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.
Most likely nation to go to war with the USA?
The USA.
The Coming Civil War
>|||||<
The inevitable clash will be orchestrated in such a fashion so that the only “logical” conclusion is to dispense with the U.S. Constitution (already bypassed by 82 years of “Emergency Rules”), the Articles of Confederation (ignored already), and the Declaration of Independence (source for the “republican form of government”).
In its place, “they” will fully implement the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America... a full service, perpetually bankrupt, “benevolent” totalitarian police state.
In the glorious socialist paradise everything not mandatory, shall be taxed, licensed, regulated or forbidden. And don’t forget your government issued photo I.D. (Internal passport) to be shown on demand to your public servants.
[/sarcasm]
Considering the fact the articles of confederation was the first consitution the federal government had until the US Constitution which was created to replace the articles of confederation it's not surprising the articles of confederation are ignored since it hasn't been law in this country for over 2 centuries now.
LOL, the U.S. "won" WWII because the Russians kicked arse and many of the Germans were unfamiliar with how bitterly cold the Russian winters were and froze to death. WWII would have been won by the Allied Nations with or without the U.S.'s help.
Considering the fact the articles of confederation was the first consitution the federal government had until the US Constitution which was created to replace the articles of confederation it's not surprising the articles of confederation are ignored since it hasn't been law in this country for over 2 centuries now.
Actually, the Articles were for confederation, not a constitution for a federation. No new powers were delegated to Congress by the USCON, either. The USCON basically reorganized the United States government into three branches.
And the Articles were incorporated by reference, into the USCON, by Article 6.
Case in point, Art.IV specifically identifies paupers and vagabonds as excepted classes.
EXCEPTED CLASSES
"The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, PAUPERS, VAGABONDS and fugitives from Justice EXCEPTED, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states; ...."
[Article IV of the Articles of Confederation (1777)]
Pauper = one who accepts public charity
Vagabond = one who has no home, or if he has one, is mostly not there
...
"STATUS CRIME - A class of crime which consists not in proscribed action or inaction, but in the accused's having a certain personal condition or being a person of a specified character. An example of a status crime is VAGRANCY. Status crimes are constitutionally suspect."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., p.1410
" VAGRANT - At common law, wandering or going about from place to place by idle person who has no lawful or visible means of support and who subsisted on CHARITY and did not work, though able to do so.... One who is apt to become a PUBLIC CHARGE through his own laziness."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., p. 1549
...
Vagrancy was criminalized before the constitution and was routinely prosecuted until the modern era - when we now call it "homeless crisis."
BTW - all participants in FICA are status criminals, pauperized by their own consent.
Clever, eh?
Can't prosecute "some" of the vagrants without prosecuting them all!
Actually, the Articles were for confederation, not a constitution for a federation. No new powers were delegated to Congress by the USCON, either. The USCON basically reorganized the United States government into three branches.
And the Articles were incorporated by reference, into the USCON, by Article 6.
Case in point, Art.IV specifically identifies paupers and vagabonds as excepted classes.
EXCEPTED CLASSES
"The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, PAUPERS, VAGABONDS and fugitives from Justice EXCEPTED, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states; ...."
[Article IV of the Articles of Confederation (1777)]
Pauper = one who accepts public charity
Vagabond = one who has no home, or if he has one, is mostly not there
...
"STATUS CRIME - A class of crime which consists not in proscribed action or inaction, but in the accused's having a certain personal condition or being a person of a specified character. An example of a status crime is VAGRANCY. Status crimes are constitutionally suspect."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., p.1410
" VAGRANT - At common law, wandering or going about from place to place by idle person who has no lawful or visible means of support and who subsisted on CHARITY and did not work, though able to do so.... One who is apt to become a PUBLIC CHARGE through his own laziness."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., p. 1549
...
Vagrancy was criminalized before the constitution and was routinely prosecuted until the modern era - when we now call it "homeless crisis."
