The Great Deception -> * 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement

* 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement, Summary /General Info; The Way to Go

Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

jofortruth	Posted: Jan 24 2009, 06:30 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	10th Amendment State Legislation - Summary Publish at Scribd or explore others: Non-fiction Books 10th amendment state sovereignty

jofortruth

Posted: Feb 4 2009, 04:38 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

The chronology of how this incredible 10th Amendment RE-AFFIRMATION document came into being. It started in Colorado.
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4199.0

QUOTE

It started in Colorado in the fall of 1993 when the direction of the Clinton police state was seen in full bloom with the obfuscation of the first and utterly botched World Trade Center bombing... when the Tower did not come down the news INSTANTLY filled with the BATF storming the church of the Branch Davidians, the stand off, and the 51 day siege began... complete with wall to wall coverage on all the networks and the World� Trade Center went back burner for over 2 months...�

Colorado State Representative Charles R. Duke of Monument, originally from Arkansas but a Colorado resident for many years knew the excesses and avarice of Clinton in the days while he was the governor of Arkansas... Charlie held out little hope that the Country could withstand even 4 years of the kind of Clinton policies that gutted Arkansas.

Charlie knew that as President, Clinton would completely destroy this nation and the method that he would use would be federal mandates, disguised as do-gooder policies, ... and many, many, executive orders.� It was then that Charlie struck upon the idea of a 10th amendment Resolution, a re-affirmation of Constitutional LAW that would absolutely mandate that the federal government show Constitutionality, for every line of every clause of each mandate they sent out to the state's. This re-affirmation of the 10th Amendment demanded that the feds show Constitutional jurisdiction, before it could be implemented by the state.�

At that time Charlie Duke was a little-known State Representative, he had no staff to speak of except for one part-time college student and a close friend Mary Anne, who could only be there on Mondays.� I heard Charlie speaking on a local talk radio show and called the station and talked with him on the air.�

In that conversation after listening to his idea, I told him that I would do what ever it took to see that his 10th amendment resolution would spread across the land as a counter to the horrors that we had seen in the months before at Waco, the WTC in New York, and at Ruby Ridge Idaho. This was in November of 1993 ... By January... I was Charlies Aide...

At the beginning of the session for the 59th Colorado State Legislative Assembly, the first week of January 1994, my work began ... My background was in the Constitution, yet I answered phones, answered questions from walk ins, read and answered letters, and explained to reporters and other news-people what the 10th Amendment resolution truly meant to this country. I scheduled radio appearances for Charlie, I weeded out the agents provocateur, from the bonafide constituents, that were to see him ... and I spent a lot of time on the radio in my private capacity, as well as in correspondence, lobbying for this incredible document.�

On April 21, 1994,. after over 4 months of wrangling votes, the document was finally signed by the President of the Senate Tom Norton, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives Charles Berry ... It was witnessed by the secretaries of both house offices and the Gold Seal of the State of Colorado was affixed. I received a� photocopy of the document from Charlie that day ... it was my birthday...kind of a birthday present...

By the beginning of the 1995 Legislative session the office was brimming with new intern's, each one "troll-screened" and each was endowed with "Constitution Savvy". For the next 2 1/2 years we lobbied state senators and Representatives throughout the Republic, touting the virtues of this 10th Amendment Resolution, until it was finally heard, and/or adopted, by at least one house of the state's legislature, by 47 of the 50 states!� In over a dozen of the states, it was adopted in both houses and then sent to Washington, putting the feds on notice.� A copy was also sent to the White House to put the main perp of the government excesses'... William Jefferson Clinton on notice as well!

Most folks have never heard of this movement ... primarily for the same reason that we're not hearing much about the SPP/NAU on mainstream news with the exception of Lou Dobbs ... It has been hushed up.� Make no mistake about it, half states in this union have a contemperary, strident re-affirmation of CONSTITUTIONAL LAW on the books...and if exerted will put an end all this right now, if the people will just claim their birth-right... The federal government is our agent created by Constitutional Contract with the people and the state's... when they no longer do the state and the people's bidding ... Well you know the story... they are in breach of constitutional contract and must be reined in, or removed.

