage will insure and grant government
money without consent prior to receiving funds; It will be no
different than the income tax is now.
WORSE it will guarantee increases to governments with the increase
of the private sector WITHOUT CONSENT AND OVERSIGHT; It will EMPOWER GOVERNMENT.
The Founders
understood the necessity of aDIRECT taxation; Taxes that
are not arbitrary,
but are DEFINED AND ENUMERATED >>>BEFORE THEY ARE
GRANTED TO GOVERNMENT.
>>>>FURTHER
DANGERS: Some plans combine state and
federal taxation or federal taxation into one "sales tax" plan; These are
EXTREMELY
DANGEROUS as it is a "SHOEHORN"
for the Federal government to involve itself with State and local taxation! The federal
government will be come a legal "PARTY" to the taxation
process with your state and thereby WREST CONTROL of local taxation and
LOCAL REGULATIONS!!!
The FairTax allows the NEW FEDERAL oversight bureaucracy to DEFINE "what
is and what is not" a business; It invites the federal government not
only into your business, but into your HOME to determine if what you do
outside your business, is a business. The Fair Tax is in reality a BUY, SELL
or TRADE TAX.
The FairTax simply "changes the name" of the IRS to the new TAX bureaucracy
name; The FairTax proponents attempt to proclaim they get rid of the
IRS, this is FALSE;
There are other ways of
direct taxationthat will remove
regulation and insure oversight and local control over taxation and stay
within the original Constitutional limits; See Anonymity Tax.
>>>ADDITIONAL
WARNING: We have heard speakers at TEA PARTY RALLIESATTEMPTING
to place Fascism as being to the FAR RIGHT; THIS IS INCORRECT.
This is a "Centrist and leftist" "Ploy" to make you think we need to
move to the center i.e. toward the left; This is meant to confuse;
Do not buy
into it.
Socialism
and Communismand Fascism are ALL LEFT;
ALL THREE require huge
socialistic bureaucracies to operate and therefore are ALL THREE,
FORMS of SOCIALISM
and ALL "LEFT".
Understanding that the State of Nature under the Law of Nature to guide it
are the Far Right, then Constitutional
Compacts to enforce the Law of Nature are the RIGHT-Freedom and Property
are protected;
To the Left are Various
forms of Socialism and collectives
which include Fascism and Communism; These naturally
degenerate through arbitrary poweragainst the properties
and liberties of the people.
To the Far Left when these break
down through ABUSES to the Law of Nature, is the temporary
condition of Anarchy which is the
State of Nature without respect
for the Law of Nature, referring to
lawlessness of any kind and without compacts to enforce the
Law of Nature;
Anarchy is a condition
that will exist until either people respect the Laws of Nature; The protections
reemerge to recognize and enforce again the Laws of Nature through Constitution"s"; Or else the
people allow themselves to again be enslaved under Governments of arbitrary
power.
Also Understand
that Corporations, Unions, Tax supported Special interests
and undelegated federal and state bureaucraciesare ALLCOLLECTIVES
and state born"Exclusive
Privileges"which should not even exist
in a free country; We have been warned by the
Founders to guard against their existence;
they are from undelegated arrogated powers.
DO NOT CONFUSE"Exclusive
Privileged" "trade" with "free trade".
YOU TUBE VIDEO>>>>>
WATCH Video speech SPECIAL REPORT #3>>>
At right on this
page, with regard to the LEFT attempting to Confuse
our people; Understand the dangers we are
facing!
Radio talk shows
rant about Debt and High income Taxes when the first issue should be How
to make the Federal Government stay within it's limited delegated powers
which would remove the income tax and restrain the federal governments spending
AND Borrowing powers, under a republic, it must not step from the Delegated
Powers under which the Republic was first created as indicated
by the founders;
Not even by one step, NOR ARROGATE "ANY" new powers.
The issues that should be discussed by Radio Talk show hosts and all
media are:
1.) Forcing
the Federal Government to stay within the limited Delegated powers as defined
and established in the Ratifying Conventions and Original
Delegated powers
of the Constitution.
2.) Returning to Enumerated taxation as established in the Original
Constitution; Changing from Enumerated Taxation to Unenumerated taxation
IS an ARROGATION of a NEW POWER and is EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.
So long as the
Federal Government continues to receive unlimited money through Flat
Percentage, Unenumerated Taxation, the federal government will continue
to use that Financial Power against the people.
When you hear talk show hosts avoid these foundation issues, ...
call them on it.
If they still do not understand, send them to this web site.
-------------
"INDEPENDENT BUSINESS" VS "JOBS"
Another topic
that needs to be noted, is the constant selling of the need for "jobs"
as if "jobs" just appear on their own; This is a "PLOY" to increase government
employment and dependency;
The real topic should be on "BUSINESS"; In particular, "INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS".
The rule that increases CORRUPTION and Dependency, is that when
the governments are in the business of "creating" "JOBS", they will "create
jobs" that are either "DEPENDENT" upon GOVERNMENT JOBS; which will
burden society in one way;
Or will grant "PRIVILEGES" to or in the form of CORPORATIONS, UNIONS
or Tax Supported SPECIAL INTERESTS (COLLECTIVE TITLE to PROPERTY), so that
citizens will be "DEPENDENT" upon those "State Born Exclusive
Privileges";
The rule that
promotes a true
Free Market Economy and Independence, is that when government removes
REGULATIONS so that small "INDEPENDENT" "BUSINESSES" which have "INDIVIDUALLY
OWNED TITLE" to their "PROPERTY and BUSINESS", Then it creates "INDEPENDENCE".
So the subject should NOT be "JOBS" singular;
But FIRST "INDEPENDENT BUSINESS" and "REMOVAL OF REGULATIONS"
so that "FREE ENTERPRISE" for those with independent title will prosper;
and create in "THAT WAKE", "JOBS" and TRUE independence which will
follow.
APP
The
Purpose of Government
is to Protect Private Property
The American Patriot Party represented here is opposed to any and
all environmental extremism or progressivism.
Such environmentalism is viewed by this party as a form of socialism
which attacks the very fabric of security in ones home, papers and effects
(property).
Environmental laws are a means of corrupting the individual rights of
free citizens through national and international manipulation of our most
cherished laws.
CBC
45 Minute Special Report
World Scientists Debunk Global
Warming Myths;
Putting to rest the "one man invented" and "Faulty" "Hockey Stick"
tree ring temperature theory.
Notice:
The American Patriot Party.CC web site will be moving our domain to our
new server. During this time you may have difficulties entering by the
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc link.
Use Side and Text Links (Top banner and "Welcome Home" Link
will direct to the .CC site; So for now use the above link or back, to back
to this page.
If you look for us on Google, you will find several access pages until the
.CC page and website is fully operable.
After our move, some links may be inoperable from the .CC domain as
we make necessary changes. Simply use the "Pacificwestcom"
link until those issues are resolved and the new links established.
You may want to bookmark it.
Thank you in advance for your patience as we make this move.
Now back to your regularly
scheduled programming...
----------------------
New!
American Patriot Party Auto Window Decals.
Great gift and Stocking Stuffer for the Constitutionalist.
If the PayPal links do not open our American Patriot Party PayPal page
in your browser, simply right click on link and choose open page in a "New
Browser Window" or "New Browser Tab".
WHILE the other
three republican presidential candidates swing from first to last place
- blindly loved or hated - the media plays with the peoples ignorance
of who these fake republican candidates really are.
Rick
Santorum, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich - All Big Government Liberals
proven by their records!
RINO's!
Republicans
In Name Only!
All three of these candidates have
voted for:
a.) Gun control
b.) Big Government programs
c.) Big Government contracts
d.) Federal Regulations against private property
And there are actually
republicans out there that would vote for any of these three?????!!!
WAKE UP
PEOPLE!!!
Look!Don't be blinded
by big government media, corporations and unions; or those talk show hosts
who blather in their favor, when those talk show hosts are supported
by those very same corporations!
LOOK
AT RICK SANTORUM'S CORRUPT RECORD!!!:
*** Padding
his own wallet as a corporate lobbyist at the expense of taxpayers;
***
Voting to RAISE the debt ceiling five times;
***
Voting to DOUBLE the federal
Department of Education;
***
Voting with liberals like Ted Kennedy on multiple occasions in support of
Big Labor's radical agenda;
***
Urging more federal involvement in housing with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
***
Voting to create a brand
new, unfunded entitlement, Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of entitlement
spending since President Lyndon Johnson - creating $16 TRILLION in unfunded
liabilities;
***
Endorsing liberal Big
Government RINOs like Arlen Specter over conservatives. Of
course, Specter later became a Democrat and worked hand-in-glove with President
Obama to pass his radical agenda;
*** Voting for Sarbanes-Oxley, which imposed
dramatic new job-killing accounting regulations on businesses;
***
Supporting raising taxes
on oil companies, which directly costs Americans more money out of their
pockets at the gas pump;
***
Voting
for gun control;
***
Voting to give Social Security
benefits to illegal aliens, while voting against an additional 1,000 border
patrol agents;
***
Voting to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea;
*** Voting to send hundreds of millions
of taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood - the nation's largest provider
of abortion and to hand out hundreds of billions of dollars
in foreign aid to enemies of Israel
But unlike many of my other establishment opponents, Rick Santorum isn't
even trying to sweep his Big Government record under the rug.
WAKE UP
PEOPLE!
WIPE THE SLEEP FROM YOUR EYES!!!
Rick Santorum, as with Mitt Romney
and Newt Gingrich, are
VERIFIABLE
SOCIALISTS!!!
---------------
How
about Mitt Romney?
Mitt Romney would allow the Canadian
Pipeline to lower gas prices...
But would Mitt Romney
take away federal regulations, so to allow any land owner in the United
States to drop an oil well on their own small 50' x 50' lot?
..... NO!
That is because
he is a progressive environmental fanatic and Corporate patsy;
He will only allow oil exploration and production that can be easily
controlled and monitored by the federal government and that can be
profited by large corporations.
He does not want
true free trade any more than the oil companies, as that would
mean TRUE COMPETITION and lower profits for the Corporations.
How about Taxes?
Mitt Romney says he would lower taxes, But would he work get rid of the
income tax altogether?
...NO!
Because that would take away the
federal powers that the income tax is used to force MANDATES on the States!;
...as well as take
away financing big government CONTRACTS to Big Corporations.
How about GUN
CONTROL?
Mitt Romney LOVES GUN CONTROL
and advocated GUN CONTROL in his own state!
Mitt Romney
loves the United Nations.
Mitt Romney loves international treaties even if they invade our sovereignty.
Mitt Romney is a Typical Socialist!
Two steps forward, one step back.
How
about Newt Gingrich?
House speaker and Bill Clinton's
buddy, he allowed liberal, environmental and regulations to prosper throughout
the Clinton administration and encouraged Clinton's WAR on the WEST.
Newt Gingrich raised taxes.
Newt Gingrich loves the income tax. Newt Gingrich loves
expanding federal bureaucracies. Newt Gingrich loves
using mandates on
the states
Newt Gingrich loves national monuments.
Newt Gingrich loves using federal power.
Newt Gingrich loves GUN CONTROL.
Newt Gingrich loves Government Unions.
Newt Gingrich loves Corporate Contracts.
Newt Gingrich loves international treaties even if they invade
our sovereignty.
Newt Gingrich loves using federal police in the states. Newt Gingrich loves
bargaining with your
rights.
Congress even kicked him out for his corrupt practices!
Is there any
invasion upon your rights that these three would not impose if they "felt"
it "necessary" to benefit their own will or political position?
WAKE
UP!!!
The news media is selling you and your rights down the road!
------------
There is only one true republican conservative running for president
that will protect your rights and obey the Constitution
Congressman Ron
Paul won the poll with 52% percent of the vote. Paul won in both
online and total statewide votes. There was more than 3,600 votes,
which far surpassed the number of voters in such large states as Ohio, Florida
and California that held straw polls earlier this year. Over 2000
of which voted for Ron Paul as their choice for president!
*WINNERAnnual Values Voter Summit
Straw Poll in Washington, D.C.; By aHUGE MARGIN!!!
Ron Paul 37% Herman Cain 23%
Rick Santorum 16%
Rick Perry 8%
Michele Bachmann 8%
Mitt Romney 4%
Gingrich 3%
Huntsman 0%
*WINNERFlorida Fox News
Poll - Fox News Pulls it's
OWN Poll Chart to hide Ron Paul leading Mitt
Romney by 11,000 Votes!!!;(Fox News Screen Shot Source
- Infowars): We would be willing to
change this declaration to 2nd place, if Fox News will post the unchanged
poll numbers AND Chart. Until then, here is the poll screen shot:
Florida Fox News Republican Presidential Debate Poll Results, Showing
Ron Paul the Debate National Opinion Winner;
Results Corresponding with Fox News Graph:
Mitt Romney 22.89% - 16,073 Votes
Rick Perry 12.8% - 8,989 Votes
Newt Gingrich 6.99% - 4,906 Votes Ron Paul 39.27%
- 27,573 Votes!!! Rick Santorium 1.44% - 1,014 Votes
Gary Johnson 1.95% - 1,366 Votes
Herman Cain 10.81% - 7, 592 Votes
Jon Huntsman 1.59% - 1,118 Votes
Info Wars Links to Articles and the full
size screen shot of Fox News Florida Republican Debate Poll:
Herman Cain's (Hermy ObamaCain) win in the Florida Republican Party
Straw Poll can hardly be considered a win for conservative Republicans;
It looks like there is a group of 983 Dependent Republican Government
Union Floridians that love Cain's proposed OBAMACAIN
Buy, Sell and Trade Tax policy; A UNENUMERATED
FLAT PERCENTAGE TAXATION that will guarantee money to government, Unions,
Wasteful corporate contracts, tax supported special interest groups, and
undelegated state and federal mandated bureaucracies.....
I would say not just a few good 'ol Union, government employee and government
corporate contract recipient boys and girls worked their way into that vote....
.
So much for federal limitations set out in the Original Constitution.
---------------
Ron Paul National
Polls Winner!
By just looking at the numbers in
the major national opinion polls; Ron Paul is the overall polls and opinion
winner by a wide margin in numbers of votes cast across the United States.
Ron Paul
(374 - 44.9%) Rick Perry (244, 29.3%)
Mitt Romney (74, 8.8%)
Michele Bachmann (64, 7.7%)
Jon Huntsman (17, 2.0%)
Herman Cain (15, 1.8%)
Newt Gingrich (14, 1.7%)
Thad McCotter (7, 0.8%)
Rick Santorum (7, 0.8%)
Gary Johnson (2, 0.2%)
Fred Karger (1, 0.1%)
Write-ins (15, 1.8%)
*WINNER of CNBC Televised
California Republican Presidential Debate Poll by 75% of 7000+ votes in two hours before CNBC pulled
down the poll to keep it from being seen!!!
*WINNER 2011 Conservatives
Choice at CPAC (two consecutive years)
*WINNER 2011 New Hampshire
Young Republicans Straw Pole!46%
for Ron Paul and only 10% for 2nd place Mitt
Romney.
MEDIA ATTEMPTS
RON PAUL BLACKOUT!
Other News: Left wing
and Corporate Right Wing (Fox and others) media, is avoiding mention
of Ron Paul who is the clear front runner, for fear of fanning the flames
Ron Paul has ignited in the people who understand that the Constitution
is the only answer to bind down the federal government, stop their wasteful
practices and remove burdensome regulations that keep communities and free
enterprise from prospering.
Ron Paul's obvious momentum is unquestionable and his understanding
of Constitutional matters unmatched; This worries the status quo of big
spending Democrats and Republicans.
The Media is making a clearly transparent attempt to prop up the weakest
and least experienced candidates to lessen the danger to Obama, or
if necessary, establish a patsy; Their invented news reports skip
from Bachman to Perry and Romney without so much as a mention of Ron Paul's
name who split the Votes almost evenly in the Ames Iowa Straw Poll;
This is a clear tactic where the media purposely play to the elbow rubbing
Democrats and Republicans to promote those who are the most ignorant to
true constitutional matters; such as Romney, Perry, Bachman who will be the
easiest to manipulate if they make it to the White House.
