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.
Lest anyone forget what triggered this lame-a$$ bird sanctuary overthrow, here's an article describing a town meeting held directly before:
Quote:
..."We are not coming into your town to shoot it up," Curtiss said. "We won't fire anything unless we're fired upon."
Curtiss said he and others were there to support the Hammonds in what they see as an illegal prosecution. Some militia members contend the federal government had no authority to prosecute the Hammonds for setting range fires because it doesn't rightfully control land in Harney County. Militia members Friday night repeatedly cited their determination to act to uphold the Constitution. ...
Burns residents confront militia over fears of violence
The Constitution of the United States on Federal Land Ownership
We the People, being free, have need to defend our freedom from time to time against those who would violate our rights as defined by our Creator. It is an arduous task to constantly be on guard in the protection of our life, our family, and our means of providing a living.
Therefore, “We the People” as neighbors, create government and laws to protect our lives, liberties, properties, and our pursuant of happiness, from those who would take them away.
Our federal government is created and receives its authority from the people as outlined in Constitution of the United States. The Constitution specifies how and what the federal government is and what powers those that hold office have. We have given the federal government specific duties to perform and granted it the power to fulfill only those duties and nothing else.
The Constitution of the United States, created by “We the People” established a government for the protection of individuals. Government in and of itself has no power or authority.
We the People of the United States of America have stated in article VI of the U.S. Constitution that, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land ...” This ensures that no other document or law created can supersede the Constitution. No case law, no code, no regulation, no foreign law, no act of congress … nothing can supersede the Constitution when it comes to governing the people. It must be pursuing the purpose and intent of the original Constitution or it is not lawful.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution further restricts and clarifies that the central government (federal) we have created is our servant, and not our master. That it does not have authority to make or take any authority or power that the people did not specifically give.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
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.
These two amendments simply clarify that the federal government does not have unlimited power, that the powers have been granted from the People, and that those powers are limited to performing specific functions.
So now the question can be asked. Where in the Constitution have we given Congress, (i.e. the Federal Government) the right to control or administer land, and under what conditions may they do it?
Let us go to article IV sec. 3 of the Constitution which states: The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States ... This section of the Constitution grants Congress the power to make needful rules and regulations while the land is still a Territory (capital T) and grants Congress the power to dispose of the land. It does not grant unto congress the power to retain the land,only to dispose of it. This means that the federal government does not and never will OWN the land, which is a Territory. They can make the rules while it is a Territory, but they have the obligation, duty and authority to dispose of it. In other words, the people OWN the land and have charged the Federal government to be administrators until it can be disposed of.
So how does Congress dispose of the land? It can be done in several ways: they can sell it, they can give it away (such as they did with the Homestead act), but however, the ultimate tool of disposal is Statehood. By accepting a State into the Union, Congress is disposing (relinquishing rights) of the land to the people of that particular State. At the moment of Statehood, no longer does Congress have the constituted authority to administrate the land or resources within the borders of that State.
So, what is a State?
The definition of a State is the same as that of a Nation. The two terms are synonymous. Evidence of this is the signing of the Treaty of Paris, named after the city where it was signed. This is the official treaty that ended the Revolutionary war. The treaty was signed by 14 states. But wait, there were only 13 original colonies! So, who was the 14th State that signed the treaty? The answer is, Great Britain! This is significant. Before the treaty the separate areas of land in America were known as Colonies. These Colonies were under the control of Great Britain and the people subjects of the king. They were not States.
By winning the Revolutionary War, the American people won their independence from the crown. They became equals to Great Britain as thirteen Nations, separate and independent, equal in every respect. Each Nation signed the Treaty of Paris. Great Britain, the fourteenth State, also signed. The most powerful Nation in the world at that time, Great Britain, considered the thirteen States as equals in every respect.
The people of the thirteen States always intended to be united in some sort of a Union. Under the Articles of Confederation, they attempted this Union and perfected it later by organizing a central government (federal) to take care of specific maters. The Constitution of the United States outlines what authorization the Unified States granted to this central government. The thing to remember is that each independent State had the choice to join the Union or not, they were independent and separate Nations that chose to enter into a Union with each other.