When I sign a contract with an attorney he becomes my agent... in exchange for my money, I expect representation from him that lives up to the contract...What is happening here is that the federal government has been taking our money yet is working for the other side...

Well, it looks like the 10th amendment Resolution may finally get to do what it was designed to do ... whip the federal government back into shape ... Constitutional shape that is, if we will only use it!

...to be continued...

--Oldyoti

J.T. Coyote

J.T. Coyote was on the AJ show Feb 16, 2009 - Audio will be here soon: (Time starts at 2:25:00)
http://www.thealexjonesshow.com/

QUOTE

Alex talks with Prison Planet forum moderator and former Colorado legislative aide J.T. Coyote (aide to Charles Duke), who worked on a Tenth Amendment resolution in 1994. Alex talks about the growing states' rights and sovereignty movement and takes a blitz of calls.

(Transcript is at the above link also)

jofortruth

Posted: Feb 4 2009, 05:30 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

New York v. United States (1992) Legal Case being used in most 10th Amendment Resolutions:
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_91_543/

Written Opinion is here:
http://supreme.justia.com/us/505/144/case.html

QUOTE

Conclusion:

In a 6-3 decision, the Court upheld two of the three provisions of the Act under review, reasoning that Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause to use financial rewards and access to disposal sites as incentives for state waste management. The third provision, the "take-title" qualification, stipulated that states must take legal ownership and liability for low-level waste or by the regulatory act. "Either type of federal action," wrote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, "would 'commandeer' state governments into the service of federal regulatory purposes, and would for this reason be inconsistent with the Constitution's division of authority between federal and state governments." This last provision violated the Tenth Amendment.

PDF Version:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/supreme/505/144.pdf

jofortruth

Posted: Feb 4 2009, 06:09 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Bill Clinton signed this draconian 9th and 10th amendment killing Executive Order on May 14, 1998
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4199.0

QUOTE

This was a brazen attempt at amending the Constitution by the executive, as things played out over the next few months however it was nullified by Executive Order 13092, and defunded by the Omnibus appropriations Bill of 1998. It needs to be rescinded however, completely destroyed!

QUOTE

EO 13083 Federalism
Suspended by EO 13092

Defunded by an amendment to the Omnibus Appropriations Bill of 1998.

This EO trash the 9th and 10th Amendments on Federalism.

EO 13083 has been nullified and replaced with EO 13132.

Also see

List 13083 for background and references.

Sources:
http://library.whitehouse.gov/cgi-bin/web_...=all+by+clinton

http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/w...action=retrieve

The White House Virtual Library

Executive Orders

FEDERALISM

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

(Birmingham, England) ?

For Immediate Release May 14, 1998

EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

FEDERALISM
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to guarantee the division of governmental responsibilities, embodied in the Constitution, between the Federal Government and the States that was intended by the Framers and application of those principles by the Executive departments and agencies in the formulation and implementation of policies, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) "State" or "States" refer to the States of the United States of America, individually or collectively, and, where relevant, to State governments, including units of local government and other political subdivisions established by the States.

(b) "Policies that have federalism implications" refers to Federal regulations, proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects on the States or on the relationship, or the distribution of power and responsibilities, between the Federal Government and the States.

� "Agency" means any authority of the United States that is an "agency" under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

Sec. 2. Fundamental Federalism Principles. In formulating and implementing policies that have federalism implications, agencies shall be guided by the following fundamental federalism principles:

(a) The structure of government established by the Constitution is premised upon a system of checks and balances.

(b) The Constitution created a Federal Government of supreme, but limited, powers. The sovereign powers not granted to the Federal Government are reserved to the people or to the States, unless prohibited to the States by the Constitution.

� Federalism reflects the principle that dividing power between the Federal Government and the States serves to protect individual liberty. Preserving State authority provides an essential balance to the power of the Federal Government, while preserving the supremacy of Federal law provides an essential balance to the power of the States.