Ron Paul, clearly the front runner in the battle for freedom and limited
government, is the only real candidate with a unquestionable track record
as the champion of the Constitution. The people would be well served in
giving their support to his campaign.
BLACK OUT THIS.
APP
LOOK OUT!
for the Liberal Plants!
Rick Perry's long past in the
Democratic Party and past campaigning for Al Gore, causes republicans
to back away; as the truth be known!.
Rick Perry's life
time Democrat and liberal leaning and "sudden" finding of "Constitutional
religion" and change to the Republican Party just before running for
president smells of a "Plant" by the left.
Mitt Romney's
Global Warming speeches drop his poll numbers drastically.
Rick Gore, Mitt Gore
and Al Gore....
The three liberal
Stooges!
And Now,
BuySell&Trade Flat Tax Everything for bigger government... Hermy ObamaCain!
And can you believe peoples memories are so short?!..... Gingrich are
you serious?!!!
Least we forget the "intelligent
idiot", Newt Gingrich, who rubbed elbows with Bill Clinton for years and
accomplished NOTHING in either protecting or returning our lost
rights from the federal government. Speaker for how long?! Clinton
Raked the west with Newt and his spineless buddies kissing up to the Democrats.
All Newt knows how to do is talk well, he doesn't "do" anything.
His speeches are full of meaningless babble and double talk. "If", "maybe"
"we could", "would be nice"...on and on and on..." Newt is a STATUS QUO
politician and nothing will change with such an "intelligent" idiot in
the White House. Every idea he comes up with has the federal government tied
tightly to it and to you. Just another Democrat in a Republican t-shirt.
Don't be deceived
by the Status Quo good'ol boys club in Washington; They want a yes
man, and Newt Gingrich has the word YES branded on his forehead.
Conservatism
means nothing without Constitutionalism, and only one candidate promotes
the Constitution;
That candidate is
Ron Paul.
-------
Rasmussen
Poll Says 76% of Tea Party members will vote for RON PAUL!!!;
Ron Paul,
The TRUE Tea Party Favorite!
-------
Orlando, Florida,
Republican Party Presidential Debate 9-22-2011 Review
Ron Paul was the true winner, because
his message was clear and concise.
By limiting the
federal government to only it's limited DELEGATED powers, it
would not be able to grant exclusive privileges that would hinder or suppress
free trade, or stand in the way of true independent business.
The economy would
grow because government would not be where it was never meant to be.
The issue is not "JOBS"; the Issue
is unhindered independent free "BUSINESS"; "Jobs" will simply be the result.
When you hear "jobs" by the status quo Republicans and Democrats, it
is because they want to maintain peoples dependency on large collectives
(collective title) whether it is government & Unions or state born exclusive
privileged corporations (which are "fictitious" individuals in law - but
are large social collectives in fact);
The last thing collectives want is true free (actual) independent (title)
trade as that would compete with them. An example is that Oil Companies
have always hated competition from "Wild Cat" private oil companies.... nothing
has changed.
Perry and Romney are just status quo politicians that love collectivism
and the corruption that follows...Romney makes global Warming Speeches
and Perry actually campaigned for Gore as a democrat; They only use catch
phrases that "hint" of Ron Paul's stands to confuse voters so that they
can get their vote... If any of the others get in, it will be status
quo, all over again.
Let's not let
that happen....
We have the RARE
Opportunity to vote for a true Constitutionalist.
Promote and VOTE:
RON PAUL for President!
VIDEOS
Ron Paul Florida Debate Highlights: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsrxdF5byQM
Review on Ron Paul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWiCY5FaA0U&feature=p
yv
Alex Jones
Ron Paul tipping Point http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=hnqMovlETmk
Michael Savage Interviews
Ron Paul: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=dqw5nEmvnho
Ron Paul Straw Poll for President
of the United States
Straw Poll Results Summary
The ones the media
hasn't told you about:
2nd Ron Paul New Hampshire GOP 2012 Straw Poll (1/22/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! DC CPAC
Straw Poll (2/10-12/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Online
Phoenix Arizona Tea Party Straw Poll (2/27/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Combined
Phoenix Arizona Tea Party Straw Poll (2/27/11) 3rd Ron Paul
Onsite Phoenix Arizona Tea Party Straw Poll (2/27/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Republican
Liberty Caucus of California Presidential Straw Poll (3/20/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! New
Orleans Republican Leadership Conference Straw Poll (6/16-18/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Clay
County Iowa Republican Party Straw Poll (6/19/11) 2nd Ron Paul
Statistical Tie for First Place!
Ames Iowa Straw Poll (8/13/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! New
Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll (8/20/11) 2nd Ron Paul
Georgia State GOP Straw Poll (8/27/11) 3rd Ron Paul
Maryland GOP Straw Poll (9/9/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Pre-Debate
Cincinnati Tea Party Straw Poll (9/12/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Post-Debate
Cincinnati Tea Party Straw Poll (9/12/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! California
GOP Straw Poll (9/17/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! DC Values
Voter Straw Poll (10/7/11-10/9/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! LA County
RPLAC Straw Poll (10/13/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Charleston
County Republican Party (10/18/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Ohio
GOP Swing State Straw Poll (10/22/11) 1st Ron Paul
Des Moines Iowa Voters NFRA Presidential Straw Poll (10/29/11) 1st Ron Paul
-WINNER! Des Moines
Non-Iowa Voters NFRA Presidential Straw Poll (10/29/11) 2nd Ron Paul
West Alabama Straw Poll (10/29/11) 1st Ron Paul
WINNER! Illinois
GOP Straw Poll (11/5/11)
As reported on ronpaulforums.
American Patriot Party.CC
----------
DANGERS AND
STATUS QUO CANDIDATES
Regarding the folly of following
candidates that intend to continue the status quo of maintaining the size
and invasiveness of the federal government, such as Herman Cain, Mitt Romney
and others;
The problem with Herman Cain, is that he works within the (UNconstitutional)
system;
His history shows that he would treat government as a "business" and
not as a "servitude";
This is the exact problem we have now, because when you operate a "business",
you will naturally protect the "business" first (i.e. the government bureaucracy),
not necessarily the consumer (the citizens);
Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan proves this intent.
When you operate a "servitude" under a "free republic", which is the
correct way to run a free government, first you must obey the principles
and limitations established in the "ORIGINAL COMPACT" that the republic
was first formed:
136. Secondly, the legislative or supreme authority cannot assume to
itself a power to rule by extemporary arbitrary decrees, but is bound to
dispense justice and decide the rights of the subject by promulgated standing
laws, 11 (APP
Note: See these exact words in the Rights of the Colonists)
137. Absolute
arbitrary power, or governing without settled standing laws, can neither
of them consist with the ends of society and government...
138. Thirdly, the supreme power cannot take from any man any part of
his property without his own consent. (APP Note: See these exact
words in the Rights of the Colonists) For the >>>>preservation
of property being the "end of government" (i.e. the PURPOSE of Government)
155. It may be
demanded here, what if the executive power, being possessed of the force of
the commonwealth, shall make use of that force to hinder the meeting and acting
of the legislative, when the ORIGINAL constitution or the public exigencies
require it? I say, using force upon the people, without authority, and "contrary
to the trust" put in him that does so, >>>is a state of war with
the people, who have a right to reinstate their legislative in the exercise
of their power. For having erected a legislative with an intent they should
exercise the power of making laws, either at certain set times, or when
there is need of it, when they are hindered by any force from what is so
necessary to the society, and wherein the safety and preservation of the
people consists, the people have a right to remove it by force. In all states
and conditions the true remedy of force without authority is to oppose force
to it. The use of force without authority always puts him that uses it into
a "state of war as the aggressor", and renders him liable to be "treated
accordingly".
194. Their persons are free by a native right, and their properties,
be they more or less, are their own, and at their own dispose, and not at
his; or else it is no property. Supposing the conqueror gives to one man
a thousand acres, to him and his heirs for ever; to another he lets a thousand
acres, for his life, under the rent of L50 or L500 per annum. Has not the
one of these a right to his thousand acres for ever, and the other during
his life, paying the said rent? And hath not the tenant for life a property
in all that he gets over and above his rent, by his labour and industry,
during the said term, supposing it be double the rent? Can any one say, the
king, or conqueror, after his grant, may, by his power of conqueror, take
away all, or part of the land, from the heirs of one, or from the other during
his life, he paying the rent? Or, can he take away from either the goods or
money they have got upon the said land at his pleasure? If he can, then all
free and voluntary contracts cease, and are void in the world; there needs
nothing but power enough to dissolve them at any time, and all the grants
and promises of men in power are but mockery and collusion. For can there
be anything more ridiculous than to say, I give you and yours this for ever,
and that in the surest and most solemn way of conveyance can be devised,
and yet it is to be understood that I have right, if I please, to take it
away from you again to-morrow ...." Relate this to US Land Patents
absolute granting of properties and the Attempt of the Federal Government
to condemn such land (or water by common law attached to the land) later,
or the state to condemn such property after giving consent to adjudicate
such transfer by authority of the United States by which it was a party, or
to create new regulations upon it after granting it with none; To encircle
that land in national monument and control the inroads and water, or to regulate
limits to anything with regard to it, or to arbitrarily tax it into debt
and thereby rendering the land not owned but rented, when no taxes were in
established at the receiving of it, or to tax it without consent, or tax without
consent for things built upon that property to improve its value, or raised
upon it to derive sustenance and earnings from his labors, or derive any
such without consent from those he wills it to. And you will find the neither
the federal government, nor the state government has no power to do so, nor
has any power of such been delegated to it by the original compact(s). For
once property is possessed of a person, it is any governments duty to protect
it, and not to devise a design to wrest it away after all rights had been
released ; As this clearly established by Locke that the protection of property
is the "purpose of government" and the "reason" that the person enters into
society.
222: "...whenever
the legislators endeavour to take away and destroy the property of the people,
or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves
into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from "any
farther obedience", and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided
for all men against force and violence. Whensoever, therefore, the legislative
shall transgress this fundamental rule of society, and either by ambition,
fear, folly, or corruption, (APP Note: See this in Samuel Adams
Statement within the Rights of the Colonists, 1772: "If men through
fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential
natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would
absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift
of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and
voluntarily become a slave.") ....endeavour to grasp themselves,
or put into the hands of any other, (Such as under undelegated/ mandated
federal powers or the United Nations) an absolute power over the lives, liberties,
and estates of the people, by this "BREACH of TRUST" they forfeit the power
the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves
to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and by
the establishment of a new legislative (such as they shall think fit), provide
for their own safety and security, (APP Note: See this in the Declaration
of Independence) which is the end for which they
are in society.
243. To conclude. The power that every individual gave the society when
he entered into it can never revert to the individuals again, as long as
the society lasts, but will always remain in the community; because without
this there can be no community -- no commonwealth, which is contrary
to the ORIGINAL agreement;
When Men enter into Society, it is by voluntary consent; and they have
a right to demand and insist upon the performance of such conditions, And previous
LIMITATIONS as form an equitable "ORIGINAL COMPACT".--
Under our COMPACT, all taxes must
be enumerated and consensually accepted before being collected, and only
after taking a consensus of the population so everyone knows how much will
need to be collected from TARIFFS.
No Capitation,
or OTHER direct, Tax shall be laid, UNLESS in "Proportion to the Census"
or "Enumeration" herein >>>>>>"BEFORE"
directed to be taken.
Since the income tax is an arrogated
power exceeding the limits of the delegated power of enumerated taxation,
it remains unconstitutional because the federal government is expressly
prohibited from arrogating any new power and the amendment and ratifying
process (i.e. a MEANS to make changes) was limited to making
changes only WITHIN the DELEGATED powers; and can "NOT take ONE STEP" beyond.
Amendment XVI(Compare to Article 1 Section
9 of the ORIGINAL COMPACT)
The Congress
shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source
derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard
to any census of enumeration.
Now lets look at the two things
the federal government can collect taxes for:
George Nicholas: > that this "GENERAL WELFARE" was united, "NOT"
to "the general power of legislation", but to the >particular power>
of laying and collecting taxes, imposts, and excises, for the "PURPOSE" of
paying the "DEBTS" and providing for the "COMMON DEFENCE", that is, that
they could raise AS MUCH money as would pay the DEBTS and provide for the
"COMMON DEFENCE", in >>>"consequence of this power". The clause
which was affectedly called the sweeping clause contained "NO new grant
of power" ......If I understand it right,
NO "new" power can be
exercised.
Edmund Pendleton:
"...With respect to the necessity of the ten miles square being superseded
by the subsequent clause, which gives them power to make all laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers,
and all other powers VESTED(i.e. Very LIMITED and DELEGATED)by this Constitution
in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer
thereof, I understand that clause as NOT going a "SINGLE STEP BEYOND" the
"DELEGATED powers". What can it act upon? Some power given by THIS Constitution.
If they should be about to pass a law in consequence of this clause, they
must pursue some of the "DELEGATED powers",
but can by >>>>>>>"NO MEANS" depart from them,
>>>>(N)OR "ARROGATE"
"ANY NEW" powers; for the >>>PLAIN LANGUAGE of the
clause is, to give them power to pass laws in order to give "effect" to
the >>>"DELEGATED" powers".
Also, government employees cannot "seek what they please" .....Union
involvement however allows government employees to "seek what they please";
....."In the state of nature men may as the Patriarchs did, employ hired
servants for the defence of their lives, liberty and property: and they
should pay them reasonable wages. Government was instituted for the purposes
of common defence; and those who hold the reins of government have an equitable
natural right to an honourable support from the same principle "that the
labourer is worthy of his hire" but then the same community which they
serve, ought to be assessors of their pay: Governors
have NO RIGHT to SEEK WHAT THEY PLEASE; by this, instead
of being content with the station assigned them, that of honourable servants
of the society, they would
soon become Absolute masters, Despots, and Tyrants. Hence as a
private man has a right to say, what wages he will give in his private
affairs, so has a Community
to determine what they will give and grant of their Substance, for the
Administration of publick affairs. And in both cases more are ready generally
to offer their Service at the "proposed and stipulated
price", than are "able and willing" to perform their duty.--
Under a free government, corporations
cannot exist because they cannot exist without the state granting them the
privilege of "cartel"; And in a free government exclusive privileges granted
by government are prohibited;
Virginia Declaration
of Rights: IV That no "man", or
"set of men", are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges
from the community, but in consideration of public services; which, not being
descendible, neither ought the offices of magistrate, legislator, or judge
be hereditary.
This would not exclude contracts,
but would remove the government from granting privileges of one or more
people over another, which would provide true free trade, and not exclusive
privileged trade;
Cain, as with Romney and others are "well versed" in Corporations, and
will have the mindset of promoting corporations, which are in fact state
born exclusive privileged trade, as free trade, which they are "NOT".
What needs to be
asked, is NOT if one can run a successful "business";
But if one can "obey
the limitations" set down in a free LIMITED republic as it
was "originally intended" so that our freedoms are maintained;
....and can they maintain a LIMITED"SERVITUDE"; within
those limitations. so that the people are not impoverished, enslaved or
have their properties placed in jeopardy;
John Locke -
201:
"It is a mistake to think this fault is proper only to monarchies. Other
forms of government are liable to it as well as that; for WHEREVER the power
that is put in any hands for the government of the people and the preservation
of their properties is applied to "OTHER ends", and made use
of to IMPOVERISH, HARASS, or SUBDUE
them to the ARBITRARY and IRREGULAR commands of those that have it, THERE
it presently becomes TYRANNY, whether those that thus use
it are one or many. Thus we read of the thirty tyrants at Athens, as well
as one at Syracuse; and the intolerable dominion of the Decemviri at Rome
was nothing better."
Cain's 9-9-9 tax (another BUY,
SELL and TRADE tax system) shows conclusively that he wants to maintain
the wasteful government as it is; at the expense of the people and their
freedoms.
The 9-9-9 plan Cain promotes as with other flat percentage tax systems
(such as the FairTax and Flat Tax) establish taxes in which the government
"SEEKS WHAT THEY PLEASE".
There is no sign that he wishes to reduce the already exceeded powers
taken by the federal government;
But to EXPAND THOSE
POWERS; and by this he is VERY dangerous;
As are all those candidates wishing to maintain the Status Quo;.
The only candidate
showing the will to LIMIT the federal government to it's Original Delegated
powers is
Ron Paul.
