Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do electors / voters have the power to take away other harmless people’s rights and liberties?
YES 5 41.67%
NO 6 50.00%
Only if the other people consent 1 8.33%
Clueless 0 0%
Voters: 12. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-11-2016, 03:35 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,023 posts, read 14,201,797 times
Reputation: 16747

Advertisements

U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 10 Feb 2016 at 06:17:32 PM GMT is:
$19,004,652,481,937.98
(In dollars, not payable with “dollar bills”)
The estimated population of the United States is 322,345,027 so each contributor’s share of this debt is $58,957.49.

Based on the Coinage Act of 1792 - - -
Double Eagle = coin containing 0.9675 ounce (troy) of gold bullion and other alloys. Equivalent to 20 unit dollars.

World supply of gold bullion (est) 5.9 billion ounces.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold
● 183,600 tonnes x 32151 =5,902,923,600 troy ounces
If coined, pursuant to the Coinage Act of 1792, would compute to
● 122,024,260,465.11
● $122 billion dollars
Coining all the gold bullion allegedly in Fort Knox Depository (147.4 million ounces) comes to approximately
● $3.05 billion dollars; or
● $9.45 per capita
● 14th amendment, Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law . . . shall not be questioned.
Federal Reserve Notes, being worthless IOUs cannot help (debt cannot pay debt). But due to the 14th amendment, clause 4, no one can question the validity of the public debt despite the obvious FRAUD. CONgress never borrowed 19 trillion dollars, because that sum does not exist. Nor is it moral, logical, or legal to indebt the American people to usurers via fraud, deceit, and withholding of material facts (via FICA).

The fifth amendment plainly states that private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation. Ergo, it would be impossible to use the people’s private property as collateral on the debt, without compensation... or they tricked us into surrendering our endowment to absolutely own private property.

Do not believe me. Write a polite questionnaire to ‘your’ public servants asking how and when you consented to be governed, surrendered your birthright to absolutely own, and became a pauper (eligible for public charity) in the eyes of the law.

The silence from the two-party collectivist totalitarian police state dictatorship is most informative.
● From the Communist manifesto: "In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."

http://www.city-data.com/forum/34913488-post10.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-11-2016, 03:51 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 5,435,569 times
Reputation: 4710
Our courts have decided that illegal aliens and foreigners in this country have many of the same rights citizens have.

So yeah, I'd violate those "rights" in a minute.

They never should have been there to begin with.

The Constitution should only pertain to U.S. citizens.

Foreigners?

We'll show due regard for their basic human rights -- and we'll be nice to them if they spend lots of money here -- but apart from that, the only right they should have is to be shown the door the minute we don't want them here anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 06:30 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,023 posts, read 14,201,797 times
Reputation: 16747
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
The Constitution should only pertain to U.S. citizens.
Actually, the USCON only obligates those who are bound by its terms. Private people are not parties to the compact, and derive nothing from it.
"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain...."
- - -Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. Mayor and Alderman, City of Savannah, 14 Ga. 438, 520 (1854) Supreme Court of Georgia
Compact?
“In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.”
- - - Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)
Remember, no one can be bound by the terms of a compact he did not agree to.
That's why the Declaration of Independence states government's two jobs:
(1) secure endowed rights, and
(2) govern those who consent.
...
"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Abraham_lincoln

Under the republican form of government, instituted by the Declaration (and guaranteed by Art. 4, Sec. 4, USCON), the people are sovereign unless they consent otherwise.
Absent consent, all government is authorized to do is secure rights (adjudicate disputes, prosecute criminals, defend against enemies, foreign and domestic).

Of course, if one grants consent, via asserting citizenship, all bets are off.

. . .
“ It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
- - - George Washington; "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289.
Every citizen owes a portion of his property [no endowed absolute ownership], owes personal services [mandatory civic duties which waive endowed liberty] and 30+ years of militia duty - the obligation to train, fight and die, on command [which effectively negates any "right to life"].
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 05:24 PM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,253 posts, read 23,733,496 times
Reputation: 38634
I answered "yes" to all three questions. But I may be missing your overall message? Are you stating that because we have not had any nominee ever support those three things that we shouldn't be voting? If so, the reason I vote is to get as close to that as possible. Not to vote is also, as I see it, allowing myself to be governed by what I did not choose, because I did not choose...which is a choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 05:36 PM
 
9,981 posts, read 8,590,580 times
Reputation: 5664
The DOI is not law. It was never meant to be law, which is why the Articles
of Confederation, then the Constitution became laws.
Essentially, the DOI was for none but those who signed it and their supporters,
not even for all who lived in the colonies.
I had to vote "yes" in this poll, not that I condone but simply due to the
facts that limitations of freedoms and infringements on personal liberty
are commonplace in the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2016, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,023 posts, read 14,201,797 times
Reputation: 16747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowball7 View Post
[1] The DOI is not law. It was never meant to be law, which is why the Articles
of Confederation, then the Constitution became laws.
Essentially, the DOI was for none but those who signed it and their supporters,
not even for all who lived in the colonies.