(d) The people of the States are at liberty, subject only to the limitations in the Constitution itself or in Federal law, to define the moral, political, and legal character of their lives.

(e) Our constitutional system encourages a healthy diversity in the public policies adopted by the people of the several States according to their own conditions, needs, and desires. States and local governments are often uniquely situated to discern the sentiments of the people and to govern accordingly.

(f) Effective public policy is often achieved when there is competition among the several States in the fashioning of different approaches to public policy issues. The search for enlightened public policy is often furthered when individual States and local governments are free to experiment with a variety of approaches to public issues. Uniform, national approaches to public policy problems can inhibit the creation of effective solutions to those problems.

(g) Policies of the Federal Government should recognize the responsibility of -- and should encourage opportunities for -- States, local governments, private associations, neighborhoods, families, and individuals to achieve personal, social, environmental, and economic objectives through cooperative effort.

Sec. 3. Federalism Policymaking Criteria. In addition to adhering to the fundamental federalism principles set forth in section 2 of this order, agencies shall adhere, to the extent permitted by law, to the following criteria when formulating and implementing policies that have federalism implications:

(a) There should be strict adherence to constitutional principles.

Agencies should closely examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any Federal action that would limit the policymaking discretion of States and local governments, and should carefully assess the necessity for such action.

(b) Agencies may limit the policymaking discretion of States and local governments only after determining that there is constitutional and legal authority for the action.

� With respect to Federal statutes and regulations administered by States and local governments, the Federal Government should grant States and local governments the maximum administrative discretion possible. Any Federal oversight of such State and local administration should not unnecessarily intrude on State and local discretion.

(d) It is important to recognize the distinction between matters of national or multi-state scope (which may justify Federal action) and matters that are merely common to the States (which may not justify Federal action because individual States, acting individually or together, may effectively deal with them). Matters of national or multi-state scope that justify Federal action may arise in a variety of circumstances, including:

(1) When the matter to be addressed by Federal action occurs interstate as opposed to being contained within one State's boundaries.
(2) When the source of the matter to be addressed occurs in a State different from the State (or States) where a significant amount of the harm occurs.

(3) When there is a need for uniform national standards.

(4) When decentralization increases the costs of government thus imposing additional burdens on the taxpayer.

(5) When States have not adequately protected individual rights and liberties.

(6) When States would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations because of fears that regulated business activity will relocate to other States.

(7) When placing regulatory authority at the State or local level would undermine regulatory goals because high costs or demands for specialized expertise will effectively place the regulatory matter beyond the resources of State authorities.

( FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=Cool"� When the matter relates to Federally owned or managed property or natural resources, trust obligations, or international obligations.

(9) When the matter to be regulated significantly or uniquely affects Indian tribal governments.

Sec. 4. Consultation.

(a) Each agency shall have an effective process to permit elected officials and other representatives of State and local governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.

(b) To the extent practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any regulation that is not required by statute, that has federalism implications, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on States and local governments, unless:

(1) funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the State or local government in complying with the regulation are provided by the Federal Government; or

(2) the agency, prior to the formal promulgation of the regulation,

(A) in a separately identified portion of the preamble to the regulation as it is to be issued in the Federal Register, provides to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of the agency's prior consultation with representatives of affected States and local governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and the agency's position supporting the need to issue the regulation; and

(B) makes available to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget any written communications submitted to the agency by States or local governments.

Sec. 5. Increasing Flexibility for State and Local Waivers.

(a) Agencies shall review the processes under which States and local governments apply for waivers of statutory and regulatory requirements and take appropriate steps to streamline those processes.

(b) Each agency shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, consider any application by a State or local government for a waiver of statutory or regulatory requirements in connection with any program administered by that agency with a general view toward increasing opportunities for utilizing flexible policy approaches at the State or local level in cases in which the proposed waiver is consistent with applicable Federal policy objectives and is otherwise appropriate.

