Firestorm Brewing Between US States and Federal Government

[Melissa K]

Posted by LadyFyre on February 23, 2009: a friend of mine from another site.
it is well worth sharing with other sites.


Could this be an ominous shadow drawing on the end of the United
States of America? For years the Federal Government has presumed to be
the all-powerful force governing our country, but it just could be
that the Federal Government only exists at the pleasure of the state
governments and the citizens thereof. States declaring sovereignty
sounds like an act of secession and revolution. However the federal
government can apparently be dissolved and another one formed anew at
the discretion of the states. The existing Federal government may not
leave willingly like so many European governments that are replaced
routinely and it may engage a military effort with our own soldiers or
the likes of a Black Water illegal military invasion to retain total
control over us.

United States Federal Government laws are often in violation of the
Tenth Amendment, which is perturbing, these events. This is predicated
on an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation, which states
that, "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence,
and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this
Confederation [now Federation] expressly delegated to the United
States, in Congress assembled."

A growing number of states are declaring their sovereignty afforded
under the U S Constitution's Tenth Amendment however the conventional
news media are not telling you about what is happening. The State of
Washington on Wednesday - 11 February 2009 and most recently, New
Hampshire [2009], Montana [2009], Hawaii [2009], Michigan [2009],
Missouri [2009], Arizona [2008], Oklahoma [2008], Georgia [1996], and
California [1994] all of which have introduced bills and resolutions
declaring and reaffirming their sovereignty. Some other states have
done this in the past but then let the issue go. Additionally, the
states of Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana,
Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering
similar measures. More well may follow, such as Wyoming and
Mississippi.

The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which is part
of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791 and states,
"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." Historically, this was done to
reassert the assignment of the remaining rights to the states and the
people of our country if they were not specifically delegated by our
Constitution to the United States Government. Further, Amendment Nine
on the Construction of the Constitution, Ratified on 15 December 1791
states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

The Arizona State Legislature is currently formulating a bill that
declares their state sovereignty. Their bill further asserts their
state's right during martial law to call back servicemen to protect
Arizona state, "…if the President or any other federal entity attempts
to institute martial law or its equivalent without an official
declaration in one or more of the states without the consent of that
state …" There is more near the end of this article.

A lot of this recent activity has come about due to the reckless
demise of the banking system now and also in memory of the past during
the great depression that fomented during 1929. There is a Russian
academic, Igor Panarin who recently predicted that the United States
would break apart into about six separate regions by 2010. Predictions
of similar persuasion have been made before, rather they are right or
not some big problems may soon ensue.

Much of the presidential character of the cabinet assembled by
President Obama is representative of that of the previous
administration. Obama perhaps is keeping the Adage, "keep your friends
close and keep your enemies even closer." A disrespect for our
so-called leaders is met from our so-called leaders disrespect for us
the citizens of our country. Should this be the case yet again, this
would establish further reason for the states course of recent action

It may seem ironic that as we have a President from the land of
Lincoln, and one who admires Lincoln, that another civil war could be
brewing. It's further ironic that states are beginning to fight back.
Many individuals that were imprisoned by Abraham Lincoln for
advocating their free speech on issues of the day. These times may be
as exciting and revolutionary as when our country was beginning.
Benjamin Franklin said something on the order of, "if we do not hang
together, we most certainly will hang separately." Its also ironic
that our revolutionary war was with Great Britain and that the
so-called Federal Reserve Board (The Banksters) is a corporate
instrument of Great Britain, still engorging itself with our blood,
our wealth and our money.

The state sovereignty issue was discussed on late night radio on
Coast-to-Coast AM. Comments reflected by Alex Jones indicate federal
misjurisdiction of its authority that is infringing on state matters
and on individual rights. States formed this federal government and it
may be disempowered by 34 states [2/3rds]. The Federal government may
have disenfranchised itself by making treatise that subvert its
powers. As such the Federal government may already be insolvent even
though it's still operating. There is mostly Republican, some
Democratic and much nonpartisan sponsorship on recreating state
sovereignty to resolve these issues. Take a look at these links: click
here and here.

Strings attached by the federal government to returning state money
for federal programs may be invalid. States are rejecting federal
intervention. Issues at hand involve the National Guard, Posse
Commentates, and FEMA Prisons for events of rebellion [or civil
demonstration] and revolution and a reimposition of the concept of
establishing a North American Union. Take a look at Jerome Corsi's
book, "The Late Great USA".

Federal negation of states' rights is selling us out and is treasonous
is among the repressive efforts against the states. States may
dissolve this federal government. An effort in Missouri to push for
sovereignty began three years ago when Missouri started to revive
interest in its sovereignty. Other issues are 2nd Amendment Rights
being taken away and the institution of civil disobedience, revolution
and re-evaluation of where we want our government to go.

Unfunded mandates are forcing issues that the states will block is
just one of many issues at hand. The Federal Government essentially
has succeeded from our union. PDD-51, part of The National Security
and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, allows for martial law a
lot too easily; this is really not in the best interest of the
citizens of the United States.