Territories
In 1789, the thirteen States were united under the newly signed Constitution. The original thirteen States had land that extended west of the Allegany Mountains, mostly unsettled. The States voluntarily and collectively decided to allow the central government (federal) to administer these lands. They called them Territories. The plan was for the federal government to administrate the Territories until they could become States. When a Territory is populated to the point that it could stand on its own, jurisdiction would be turned over to the people of that Territory and it would become an Independent State and part of the Union.
As the population grew due to westward expansion, Territorial lands were created into States. The process to become a State is established on the "Equal footing Doctrine" where all future States would be treated sovereign and equal. New States entering the Union would enter on an equal footing with the original thirteen States. According to Article IV, Section IV of the U.S. Constitution, all new States would be equal to the other States, in every regard. There is no question that the people in the original thirteen States owned the land within the State borders. There is no question that the central, or federal government, had no right to any land within the several States. It is absurd to think that a newly created State, equal to the original thirteen, must give up their lands to the central government.
So is there any place in the Constitution of the United States that allows Congress to administrate land inside a State?
Article IV, Sec. 3 of the US Constitution records that, "The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; ..." So what is this "other property"? Where is it found in the Constitution? The answer is found in Article 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17. This is the only other place in the Constitution that gives power to Congress regarding administration or control of land.
Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 17 states, The Congress shall have power: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.
Through this section of the Constitution We the People granted unto congress an area of land 10 miles x 10 miles, so 100 square miles for the purpose of being the seat of government. We know this area as Washington DC. This land had to be carved out of existing States. Notice that it was not taken by force but “…as may by Cession of particular States ... become the Seat of Government..." The States from which it came voluntarily ceded the land to Congress; they did this only for the purpose of it becoming the seat of government, and no other purpose.
We also give Congress the opportunity to use land within a State. It is not done by force, but must be done with the "Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be" (land within a State includes all the land within borders of the State, public or private. Congress cannot purchase private land without the consent of the State Legislator). This purchased land cannot be used for any purpose that Congress whishes. We only authorize Congress to use the land for five purposes, "for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." Four of the five are strait forward uses, military uses and shipping. Other needful building’s is a bit open-ended but is restricted to a building and not of vast lands.
So consider these questions:
If the State does not own the land how could the States sell it?
When our founders created the Constitution they were trying to protect the People’s rights to the ownership and control of the land and resources. They just fought a hard and bloody war to ensure these rights. They were not about to create another monster, tyrannical government like the one they just freed them selves from. It was their original intent to create a small general government with power enough to defend against outside enemies and create peace within. They never intended government to own mass amounts of land. The United States of America is a Union of States. Union by definition is many or at least more than one who have come together for a specific purpose. The United States is not one nation, but many, 50 Nations that have United for specific purposes as constituted.
We the People have never granted to congress the right to administrate land inside States except for the limited purposes outlined in Article 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution. All the land that the federal government now claims, i.e., BLM, Forest Service, Monuments, Recreation areas, Wilderness, Reclamation areas, Wildlife refuges, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), National parks, etc., are all unconstitutional! None of them fit within the boundaries of the Constitution. It is simple; the land belongs to the People!
Additionally, We the People have never given Congress the power or authority to control our resources; water, lumber, minerals, petroleum, forage, or wildlife of any kind. These all fall under the 10th Amendment and are reserved to the State, or to the People. Any act of Congress stating otherwise, is not in pursuance of the Constitution.
I urge each government body to uphold the Constitution of the United States, uphold its original intent and disregard unconstitutional entities, acts, codes, etc., that circumvent the freedom of the individual. A State is not a Territory and is not subject to Territorial laws once it becomes a State. The Constitution is very clear on this matter.
I strongly encourage each State to act like a State and stop being subjugated and controlled like a Territory. As State leaders, it is time to start doing what the People expect of you, and that is to protect their lives, protect their liberty, protect their property, and allow the pursuit of happiness. In other words, protect their God given rights.
It is time to stop allowing the federal government to violate these sacred liberties. We the People desperately need your protection. If you will not fulfill your constitutional duties the people are exposed to suffer oppression, and the power of the State reverting to an all-powerful central government becomes a reality, more than it already is. If you, as leaders of a sovereign State will not protect the people’s rights, then We the People will have to do it ourselves and replace you with others who will stand for our future.
These are the words of Con Man Cliven, are they not?
The same Con Man Opportunist that is on record for saying this:
CLIVEN BUNDY (4/10/2014): I abide by all of Nevada's state laws. But I don't recognize the United States government as even existing.