� Each agency shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, render a decision upon a complete application for a waiver within 120 days of receipt of such application by the agency. If the application for a waiver is not granted, the agency shall provide the applicant with timely written notice of the decision and the reasons therefor.

(d) This section applies only to statutory or regulatory requirements that are discretionary and subject to waiver by the agency.

Sec. 6. Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

Sec. 7. General Provisions.

(a) This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

(b) This order shall supplement but not supersede the requirements contained in Executive Order 12866 ("Regulatory Planning and Review"), Executive Order 12988 ("Civil Justice Reform"), and OMB Circular A-19.

� Executive Order 12612 of October 26, 1987, and Executive Order12875 of October 26, 1993, are revoked.

(d) The consultation and waiver provisions in sections 4 and 5 of this order shall complement the Executive order entitled, "Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments," being issued on this day.

(e) This order shall be effective 90 days after the date of this order.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE, May 14, 1998.

http://www.uhuh.com/laws/eo13083.htm

JTCoyot�

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 7 2009, 09:13 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	The 10th Amendment State Sovereignty Movement is NOT PETITIONING THE FEDS FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, only the scum who work for the elite NWO are doing this (because they hope to take control of it, if called). This movement is about putting the Feds on notice to "cease and desist all mandates beyond the scope of the US Constitution delegated authority and to start following the Constitution." (Senator Charles Duke, Colorado) OUR CONSTITUTION IS UNDER ATTACK BY THE NWO. The States are introducing legislation to take their Constitutional power back from the Feds who are doing the bidding of the NWO offshore Elites, and are not abiding by their Oath of office to Protect the Constitution. This movement is NOT calling for a Con con because they're not trying to change the Constitution; they are trying to enforce the Constitution. The calls for a Con Con are instigated by the thugs in government and their minions or people who are completely ignorant of what's really happening to our Nation. SECESSION WOULD GIVE THE ELITE MORE POWER - WARNING BY Economist, Adrian Salbuchi, From Argentina - HIS COUNTRY WAS DESTROYED FINANCIALLY JUST LIKE IS BEING DONE TO THE US NOW, AND BY THE SAME GLOBALISTS: http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...topic=5524&st=0 THIS IS WHY WE KEEP SAYING THAT THE 10TH AMENDMENT MOVEMENT IS NOT ABOUT SECESSION. ANYONE TELLING YOU THAT, HAS OTHER OBJECTIVES, OR IS JUST IGNORANT OF THE DANGERS! PLEASE LISTEN TO THE VIDEOS ABOVE! ARGENTINA HAS BEEN THROUGH EXACTLY WHAT AMERICA IS HEADING TOWARDS. CAN WE LEARN FROM HISTORY FOR A CHANGE?

jofortruth

Posted: Feb 11 2009, 08:31 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Lawmakers in 20 states move to reclaim sovereignty
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88218

Obama's $1 trillion deficit-spending 'stimulus plan' seen as last straw

QUOTE

Posted: February 06, 2009
By Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily

NEW YORK � As the Obama administration attempts to push through Congress a nearly $1 trillion deficit spending plan that is weighted heavily toward advancing typically Democratic-supported social welfare programs, a rebellion against the growing dominance of federal control is beginning to spread at the state level.

So far, eight states have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, including Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.

Analysts expect that in addition, another 20 states may see similar measures introduced this year, including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania.

"What we are trying to do is to get the U.S. Congress out of the state's business," Oklahoma Republican state Sen. Randy Brogdon told WND.

"Congress is completely out of line spending trillions of dollars over the last 10 years putting the nation into a debt crisis like we've never seen before," Brogdon said, arguing that the Obama stimulus plan is the last straw taxing state patience in the brewing sovereignty dispute.

"This particular 111th Congress is the biggest bunch of over-reachers and underachievers we've ever had in Congress," he said.

"A sixth-grader should realize you can't borrow money to pay off your debt, and that is the Obama administration's answer for a stimulus package," he added.