Ron Paul's Plan?
The 0-0-0 Plan
that will limit federal taxes to tarriffs; Remove the income tax, prohibit
federal sales tax, etc. and remove the IRS.
Richard Taylor
Chair
American Patriot Party.CC
American Patriot Party of Oregon
"It is a mistake to think this fault
is proper only to monarchies. Other forms of government are
liable to it as well
as that;forWHEREVER the power
that is put in any hands for the government of the people and the preservation
of their propertiesis applied to"other ends", and made use of to
IMPOVERISH, HARASS, or SUBDUE
them to the ARBITRARY and
IRREGULAR commands ofthose that have it,THERE it presently becomes
TYRANNY,whether those
that thus use it are one or many. Thus we read of the thirty
tyrants at Athens, as well as one at Syracuse; and the intolerable dominion
of the Decemviri at Rome was nothing better."
See also "Fascism is
Left" Note at left column this page.
AMENDMENTS
ARE NOT FOR ARROGATING POWER
For those who think the federal
government through it's constitutional legislative process or even states
"Ratifying and Amendment process" has the power of a democracy to
do as it pleases outside the republic that limits them, these words
from the AUTHORS OF both the Declaration
of Independence and ConstitutionPROVE THE
OPPOSITE;
The federal government is limited to the delegated powers
and NO power
can be assumed or arrogated beyond those ORIGINALLY
DELEGATED to them by ANY means;
Norcan the state's
legislatures act on the federal legislative's behalf through mandates,
ratification, amendment or other means to accomplish the same end; As that would
allow the federal government, or any one or number of states, to dictate
unlimited decrees or to enslave the rest:
2." Resolved,
That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress
a power to punish: a.) treason, b.) counterfeiting
the securities and current coin of the United States, c.) piracies,
and felonies committed on the high seas, and
d.) offenses against the law of nations,
and >>>>
NO OTHER CRIMES >>>"WHATSOEVER";
and it being true
as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having
also declared, that "the powers not delegated
to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited by it to the States,
are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,"
therefore the
act of Congress, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, and intituled
"An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of certain
crimes against the United States," as also the act passed by them on the
— day of June, 1798, intituled "An Act to punish frauds committed on the
bank of the United States," (>>>> and ALL
their OTHERACTS which assume to CREATE,
DEFINE, or PUNISH crimes,
OTHER than THOSE so enumerated
in the Constitution,)
>>>
are "ALTOGETHER" "VOID", and of "NO FORCE";
and that the power
to
create, define, and punish
such other crimes is reserved, and, of right,appertainssolely and exclusively
to the respective "STATES", each within its own territory.
"...That this Assembly doth
explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal
government, as resultingfrom the "compact", to which the
states are parties; as limited
by the "plain sense and intention"of the instrument
constituting the "compact"; as NO further
valid that they are authorized by
the grants"enumerated" in that "compact"; and that in case
of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of OTHER
powers, NOT granted by the said "compact", the STATES who are parties thereto, have the RIGHT, and are in DUTY BOUND, to "interpose"
for ARRESTING the progress of the evil, and for maintaining
within their respective limits, the authorities, rights
and libertiesappertaining to them."
10 years earlier in the Virginia
Ratifying Convention his message was the same:
James Madison
6-16-1788:"...If that "latitude" of construction
which he contends for were to take place with respect to the "sweeping clause" (Article VI),
there "would" be room for those
horrors.
But it gives
"NO" "supplementary" power. It ONLY enables them to
execute the "delegated powers".
"If" the "delegation" of their powers
be "safe", no possible inconvenience can arise from this clause.
It is at
most "but" explanatory.
For when any power
is given, its delegation necessarily involves authority to make laws to
execute it
Edmund Pendleton
6-16-1788: "With respect to the necessity
of the ten miles square being superseded
by the subsequent clause, which gives them power to make all
laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the
foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the
government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof
(Article VI), I understand
that clause as NOT going a "single step beyond" the "DELEGATED
powers". What can it act upon? Some
power given by THIS Constitution. If they should be about to
pass a law in consequence of this clause, they must pursue
some of the "DELEGATED powers", but can by "NO MEANS"depart from
them,
(N)OR"ARROGATE"
"ANY NEW" powers; for the PLAIN LANGUAGE
of the clause is, to give them power to pass laws in order to give
"effect" to the "DELEGATED" powers".
It is clear
the federal government has long since exceeded its authority granted
to it by the states through the compact between them, the Constitution.
The states themselveshave stepped from their authority
to allow undelegated and unauthorized federal mandates to enter our states
and subjugate the people and their properties under them.
This, when it is clear that it is the State's Duty to do
the opposite; and that it is to "interpose for arresting the
evil"; as Thomas Jefferson clearly presents.
John Locke establishes the below facts of resolve clearly when a government
oversteps the bounds of limited authority and trustgranted
it:
John Locke 155:"...I say, using force upon
the people, "without authority", and"contrary"
to the TRUST (i.e. Trust established in
the LIMITS set out in the ORIGINAL CONSTITUTIONAL COMPACT that establish
the extent of the Grant of AUTHORITY) put in him
that does so, >>>is
a State of WAR with the people ..."
"....In "ALL"
states and conditions
the TRUE REMEDY of "FORCEWITHOUT AUTHORITY" is to oppose
force "TO" it.
The use of "FORCEWITHOUT AUTHORITY" (without right)ALWAYS
puts him that uses it into a STATE of WAR as the "Aggressor", and
renders him liable to be "TREATED
ACCORDINGLY"."
1.) The first fundamental natural law
which is to govern even the legislative power itself, is the preservation
of the Society."
2.) "The Legislative
hasno right to absolute arbitrary power over
the lives and fortunes of the people"
3.) "The supreme power (legislative)"cannot" "Justly" take from any man, "any part"
of his property without his "consent", in person >>>"or"
by his Representative.--"
4.) "There shall beone rule of Justice for rich
and poor; for the favorite in Court, and the Countryman at the Plough."7
5.) Justice and
Rights being established from "promulgated, standing
and known laws"
Unlike the major parties
whose platforms are both based on national interests of a central party
agenda, the American Patriot Party not only defers agendas not in conflict
with the party goals defending certain inalienable rights, to the states,
but the American Patriot Party and Oregon Patriot Party, beyond state issues,
defers and works to strengthen both county and local community strengths
against imposing state powers as well as federal.
Our aim is in educating the true definitions of freedom and reestablishing
those definitions in all aspects of American law.
Many people have never read the founding documents or the letters of
this country and often recite statements that have nothing to do with freedom.
It is critical to understand the foundations of freedom, otherwise we
undermine its purpose, reason and intent.
What you should do before
joining the American Patriot Party Independent States Parties or Oregon
Patriot Party
1.) Read the Declaration
of Independence. This is the founding document of this country and
the true definition of Freedom.
a.) The Declaration of Independence defines your First
Right and Duty as a Patriot of Freedom.
b.) The Declaration of Independence lists 40 Grievance
that define 40 definitions of a Tyrannical government.
d.) The Declaration of Independence
draws from hundreds of years of slow and agonizing history to establish
the definition of freedom. From the Magna Carta 1200 AD to the Rights of the Colonists 1772, These are 1 page documents - copy
them and save them to your desktop; See the full history. To the Originating Founders, is
the intent of freedom defined:
2.) Know the difference
between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
a.)
These two documents are entirely different in their function.
b.) The Declaration of Independence defines Certain
Inalienable Rights that do not change. The intent of these Certain Inalienable
Rights are backed and founded by the letters of the Founding Fathers of
Freedom; All patriots who died giving you and establishing your freedoms
died for this document alone. George Washington read this document
to his men before battle so that there was no question as to what they were
sacrificing for.
c.) The Constitution limits the Federal Government. That's
it. It is a document that was written many years after the Declaration of
Independence, after the Articles of Confederation of which this country
operated on during the revolution; The Constitution itself and the Federalists
were opposed by many of the Originating Founding Fathers of freedom
for good reason;
d.) No one died to ratify the Constitution. Though
at the time was deemed a necessity by some, this document has been incorrectly
interpreted and these incorrect interpretations usurped many of the purposes
freedom was fought for; Such as Independent States Rights, among others
at the time;
Later corrupted in areas such as where the 17th Grievance of the Declaration
of Independence was usurped by the 16th Amendment of the Constitution first deemed
Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, then claimed "so called constitutional"
by our so called "representatives" after amending the Constitution;
Certain, Inalienable, Rights, cannot be changed at will by
representatives or any man, no matter how many vote upon it.
That is why they are called "Certain" and "Inalienable".
The Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788
See Pendleton and Nicholas establishes this limitation
on the federal government by clearly stating that the federal government
"CANNOT ARROGATE ANY NEW
POWER"; That
any changes in the constitution are limited to the DELEGATED powers and "CANNOT TAKE
ONE STEP BEYOND THEM"
The Welfare Clause is limited to collecting taxes for ONLY TWO (2) purposes;
Paying the Debts and National Defense.
Nothing More. No Social
Programs, No Welfare Checks, No National Health Care, Nothing Else.
The 16th Amendmentremainsunconstitutional
as the constitution's purpose is to protect inalienable rights as presented
in the 17th Grievance
of the Declaration of Independence - No taxation without our"CONSENT".
The word "Consent" is descriptive
of freedom. It is used often in the documents. With out the ability to consent,
you have no freedom.
It is further unconstitutional because the Ratifying
and Amendment "Process" was meant to make changes ONLY "WITHIN"
the DELEGATED powers;
The Ratifying and Amendment
"Process" was NEVERMEANT to be used as a means to ARROGATE
new powers upon the federal government; In FACT the federal government is EXPRESSLY
PROHIBITED from ARROGATING ANY new powers by
ANY MEANS;
This prohibits the states from bestowing such undelegated powers upon
the federal government:
" Pendleton
Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788: I understand
that clause as NOT going a "single step beyond" the "DELEGATED powers". What can
it act upon? Some power given by this Constitution.
If they should be about to pass a law in consequence of this clause, they must
pursue some of the "DELEGATED powers", but can by "NO MEANS" depart
from them,
(N)OR "ARROGATE"
"ANY NEW" powers; for the >>>PLAIN LANGUAGE of the clause
is, to give them power to pass laws in order to give "effect" to the
>>>>>>>"DELEGATED" powers"."
e.) The Constitution's
(or "Central National Government") weakness is that, as was warned by the
Founding Fathers, it is able to be changed, altered and corrupted, if
the delegated limits to their powers are simply disobeyed by our own state
legislatures and federal representatives.
And this
has been the case.
f.)No oath to
the Constitution supersedes the Oaths first given and established in the
Declaration of Independence; and no oath is held to any man
that which original intent the oath was given has been corrupted; Military
or Civilian.
--------------------
Declaration of Independence:
"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the
protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives,
our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
Constitution: Article
VI: All Debts contracted "and "Engagements" entered into
(Oaths and Declarations),before the adoption of this Constitution,
shall be as validagainst the United States
under this Constitution as under the "Confederation".
This Constitution, and
the Laws of the United States
which shall be "made"
in >>>"pursuance thereof" ;and all Treaties
(Oaths and Declarations) "made", or which shall
be "made", under
the Authority of the UnitedStates, shall be supreme
Law of the Land ...."
*** Note that
these "Supreme Laws" "Made"
can only be madewithin the "VERY LIMITED"
"DELEGATED powers.
This was clearly defined in the Constitutional Debates. The Federal Government must stay
within the "limited delegated powers" and CANNOTARROGATEANYNEWPOWERS.
Mr. Pendleton:"... What can it act upon?
Some power given by this Constitution. If they should be about to
pass a law in consequence of this clause, they must pursue some of the
delegated powers, but can by "no means"depart from them, or arrogate"any new" powers;
for the plain language of the clause is,
to give them power to pass laws in order to give "effect" to the
"delegated powers"."
This was also Clarified again
Clearly, by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison after the Constitution
was ratified when they established the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (which See)
"That this assembly
most solemnly declares a warm attachment to the Union of the "States",
to maintain which it pledges all its powers; and that for this end,
it is their duty to watch over and oppose
"every infraction" of
those principles which constitute the "only basis" of that Union, because a "faithful
observance" of them, can alone secure it's existence
and the public happiness.
That this Assembly doth
explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the "powers" of
the federal government, as resulting from the compact,
to which the states are parties; as limited
by the "plain sense and intention" of the instrumentconstituting the "compact";
as "no
further valid" that they are
authorized by the grants
"enumerated" in that compact;
and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous "exercise"
of "other powers", "not granted" by the said "compact", the states
who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for
arresting the progress of the
evil, and for maintaining
within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and
liberties appertaining to them.
"... so as to destroy the meaning and
effect, of the particular
"enumeration"which
"necessarily" explains
and "limits" the "general phrases"; and so as to "consolidate
the states by degrees", into "one sovereignty", the obvioustendency and inevitable
consequence of which would be, to transform
the "present republican system"(1789) of the United States, into an
"absolute", or
at best a "mixed >monarchy
".
APP Note: You can see
how the federal government has twisted the Fifty United Free Independent
State Nations into "one nation" which the Founders had no intention
by the Constitution; A simple limited "compact" between Free and Independent
States (State Nations); And in fact here have placed a harsh warning >never
to allow it.
"That the General
Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming
infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the "Alien
and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of
which exercises a power "no where delegated" to the federal
government, and which by uniting legislative and judicial powers
to those of executive, subverts the general principles
of free government;as well as the particular
organization, and positive provisions of the federal constitution; and the
other of which acts, exercises
in like manner, a power not delegated by the
constitution, but on the contrary, expressly
and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto; a power,
which more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm, because it is
leveled against that right
of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication
among the people thereon, which has ever been justly deemed, the only
effectual guardian of every other right
Resolved, That the
several States composing, the United States of America, are NOT united on
the principle of unlimited submission to their general government;
but that, by a compact under the style
and title of a Constitution for the United States,
and of amendments thereto,
they constituted a general government for
special purposes — delegated to that governmentcertain definite powers, reserving,
each State to itself, the residuary mass
of right to their "own self-government"; and that whensoever
the general government "assumes undelegated powers", its "acts"
are "unauthoritative, void,
and of no force": that to this compact
each State acceded as a State, and is an integral part, its co-States forming,
as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compactwas NOT made the exclusive
or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself;
since that
would have made its discretion, and "not the Constitution", the "measure of
its powers";
but that, as in
all other cases of compact among
powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge
for itself, as well
of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress...."
#8: "...that in cases
of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the general
government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would
be the constitutional remedy;BUT, where powers are assumed
which have NOTbeen delegated, a "NULLIFICATION" of
the act is the RIGHTFULREMEDY: that every
State has a natural right in cases not within
the compact, (casus non fœderis) to
NULLIFY of their OWN AUTHORITYALL assumptions of
power by others within their limits: that without this "RIGHT", they would be
under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise
this right of judgment for them: "
To ignore the intent
set by these original authors, would be to attempt dissolution
of the entire Constitution.
Or as John
Locke 227 presents: "The "Umpirage" is removed
when the legislature acts contrary
to the end they "were" constituted, destroying
the authority given to them by the consent of the
people."
It is clear that the Constitution
was never meant to be distorted to the extent that
the president, federal government or legislature would be able to act without
authorization by the states or beyond the limits set and delegated by the
Constitution.
George Mason:
"...But I wish a clause in the Constitution, with respect to "all" powers which are
not granted, that they
are retained by the states.
Otherwise, the
power of providing for the
"general welfare" may be perverted
to its "destruction"."
This is exactly what
has happened in this country;
From the federal government assuming non-delegated powers
within the states through federal Non-delegated(in theOriginal Compact)"departments"; and non-enumerated taxation
in the form of the income tax;
To the states and federal
governments granting "exclusive privileges" in the form
and design of allowing the creation and existence
of corporations, unions
and special interest entities;
37th Grievance: "We, therefore, the representatives of the United
States of America, in general congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme
Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions, do,
in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies,
solemnly publish and declare that these united colonies are, and "of
right" "ought to be", free and "independent" states;"
39th Grievance: "and that as free and independent states
they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances,
establish commerce, and to do all other actsand things which
independent states may of "right" do."