The Constitution of the United States on Federal Land Ownership
We the People, being free, have need to defend our freedom from time to time against those who would violate our rights as defined by our Creator. It is an arduous task to constantly be on guard in the protection of our life, our family, and our means of providing a living.
Therefore, “We the People” as neighbors, create government and laws to protect our lives, liberties, properties, and our pursuant of happiness, from those who would take them away.
Our federal government is created and receives its authority from the people as outlined in Constitution of the United States. The Constitution specifies how and what the federal government is and what powers those that hold office have. We have given the federal government specific duties to perform and granted it the power to fulfill only those duties and nothing else.
The Constitution of the United States, created by “We the People” established a government for the protection of individuals. Government in and of itself has no power or authority.
We the People of the United States of America have stated in article VI of the U.S. Constitution that, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land ...” This ensures that no other document or law created can supersede the Constitution. No case law, no code, no regulation, no foreign law, no act of congress … nothing can supersede the Constitution when it comes to governing the people. It must be pursuing the purpose and intent of the original Constitution or it is not lawful.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution further restricts and clarifies that the central government (federal) we have created is our servant, and not our master. That it does not have authority to make or take any authority or power that the people did not specifically give.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
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.
These two amendments simply clarify that the federal government does not have unlimited power, that the powers have been granted from the People, and that those powers are limited to performing specific functions.
So now the question can be asked. Where in the Constitution have we given Congress, (i.e. the Federal Government) the right to control or administer land, and under what conditions may they do it?
Let us go to article IV sec. 3 of the Constitution which states: The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States ... This section of the Constitution grants Congress the power to make needful rules and regulations while the land is still a Territory (capital T) and grants Congress the power to dispose of the land. It does not grant unto congress the power to retain the land,only to dispose of it. This means that the federal government does not and never will OWN the land, which is a Territory. They can make the rules while it is a Territory, but they have the obligation, duty and authority to dispose of it. In other words, the people OWN the land and have charged the Federal government to be administrators until it can be disposed of.
So how does Congress dispose of the land? It can be done in several ways: they can sell it, they can give it away (such as they did with the Homestead act), but however, the ultimate tool of disposal is Statehood. By accepting a State into the Union, Congress is disposing (relinquishing rights) of the land to the people of that particular State. At the moment of Statehood, no longer does Congress have the constituted authority to administrate the land or resources within the borders of that State.
So, what is a State?
The definition of a State is the same as that of a Nation. The two terms are synonymous. Evidence of this is the signing of the Treaty of Paris, named after the city where it was signed. This is the official treaty that ended the Revolutionary war. The treaty was signed by 14 states. But wait, there were only 13 original colonies! So, who was the 14th State that signed the treaty? The answer is, Great Britain! This is significant. Before the treaty the separate areas of land in America were known as Colonies. These Colonies were under the control of Great Britain and the people subjects of the king. They were not States.
By winning the Revolutionary War, the American people won their independence from the crown. They became equals to Great Britain as thirteen Nations, separate and independent, equal in every respect. Each Nation signed the Treaty of Paris. Great Britain, the fourteenth State, also signed. The most powerful Nation in the world at that time, Great Britain, considered the thirteen States as equals in every respect.
The people of the thirteen States always intended to be united in some sort of a Union. Under the Articles of Confederation, they attempted this Union and perfected it later by organizing a central government (federal) to take care of specific maters. The Constitution of the United States outlines what authorization the Unified States granted to this central government. The thing to remember is that each independent State had the choice to join the Union or not, they were independent and separate Nations that chose to enter into a Union with each other.
Territories
In 1789, the thirteen States were united under the newly signed Constitution. The original thirteen States had land that extended west of the Allegany Mountains, mostly unsettled. The States voluntarily and collectively decided to allow the central government (federal) to administer these lands. They called them Territories. The plan was for the federal government to administrate the Territories until they could become States. When a Territory is populated to the point that it could stand on its own, jurisdiction would be turned over to the people of that Territory and it would become an Independent State and part of the Union.
As the population grew due to westward expansion, Territorial lands were created into States. The process to become a State is established on the "Equal footing Doctrine" where all future States would be treated sovereign and equal. New States entering the Union would enter on an equal footing with the original thirteen States. According to Article IV, Section IV of the U.S. Constitution, all new States would be equal to the other States, in every regard. There is no question that the people in the original thirteen States owned the land within the State borders. There is no question that the central, or federal government, had no right to any land within the several States. It is absurd to think that a newly created State, equal to the original thirteen, must give up their lands to the central government.