The Ninth Amendment reads, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

The Tenth Amendment specifically provides, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Brogdon, the lead sponsor of the Oklahoma state senate version of the sovereignty bill, has been a strong opponent of extending the plan to build a four-football-fields-wide Trans-Texas Corridor parallel to Interstate-35 to Oklahoma, as WND reported.

Rollback federal authority

The various sovereignty measures moving through state legislatures are designed to reassert state authority through a rollback of federal authority under the powers enumerated in the Constitution, with the states assuming the governance of the non-enumerated powers, as required by the Tenth Amendment.

The state sovereignty measures, aimed largely at the perceived fiscal irresponsibility of Congress in the administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, have gained momentum with the $1 trillion deficit-spending economic stimulus package the Obama administration is currently pushing through Congress.

Particularly disturbing to many state legislators are the increasing number of "unfunded mandates" that have proliferated in social welfare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, in which bills passed by Congress dictate policy to the states without providing funding.

In addition, the various state resolutions include discussion of a wide range of policy areas, including the regulation of firearms sales (Montana) and the demand to issue drivers licenses with technology to embed personal information under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative and the Real ID Act (Michigan).

Hawaii's measure calls for a new state constitutional convention to return self-governance, a complaint that traces back to the days it was a U.S. territory, prior to achieving statehood in 1959.

"We are trying to send a message to the federal government that the states are trying to reclaim their sovereignty," Republican Rep. Matt Shea, the lead sponsor of Washington's sovereignty resolution told WND.

"State sovereignty has been eroded in so many areas, it's hard to know where to start," he said. "There are a ton of federal mandates imposed on states, for instance, on education spending and welfare spending."

Shea said the Obama administration's economic stimulus package moving through Congress is a "perfect example."

"In the state of Washington, we have increased state spending 33 percent in the last three years and hired 6,000 new state employees, often using federal mandates as an excuse to grow state government," he said. "We need to return government back down to the people, to keep government as close to the local people as possible."

Shea is a private attorney who serves with the Alliance Defense Fund, a nationwide network of about 1,000 attorneys who work pro-bono. As a counter to the ACLU, the alliance seeks to protect and defend religious liberty, the sanctity of life and traditional family values.

Republican state Rep. Judy Burges, the primary sponsor of the sovereignty resolution in the Arizona House, told WND the federal government "has been trouncing on our constitutional rights."

"The real turning point for me was the Real ID act, which involved both a violation of the Fourth Amendments rights against the illegal searches and seizures and the Tenth Amendment," she said.

Burges told WND she is concerned that the overreaching of federal powers could lead to new legislation aimed at confiscating weapons from citizens or encoding ammunition.

"The Real ID Act was so broadly written that we are afraid that it involves the potential for "mission-creep," that could easily involve confiscation of firearms and violations of the Second Amendment," she said.

Burges said she has been surprised at the number of e-mails she has received in support of the sovereignty measure.

"We are a sovereign state in Arizona, not a branch of the federal government, and we need to be treated as such, she insisted.