---------------
g.) Does anyone think that
these patriots died for another differently named central government not
unlike the one they just left and where fighting with their lives to remove?
What greater Engagement is there than a oath given by the founders,
representatives and people of their lives in the Declaration to uphold?!
The sole purpose and reasons for freedom are within that Declaration
and the intents written in the early letters.
Clearly as written in the Constitution Article VI, that the Constitution is bound
by prior Oaths which are Engagements of the People, declared in The Declaration
of Independence, and all agreements set forth in the Confederation; All
those and future laws subject ultimately to those oaths which are "Engagements"
of and with the People presented in the Declaration of Independence.
The Constitution would never have existed without the Declaration of
Independence; and it, and all law, is bound by its intents and defined by
the letters of the originating Founding Fathers of 1776.
Freedom is "defined"
in these certain inalienable rights;
And being "certain" and "inalienable", these rights cannot be given
away, voted away by man or his representatives, surrounded by limiting
requirements (infringed) set of any man, government or institution, lost
by folly to others, or sold.
Here it is
defined in the letters by Samuel Adams:
-------------------
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms
renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason
and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation;
the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it
is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become
a slave."
3.) Know where the Constitution
has been Corrupted so you can understand where the changes need to take
place and safeguards set.
Know that the Federal Government of this country is a bureaucracy, it
is not Freedom. Federalism is not freedom. Nationalism and national pride
is not freedom. Borders are not freedom. Symbols are not freedom. Flags
are not freedom.
Establish your understanding of freedom through the foundation of the
Declaration of Independence and the "Originating" Founders Letters.
Freedom is certain, inalienable, rights.And
these rights are defined. They are not anything you want them
to be.
If certain inalienable rights are breached at all, (by vote, by reason
or other) you have nothing more than simply another form of "socialism".
There is many faces of socialism, but they are still socialism.
Examples of
where the original Constitution has been Breached and Certain Inalienable
Rights corrupted:
a.) Inalienable
right Grievance 17 of the Declaration of Independence: No taxationwithout our "Consent";
Breached by the 16th amendment of
the Constitution; Income tax was declared unconstitutional by the the supreme
court; so what did these socialists do? They took an inalienable right that
protected us and usurped it by changing the Constitution; and calling it
then "Constitutional".
Results:Unlimited funds for the federal
social bureaucracy machine.
What did the founding fathers of
Freedom say about such acts of treason?
In defining Tyranny in government the Declaration of Independence presents:
17th Grievance:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent;
Declaration of Independence opening paragraphs:
That, to secure
these rights, governments
are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent
of the governed; 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 a new government, laying
its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form,
as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Samuel Adams,
Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and
give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great
end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to
freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to
alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave."
-----------------
This letter of Intent presents
clearly that Inalienable Rights cannot even willingly be given away for
any reason.
The 16th Amendment, income tax and taxation of any kind without each
person's willing "Consent" is and continues to be unconstitutional,
and in direct conflict of our certain inalienable rights, freedom and a
free country.
The forced income tax has not only funds unlimited growth in
bureaucracies, it also provides unlimited funds for "exclusive
privileges" such as corporations and unions through government contracts;
and special interests through tax right offs and loop holes.
b.)
Inalienable Right Grievance 36 & 37 of the Declaration of Independence:
define Independent States Rights as the purpose;
37th Grievance:
"We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in
general congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for
the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of
the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare that these
united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states;"
39th Grievance: "and that as free and independent states
they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract
alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things
which independent states may of right do."
Breached by small the Portions of
the Articles of Confederacy, Huge manipulations of the authors of the Federalist
Papers and Federalists, the Constitution and Civil War.
Results:
subjugation of independent states to a National Central Controlling federal
socialist government.
c.) Inalienable right of a people to secede from
any government: Declared in the Declaration of Independence opening paragraphs:
"When, in the course
of human events, it becomes
necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which
have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers
of the earth the "separate and equal station" to which the laws
of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect
to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare
the causes which impel them to the separation."
Breached by the Federalist Papers,
the Constitution and Civil War.
Results:
subjugation of independent states to a National Central Controlling federal
socialist government.
d.) Inalienable
right Grievance 12 of the Declaration of Independence and founder's intent:
The right of the Civilians to possess greater powers than the standing army.
12th Grievance:
"He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to the
civil power".
Breached by numerous federal gun
laws.
In addition to federal gun laws imposed by the National Firearms Act
(1934), Gun Control Act (1968), Firearms Owner`s Protection Act (1986),
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993), the 1994 Omnibus Crime Control
Act and other laws, most states and some local jurisdictions have imposed
their own firearms restrictions.
Results:
subjugation of independent states and free individuals inalienable rights
from even their own states to a National Central Controlling federal socialist
government which also use administrative rules as if they were law. .
- subjugation of
free individuals inalienable rights from Counties by Total democracy (socialist)
majority passed laws
- subjugation to Laws of Corporations - this as Cities
are corporations, and create their own gun laws against the individual.
- subjugation and refusal of the right of a free people
to use such inalienable rights to remove such government as defined in the
Declaration of Independence
defined therein as your First Right and duty: "if any government
...... evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government..."
e.) Inalienable
right Grievance 4 of the Declaration of Independence:
4th Grievance:
"He has called together legislative bodies, at places unusual, uncomfortable,
and distant from the repository of their public records, for the sole purpose
of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures."
Breached by State "Administrative
laws" that can force people to drive long distances to "Hearings" and face
appointed judges federal and state, with no juries;
This occurring, long before the trial in an area local to them, and
where findings of the Hearing, are given weight at the trial.
The findings derived for which information was gathered together from
the individual under great duress to the individual because of this distance.
Corporate and legal agreements (small print) that cause grievances of
an individual also to be held in a state or location far from the place
of the occurrence.
Results:
subjugation to unconcerned contractors of law which have been contracted
by the state and federal governments following administrative rules as
if they were law; Which fatiguing individuals into compliance with state
and federal measures, limits the ability to provide witnesses, presenting
them with unfamiliar surroundings in which to bring and find needed information.
Subjugation to corporate tactics
using the same effect but greater, as such agreements can cause people to
travel thousands of miles to defend themselves.
f.) Inalienable right Grievance 10 of the Declaration
of Independence:
The right to have a noninvasive non-complicated small non-intrusive
and inexpensive government.
10th Grievance
"... He has erected a multitude of new offices
and sent hither swarms of
officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."
Breached by: Huge ever expanding
government caused by our "representatives" lack of understanding of true
freedom and owing to union and corporate constituents who have unlimited
funds to lobby.
Results:
subjugation to an ever increasing government imposed bureaucracy, Loss of
individuals certain, inalienable, rights; increased and ever varied taxes
from bureaucracies and programs that eat out our substance.
I hope this was a clear picture
as to the depth that the federal socialist government, corrupt representatives,
its judges, has corrupted this free country.
4.) Know that the Constitution
does not overwrite the Declaration of Independence or any of the Certain
Inalienable Rights that are the Basis and Foundation of Freedom.
a.)
Rights, which are Supreme Law in a truly free country, are Certain and Inalienable.
Rights that cannot be taken away, given away, voted away, changed, sold
or altered by any individual, government or entity. They are indeed Certain
Inalienable Rights.
About Membership in
the American Patriot Party States Parties and the Oregon Patriot Party
The purpose of membership
allows us to register candidates in the various states and also gives the
party respect and credibility to the media, general public and lawmakers.
We do not require you to revoke any current membership with other political
parties.
On the contrary, we highly recommend that you keep your membership in
your current political party until we have enough registered members in
your state.
So you can be a registered Republican or Democrat and an American Patriot
Party Member at the same time.
Even after we have enough registered members, you may still wish to
retain your current political party membership and vote the American Patriot
Party Platform. This is entirely acceptable, as substance will always exceed
titles in the American Patriot Party.
Your membership is very important to the party. Its fast, easy and free.
All information is kept strictly confidential and will never be sold or
traded.
Mission Statement
The American Patriot
Party and Oregon Patriot Party are for the education and strengthening of
the meanings, rights and powers originally drafted in the Declaration of
Independence and by the founding fathers of this country.
That the states shall be free and independent respectfully, wherein
the 39th Grievance
of the Declaration of Independence clearly states:
"... and that as free and
independent states they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract
alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which
independent states may of right do."
The Declaration of Independence
we believe is the defining document which bears a free peoples First Right
and Duty.
All those who fought and
died for the cause of freedom fought and died for the words in this document
alone.
That "first right and
duty" is clearly defined where in it states if "any form of government"
oversteps its bounds, this includes the Constitution, the Federal government,
or "any form" of government, it is the peoples right and duty
to "correct it" or "throw it out";
This is the first Right and Duty of a true Patriot of Freedom, Wherein
it states clearly:
Declaration
of Independence:
"That, to secure "these" rights,
governments are instituted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed; 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
a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing
its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect
their safety and happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should
not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience
hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable,
than to right themselves by
abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing
invariably the same object,
evinces a design to reduce them
under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty,
to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future
security.
Such has been the patient suffering of these colonies, and such is now
the necessity which constrains
them to alter their former systems of government."
Our mission is to make America the
free America that it was intended and outlined in the Declaration of Independence.
More complete National stands on issues will be be posted on an ongoing
basis.
To Join:
To Join the American
Patriot Party or Oregon Patriot Party see our JOIN
Page. To
start a New American Patriot Party State Party or an American Patriot Party
States County Party, Contact Richard Taylor, Chair, or Matt Thiring, Co-Chair
Welcome People for the USA!
US Military Armed Forces Base Directory:
Army Major Commands, Army Major Commands AMC
U.S. Army Material Command located in Fort Belvior, VA. The official
web site is www.amc.army.mil AMC is the Army's premier provider of
materiel readiness to the total force across the spectrum of joint military
operations. If a soldier shoots it, drives it, flies it, wears it or
eats it, AMC provides it.
MTMC U.S. Army Military Traffic Management Command located on
Alexandria, VA. The official website is www.mtmc.army.mil MTMC
is the Department of Defense's heavy-equipment mover for contingency, training
and humanitarian operations.
MEDCOM U.S. Army Medical Command located at Fort Sam Houston,
Texas. The official website is www.armymedicine.army.mil MEDCOM
projects and sustains a healthy and medically protected force; trains,
equips, and deploys the medical force; and manages and promotes the health
of soldiers and military families.
USARPAC U.S. Army Pacific located at Fort Shafter, Hawaii.
The official website is www.usarpac.army.mil USARPAC provides trained
and ready forces in support of military and peacetime operations in the
Asia-Pacific area in order to contribute to regional stability, crisis response
and decisive victory.
FORSCOM U.S. Army Forces Command located at Fort McPherson, Georgia.
The official website is www.forscom.army.mil The Army component of U.S.
Joint Forces Command, FORSCOM trains, mobilizes, deploys and sustains active
and reserve component forces capable of operating in joint and combined environments
to meet worldwide operational commitments.
USASOC U.S. Army Special Operations Command located at Fort Bragg,
North Carolina. The official website is www.soc.mil USASOC organizes,
trains, educates, mans, equips, funds, administers, mobilizes, deploys
and sustains Army special operations forces to successfully conduct worldwide
special operations across the range of military operations, in support
of regional combatant commanders, American ambassadors and other agencies,
as directed.
USARSO U.S. Army, South located at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico.
The official website is www.usarso.army.mil USARSO commands and controls
Army forces in the U.S. Southern Command area of responsibility and provides
theater support for Army forces and headquarters as directed by the USSSOUTHCOM
commander in chief. USARSO will become a major subordinate command
of FORSCOM and move to Fort Sam Houston, Texas, during fiscal year 2003.
TRADOC U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command located at Fort
Monroe, Virginia. The official website is www.tradoc.army.mil
TRADOC shapes the 21st-century Army by training and educating its soldiers
and leaders while sustaining the shared vision of how the Army operates as
a member of joint service, combined arms and multinational teams.
CID U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command located at Fort Belvoir,
Virginia. The official website is www.cid.army.mil CID is the
Army's criminal investigative organization and conducts investigations in
which the Army is or may be a party of interest. CID provides senior
leader protective-services and forensic laboratory support to investigations;
maintains the Army's criminal records; provides logistical security from
factory to foxhole; conducts computer network intrusion investigations; and
develops countermeasures to criminal and subversive activity.
INSCOM U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command located at
Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The official website is www.inscom.army.mil
INSCOM conducts dominant intelligence, security and information operations
for commanders and national decision-makers, and provides warfighters with
the seamless intelligence needed to understand and dominate the battlefield.
SMDC U.S. Space and Missile Defense Command located in Arlington,
Virginia. The official website is www.smdc.army.mil SDMC develops
and provides space and missile-defense capabilities for the Army and the
nation.
EUSA Eight U.S. Army located in Yongsan, Korea. The official
website is http://8tharmy.korea.army.mil EUSA supports deterrence
of North Korean aggression against the Republic of Korea and, should deterrence
fail, supports noncombatant-evacuation operations and transitions to hostilities
as it generates combat power to support the United Nations Command and Combined
Forces Command response.
USAREUR U.S. Army, Europe located at Heidelberg, Germany.
The official website is www.hqusareur.army.mil As America's Army in
Europe, USAREUR is structured and trained as a versatile and agile power-projection
force, ready for joint and multinational operations, and committed to providing
for the readiness and well being of its soldiers, civilians and families.
USASCE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers located in Washington, D.C.
The official website is www.usace.army.mil USACE provides quality, responsive
engineering services to the Army, Department of Defense and the nation.
MDW U.S. Army Military District of Washington located at Fort
McNair, Washington, D.C. The official website is www.mdw.army.mil
MDW responds to crisis, disaster or security requirements in the National
Capital Region; provides base operations support for defense organizations
throughout the NCR, including operation of Arlington National Cemetery;
and conducts official ceremonies on behalf of the nation's civilian and
military leaders.
Provided by MilitaryDial.Com - home of Discount Long Distance, Cellular
Accessories, Printer Ink and Satellite TV for Military Members.
Pacific Command
- U.S. Army Pacific 8th U.S. Army
- 25th Infantry Division (Light) - 6th Cavalry Brigade
- U.S. Army Japan - 17th Aviation Brigade
- U.S. Army Alaska - 164th ATS Group
- 18th Medical Command
- 19th Theater Support Command
- 2nd Infantry Division (Light)
Unit
Type
Base
Barracks
Pacific Command (PACOM)
HQ Honolulu,HI Camp Smith
U.S. Army Pacific (USARPAC)
HQ Bat Honolulu,HI Fort Shafter
45.SuppGr Wahiawa/Oahu,HI Schofield Bks
68.MedCo (AA)/524.SB UH-60A Wahiawa/Oahu,HI Wheeler AAF
B.Co/214.Av(M)/524.SB CH-47D Wahiawa/Oahu,HI Wheeler AAF
U.S. Army Japan (USARJ)
HQ Co Sagamihara,Japan Camp Zama
9.TSC Sagamihara,Japan Camp Zama
78.AvBat (CMD) Sagamihara,Japan Camp Zama/Kastner AAF
78.AvBat/A.Co C-12F, UH-60A Sagamihara,Japan Camp Zama/Kastner AAF
78.AvBat/D.Co Sagamihara,Japan Camp Zama/Kastner AAF
U.S. Army Alaska (USARAK)
HQ Anchorage,AK Fort Richardson
ArcticSuppBrig Anchorage,AK Fort Richardson
4.Bat/123.Av (TA) Fairbanks,AK Fort Wainwright/Ladd AAF
4.Bat/123.Av/B.Co (MHC) CH-47D Fairbanks,AK Fort Wainwright/Ladd AAF
4.Bat/123.Av/D.Co (AHC) UH-60A Fairbanks,AK Fort Wainwright/Ladd AAF
C.Co/123.Av (AVIM) UH-60A, CH-47D Fairbanks,AK Fort Wainwright/Ladd
AAF
68.MedDet (AA) UH-60A Fairbanks,AK Fort Wainwright/Ladd AAF
129.MedDet (AA) UH-1V Anchorage,AK Fort Richardson/Bryant AAF
USAG Fort Greely/AvDet UH-1H Delta Junction,AK Fort Greely/Allen AAF
Back to Top
8th U.S. Army (EUSA)
HQ Yongsan,RoK Yongsan Main Post 1
6.CavBrig (Air) Pyongtaek,RoK Camp Humphreys/Desiderio AAF
1.Sq/6.Cav (ATK) AH-64A Hoengsong,RoK Camp Eagle
3.Sq/6.Cav (ATK) AH-64D Pyongtaek,RoK Camp Humphreys/Desiderio AAF
17.AvBrig (TA) Yongsan,RoK Yongsan Main Post 1
1.Bat/52.Av (CMD) Songnam,RoK Seoul AB
1.Bat/52.Av/A.Co (CS) UH-60A Songnam,RoK Seoul AB
1.Bat/52.Av/B.Co (CS) UH-60A Songnam,RoK Seoul AB
1.Bat/52.Av/C.Co (CS) UH-60A Songnam,RoK Seoul AB
1.Bat/52.Av/D.Co (AVUM) Songnam,RoK Seoul AB
2.Bat/52.Av (MHB) Pyongtaek,RoK Camp Humphreys/Desiderio
AAF
2.Bat/52.Av/A.Co (M) CH-47D Pyongtaek,RoK Camp Humphreys/Desiderio AAF
2.Bat/52.Av/B.Co (M) CH-47D Pyongtaek,RoK Camp Humphreys/Desiderio AAF
6.Bat/52.Av/A.Co (TA) C-12F Songnam,RoK Seoul AB
ACT = Air Cavalry Troop
AE = Aerial Exploitation
AHC = Assault helicopter company
ATK = Attack
ATS = Air traffic service
AvSuppBat = Aviation support battalion
AVUM = Aviation unit maintenance
AVIM = Aviation intermediate maintenance
Bks = Barracks
CAC = Command and control
CMD = Command
Evac = Evacuation
GSAB = General support aviation battalion
M = Medium helicopter
MI = Military intelligence
RC = Reserve component
SAC = Support aviation company
United States Army Pacific Command (USARPAC).
