U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Montana
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-28-2008, 09:20 AM
 
5 posts, read 11,316 times
Reputation: 19

Advertisements

hello, ive been following this interesting thread and concur that as uncle sammy continues to systematically erode our constituition and bill of rights each state must surrender more and more or find a way to unite and break away, but consider this: have any of you guys read in full what all of the execuitive orders say? that the presidents have written since FDR, and Kennedy added to it, then Nixon, Clinton and especially George W. Bush.. Please read what the E.O.s say the president can do in the event of a war or disaster... then read the Homeland security laws, Patriot act and homegrown terrorism bills that are now law... basically to sum them all up, the feds can do whatever whenever to whomever for however long they want..and i dont think they are very vocalabout all this YET, because it would be wise for them to disarm the people first before the full understanding of these laws is widely known. also i forgot to mention the doing away with possee comitadis(sp?) and the writ of habius corpus... which means, they can now use the military against the civilian populous and arrest you without probable cause and you dont have a right to trial with attorney representation,,, they have not pushed these new laws very hard yet but i think they are now on the books waiting for some emergency before they break them out... please correct me if im wrong.... it looks like when the $#@$% hits the fan the president can declare martial law and do whatever , some of the states may object and if enough states get into agreement maybe this foolishness can be reversed, but i think we the people need to hold our local and state governments feet to the fire... but no kidding, do a google on the Execuitive orders and read all of them, they give a president more power than a dictator.. even though the constituition says any law passed that is unconstituitional is null and void, no one knows or enforces that..... basically all of the patriot act , NAIDs, homeland security act, and federal reserve , IRS ect is unconstituitional but whos gonna junk them??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-28-2008, 09:27 PM
 
Location: Brendansport, Sagitta IV
7,538 posts, read 12,550,904 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by princeabc View Post
In lieu of Heller v. Washington D.C. Montana is threatening to secede if the case is decided as a collective right versus as an individual right. The following is a letter written by the Secretary of State, Brad Johnson of Montana, delivered to the Washington Times about possible outcomes of the Heller decision.
Eh? What's this?? the cited letter was absent.

I saw the Heller decision, but nothing about MT's reaction?

[later] Okay, I found a copy of the referenced letter; here it is:

http://progunleaders.org/johnson.html (broken link)
==================================
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Montana Threatens to Secede
A letter from the Secretary of State of Montana:
=================================
http://progunleaders.org/ has a whole bunch more documents including the state resolution.

Last edited by Reziac; 08-28-2008 at 09:36 PM.. Reason: more info found under different rocks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2008, 10:26 PM
 
1 posts, read 3,868 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElkHunter View Post
Yes Timberwolf,

The one and only state that can succeed at this time, is Texas.

And you are absolutely correct. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that any state could succeed. The only ones that could benefit would be Alaska or Hawaii. Because they are pretty much independent now, except for federal funds.

No state would do it if they could. Like you mentioned, there is way too much infrastructure that they depend on. Federal monies keeping schools open, teachers paid, extra police, Colleges kept open, College grants, Tax reliefs for new companies coming on line, and lots and lots of other things.

Dare program, welfare, medicare, medicade, WIC,. Now people are going to argue that Medicade and wic and welfare are state run. Yup. State run with Federal money.

So I personally don't believe, any state can afford to opt out.


TEXAS hahahahaha

you better get more knowlegable on napolyonic law the primary law in Louisina as agreed to in the Louisina purchase agreement contract number 3 of 12 in the purchase agreemeent .

the entire purchase parts of oklahoma ,texas,lousina,and more sections could all be revolked by france or its old propertys of land .

read up folks its law

and it would be the best thing to happen every body talks about all the fed support the states get please give me a break thats plain funny lol lmao
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 08:17 AM
 
Location: Montana
1,219 posts, read 2,807,762 times
Reputation: 672
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizzardproduction View Post
TEXAS hahahahaha

you better get more knowlegable on napolyonic law the primary law in Louisina as agreed to in the Louisina purchase agreement contract number 3 of 12 in the purchase agreemeent .