[2] I had to vote "yes" in this poll, not that I condone but simply due to the
facts that limitations of freedoms and infringements on personal liberty
are commonplace in the USA.
[1] Declaration of Independence IS part of American law
http://www.city-data.com/forum/42519272-post12.html

[2] Only those who consent are "governed" - and thus waived their endowed rights.

[See previous post with George Washington's letter re: CITIZENS.]

According to the Declaration of Independence, our Creator endowed us with the right to life, liberty, and the right to absolutely own.

If you’re nitpicking that “pursuit of happiness” does not mention ownership, you are correct. But, to pursue happiness upon anyone else’s property, you need THEIR permission. Ergo, it’s not a right. To have a RIGHT to pursue happiness, you need to have some property that belongs to you, absolutely. Thus you need no one else’s permission (or license) to pursue happiness.

Does the servant government, instituted to secure rights, recognize such sacred rights?
ABSOLUTELY.
" Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable."
- - - 16 Corpus Juris Secundum, Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.
In this excerpt we see that sacred rights encompass natural rights, personal liberty, and the right to private property (i.e., absolutely owned by an individual).
NATURAL RIGHTS - ... are the rights of life, LIBERTY, privacy, and good reputation.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 1324
In short, if one has not CONSENTED, all endowed rights to life, liberty, privacy, absolute ownership of private property, etc, etc, are INTACT.

But if one has consented (i.e. to be a subject citizen), all bets are off.
Title 10 United States Code, Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of ALL able-bodied MALES at least 17 years of age and, ... under 45 years of age who are ... CITIZENS of the United States
...
If you are a male citizen (female citizens are more privileged with less duties), you are the government’s militia, subject to activation on the orders of the executive (governor or president). You have waived your rights and liberties... unless you still think that being compelled to train, fight, and die, on command equates to endowed rights to life and liberty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 04:11 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 5,435,569 times
Reputation: 4710
Just throw the illegal aliens out, without hearings, etc.

That's all I ask.

For now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2016, 09:30 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,023 posts, read 14,201,797 times
Reputation: 16747
Under Standing
❏ Under the republican form of government, Americans have endowed rights, that governments were instituted to secure.
❏ Under the democratic form of government, Americans have government granted privileges, though surrendering endowed rights.
❏ Under the socialist form of government, Americans have qualified ownership, subject to the government.
❏ Under the perpetual “temporary” State of Emergency, bankrupt governments no longer heed the constitution, and anyone who consents, is excluded from protections afforded by the constitution or the republican form of government.

= = =
Benefits / Costs
= = =
Under the republican form, Americans are sovereign, exercising natural and personal liberty, absolutely owning themselves, their labor, and that which their harmless labors have provided. They have natural rights and powers, that no government, nor ballot, nor majority may infringe, tax, or impair.

Under the democratic form, American citizens are subjects, surrendering their endowment, in order to exercise political liberty (vote, and hold public office), in service to their fellow Americans. They are held to a higher standard, as well as being obligated to perform mandatory civic duties.

Under the socialist form, American recipients are paupers, descending to status criminals in exchange for access to public charity (aka “entitlements”). Without endowed rights nor innocence, they are presumed guilty, compelled to obey and pay, by their consent to be “human resources.”

Under the state of emergency, lacking lawful money, no one lawfully pays debt. Everyone is presumed to be a debtor / bankrupt, under “protection” from prosecution for their inability to pay debt. As “contributors” equally liable on the debt, they cannot object to the tender of worthless debt (dollar bills) in lieu of lawful money. Thus, Americans have become collateral, been dispossessed and subjugated since 1933, by the masters of money madness.

= = =
I cannot speak for others, but it seems obvious that being sovereign, free and independent under the protections of the republican form is superior to being a subject citizen without endowed rights. Furthermore, I do not think many would wish to descend to paupers and status criminals, bereft of all dignity, as wards of the “benevolent” State. Nor would they wish to be bankrupts, under the protection and administration of the federal government, which graciously disburses bribes (“benefits”) in gratitude to the multitude who have underwritten the “bad checks” kited by a profligate and unscrupulous CONgress.

But as long as you consent, government remains blameless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:48 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top