BTW - all participants in FICA are status criminals, pauperized by their own consent.
Clever, eh?
Can't prosecute "some" of the vagrants without prosecuting them all!
1789: US Constitution replaces Articles of Confederation.
"The Articles created a loose confederation of sovereign states and a weak central government, leaving most of the power with the state governments. The need for a stronger Federal government soon became apparent and eventually led to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The present United States Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation on March 4, 1789."
I was reading this article and it caused me to start thinking,...
What if a spider barked?
See this....
Quote:
We looked at:– Military personnel count (total active, reserve and paramilitary troops)
– Naval size (by displaced tonnage of water, i.e. total real weight of military sea vessels)
– Air force size (number of combat planes and attack helicopters)
– Trends in military spending (both the amount in U.S. dollars, and percentage of GDP).
– Estimated nuke count
...that's how far I made it, before I permanently blocked the site as just a nutter whack-job disinformation site.
The united states has the most powerful military on the planet. If you took the military of all nations combined it would still not out match the power of the us. No nation is as skilled at war than the us military. No nation in their right mind would start a conflict with the united states unless they had a death wish. If putin thought he could take on the us, don't you think he would have tried by now? If any country in the world thought they could take on the us don't you think they would have tried by now?
What do you think happened to the $17 trillion that rumsfeld couldn't account for when asked by congress, to it's whereabouts? It went for military defense spending on weapons we don't even know about. The enemy of the us is deathly afraid of the strength of the might of the us military.
Radical Islam, so long as muslim loving Obama is in the WH. Remove his arse, then probably none of the above, although there could be a nuclear holocaust. Rogue nations such as N. korea, Iran, etc. scare the hell out of me, esp. with Obama letting Iran nuke right along. Thank God the Israelis will attack their nuclear arsenal before they could use it, to Obama's chagrin
1789: US Constitution replaces Articles of Confederation.
"The Articles created a loose confederation of sovereign states and a weak central government, leaving most of the power with the state governments. The need for a stronger Federal government soon became apparent and eventually led to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The present United States Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation on March 4, 1789."
If you read both, you will see that it is NOT what you were led to believe.
90% of the Articles is delegation of power to the "United States, in Congress assembled."
90% of the Constitution is reorganization of the "United States, in Congress assembled" into three branches.
The KEY FACTOR that gave uncontested power to the U.S. federal government was the requirement for STATE officers to also swear to the USCON, thus making it the supreme law of the land.
However, all debts and engagements (mutual promises) made under the Articles were BINDING on the government under the USCON. (See: Art. 6).
Furthermore, the state's people RETAINED their sovereignty.
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government) - One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people ... directly ...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
At the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people and they are truly the sovereigns of the country.
Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, 463
It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states.
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997
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)]
Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.
[Yick Wo vs Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886)]
. . .
*****************
"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) Abraham Lincoln - Wikiquote
As Lincoln reminds us, under the republican form, promised by the USCON, instituted by the Declaration of Independence, NO MAN (nor American government) is good enough to govern you without your consent.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Of course, citizens, by definition, are subjects, and not sovereigns. Citizens are obligated to perform mandatory civic duties, which void any presumption of sovereignty.
"CITIZEN - ... Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associative capacity, have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of government for the promotion of the general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights. "
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. p.244
"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "subject" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
- - - State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)
SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425
.....................
In countries like the USA, that ENJOY a republican form, men are not presumed to be subjects and citizens. Nor are they bound to OBEY laws (regulatory). BUT if one is NOT in a republican form - such as those in a constitutionally limited indirect democracy - one is a subject and bound to obedience - by consent.
IMAGINE the repercussions if a substantial number of AMERICANS withdrew consent - - -
__ from voluntary servitude via FICA;
__ from voluntary servitude via citizenship;
__ from indentured servitude via banking?
No law compels an American national to declare for citizenship, nor sign up with FICA, nor engage in contracts with usurers.
Unfortunately, I am another vote for fall-from-within.
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.
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.