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 15 2009, 08:15 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	New Hampshire HCR6 Railroaded in the Executive Session - (DON'T WORRY, THIS MOVEMENT IS GOING TO GROW, THEY CAN'T IGNORE IT LONG) http://www.dailypaul.com/node/82709 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ilpi4mk4_fs UPDATE: We discovered the possible reason why this didn't pass (the clause that talks about a Constitutional Convention. This is NOT what the 10th Amend Movement is about. The movement simply wants the Fed to cease and desist their mandates and going over the lines of their Constitutional powers). nhcitizen.org Website: http://www.nhcitizen.org/modules/content/?id=63 http://bikerbillnh.blogspot.com/2009/02/nh...henanigans.html This movement is growing exponentially because the American people are waking up in droves. The people who sit in leadership positions on these legislatures, committees and councils will soon be looking for a new job, if they don't smarten up and become real Americans and do what they swore to do when they took their jobs! They need educating if they don't know why this movement exists. Find Status of Resolution here: HCR 0006 (In Committee Until 3-19-09) http://www.generalcourt.state.nh.us/house/...r=274&code=XH25 State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee - FULL COMMITTEE IS HERE: http://www.generalcourt.state.nh.us/house/...s.aspx?code=H25 http://www.generalcourt.state.nh.us/house/....aspx?code=XH25 Chairman: Michael Rollo(d) V. Chairman: Patrick Garrity(d) (Moved to have the Resolution shut down) http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/memb...x?member=376582 Baldwin Domingo (d) (Moved to have the Resolution shut down) http://forums.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=14728 Kris Roberts (d) (Voted Yes) Robert Haley (d) Cynthia Sweeney (d) George Katsiantonis (d) Alexis Chininis (d) Valerie Hardy (d) Thomas Katsiantonis (d) Alfred Baldasaro � (Voted Yes) James Twombly � (Voted Yes) Anne Priestley � Lars Christiansen � (Voted Yes) Frank Emiro � (Voted Yes) Dennis Fields � (Voted Yes) Leo Pepino � Todd Smith � (Voted Yes) The Vote was 11 "Nay" 7 "Yes". Did all the Dems vote against, plus one Rep? It is confirmed that 2 Rep voted with the Dems to stop this from passing. So is partisanship more important than principle in New Hampshire, than doing what is necessary and right? Yes votes No votes (by process of elimination) This committee and these two men need to hear from the people! I called the Secretary of the Committee and she told me the people who voted YES to this bill. (SEE ABOVE) NOTE: The suggestion has been made that maybe NH put too much in this resolution, to begin the process. Some of the items could have come later in the form of an Act. The simpler versions (i.e. Oklahoma and most others) might be the best way to start the discussion for most States. Then further Acts could be enacted to address the other issues. The States will have to decide which version they want to introduce. This just sounds like a reasonable proposition that might want to be considered.

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 16 2009, 11:54 AM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	CRS Report for Congress - "Federalism, State Sovereignty, and the Constitution: Basis and Limits of Congressional Power" - Feb 1, 2008 http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=6041

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 18 2009, 06:37 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Coast to Coast Radio Show - Discussion of State Sovereignty Movement: (The States are upset with the Feds and Passing Resolutions Demanding they Cease and Desist) MUST HEAR! http://www.infowars.com/you-tube-alex-jone...ts-martial-law/ Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJpLZt1QfVg Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvZt2kZkwZM Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgGDYJMLDG0 Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YFZSd4F-mw Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXVW-rNZ1HA Rest of the Videos here: Parts 6-10 http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=00BD002123AF66B1

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 18 2009, 07:48 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Network- I'm Mad as Hell (from the movie "Network") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dib2-HBsF08 IT'S TIME TO GET MAD PEOPLE, AND STOP THE DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA! THIS DOES NOT MEAN DOING SOMETHING STUPID, BUT MEANS USE YOUR HEAD, GET INFORMED, AND SPREAD THE WORD!

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 28 2009, 03:10 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	The Original Meaning of an Omission: The Tenth Amendment, Popular Sovereignty and �Expressly� Delegated Power http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.c...ntext=kurt_lash

jofortruth	Posted: Feb 28 2009, 05:30 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	California is Calling for a Con Con: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ca...475,full.column The Legislation: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/a..._introduced.pdf http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquer...uthor=blakeslee One would expect this from Arnold!

jofortruth	Posted: Mar 5 2009, 02:17 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Are the States About to Slap the Runaway Fed Down to Constitutional Size? http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/8810

jofortruth

Posted: Mar 6 2009, 01:21 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Arkansas Coward Dems Killed Sovereignty Bill in Committee:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpMbCgZNWeY

HEY GUYS, THIS IS NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE. GET EDUCATED AND VOTE "YES" THE NEXT TIME. THIS IS ABOUT THE SURVIVAL OF OUR REPUBLIC AND AMERICA, AS WE'VE ALWAYS KNOWN IT.