the entire purchase parts of oklahoma ,texas,lousina,and more sections could all be revolked by france or its old propertys of land .

read up folks its law

and it would be the best thing to happen every body talks about all the fed support the states get please give me a break thats plain funny lol lmao
Yeah, we are really worried about France. Now THAT is funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Brendansport, Sagitta IV
7,538 posts, read 12,550,904 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timberwolf232 View Post
Yeah, we are really worried about France. Now THAT is funny.
Heh heh... tho it gives one pause to think: what if all the terms of acquisition and treaties pertaining thereto were gone over with a fine-toothed legal comb? what if all the ignored or violated terms were magically enforced? one suspects a great deal of the world would abruptly belong to someone else (quite possibly a someone-else that no longer exists). Would make an interesting project for an advanced history student.

Just for the exercise, what if MT *did* successfully secede?? occurs to me that a smart next move would be an economic alliance directly with Alberta (which of all the provinces, is the only part of Canada that could presently make it on its own as a country). And that North Dakota might well follow, being also generally of more independent mind than some other states. Could have a cascade effect after that, mainly for farming states with low populations.

Highly doubtful of course, but makes an interesting hypothetical scenario.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2008, 05:42 PM
 
Location: Montana
1,219 posts, read 2,807,762 times
Reputation: 672
Sure would be interesting. I agree that a Canadian alliance would be smart, as well as with the Dakotas and Wyoming.

Would be a good project for a student. The topic makes me want to go take a class or two myself!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 11:24 AM
 
1 posts, read 1,879 times
Reputation: 10
You are illinformed about The Republic Of Texas. It does not need to seceed it still is a Republic. Check out The Republic of Texas on the web. Texas and GA both have bills in process to re-afirm articl 10 of the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 09:09 PM
 
Location: Sheridan, Wy
1,466 posts, read 3,581,756 times
Reputation: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJDAVISSR View Post
You are illinformed about The Republic Of Texas. It does not need to seceed it still is a Republic. Check out The Republic of Texas on the web. Texas and GA both have bills in process to re-afirm articl 10 of the Constitution.
This post is a couple years old, why do you try and start a new post out on the main forum instead? Thanks..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2009, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Great Falls, Montana
3,983 posts, read 3,364,167 times
Reputation: 1301
From a geopolitical perspective, I can see where various certain states would team up to create their own Republics.

From Alberta, all the way down to Texas, we stand pretty much connected, through our politics, views and lifestyles.

Once the splits begin to happen ... and they will ... I can see Alberta, Montana, North/South Dakota, Wyoming, portions of Nebraska and Idaho, forming it's own Republic.

Likewise, with Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Louisianna, and portions of Colorado, Mississippi, and Georgia forming their own Republic.

So these might be populated states on the lower end, but we have to take into account that though these be collectively lower in population, the states mentioned can account for nearly 80% of all of the oil that is produced in this country, and roughly 75% of all of the food.

Take these states out of the equation with regard to the union, and the liberal coasts would have to either starve, or be subjected to doing our bidding.

Remember, most if not all of the policies born of late in Washington, have come from the coastal regions of this continent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2009, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Montana
193 posts, read 406,899 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigskydude View Post
From a geopolitical perspective, I can see where various certain states would team up to create their own Republics.

From Alberta, all the way down to Texas, we stand pretty much connected, through our politics, views and lifestyles.

Once the splits begin to happen ... and they will ... I can see Alberta, Montana, North/South Dakota, Wyoming, portions of Nebraska and Idaho, forming it's own Republic.

Likewise, with Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Louisianna, and portions of Colorado, Mississippi, and Georgia forming their own Republic.

So these might be populated states on the lower end, but we have to take into account that though these be collectively lower in population, the states mentioned can account for nearly 80% of all of the oil that is produced in this country, and roughly 75% of all of the food.

Take these states out of the equation with regard to the union, and the liberal coasts would have to either starve, or be subjected to doing our bidding.

Remember, most if not all of the policies born of late in Washington, have come from the coastal regions of this continent.

Agreed..
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > U.S. Forums > Montana
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - 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 - Top