The U. S. Army, Pacific serves as the Army Component Command to the
Commander in Chief U. S. Pacific Command (USCINCPAC), less the geographic
area of Korea. USARPAC commands active U. S. Army and U. S. Army Reserve
forces in Alaska, Hawaii, Japan, and in possessions and trust territories
administered by the United States in US Pacific command.
In October 2000, USARPAC became a Multi-Component Unit (MCU) and Army
Service Component Command (ASCC) as part of the US Army transformation
to meet the emerging security needs of the United States in which USARPAC
continues to be a key strategic player. The whole idea of the multi-component
unit is to give active army units additional resources to accomplish the
mission. The multi-component integration is important in the overall picture
of the Army's success going into the 21st century. With the Reserve and
National Guard assuming a more active role in total Army operations and
the "One Team, One Fight, One Future" concept, multi-component integration
provides for a better understanding of each component's role in achieving
victory.
USARPAC trains Army Forces for support of military operations and peacetime
engagements in order to contribute to decisive victory and promote regional
stability. USARPAC solicits, awards, and administers contracts in support
of mission-related requirements, including administrative supplies and services,
waste disposal, food services, minor construction, facilities, maintenance
and repair, grounds maintenance, ADP equipment and services, and laundry
services.
Following World War II, numerous Army headquarters in the central Pacific
were consolidated with the goal of forming a single Army command based in
Hawaii. In 1957, the U.S. Army, Pacific (USARPAC) was established at Fort
Shafter, following inactivation of the Far East Command. As Army component
of the unified command led by the U.S. Commander in Chief Pacific, USARPAC
was assigned a threefold mission: Provide necessary ground Army combat forces;
Support those forces administratively and logistically; and Provide reserves
and contingency plans to meet any ground threat to United States interests
in the Pacific.
On March 23, 1979, The Department of the Army announced the establishment
of the U.S. Army Western Command (WESTCOM). Then, a decade later, U.S. Army
forces in the Pacific were further consolidated. Army units in Alaska and
in Japan were placed under the command of the Fort Shafter headquarters,
which was once again designated U.S. Army, Pacific. The new command was formally
reestablished on August 30, 1990.
In the years since the end of the Vietnam War, Army forces in the Pacific
have participated in major peacekeeping operations in the Sinai Desert,
and have provided humanitarian and disaster relief missions in Bangladesh,
the Philippines, Guam, and the island of Kauai.
Although fully trained for warfare, USARPAC soldiers are also skilled
in conducting operations other than war. Whether it is assuring order among
refugees at Guantanamo, providing flood relief in the deltas of South Asia,
or maintaining a cease fire in the Middle East, USARPAC personnel operate
far and wide in peacekeeping and humanitarian missions. In late 1994, fully
one half of the 25th Infantry Division deployed to Haiti as the United States
and other governments worked to restore democracy to that unfortunate nation.
Two years later, USARPAC peacekeepers went to Bosnia to help restore hope
to that warshattered land.
Joint Rear Area Coordination (JRAC)
The United States Army Pacific (USARPAC), in partnership with local,
state and federal authorities, have developed a plan of preparedness for
the state of Hawaii. The Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Command, has identified
the USARPAC as the executive agent for joint rear area coordination (JRAC).
This task is normally accomplished in a wartime theater of operation, but
in this case, it is being accomplished for the state of Hawaii. Teaming with
local and state civil organizations and federal agencies, JRAC-Hawaii (HI)
has accomplished a significant amount in the short time since Sept. 11.
JRAC-HI is protecting its military installations by reducing and restricting
entry points using roving patrols. Guard duties have completely changed.
Guards must now understand the changing dynamics of a more dangerous world,
and must learn to expect the unexpected. Military installations worldwide
are now on the front lines and are the subject of surveillance and probes
more than ever before. Guards must be more alert to activities both on and
off the installations, and they must constantly vary security procedure patterns
to eliminate predictability. They must also be linked to local law enforcement
and must be the beneficiaries — and target audience — of a regular joint
and interagency intelligence summary. Because of these changing conditions,
JRAC-HI reinstituted more formalized guard mounts and instructions — tailored
to the current operational environment.
JRAC-HI has identified mission essential or vulnerable areas (MEVAs)
both on and off the installations. MEVAs are facilities and capabilities
essential to accomplishing the military mission. These MEVAs have been thoroughly
assessed and security needs addressed. Tailored after general defense plan
(GDP) battle books from the Cold War in Europe, MEVA folders detail every
aspect relevant to the defense of these critical sites. Local civil authorities
have done the same with over 150 of their own MEVAs and both the civil
and military authorities regularly conduct site surveys.
JRAC-HI has fine-tuned procedures for providing military support
to civil authorities (MSCA) in the event of a natural or man-made disaster.
As the executive agent for MSCA in Hawaii, American Samoa, and neighboring
islands, JRAC-HI provides a defense-coordinating officer to coordinate military
support of civilian consequence management operations. Even before Sept.
11, JRAC-HI maintained a close relationship with local and state government
leaders, who can leverage many standing MSCA concepts and plans as the JRAC
operation comes together. JRAC-HI's participation in steering committees and
plenary groups, such as the Hawaii Emergency Preparedness Executive Committee,
the Hawaii Energy Council and the Joint Armed Services/State of Hawaii Civil
Defense Coordinating Committee, is instrumental in sharing information and
developing joint and civil-military solutions to emerging challenges.
JRAC-HI has established quick reaction forces (QRFs) drawn from both
U.S. Marine Corps and Army units. These QRFs are capable of moving on short
notice by air or road to any place in the state to provide additional security
or to assist in any other way. While awaiting adjudication at the national
level on the procedures for employing those forces in domestic situations,
JRAC-HI is regularly conducting joint training with civil authorities.
JRAC-HI has worked to identify seams in its collective efforts to secure
Hawaii's soil and people. This coordination is taking place with all the
military services in Hawaii, state and local civil defense (CD), U.S. Coast
Guard (USCG), National Guard (NG), Honolulu Police Department (HPD), fire
departments, and a host of other local and federal government agencies such
as the state health and transportation departments. Also included in this
effort are the FBI, Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), U.S. Customs
Service (USCS) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), as well as
selected private firms and enterprises involved in supporting Hawaii's critical
infrastructure. The Joint Interagency Planning Group, established by USARPAC
within days of the attacks, has been the principal driver behind this effort.
Isn't
it Amazing
Isn't it amazing, that three liberals
posing as republicans are actually
getting any votes at all from other republicans?
... As though their obvious past big government luggage
does not exist; and that their present proposals if elected, do not
promise to increase even more
the already bloated and invasive federal government and to further empower
privileged collectives;
Their statements showing clearly a willingness for costly foreign wars
and continuation of federal & state mandates on individual business
& liberties.
The irony of Patrick Henry's statement over 200 years
ago is ringing true today:
"Who has enslaved the people of Germany, France and
Spain? They have been enslaved by
their OWN PEOPLE; If it happens here, it will only
be as it has beeneverywhere else."
In that same Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788it was stated that the reason
that this occurred in those countries was because the peoples "Lack of knowledge"
and ignorance that produced their own slavery.
Here we have a rare opportunity
to vote for someone, Ron Paul, who actually understands
the Constitution and the limits it has upon the federal
government. Who from his past record, we can trust he will do what he says
and work to reign in the wasteful spending and remove unconstitutional
bureaucracies and wasteful spending.
Why would anyone vote for
someone else? Willful or pure ignorance? So sad.
1.) Republics, once created, cannot
change and are LIMITED to the "ORIGINAL" COMPACT(S).
Samuel Adams: "When Men enter
into Society, it is by voluntary consent; and they have a right to demand
and insist upon the performance of "suchconditions",
And "previous limitations" as form an equitable "ORIGINAL""COMPACT."
EVERY natural Right not
expressly given up or from the nature
of a Social "Compact" necessarily ceded "REMAINS"."
2.) Changes in the Federal Government
are LIMITED to changes ONLY WITHIN the DELEGATED powers ORIGINALLY
granted in the "ORIGINAL" COMPACT; They CANNOT ARROGATE ANY NEW
POWERS;NOR can the states "Ratify" new powers upon them through
the "Amendment" process which is LIMITED to changes "WITHIN" the limited
"DELEGATED" powers .
Edmund Pendleton,
VIRGINIA RATIFYING CONVENTION 6-16-1788: "With respect to
the necessity of the ten miles square being superseded
by the subsequent clause, which gives them power to make all
laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the
foregoing powers, and
all other powers VESTED by this Constitution in the government
of the United States, or in ANY department or officer thereof
(Article VI), I understand
that clause as NOT going a "SINGLE STEP BEYOND" the "DELEGATED
powers". What can it act upon? Some
power given by THIS Constitution. If
they should be about to pass a law in consequence of this clause, they
must pursue some of the
"DELEGATED powers", but can by "NO MEANS"depart from
them,
(N)OR"ARROGATE" "ANY"
"NEW" powers; for the PLAIN LANGUAGE
of the clause is, to give them power to pass laws in order to give
"effect" to the "DELEGATED" powers."
3.)The federal government and all
departments, except for forts in undeveloped territories not developed into
states (which now all lands are) are limited in AREA to the 10 miles
square of Washington DC:
James Madison,
VIRGINIA RATIFYING CONVENTION 6-16-1788:" Mr. Chairman:
I did conceive, sir, that the clause under consideration was one of those
parts which would speak its own praise. It is hardly necessary to say any
thing concerning it. Strike it out of the system, and let me ask whether
there would not be much larger scope for those dangers. I cannot comprehend
that the power of legislating over a "SMALL district", which >>>CANNOT
EXCEEDTEN MILES SQUARE, and >>>MAY NOT BE MORE
THAN "ONE MILE", will involve the dangers
which he apprehends. If there be any knowledge in my mind of the
nature of man, I should think it would be the last thing that would
enter into the mind of any man to grant exclusive advantages, in
a VERY "CIRCUMSCRIBED DISTRICT" to the prejudice
of the community at large.
4.) The federal government cannot
govern any police force within the states outside the Ten Miles Square of
Washington DC; Actually, by James Madison's terms, only 1 mile:
GEORGE MASON:
"...then observed that he would willingly give them(The federal government) exclusive power,
as far as respected the police and
good governmentof >>>THE "PLACE"
(APP: THE "PLACE" i.e the
10 miles square of Washington DC); but he would give them
>>>"NO MORE", because
he thought it unnecessary."
Mr. GREYSTON:
"...It was often in contemplation of Congress to have power of regulating
the police of the seat of government; but they >>>"NEVER"
had an idea of exclusive legislation in all cases. The power
of regulating the police and good
government of >>>"it" (APP: THE
"PLACE" i.e the 10 miles square of Washington DC) will secure
Congress against insults. "What originated the IDEA" of
the "exclusive legislation" was, some insurrection
in Pennsylvania, whereby Congress was insulted, on account of which,
it is supposed, they left the state. It is answered that the CONSENT of
the STATE MUST be required, or else they CANNOT have such
a district, "OR" places for the
erecting of forts..."
(APP Note: the Civil War was
begun by the federal government exceeding this limitation of federal power
in attempting to refuse a state's Constitutional Right of power of
consent to allow or disallow federal forces to keep or occupy a fort within
their state - FORT SUMTER)
Mr. PENDLETON.
Mr. Chairman, this clause does "NOT" give Congress
power to impede the operation of "ANY PART"of the Constitution,
(N)or to make >>>"ANY"
"REGULATION" that may affect the interests of the citizens of the Union
>>>AT LARGE. But it gives them power over
the "local" "police of THE >>>PLACE"
(APP: THE "PLACE" i.e the
10 miles square of Washington DC), so as to be secured from any
interruption in their proceedings. Notwithstanding the violent attack
upon it, I believe, sir, this is the >>>"fair construction
of the clause". It gives them power of
exclusive legislation in any case within >>>THAT district.
What is the meaning of this? What is it opposed to? Is it opposed to
the general powers of the federal legislature, or to those of the state
legislatures? I understand it as opposed to the legislative
power of that state where it shall BE. What, then,
is the power? It is, that Congress shall exclusively legislate there,
in order to preserve {440} serve the "police"
OF THE >>>"PLACE" and their OWN personal independence,
that they may not be overawed or insulted, and of course to preserve
them in opposition to any attempt by the state where it shall BE
this is the >>>"fair construction"."
-----------------
PEACE IS NO
EXCUSE FOR SLAVERY
The greatest danger to our freedoms
is an ignorant and systematic police and military forcethat does
not know or care of the meaning and limits of our government's powers or
the extent of our rights.
This condition allows for these
forces to be misguided by the PRETENSE of AUTHORITY
from those who direct them.
The result will be, to easily use these forces as a tool of force against
the rights, liberty, freedoms and property of the citizens.
The ARROGATED POWERS far outside the limited original
delegated powers, now used of the federal government; in which
they are EXPRESSLY prohibited from arrogating outside the very
limited delegated powers in the Ratifying Conventions that define
the Constitution, are presently accepted by police
and military without question;
The ignorance
of police or military enforcing "ANY LAW" approved by state and federal
legislatures is a real
and actual danger.
This is even though they have sworn
to uphold the Constitution(s) which have already long ago defined the laws
we are to be under and no other;
The blind adherence by military and police forces to obey unconstitutional
laws and directives of federal and state governments; which have so clearly
detached themselves from the people and Constitutional laws and limitations,
has long placed the military and police existence potentially at odds with
the people they are suppose to serve, as they have with their own oath to
office.
To keep from acting without authority,which is to
assume the same status as criminal or enemy, those in positions of
police and military command need to set limits in policy and act politically
to reverse the present situation of this steady invasion of rights and
use of power through the Pretense of Authority.
If something is known to be a unconstitutional
law they are called out to enforce, they need to learn to say NO.
Even if it means that peace will be ignored.
This is founded in Civil Law and clearly presented by John Locke on
Civil Government.
Here John Locke was Clear as to when "the Legislative" of any government
or anyone who revolts against its own country's laws put there by the consent
and grant of authority given by the people who created the legislative and
the laws:
Locke #226. "Thirdly:
I answer, that this power in the people of providing for their safety anew
by a new legislative "when their legislators have acted contrary to
their trust" by invading their property, is the best fence against
rebellion, and the probable means to hinder it.