QUOTE

TolbertReport.com - Arkansas State Representative Jon Woods discusses his State Sovereignty Bill which failed in committee the morning of this interviews.

jofortruth	Posted: Mar 15 2009, 06:17 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Text of Bills by State is being collected here: http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=6267

jofortruth

Posted: Mar 25 2009, 01:06 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

States Should Follow a Specific Procedure:
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=86802.80

QUOTE

There is a procedure in this movement, a specific set of steps that must be followed in order to satisfy lawful service. The way I described this is much like the final moves in a chess game. The 10th Amendment Resolution puts the federal agent's King in check, at which point you inform your opponent that his king is in danger. The resolution demands that the federal agency show chapter and verse, to the satisfaction of the state, as to the constitutionality of their federal mandates.� Once 38 of the 50 states have independently informed the federal government of this condition, the feds can push to continue their little game... or they can resign it.

If they choose to continue, then the states put forth the Constitutional State Sovereignty Act. This bill of law is enacted within the state, and emphasizes that the state no longer recognizes any power exerted by the federal government, that has not been determined by the state legislature to be within the prescribed parameters set by the Constitution regarding federal power. Thus it shall not, and therefore cannot become law within the state.

In effect this shuts down all federal power within the state, over and above that which the state determines by law, to be Constitutional... this opens to state scrutiny, all federally enacted power, including all constitutional amendments and subsequent statutory interpretation that has been enacted since the ratification of the organic Constitution on December 15, 1791. In effect... "Checkmate!" The feds game is lost.

By adhering strictly to the organic Constitution for the United States of America and the Bill of Rights as ratified in convention on December 15, 1791, as being the basis of, and for this inquiry via the 10th Amendment, and thus necessitating that the organic 1791 ratified Constitution SHALL, and must remain untouched as the supreme Law of the Land, being in itself the organic basis for the 10th Amendment and Constitutional complaint against the federal government, in so doing, the movement remains lawful and true. Secession, or the breaking away of any state, would spell disaster!

Each of these state resolutions, and each of the sovereignty acts, must be done within the state alone and not by some convention. I'm sure you all understand why. The flurry of constitutional amendments that exploded from 1865 until the present day, are precisely the method that has been used by the rogue government to exploit the states and the people and to render us debtors and paupers in the richest land on planet Earth.

The Bill of Rights begins at the 1st Amendment and the words, "Congress shall make no law..." By the time of the nefarious and usurping 16th amendment... amendments begin with the words, "Congress shall have power..."

As has been correctly pointed out here, there is latent secessionism, as you have shown, in the New Hampshire resolution. The secessionists as I have stated before, are a provocateur group.� They have their roots clear back to before the Civil War. The object of their provocateuring is to stop any possible lawful 10th amendment movement within the states aimed at reigning in Federal power, and twist it into an unlawful secessionist movement. If someone says they are for secession... then they are a Global/FED, whether they know it or not.

JTCoyot�

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 1 2009, 03:24 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Majority Of U.S. States Join Sovereignty Movement, Assert 10th Amendment Rights (Feb 2009) http://www.infowars.com/majority-of-us-sta...endment-rights/

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 15 2009, 02:26 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	CNN - Lou Dobbs - State Sovereignty http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtAs_m1g3cA THANK YOU, LOU FOR BEING A PROFESSIONAL, A "REAL" AMERICAN AND FOR COVERING THE "REAL" NEWS! It's nice to see at least one grown up in the media! Just be aware that Rick Perry may have other alternatives and only acting like he supports this movement. The man has attended Bilderberger in violation of the Logan Act, and he was allowing the TTC to go forward. SOMEONE NEEDS TO ASK HIM WHICH SIDE OF THE ELITE FENCE HE SITS ON! IS IT BOTH SIDES, RICK? WATCH PERRY'S ACTIONS, JUST LIKE ALL OF THE ELITE CLEVER CHILDREN WHO CAN'T SEEM TO DECIDE WHOSE SIDE THEY'RE ON. THIS IS INTENTIONAL! THEIR GAME IS CO-OPTING OF "REAL" PATRIOT MOVEMENTS NOW BECAUSE THEY SEE THE PEOPLE ARE WAKING UP AND SMELLING A RAT (THEM)! DON'T BE FOOLED, BUT WATCH THEM CLOSELY AND RECORD THEIR ACTIONS! THESE IDIOTS ARE BEING CAUGHT IN ONE LIE AFTER THE OTHER, AND THEY CAN NO LONGER GET BY WITH THEIR SCHEMES!