The negation of Congressional authority by the Executive branch is
further ammunition for the states to declare their sovereignty.
Congress has become a ceremonial branch of the government with no real
power left. Congress has just given up its power by not reading the
legislation it is being persuaded to pass hurriedly. Nobody in
Congress seems to read the bills they pass. We must educate ourselves
or suffer the consequences for lack of knowledge. Presidents have
become front men for wealthier world powers.

Generally all state resolutions and bills to regain states inherent
rights are a perfectly legitimate concept. While succession could be a
possibility, the dissolution of the entire federal government and the
institution of a new one predicated mostly on our current one is a
distinct possibility.

It has come to the point where the banks are controlling Washington DC
[or, is it the Bilderbergers as part of the new world order?]. Or is
it just the old world order they are trying to recreate? The use of
crises to terrorize us and promote a new world order, based not on
what is good for us, but for them! Any world government that should
arise must be democratic and not arbitrary. Actually, it is still the
Old World Order that the new world order advocates guised in the
remains of globalism misused.

The primary Constitutional responsibilities of the Federal government
are to control our borders, our currency and our military of which
they are abdicating on all of these. Granted there is an enumeration
in Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution providing for eighteen or
so in total responsibilities and rights. Clause 18, considered the
expansion or elastic clause states, "To make all Laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,
and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of
the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." The union
is already gone and America has been sold out to foreign banks. States
have the right to dissolve the federal government in order to
reconstitute it. There is a non-democratic globalist effort that is
stealthily moving ahead with its plan for a world government and
economy made in their image, not ours.

The Constitutional principle in the Tenth Amendment is reflective of
Federalism in that by providing that powers not granted to the
National government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the
states and to the people. In the Articles of Confederation, a
precursor to our Federal Government today, "Each state retains its
sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction,
and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to
the United States, in Congress assembled."

Once our Constitution was ratified, many desired the addition of a
similar amendment limiting the Federal government to powers to those
"expressly" delegated; this would have denied the use of implied
powers. These powers result under the Elastic Clause the Constitution.
Those implied powers are powers not given to the government directly
through the Constitution, but are considered to be implied in Section
Eight of our Constitution.

This document lets the government create Legislation and laws they
considered necessary and proper so that they may remain in force, to
meet as then or in the future unanticipated applications of the
Constitution. The word "expressly" did not appear in the final version
of the Tenth Amendment as it then was ratified.

Some state representatives on late night radio Coast to Coast AM were
Matt Shea - WA, Jim Guest - MO, Dan Itse - NH, & Charles Key – OK
provided a range of views on this subject. Click here.

In response to increasing federal encroachment, a growing number of
states have passed and proposed resolutions to assert the Tenth
Amendment and the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.

The Declaration Of Independence states: "Governments are instituted
among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of
these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,
and to institute new Government"

A new vision for America is in the works. This is not just about state
sovereignty, but America's Sovereignty. We will be rebuilding America
in the image we want, not what outsiders want. We are not ending
America, but providing it a new beginning.

Here in are some of the resolutions and portions thereof:

A small portion from the resolution in Arizona created in 2009: "Be it
resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the
Senate concurring, that:

1. That the State of Arizona hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not
otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the
Constitution of the United States.

2. That this Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal
government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately,
mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated
powers.

3. That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to
comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or
requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be
prohibited or repealed."

Each state's resolution has some language that is about the same but
also has more to say in many cases. The California Resolution
initiated in 1994 reads thusly,

"WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
reads as follows:

"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"; and

WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment defines the total scope of federal power
as being that specifically granted by the United States Constitution
and no more; and

WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the 10th Amendment means that
the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an
agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, In the year 1994, the states are demonstrably treated as
agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Numerous resolutions have been forwarded to the federal
government by the California Legislature without any response or
result from Congress or the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Many federal mandates are directly in violation of the 10th
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v.
United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply
commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations and some
now pending from the present administration and from Congress may
further violate the United States Constitution; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and Assembly of the State of California,
jointly, That the State of California hereby claims sovereignty under
the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all
powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government
by the United States Constitution and that this measure shall serve as
notice and demand to the federal government to cease and desist,
effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its
constitutionally delegated powers; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this
resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States,
the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the
President pro Tempore of the United States Senate, each Senator and
Representative from California in the Congress of the United States
and to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of
each state legislature in the United States of America."

While each State Resolution and/or Bill is written somewhat
differently but expresses much of the same determination. New
Hampshire has a rather interesting and long dissertation in its
resolution, excerpted here are some poignant points,

"That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of
the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the
Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not
delegated to the government of United States of America by the
Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to
diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their
citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the
United States of America by the government of the United States of
America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are
not limited to:


I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the
States comprising the United States of America without the consent of
the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other
than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an
alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of
persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an
alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any
corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of
political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including
prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or
Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to
the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States
shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government
of the United States of America shall require ratification of three
quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United
States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking
to form such a government . . ."