For rebellion being an opposition,
not to persons, "but AUTHORITY", which is
"founded ONLY in the CONSTITUTIONS and "laws of the
government" (APP: which must follow the
limitations of the CONSTITUTION)": those,
"whoever they be", who, by force, break through, and, by force, "justify
their violation of them", are "truly and properly rebels".
For when men, by entering into society and civil government,
have excluded force, and introduced laws for the preservation of property,
peace, and unity amongst themselves, those who set up force again
in opposition to the laws, "do rebellare" -- that is, "bring back again
the state of war", and are "properly rebels",
>>>which "they who are
in power", "by the >>>"PRETENSE THEY HAVE TO AUTHORITY", the temptation
of force they have in their hands, and the "flattery of those
about them" being likeliest to do,
>>>the proper way to
prevent the evil is to "show them the danger" and "injustice of it"
who are under the "greatest temptation to run into it".
APP Note: Thomas Jefferson did
this quite well in the KENTUCKY RESOLUTIONS (which see) when he warned the
federal government of further bloodshed if they attempted to grant themselves
powers to prosecute crimes that they were "not delegated" to prosecute.
Locke #227.
In both the forementioned cases, when either the legislative is
changed,
OR the legislators
act contrary to the end for which they were constituted,"those
who are" guilty are guilty of rebellion. For if any one by force takes
away the established legislative of any society, and the laws by them made,
pursuant to their trust, he thereby takes away the umpirage which every
one had consented to for a peaceable decision of all their controversies,
and a bar to the state of war amongst them. They who remove
or CHANGE the legislative take away this decisive power, which nobody can
have but by the appointment and consent of the people, and so destroying the
authority which the people did, and nobody else can, set up, and introducing
a power which "the people" hath "NOT authorised", actually introduce a state
of war, which is that of "FORCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY"; and thus by removing
the legislative established by the society, in whose decisions the people
acquiesced and united as to that of their own will, they untie the knot,
and expose the people anew to the state of war.
>>>>>>>And
if those, who by force take away the legislative, are rebels, the LEGISLATORS
THEMSELVES, as has been shown, can be NO
LESS esteemed so, when they who were set up for the protection and
preservation of the people, their liberties and propertiesshall by force invade and
"endeavour to take them away"; and so they (the LEGISLATORS)putting "THEMSELVES"
into a "state of war" with those (the people) who made
them the protectors and guardians of their peace, are (the LEGISLATORS) properly,
and with the >>>>>>>GREATEST AGGRAVATION, rebellantes,
rebels.
Locke #228.
But if they who say it lays a foundation for rebellion mean that it may
occasion civil wars or intestine broils to tell the people they are absolved
from obedience when illegal attempts
are made upon their liberties or properties, and may oppose the "unlawful
violence" of those who were their magistrates
when they invade their properties,
contrary to the trust put
in them, and that, therefore,
this doctrine is not to be allowed, being 'so destructive to the "peace"
of the world';
>>> they may as well
say, upon the same ground, that honest men may not oppose robbers
or pirates
, because this may occasion
disorder or bloodshed. If any mischief come in such cases, >>>
it is not to be charged upon him who defends his own right, but "on him"
that "invades his neighbour's".
If the innocent
honest man must quietly quit all he has for peace sake to him who will
lay violent hands upon it, I desire it may be considered what kind
of a peace there will be in the world which
consists only in violence and rapine,
and which is to be maintained
only for the benefit of robbers and oppressors.
Who would not think it an admirable peace betwixt the mighty and the
mean, when the lamb, without resistance, yielded his throat to be torn by
the imperious wolf?
Polyphemus's den
gives us a perfect pattern of such a peace.
Such a government
wherein Ulysses and his companions had nothing to do but quietly to suffer
themselves to be devoured. And no doubt Ulysses, who was a prudent man,
preached up passive obedience, and exhorted them to a quiet submission by
representing to them of what concernment peace was to mankind, and by showing
[what] inconveniencies might happen if they should offer to resist Polyphemus,
who had now the power over them."
Locke #229. The end
of government is the good of mankind; and which is best for mankind, that
the people should be always exposed to the boundless will of tyranny, OR that the
rulers should be sometimes "liable to be opposed" when they grow exorbitant
in the use of their power, and employ it for the destruction, and not the
preservation, of the "properties" of their people?
Locke #230.
Nor let any one say that mischief
can arise from hence as often as it shall please a busy head
or turbulent spirit to desire the alteration of the government.
It is true such men may stir whenever they please, but it will be only to
their own just ruin and perdition. For till the mischief be "grown general", and the ill designs
of the rulers become visible, or their "attempts" sensible to the greater
part, the people, who
are more disposed to suffer than right themselves by resistance, are not
apt to stir. (Note:
Review the Declaration of Independence for these exact words and or
meaning)The examples of particular
injustice or oppression of here and there an unfortunate man moves them
not. But if they universally have
a persuasion grounded upon manifest evidence that "designs"
are carrying on against their liberties, and the general
course and tendency of things cannot but give them strong suspicions of the
evil intention of their governors, who is to be blamed for it? Who
can help it if they, who might avoid it, bring themselves
into this suspicion? Are the people to be blamed if they have the sense
of rational creatures, and can think of things no otherwise than as they
find and feel them? And is it not rather their fault who put things in such
a posture that they would not have them thought as they are?
I grant that the pride, ambition, and turbulency of private men have sometimes
caused great disorders in commonwealths, and factions have been fatal to
states and kingdoms. But whether the mischief hath oftener begun in the people's
wantonness, and a desire to cast off the lawful authority of their rulers,
or in the rulers' insolence and endeavours to get and exercise an arbitrary
power over their people, whether oppression or disobedience gave
the first rise to the disorder, I leave it to impartial history to determine.
This I am sure, whoever, either
ruler or subject, by force goes about to invade the rights of either prince
or people, and lays the foundation for overturning
the "constitution" and "FRAME" of any just government, he is guilty
of the greatest crime I think a man is capable of, being to answer
for all those mischiefs of blood, rapine, and desolation, which the breaking
to pieces of governments bring on a country; and he who does it is justly
to be esteemed the common enemy and pest of mankind, and is to be
"treated accordingly"."
One has only to
read the Ratifying Conventions to know without
doubt that both federal and state governments have far exceeded their
limited powers; and have, in areas too numerous to count, invaded the
rights, liberties and properties of the people they are supposed to serve;
Their propensity of granting Exclusive Privileges has corrupted the
very foundations of our governments.
The corruption has grown so obvious
and "general" that it is necessary that the police and military deny
the legislative, executive and judicial any consideration of
any use of their force outside the limited delegated powers of the original
compacts; and to yield and side with the citizenry respective of
those limitations.
Become educated in
the REAL ORIGINAL LAWS
of our states and country; Make your choices now as to side; as neither
ignorance or voluntary adherence to law without true authority granted
by those original compacts
will be given any consideration when the time comes to remove all arbitrary
burdens.
Wish PEACE?
Show it by educating yourself
and others and by making serious changes in your government, laws,
practice and policies to RETURN and abide by the original intent
of our constitutions;
Remove and
or refuse to enforce laws that are clearly unconstitutional;
SHUN State Born
Exclusive Privileges such as corporations, Unions, tax supported special
interests, federal mandates, undelegated federal and state bureaucracies;
Remove ZONING laws that create "exclusive privileges between citizens"
and any other restrictions or regulations on free enterprise and use of
property.
-------------------
Without the Constitution and Common Law, the practice of Capitolism
will lead to corruption of Conservatism which will be gutted of it's meaning..
"Some Cautious" (see Caution Below)
GOOD NEWS IN BRITAIN: UK SCRAPS NATIONAL ID and DESTROYS
RECORDS KEPT ON CITIZENS.
Not often is there a glimpse of
hope for change in such socialist government policies;
But here is a good lesson in the expensive cost and invasiveness of
the National ID card that Britain
has tried and then thrown out.
And NOTICE that when
people in government put their minds on the correct limitations to government
and act, that complete bureaucracies can
be "shut down";
Though the british people are still
under the thumb of their government in far too many other areas that invade
their rights, (See bottom video on citizen's
guns being destroyed) this "particular instance" was
a pleasant surprise:
A "CAUTION"
to this news is that other less obvious "departments" can
be used to house the "same or similar" personal information under a different
"Title".
Finances my have made them reverse, but a "socialist mindset" and arbitrary
power can re-implement or work toward greater invasions upon personal liberties
later... Keep one eye open when you sleep.
--------
DANGER ON
HORIZON!
EUROPEAN UNION NEWS
Socialists
Start Takeover of EU
Raisingpolitical groupThresholdstatus before rival political parties
will be recognized;
Watch these videos closely and
more than once, so that you can understand what is taking
place!
Watch as the "socialist party"(the smug and
arrogant little instigator in the Red Tie and his counter part) has seduced the councils
to ignore and defy European Union rules and procedure to pass for the "second
time" a raise in the number of support states that
will be necessary before a political party will even be recognized there.
Listen as he attempts to quell
their fears by stating that it would not endanger "those parties""already" "in the Union"...
and what about those who are
not yet recognized but wish to be!
"Or" if those parties already
in the union are caused to fraction to their destruction, that is, loosing
the required number of states in which to be recognized, then loosing representation
of all those states!
This "threshold limit"
purpose is only there to limit the competition and descent that
may rise up against the will of the larger parties. This is made clear by
those opposing the measure.
There is no other purpose
but to destroy the voice and independence of the smaller republics;
What they should have asked this "little socialist" and
his little Comrade, is why he saw raising the threshold for a SECOND
TIME or even a first timeNECESSARY!
There being NO NECESSITY!
They need to find out who is
filling his pockets and make ready the TAR and FEATHERS; Stocks and prison.
This steady corruption
is a sure thing to start a war;
This is as the other European nations are alreadygranting
themselves advantages in trade over Britain and others.
If you do not think so, look at the
next video below"after" reviewing
this one thoroughly!
SIMILARITY IN THE UNITED STATES
This removal of political
competition exists in our country as well with the very
same dangers:
Our country does this much
of the same by causing a new party to gather thousands of votes
before being "recognized" by a
state as "a party"; And as the population and voters increase, so does
the threshold to be recognized!
The Corruption
is the same!
This is why all limitations
to parties to be recognized should be removed as well as removal
of any government funding for candidates.
It should not even
be necessary to be recognized by anyone;
Nor should the
state be involved with limiting or granting anything based on parties at
all.
Simply proclaiming to be a
party should be enough;
Then let the people decide at the voting booth on what
party they will wish to support.
The result of party recognition
policies is the establishment of:
"EXCLUSIVE
PRIVILEGES"
The corruption shown
by limiting recognition to only certain parties, is a "Exclusive
Privilege" of "Advantage"granted by the state to
existing parties; and no where
granted in the Constitution(s) as a power.
It is against the freedom of expression, it is also a branch of corruption
through the existence of unconstitutional income tax.
It is no excuse to Create a Bar that well financed can can reach, then
state, "Well, if you are good enough to reach the bar, then you too can
can have your party printed on the voters ballot. " as if a list of
party names would use too much ink or paper.
This limits the competition to only the larger and
better financed parties who are supported by other "exclusive
privileged" organizations and collectives such as Corporations,
Unions and Special interests such as Banks, and national/international organizations.
Exclusive
Privileges were warned by the
founders never to exist in a free country.
IV ::
That no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments
or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public
services; which, not being descendible, neither ought the offices of magistrate,
legislator, or judge be hereditary.
James Madison:
"If there be any knowledge in my mind of the nature of man, I should think
it would be the last thing that would enter
into the mind of any man to grant exclusive advantages, in a very circumscribed
district, to the prejudice of the community at large."
Warning by Greyston
in the same convention indicating the granting of exclusive privileges
is an abuse of power:
Mr. Greyston:
"They may grant "exclusive privileges" to any particular
part of which they have the possession. But it may be observed that those
extensive countries will be formed into independent states, and that their
CONSENT will be NECESSARY. To
this I answer, that they may still grant such "privileges"
as, in that country, are already granted to Congress by the states. The grants
of Virginia, South Carolina, and other states, will be subservient to Congress
in this respect. Of course, it results from the whole, that requiring the
consent of the states will be "NO GUARD" against this "ABUSE
of POWER".
"...Adverting to the clause investing
Congress with the power of exclusive legislation in a district not exceeding
ten miles square, he said he had before expressed his doubts that this {431}
district would be the favorite of the generality, and that it would
be possible for them to give"exclusive privileges" of
commerce to those residing within it. He
had illustrated what he said by "European examples".
It might be said to be impracticable
to exercise this power in this manner. Among the various laws and
customs which pervaded Europe, there were
exclusive privileges and immunities enjoyed in many places.
He thought that this ought to be guardedAGAINST; for should such
"exclusiveprivilegesbe granted to merchants" residing within
the ten miles square, it would be HIGHLY injuriousto the inhabitants
of OTHER PLACES."
This is a lesson told over and
over in history;
Adequate Representation Needs
Small Independent Republics
Relate this statement by George
Mason in the Constitutional Debates to what is clearly happening in
these videos of the European Union:
Mr. GEORGE MASON:"thought that there were few
clauses in the Constitution so dangerous as that which gave Congress "exclusive
power of legislation" within "ten miles square".
Implication, he observed, was capable
of "any extension", and would probably be extended to
augment the congressional powers."
"But
here there was no need of implication. This clause gave them an unlimited
authority, in every possible case, within that district. This ten miles
square, says Mr. Mason, "may set at defiance the
laws of the surrounding states",(which has already occurred in
the US and in the EU) and may, like the custom of the
superstitious days of our ancestors, become the sanctuary of the
blackest crimes. Here the federal courts are to
sit. We have heard a good deal
said of justice."
The protections defined by the
Founders to this danger, was that of the limitation of our federal government
to "delegated
powers";
Which our federal government has begun stepping beyond to allow the
corruption we see taking place in "our" country and states from our
design of "union"; It has taken 200 years for the peak of corruption
to begin in our country because of our state constitutions and jealous
protections of them have restrained the progress;
Early Corruption
in Europe's Union
But look how quickly
the corruption has taken hold of the European Union in just a few years;
Those who have bided their
time, have found the vehicle in the European Unionto disarm the nations and
strip what very few freedoms the people there do have (see lower video of
removing their rights to even the simplest weapons).
Where the only hopethey have to retain their sovereignties
from being taken over completely by the banking and corporate elite,...
Would beto immediatelycast down
the Union altogether, or be chained hand and foot
to it until their destruction.
And to deny those, if they
are not the same in heritage, who would find victory in enslaving their
past enemies through the means of finance, debt and dependency; To enslave
countries who had in earlier times had defeated them in a justly fought
and won, open war.
George Mason gave another warning
relating to "this type" of take
over; and
further about giving too much power to a "central group"such as our US congress, which
is suppose to be highly
limited to the 10 miles square of Washington DC except for forts in
the unclaimed territory until the land was constructed into states who would
then take full control and management.
George Mason:"The
objection was, that too much power was given to
Congresspowerthat
wouldfinally destroy the "state
governments""more effectually" by >>>insidious,
"underhanded means", >>>than
such as could be openly practiced.
This, said he, is the opinion
of many worthy men, not only in this Convention, but in all parts of America."
Now let us view the Second
video of the forces within the European Union granting Exclusive
Privileges in trade to some states and not others, listen
to the complaint of the British spokesman, Mr. Nigel Farage of the United
Kingdom Indepenent Party (UKIP):
John Locke: 155.
"It may be demanded here, what
if the executive power, being possessed of the force of
the commonwealth, shall make use of that force to hinder
the meeting and acting of the legislative, when the "original
constitution" or the public exigencies require
it? I say, using
force upon "the people", "without authority", and contrary
to the trust put in him that does so, >>>is a state of war
with "the people", who have a right to reinstate their
legislative in the exercise of their power. For having erected
a legislative with an intent they should exercise the power of making laws,
either at certain set times, or when there is need of it, when they are
hindered by any force from what is so necessary to the society, and wherein
the safety and preservation of the people consists, the people have a RIGHT to
remove it BY FORCE.
In ALL states and
conditions the true remedy of force without
authority
is to oppose force TO it.
The use of force "without authority"ALWAYS puts him that
uses it into a state of war as the aggressor, and renders him liable
to be "treated accordingly"."