So is there any place in the Constitution of the United States that allows Congress to administrate land inside a State?
Article IV, Sec. 3 of the US Constitution records that, "The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; ..." So what is this "other property"? Where is it found in the Constitution? The answer is found in Article 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17. This is the only other place in the Constitution that gives power to Congress regarding administration or control of land.
Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 17 states, The Congress shall have power: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.
Through this section of the Constitution We the People granted unto congress an area of land 10 miles x 10 miles, so 100 square miles for the purpose of being the seat of government. We know this area as Washington DC. This land had to be carved out of existing States. Notice that it was not taken by force but “…as may by Cession of particular States ... become the Seat of Government..." The States from which it came voluntarily ceded the land to Congress; they did this only for the purpose of it becoming the seat of government, and no other purpose.
We also give Congress the opportunity to use land within a State. It is not done by force, but must be done with the "Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be" (land within a State includes all the land within borders of the State, public or private. Congress cannot purchase private land without the consent of the State Legislator). This purchased land cannot be used for any purpose that Congress whishes. We only authorize Congress to use the land for five purposes, "for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." Four of the five are strait forward uses, military uses and shipping. Other needful building’s is a bit open-ended but is restricted to a building and not of vast lands.
So consider these questions:
If the State does not own the land how could the States sell it?
When our founders created the Constitution they were trying to protect the People’s rights to the ownership and control of the land and resources. They just fought a hard and bloody war to ensure these rights. They were not about to create another monster, tyrannical government like the one they just freed them selves from. It was their original intent to create a small general government with power enough to defend against outside enemies and create peace within. They never intended government to own mass amounts of land. The United States of America is a Union of States. Union by definition is many or at least more than one who have come together for a specific purpose. The United States is not one nation, but many, 50 Nations that have United for specific purposes as constituted.
We the People have never granted to congress the right to administrate land inside States except for the limited purposes outlined in Article 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution. All the land that the federal government now claims, i.e., BLM, Forest Service, Monuments, Recreation areas, Wilderness, Reclamation areas, Wildlife refuges, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), National parks, etc., are all unconstitutional! None of them fit within the boundaries of the Constitution. It is simple; the land belongs to the People!
Additionally, We the People have never given Congress the power or authority to control our resources; water, lumber, minerals, petroleum, forage, or wildlife of any kind. These all fall under the 10th Amendment and are reserved to the State, or to the People. Any act of Congress stating otherwise, is not in pursuance of the Constitution.
I urge each government body to uphold the Constitution of the United States, uphold its original intent and disregard unconstitutional entities, acts, codes, etc., that circumvent the freedom of the individual. A State is not a Territory and is not subject to Territorial laws once it becomes a State. The Constitution is very clear on this matter.
I strongly encourage each State to act like a State and stop being subjugated and controlled like a Territory. As State leaders, it is time to start doing what the People expect of you, and that is to protect their lives, protect their liberty, protect their property, and allow the pursuit of happiness. In other words, protect their God given rights.
It is time to stop allowing the federal government to violate these sacred liberties. We the People desperately need your protection. If you will not fulfill your constitutional duties the people are exposed to suffer oppression, and the power of the State reverting to an all-powerful central government becomes a reality, more than it already is. If you, as leaders of a sovereign State will not protect the people’s rights, then We the People will have to do it ourselves and replace you with others who will stand for our future.
Look, you have figured out cut and paste!
Why don't you show us were in the indictment anyone stands accused of "speaking out against government"?
Why don't you show us were in the indictment anyone stands accused of "speaking out against government"?
I'll wait.
The Federal Government is on trial here too. Don't be fooled to think they are not.
They have no evidence against the individuals, that their protest was not unconstitutional.
The laws they are accused of their actions breaking, are unconstitutional.
The 9th Amendment declares this. It is not illegal to protest. It is not illegal to protest while armed. Government incited violence would be used to stop the protest, first.... That is well documented many times over. It is not governments job to threaten peacefully protesting people.
The government is saying it is with their accusations, armed protest is illegal. The 9th Amendment says otherwise.
And the only one that got violent, was the government.
If we stopped apprehending criminals, violent arrests could be prevented? That's some fine law enforcement you're envisioning there.
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.