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 15 2009, 09:55 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	SECESSION WOULD GIVE THE ELITE MORE POWER - WARNING BY Economist, Adrian Salbuchi, From Argentina - HIS COUNTRY WAS DESTROYED FINANCIALLY JUST LIKE IS BEING DONE TO THE US NOW, AND BY THE SAME GLOBALISTS: http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...topic=5524&st=0 THIS IS WHY WE KEEP SAYING THAT THE 10TH AMENDMENT MOVEMENT IS NOT ABOUT SECESSION. ANYONE TELLING YOU THAT, HAS OTHER OBJECTIVES, OR IS JUST IGNORANT OF THE DANGERS! PLEASE LISTEN TO THE VIDEOS ABOVE! ARGENTINA HAS BEEN THROUGH EXACTLY WHAT AMERICA IS HEADING TOWARDS. CAN WE LEARN FROM HISTORY FOR A CHANGE?

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 17 2009, 12:35 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?to...cseen#msg592483 Gov Rick Perry is really showing his GLOBALISTS NWO COLORS now. He's calling for the SECESSION OF TEXAS - JUST LIKE WE SAID HE WOULD. Folks, THE REAL 10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement IS NOT CALLING FOR SECESSION. Thus, you now know PERRY IS ON THE WRONG SIDE. HE IS WITH THE NWO GLOBALISTS AND NOW ATTEMPTING TO HIJACK THE MOVEMENT! WHAT A JERK!

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 17 2009, 02:55 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	10th Amendment Sovereignty Movement - Legislation Per State Publish at Scribd or explore others: Non-fiction eBooks 10th amendment state sovereignty

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 17 2009, 03:33 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	What is meant by States Memorializing Congress? http://www.rules.house.gov/Archives/98-839.pdf For example, you can see many 10th Amendment Sovereignty Memorials in this document back in 1995: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house/house10cal/104con/102.pdf

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 18 2009, 12:31 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Interestingly, the DOWNLOAD PDF doesn't work at the Scribd site anymore (At least not for me). So if you want to download the document and it doesn't work for you, find it here: http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?fnwjjzzidwm

jofortruth	Posted: Apr 19 2009, 12:30 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 19,251 Member No.: 1 Joined: 1-May 07	Couple of things to know about this 10th Amendment movement. 1. This is NOT about secession. The US Constitution is a contract/compact between the 50 States. Secession would legally nullify any protection or support by the other states. So bad idea. 2. Many people are buzzing about a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con). This would effectively scrap and rewrite the entire US Constitution. Again, especially at this time, a very bad idea. 3. Many people don�t understand that the federal government derives its authority directly from the 50 states. This is key. People that support the 10th Amendment movement believe that there�s nothing inherently wrong with the US Constitution. The problem is that the federal government, a child of the states, is not following it.

jofortruth

Posted: Apr 19 2009, 07:59 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 19,251
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07

Go to this website:
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/r104query.html

Select Congress: 103

Search on: State 10th Amendment Memorials Received 1994

Click: Search

THESE WERE FOUND IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 1994 & 1995, AND SHOW JUST HOW LONG STATES HAVE BEEN TELLING THE GOVERNMENT IT IS OVER ITS BOUNDS!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUOTE

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r103...p/~r103PvWBKB::

MEMORIALS (House of Representatives - September 12, 1994)

POM-612. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Louisiana; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

[Page: H9087]Under clause 4 of rule XXII, memorials were presented and referred as follows:

475. Also, memorial of the Legislature of the State of Louisiana, relative to the 10th amendment of the Constitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)

0 Members:

« Next Oldest | 10th Amendment State Sovereignty Movement & Other Counter Movements | Next Newest »