John Locke#201: "...For exceeding
the bounds of authority is no more a right in a great than a petty officer,
no more justifiable in a king than a constable."
John Locke #221:
There is, therefore, secondly, another way whereby governments are dissolved, and that is, when
the legislative, or the
prince, either of
them "act contrary to their TRUST".
For the legislative acts against the trust reposed in them when they
endeavour to invade the property of the subject, and to make >>>themselves,
>>>OR ANY PART of the COMMUNITY, masters or arbitrary
disposers of the lives, liberties, or fortunes of "the people".
John Locke
#222: The reason why men
enter into society is the preservation of their property; and the end while
they choose and authorise a legislative is that there may be laws made,
and rules set, as guards and fences
to the properties of all the society, to limit the power and moderate the
dominion of every part and member of the society. For since it
can never be supposed to be the will of the society that the legislative
should have a power to destroy that which every one designs to secure by
entering into society, and for which the people
submitted themselves to legislators of their own making:
WHENEVER the >>>
legislatorsendeavour to take away and destroy
the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under
arbitrary power, they put themselves
into a "state of war" with "the people", who are thereupon
absolved from any farther
obedience, and are left to the common
refuge which God hath provided for all men against force
and violence...."
James Madison - Virginia Resolutions:
"...That this Assembly doth
explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the "powers" of
the federal government, as resulting from the compact,
to which the states are parties; as LIMITED by the >>>"plain
sense and intention" of the instrumentconstituting
the "compact"; as "no further valid" that they are
>>>authorized by the grants
"enumerated" in "THAT"compact;
and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous "exercise"
of "OTHER powers", "NOT
granted" by the said "compact",
the states who are parties thereto, have
the RIGHT, and are in DUTY BOUND, to interpose
for arresting the progress of the EVIL, and for maintaining
within their respective limits, the authorities,
rights and liberties appertaining to them."
SPECIAL REPORTS
#2
EXPOUNDING
on
GENERAL PHRASES
SUPREME LAW OF THE "LAND"?
DEFINE "LAND".
The Founders defined the term "Land"
and the "Supremacy of it, often referring "ONLY" to
the 10 miles square of Washington DC.
a.) Cannot serve police
outside the 10 miles square of Washington DC.
b.) Nor can they prosecute crimes other than the few crimes allowed
to be prosecuted by them by the delegated powers and cannot create
any new laws or crimes in which they would even have the power to
prosecute. i.e. Could Not ArrogateANY NEW POWERS
c.) Lands in undeveloped territories were not to be used to the prejudice
of any existing state; But when any territory became a state, that state
was to take full management of all lands within it's borders for distribution
to the people who chose to settle within it.
d.) The federal government and "departments" were limited to the 10
miles square, except for needful forts in undeveloped territories,
only where states gave permission when developed into states.
Problems occur as warned
by the Founders, when the Constitution is taken by its single face value
and not related the Ratifying Conventions that define the meaning of
the words written in the Constitution; And as warned, governments
begin to EXPOUND on "GENERAL
PHRASES" without
stopping to consider the LIMITATIONSof those
>>>"GENERAL PHRASES":
------------
The PHRASE
and
Extent of the word "LAND"
When the PHRASE in the Constitution "Supreme Lawof the Land" is used, when correctly defined
through the Ratifying Conventions, that "LAND" was limited in most places to the 10 miles square
of Washington DC when describing supreme powers
within the states, and NOT to be
interpreted as a "unlimited power" of
Congress over or within all states;
That "Supremacy" was thereby limited to a SMALL AREA
in most cases (see James Madison below);
And limited to delegated
powers in
all
others.
-----------------
The Declaration
and Intent:
Thomas Jefferson
Declaration of Independence 1776:
We, therefore, the representatives
of the United States of America, in general congress assembled, appealing
to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions, do,
in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly
publish and declare that these united colonies are, and of right ought
to be, free and independent states;
39.) and
that as free and independent states they have full
power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish
commerce, and to do all
other acts and things which independent states may of right do.
"And for the support
of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection
of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes
and our sacred Honor."
-----------------
The "Limited" Constitutional
Compact:
Constitution
1788: Article VI: All Debts contracted "and "Engagements"
entered into(Oaths and
Declarations), before the adoption of
this Constitution, shall be as valid >>>against the United States
under THIS Constitution as
under the "Confederation". THIS Constitution, and
the Laws of the United States
which shall be "made"
in >>>"pursuance thereof" ; and all Treaties
(Oaths and Declarations) "made", or which shall
be "made", under the "Authority"
of the United States, shall be >>>"supremeLaw "of the Land" ...."
----------------
AUTHORITY
"Authority" and "Supremacy are "limited" to the "VeryLimited DELEGATED" powers; and the
words "of the Land" is limited in most cases to
meanONLY within the 10
miles square of Washington DC, and ONLY elsewhere
within the"DELEGATED" powers.
It is NOT a "sweeping power", but a exclusive, defined
and "very limited" power. It is a >>>"GENERAL
PHRASE" NOT to be distorted or "EXPOUNDED"
upon to grant unlimited
powers:
-----------------
MISUSE of
GENERAL PHRASES
This misuse of "GENERAL PHRASES" in the Constitution was first
stopped by the authors
of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution - Thomas Jefferson
and James Madison when they wrote the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions in response to the John Adams
administration passing the Alien and Sedition acts.
James Madison:" ....That the General Assembly
doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has
in sundry instances, been manifested
by the "federal government", to enlarge its powers by forced
constructions of the >>>constitutional charter "which >>>defines
them"; and that implications have appeared
of a "design" to
>>>>>>>"EXPOUND"
certain "GENERAL" "PHRASES"
(which having
been copied from the "very limited" grant of power,
in the former articles of confederation were the less liable to
be misconstrued) so as to
destroy the meaning and effect, of the "particular" "enumeration"
which>>>"necessarily"
explains and >>>limits" the "GENERAL"
"PHRASES"; and so as to consolidate the
states by degrees, into one sovereignty (i.e. ONE NATION
- clearly here establishing something never intended), the obvious tendency
and inevitable consequence of which would be, to transform the present
republican
system of the United States, into an absolute,
or at best a >>>mixed MONARCHY".
A wake up call from James Madison's
testimony and others, 10 years prior:
JAMES MADISON. Mr. Chairman:
"...I cannot comprehend that the power of legislating
over a "small district", which >>>"CANNOT
EXCEED" >>>ten miles square, and may >>>"NOT
be" more than "ONE" mile, will involve
the dangers which he apprehends.
If there be any knowledge in my mind of the nature of man, I should
think it would be the last thing that would enter into
the mind of any man to grant exclusive advantages, in
a "VERY"
circumscribed district, to the prejudice
of the community at large.
...... Let me remark, if not already remarked, that there must
be a cession, by particular states, of the district
to Congress, and that the states may settle the terms of the cession.
The states may make what stipulation
they please in it, and, if they apprehend
>>>"ANY" danger,
they >>>"MAY"
>>>REFUSE it >>>ALTOGETHER."
Mr. LEE
"... Gentlemen had suggested that the seat of government would become
a sanctuary for state villains, and that, in a short time,
ten miles square would subjugate a country of eight hundred miles square.
(APP: This
statement shows that the federalists had no idea of how power corrupts
- the federal government has subjugated not only the state but
all the states today)
This appeared
to him a most improbable possibility; nay, he might call it "impossibility". Were the
place crowded with rogues, he asked if it would be an agreeable place
of residence for, the members of the general government, who were
freely chosen by the people and the state governments. Would the people
be so lost to honor and virtue, as to select men who would willingly
{436} associate with the most abandoned characters? He thought the honorable
gentleman's objections against remote possibility of abuse went to prove that
government of no sort was eligible, but that a state of nature was preferable
to a state of civilization. He apprehended no danger; and thought that persons
bound to labor, and felons, could not take refuge in the ten miles square,
or other places exclusively governed by Congress, because it would be contrary to
the Constitution, and a palpable usurpation, to protect them.
Mr. PENDLETON.
"...With respect to the necessity of the ten miles
square being superseded by the subsequent
clause, which gives them power to make
all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution
the foregoing powers, and all
other powers VESTED by this Constitution
in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer
thereof, I understand that clause as
NOT going a "single step beyond" the "DELEGATED powers". What can it act
upon? Some power given by this Constitution. If they should be about
to pass a law in consequence of this clause, they must
pursue some of the "DELEGATED powers", but can by "NO MEANS" depart
from them,
(N)OR "ARROGATE"
"ANY NEW" powers; for the >>>PLAIN LANGUAGE of the clause
is, to give them power to pass laws in order to give "effect" to the
>>>>>>>"DELEGATED" powers"."
(APP: Note that
state's federal representatives (house and senate) "ratifying" laws outside
the "delegated" powers is an "ARROGATED" power. The
income tax is an "ARROGATED" power; Printing paper
money and not using gold and silver as currency is a "ARROGATED" power; Mandates
on states is an "ARROGATED" power;
The "ratifying or amendment"
process was for correcting and limiting existing delegated federal
powers, NOT to be used as a
means of states or federal governments to ARROGATE NEW POWERS "outside"
the original DELEGATED POWERS, which clearly the federal and state
governments are PROHIBITED from doing (or
allowing to be done) by "ANY" "MEANS". As Edmund Pendleton
establishes)
"Suppose it was contrary to the
sense of their constituents to grant exclusive privileges
to citizens residing"within >>>THAT
place"
(APP Note: Today's
corruption does not limit this to that area and extends far beyond
- Corporations, Unions, Tax supported Special Interests, Undelegated
- Under the Original Compact - state and federal bureaucracies as well
as Zoning grants & restrictions are ALL examples of "exclusive privileges"
granted by the state);
the effect would be directly in opposition to what he says. It could have
NO operation without the LIMITS of >>>"THAT"
district. Were Congress to
make a law granting
them an exclusive privilege of trading to the East
Indies, it could
have >>>NO effect the moment it would go without
>>>>>>>"THAT"
PLACE;
for their >>>>>"exclusive power" is>>>>>"CONFINED"
to
>>>>>>>>>>>"THAT" district.
Were they to
pass such a law, it would
be NUGATORY; and "EVERY"
member of the community
at large could trade to
the East Indies as well as the citizens of that district. This "exclusive"
power is "LIMITED"
to>>>>>>>"THAT" PLACE "SOLELY", for their >>>OWN preservation,
which all gentlemen allow to be necessary. "
Federal Police powersinside the United States are LIMITED to THAT area within
the 10 miles square:
GEORGE MASON:
"...then observed that he would willingly give them exclusive power,
as far as respected the police and
good governmentof >>>THE "PLACE"; but he
would give them
>>>"NO
MORE", because he thought
it unnecessary."
Mr. GREYSTON:
"...It was often in contemplation of Congress to have power of regulating
the police of the seat of government; but they >>>>>>>"NEVER"
had an idea of exclusive legislation in all cases. The power
of regulating the police and good government of >>>"it"
(APP: THE "PLACE") will secure
Congress against insults. "What originated the IDEA" of the "exclusive
legislation" was, some insurrection in Pennsylvania, whereby Congress
was insulted, on account of which, it is supposed, they left the state.
It is answered that the CONSENT of the STATE MUST be required,
or else they CANNOT have such
a district,
"OR"
places for the erecting of forts..."
(APP Note: the Civil War was
begun by the federal government exceeding this limitation of federal power
in attempting to refuse a state's Constitutional Right of power of
consent to allow or disallow federal forces to keep or occupy a fort within
their state - FORT SUMTER)
Mr. PENDLETON.
Mr. Chairman, this clause does "NOT" give Congress
power to impede the operation of "ANY PART"of the Constitution,
(N)or to make >>>"ANY"
"REGULATION" that may affect the interests of the citizens of the Union
>>>AT LARGE.
But it
gives them power over the "local" "police of THE >>>PLACE",
so as to be secured from any interruption in their proceedings. Notwithstanding
the violent attack upon it,
I believe, sir, this is the "fair construction of
the clause".
It gives them power of exclusive legislation in any case within
>>>>>>>THAT district.
What is the meaning of this? What is it opposed to? Is it opposed to
the general powers of the federal legislature, or to those of the state
legislatures?
I understand it as opposed to the legislative
power of that state where it shall BE. What, then,
is the power? It is, that Congress shall exclusively legislate there,
in order to preserve {440} serve the "police"
OF THE >>>>>>>"PLACE" and their OWN personal independence,
that they may not be overawed or insulted, and of course to preserve
them in opposition to any attempt by the state where it shall be this is
the
>>>>>>>"fair
construction".
POWER TO PROSECUTE
CRIME "LIMITED" to the DELEGATED
POWERS ONLY
The powers of
"prosecuting crimes" are limited to "ONLY THOSE CRIMES
listed in the delegated powers granted the federal government under
the >>>ORIGINAL COMPACT - i.e. the >>>ORIGINAL
CONSTITUTION:
"#2. Resolved,
That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated
to Congress a power to:
a.) punish treason,
b.) counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States,
c.) piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and
d.) offenses against the law of nations, and
>>>>>>>"NO OTHER" CRIMES,
>>>>>>>"WHATSOEVER";"
FBI, CIA, DEA,
ATF etc. are all undelegated federal powers within the states; and all "other"
"crimes" which the federal government now prosecute outside these limited
delegated powers are the true responsibility of the individual state's
within their own territory.
(illegal aliens etc. are a states responsibility)
"and it being true
as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution
having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, not prohibited by it to the States,
are reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people,"therefore
the act of Congress, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, and intituled
"An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of
certain crimes against the United States," as also the act passed by
them on the day of June, 1798, intituled "An Act to punish frauds committed
on the bank of the United States," (and "ALL" their OTHER
acts which >>>ASSUME to >>>create, >>>define,
or >>>punish crimes, OTHER than those SO ENUMERATED
in the Constitution,)
are >>>"ALTOGETHER"
>>>"VOID", and of >>>"NO FORCE";
and that the power to create, define, and punish
such OTHER crimes is RESERVED,
and, of right, appertainssolely
and exclusively to the respective States,
>>>>>>>each
within its OWN territory."
THE ORIGINAL
INTENT:
Declaration
of Independence 1776:
37th Grievance: "We, therefore, the representatives of the United
States of America, in general congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme
Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the
name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies,
solemnly publish and declare that these united colonies are, and "of
right" "ought to be", free and "independent" states;"
39th Grievance:
"and that "as" free and independent
states they have full power to levy war, conclude
peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other
acts and things which independent states may of RIGHT do."
The original "General Welfare"
or purpose of the Constitution was to provide defense against obvious
foreign aggression and the setting of standards between states for orderly
commerce, limited within the "delegated" powers.
ALL other powers were reserved by the states and no less to the people;
PARTY COMPARISON
We are often asked why patriotic
parties are so fractured.
To illustrate, we will compare probably the closest party to our own,
the Constitution Party.
The major difference between our party and the Constitution party,
as well other "patriotic" parties, is that the Constitution party still
seems to start from the Constitution at face value without referring
to the Ratification Conventions that quite necessarilydefine the meaning of the GENERAL PHRASES in the Constitution and LIMITATIONSset by the Founders of and written
in that constitution.
We have not seen much in the way of any other party presenting
the limitations established both in historical Common Law that are
still in effect as preexisting
claim to
rights; or those limitations to the Constitution
defined in the Ratifying Conventions;
George Nicholas:
6-16-1788: "....But the "COMMON LAW" is
"NOT EXCLUDED". There is "NOTHING" in "that
paper"(APP Note: referring to the US
Constitution being considered) to warrant the assertion. ....A
bill of rights is only an acknowledgment
of the preexisting claim to rights in the people.
>>>They
belong to us as much as if they had been inserted in the Constitution."
It seems that though the Constitution
Party promotes that they are for states rights, they tend to lean toward
still enacting laws from congress outside the delegated powers over
all the states;Rather than giving it to states and counties
to decide so enforcing state and county laws to NULLIFY undelegated powers both federal
and state; or to leave states, counties and people to empower themselves;
The Constitution Party also still seems to promote the Federal Constitution
as unlimited in power often quoting "supreme law of the land" as
an absolute power, which it is not in the way they present
it; Or as a means to promote goals in the states through the constitution
or federal legislative not delegated to them in some areas of >>>their
interest.
We are unconvinced, though the Constitution Party has many good features,
that the Constitution Party (or other party) would simply remove the federal
hand from the states to such the extent as was clearly intended by
the Founders(though some of CP's state parties might follow others
lead to do so).
Expecting the federal government to act on undelegated powers, empowers
the federal government to act outside the delegated powers;
The Constitution Party, as with other parties, by expecting a "national"
decision, create their own opposition!
Instead of removing undelegated federal powers and presence from the
states, so that local communities can enforce their own laws without
national opposition and interference!
Manipulation
by State
Exclusive Privileged Groups.
Nor are we convinced that if in
power that the Constitution Party or other party except our own would act
to remove "exclusive privileges" that the founders insisted should
never exist in the states.
Corporations;
Unions; Tax supported Special Interests; Undelegated - Under the
Original Compact - state and federal bureaucracies; as well as
Zoning grants & restrictions; are ALL examples of "exclusive privileges"
granted by the state;
If you have to ask the government to do something, someone else is prohibited
unless they too ask, it is an exclusive privilege;
Stating that someone else can
have an exclusive privilege if they ask the state, or are fortunate enough
to acquire from the state, as may be an argument, is no excuse for allowing
that which should not exist.
Yet another of our many goals we do not believe any other party
would even consider, but is critical in strengthening and empowering local
representation and local control;
Ultimate Solution
Nullification by the states of ALLundelegated federal powers, bureaucracies
and federally mandated state bureaucracies within their state borders,
as well as relinquishing their own
state powers by granting all counties within their state, full
statehood for adequate local representation; as well as federal acknowledgment
by each state's federal representation as directed by the Constitution for
new states.
We hope to have these and other comparisons when we complete our Compare
page as well as discuss the misuses of the term "Freedom
of Contract" and free trade when "exclusive privileges"
are allowed to exist.
Education
Directing others to learn the true
intent of the founders by having them read the Ratifying Conventions of 1788 (full day debate 6-16-1788 with
a link at bottom of page into all the conventions at constitution.org) which
define the meaning and intent
of both the Constitution and Federalist papers, is the first step
to regaining control of this country.
Voluntary ignorance
of those who simply refuse to read these documentsis our greatest
enemy.
Fractured
Patriotism
The reason many so called "patriotic"
parties are so "splintered" is much from this ignorance and confusion brought
about by "blind undefined nationalistic patriotism"; Instead
of knowledgeable, historically correct and "factually based patriotism"
which is clearly defined in the documents.
These issues need to be remedied before so called patriotic parties
can support one another.
So long as parties:
a.) try to place the
pulpit or other undelegated issues in a federal position,
where NO power to do so was ever
delegated;
b.) attempt to make "one
nation" out of nation of independent states; Which was never intended;
c.) or refuse to simply empower the states and local communities
were the power was reserved and best served;
...then they will continue to allow all the combined states,
and general national and international opinions to dictate over the individual
states and communities and continue a power over us, which was never
delegated to them, or to congress to do so.
NULLIFICATION
THE RIGHTFUL REMEDY
Nullificationby State or CountyResolution
or Local JudicialJudgment of ALL undelegated federal and
state powers and bureaucracies not listed under the Original Compactby
any and every local county or state judge,or county or state
legislature, is the first step:
> ...that this "general welfare" was united, "NOT"
to "the general power of legislation", but to the >particular
power > of laying and collecting taxes, imposts, and excises,
>>>FOR THE PURPOSE of paying the debts and providing
for the "common defence",
that is, that they could raise as much money as would pay the debts
and provide for the "common defence", in "consequence of this power".
The clause which was affectedly called the sweeping clause (Article VI) contained "NO new
grant of power". To illustrate this position, he
observed that, if it had been added at the end of every one of the enumerated
powers, instead of being inserted at the end of all, it would be obvious
to any one that it was "NO" augmentation of power.
If, for instance, at the end of the clause granting power to lay and
collect taxes, it had been added that they should have power to make necessary
and proper laws to lay and collect taxes, who could suspect it to be an
addition of power? As it would grant "NO"new power if inserted at
the end of each clause, it could not when subjoined to the whole.
He then proceeded thus: But, says he, who is to determine the
extent of such powers?
I say, the same power which, in >>>>>>>ALL
well-regulated communities, determines the "extent" of "legislative"
powers.
If they exceed these
powers, the "JUDICIARY" WILL declare it "VOID",
or else "the PEOPLE" will have
a "RIGHT" to declare it "VOID".
Kentucky Resolution
1798
Thomas Jefferson:
".....that it does also believe, that to take from the States all
the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated
government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations
solemnly agreed to in that compact, is "NOT" for the peace,
happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this commonwealth
is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit
to undelegated, and consequently
unlimited powersin
>>>"NO""MAN", or "BODY of MEN"
on EARTH:
that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the
members of the general government, being chosen by the people, a change
by the people would be the constitutional remedy;
>>>>>>>BUT, where powers
are assumedwhich have NOT been delegated,
a >>>"NULLIFICATION"
of the act is the "RIGHTFUL REMEDY"
thatevery State has a natural RIGHT in cases not
within the compact, (casus non fœderis) to NULLIFY
of their OWN AUTHORITY"ALL" assumptions of
power by others within their limits:
thatwithout
this "RIGHT", they would be under the dominion,
absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of
judgment for them:"
Local and StateJudges who do not Nullify
on a regular basisany and all undelegated federal
powers and bureaucracies are the first problem to be removed; and
replaced with those who will.
SPECIAL REPORTS
#3
Federal Government and Socialists
Demonizing that which should be exalted
and Confusing that which was clearly written.
Speeches and Videos
to Remind Us.
Dwight D. Eisenhower's
Secretary of Agriculture, Ezra Taft Benson
Below are two subjects, The first
is where the Executive organizes others in government to do his own
bidding; and Second, the practice past and present, to use such confusion
as mentioned in the above videos, to demonize those things that in freedom
we should be exalting. In this subject, the MILITIAS.
See the below VIDEO of Obama
creating a special branch in government of his own making, and purposes;
So to exceed his authority.
A Warning from John
Locke about the Executiveverbally establishing his intentions
to dictate powers not delegated to him:
John Locke
168: The old question will
be asked in this matter of prerogative, "But who shall be judge when
this power is made a right use of?" I answer: Between an executive power
in being, with such a prerogative, and a legislative that depends
upon his will for their convening, there can
be no judge on earth.
As there can be none between
the legislative and the people, should either the executive or
the legislative, when they have got the power in their hands, design, or
go about to enslave or destroy them, the people have
no other remedy in this, as in "ALL other
cases" where they have no judge on earth,
but to >>> appeal to
Heaven;(APP Note: This Appeal to Heaven
is clearly written in the Declaration of Independence) for the rulers
in such attempts, exercising a power the people NEVER put
into their hands, who can NEVER be supposed
to consent that anybody should rule over them for their harm,
do that which they have NOT a right to do.
And where the >>>body of the people,
or ANY SINGLE MAN, are deprived of
their right, "or" are under
the >>>"exercise of
a power WITHOUT right", having no appeal on earth they
have a liberty to appeal to Heavenwhenever THEY
judge the cause of >>>"SUFFICIENT MOMENT"."
John Locke
222: "...He (the Executive) acts alsocontrary to his trustwhen he
employs the force, treasure, and >>>offices of the society
to corrupt the representatives
and gain them to his purposes, when he openly pre-engages
the electors, and prescribes, to their choice, such whom he has, by solicitation,
threats, promises, or >>>otherwise, won to his "designs", and "employs them" to bring
in such who have promised beforehand what to vote and >>>what
to enact....
(APP: Relate
this to below video Obama creating a new branch to incarcerate indefinitely
those who "He or the legislative" deems dangerous)>>>
...To prepare
such an assembly as this, and endeavour to set up
the declared abettors of his own will, for the
true representatives of the people, and the law-makers of the
society, is certainly
as >>>GREAT a BREACH OF TRUST, and as perfect a declaration of a
"DESIGN" to
SUBVERT the government, as is possible to be met
with.
To which, if one shall add rewards and punishments visibly employed
to the same end, and all the arts
of perverted law made use of to take off and destroy all that
stand in the way of such a >>"design",
and will not comply and consent to betray the liberties
of their country, it will be
>>>>past doubt what is doing.
What power they ought to have in the society who thus employ it contrary to
the TRUST that along with it in its FIRST institution (Original Compact i.e. Constitution
and limited delegated powers), is easy to determine; and one cannot
but see that he who has once attempted
any such thing as this >>>cannot any longer be trusted."
--------------------
See this in the Declaration of Independence " ... But
when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
the same object, evinces a
"DESIGN" to reduce them
under absolute despotism, it is their RIGHT, it is their
DUTY, to throw off
such government and to provide new
guards for their future security"and compareLocke 223-226)
"#2. Resolved, That the
Constitution of the United States,
having delegated to Congress
a power to:
a.) punish treason,
b.) counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States,
c.) piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas (only), and
d.) offenses against the law of nations, and
>>>>>>>"NO OTHER" CRIMES,
>>>>>>>"WHATSOEVER";"
---------------------
2.) Government
Demonizing that which should be EXALTED.
LOCAL MILITIAS
George Mason ten years earlier
warning of the demonizing of the militia by governments illustrated the
dangers:
Mr. GEORGE MASON(Virginia Ratifying conventions 6-16-1788):"asked to
what purpose the laws were read. The objection was, that >>>too
much power was given to Congress powerthat would finally destroy
the state governments more effectually by insidious, >>>underhanded
means, than such as could be openly practiced.
This, said he, is the opinion
of many worthy men, not only in this Convention, but in all parts of America.These laws could only show that
the legislature of this state could pass such acts. He thought they
militated against the cession of this power to Congress, because the
state governments could call forth the militia when necessary, so as to compel
a submission to the laws; and as they were competent to it,Congress ought not to have
the power.
George Mason then Warns of
the danger:
The meeting of three or four
persons might be called an insurrection, (APP: by the federal government) and the militia
(Now it would be standing
army under control of congress)might be called out to disperse
them.(i.e.
against the people and their liberties for "the federal or state government's"
own purposes)
He was not satisfied
with {416} the explanation of the word "organization" by the gentleman
in the military line, (Mr. Lee.)
He thought they were not confined
to the technical explanation, but that Congress could inflict severe
and ignominious punishments on the militia(APP: then, ALL the people), as a necessary
incident to the power of organizing
and disciplining them. The gentleman had said there was
no danger, because the laws respecting the militia were less rigid in the
other states than this. This was NO conclusive
argument. His fears, as he had before
expressed, were, that grievous punishments
would be inflicted, in order to render the service
disagreeable to the "militia themselves", and "induce them" to
wish its abolition, >>>>>which would afford a >>>>"pretence"
for establishing a "standing
army".
(APP Note: This has already happened)
He was convinced the STATE GOVERNMENT"S"
ought to have the control of the militia,except
when they were absolutely necessary for general purposes. The gentleman
had said that they would be "only subject to martial law when in "actual
service".He demanded >>>>what
was to hinder Congress from >>>inflicting it always, and
making a >>>general law for the purpose.
(APP Note: This has already happened)
>>>>If
so, said he, it must finally
produce, most infallibly, the annihilation of the state governments. These were his
apprehensions; but he prayed God they might be groundless."
---------------
RELATED VIDEO
The below video has poor audio
due to the person creating it having recorded music for effects; Best if volume
is lower to reduce static noise.
The presentation is however good
and underscores the fact that government has created their own issues bystepping outside the limited delegated
powers and have imposed upon the people burdensome
taxes, caused
by the creation and support of Exclusive Privileged organizations
such as:
a.)Unions, with dictated maximumwages - salaries (prevailing wages) in and out of government forcing
citizens to pay them through arbitrary, unconstitutional and unconsensual
taxation;
b.)Corporations, and "exclusive privileged" government contracts that limit
competition by actual individuals under the guise of free trade; Paid both
exaggerated profits and also maximum wages &"professional"
salaries(prevailing wages) through those contracts;
c.) Undelegated
laws accepted
by states in the form of "mandates" formed by Special Interests
Groups
created and paid through tax dollars assisted from a unconstitutional
income tax that allows tax write-offs when moneys are given to "so called"
"Non Profits" insuring steady flow of capital for support; Such "lawsplacing undo
andarbitrary burdens
upon the people and their properties;
Further aggravated by Corporate funds to establish environmental laws
they can benefit by, that limits outside competition;
and "land trusts" taking land out of private
ownership
and placing it into government hands so that it can only be accessed
through large corporate exclusive privileged contracts.
d.) Undelegated
(under the original compact) federal and state bureaucracies
As a result, harsh and unconstitutional
regulations have
been establishedwithout constitutional authorityas a result of such laws and
bureaucraciesnever delegated to any
government through the constitution;
Therefor, as Thomas
Jefferson has presented in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutionssuch laws and regulations are
"VOID" and of "NO FORCE".
-----------------
Below VIDEO
Includes:
CSpan Coverage
of Special Congressional panel and conference with Militias
Obama's Unlimited Detention Plan for those who would oppose his
will even BEFORE they commit a crime;
Proclaiming rule of law and yet defying the rule of law in one breath:
Review again Thomas Jefferson's words in the Kentucky Resolutions - #2 limiting the federal government
to prosecuting only those crimes delegated to it and: "No other
crimes whatsoever"
Militias Training to Protect the Constitution as it was written and
intended.
Remember, that the correct definition
for militia are those local citizens, individuals or groups, defined by
James Madison: "Officered by
men chosen among themselves";
If not, it is not a militia.
All other definitions are fabrications.
If chosen by government, they are a standing army.
George Masonon the definition of militia:Warns of the now present dangers
if they change from being what they were; That is that: "They are the
whole people."
Mr. GEORGE
MASON. Mr. Chairman, a worthy member
has asked who are the militia,if they benot "the people"of this country,
and if we are not to be protected from the fate of the Germans, Prussians,
by OUR representation?I ask, Who
are the militia?They consist now of the "whole
people", except a few public officers.
But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper
on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day
may not consist of all classes,
high and low, and {426} rich and poor;
but
they may be confined to the lower and middle classes of the people,
granting exclusion to the
higher classes of the people. If we should ever see that
day, the most ignominious punishments and heavy fines may be expected.
Under the present government, all ranks of people are subject to militia
duty (APP: "Local").Under such
a full and equal representation as "OURS", there can be no ignominious punishment
inflicted.But under this "national",
or rather "consolidated government", the case will be different.The representation
being so "small and inadequate", they will have NO fellow-feeling
for the people. They may discriminate people
in their own predicament, and exempt from duty all the officers and lowest
creatures of the "national government".If there were
a more "particular definition of their powers", and a clause exempting the
militia from martial law except when in actual service, and from fines and
punishments of an unusual nature, then we might expect that the militia would
be what they are.
But, if this be not the case,
we cannot say how long all classes of people will be included in the militia.There willnot be
the same reason to expect it,because the government will be administered
by "different people".We know what they are now,
but know not how soon they may be altered.(for more see full
day debate)
Mr. JOHN MARSHALL asked if gentlemen
were serious when they asserted that, if the state governments had power
to interfere with the militia, it was by implication. If they were, he asked
the committee whether the least attention would not show that they
were mistaken.The state governments "DID
NOT derive their powers from the general government";but each
government derived its powers from the people, and each was to "act
according to the powers given it".Would any gentleman
deny this? He demanded if powers not given were retained by implication.
Could any man say so?Could any man
say that this power was not retained by the states, as they had not given
it away?For, says he, does not
a power remain till it is given away? The state legislatures had power
to command and govern their militia before, and have it still, undeniably,
unless there be something in this Constitution that takes it away.
For "Continental" purposes Congress may call
forth the militia, as to suppress insurrections and repel invasions. But the power
given to the states by the people is "NOT taken away"; for the Constitution
does NOT say so. In the Confederation Congress had
this power; but the state legislatures had it "also". The power of
legislating given them within the ten miles square is exclusive of the states,
because it is expressed to be exclusive. The truth is, that when
power is given to the general legislature, if it was in the state legislature
before, both shall exercise it; unless there be an incompatibility
in the exercise by one to that by the other, or negative words precluding
the state governments from it. But there are NO negative words here.
It rests, therefore, w