See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: The United States government is not violating the Constitution
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 12, 2006
Author: richard9151
Post Date: 2006-10-12 15:13:57 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 189
Comments: 14
The United States government is not violating the Constitution Sorry for the delay, but I have been very busy, both with work and with groups where I am talking about a Solution. So, permit me to recap; All of you basically hold the position that the United States government is violating the Constitution. And, to support this, you go to code books, cut and paste parts of the code and say, see? Don´t you understand?! Well, actually, no, I do not understand how anyone can go to a code book and use that as support for anything that the government does or does not do, as the code is a creature of Congress, and with the code, Congress can do as it wishes/desires/decides. And since there are millions of pages of codes at the federal level, the chances of finding everything is, simply, impossible. And yes, I have always been well aware that the Congress applied the Constitution to Washington, DC, in 1871. So what? Is it your intention to claim that Congress has the authority to change the Constitution? .... [A]nd the Constitution and all the laws of the United States, which are not locally inapplicable, shall have the same force and effect within the District of Columbia as elsewhere within the United States." 16 Stat. 419, 426, Sec. 34 (1871). So, please help me understand, you are claiming that the Congress has the authority to alter the Constitution. Correct? Inquiring minds want to know, because if you are not claiming that Congress has the authority to change the Constitution, then the statement speaks for itself; ...shall have the same force and effect within the District of Columbia as elsewhere within the United States... That specifically says that nothing in the Constitution is changed, and that it has the EXACT same force and effect within the District of Columbia as it has always had elsewhere; i.e., the Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause applies. Now, please look at the above statement one more time. Specifically, at this; … which are not locally inapplicable …. This is PUBLIC NOTICE that the Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses are still in force, or they would not have included it in the codification. If anyone is interested in seeing this, incorrectly, used in an argument before a federal judge, go here; http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/intentm3.filed.htm#1871 http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/intentm3.filed.htm#1873 The above, as some of you will recognize, is from the Paul Andrew Mitchell information. Now, what I am relating can not be otherwise, as the federal courts have been telling us since 1901. And it only makes sense, as the only ones capable of changing the Constitution are the states, as they are only ones who are a party to the Constitution. And now I am going to repeat one more time; the United States government is not violating the Constitution. The only problem is that you, instead of studying the problem through, simply repeat what others have to say. In addition, you will note that within the Federal District of Columbia, the Constitution is CODIFIED, at; 16 Stat. 419, 426, Sec. 34 (1871), (they did not have to copy the Constitution at that location in order to codify it). Once the Constitution is codified, it becomes a creature of the Congress to do with as they wish/please/desire. The federal courts in operation today, and the same is true of the so-called state courts controlled by the BAR, are operating within the Exclusive Jurisdiction of Congress because they are operating within the federal district states; Supreme Court Rule 45.1, which says that all process of that court is in the name of the President of the United States. The Supreme Court (and all courts subject to the rules laid down by the Supreme Court; this includes all so-called state courts) can only be an executive branch (martial law) court. Where is the confusion? Seems pretty clear to me. What is the problem with understanding these subjects? If you are still confused, I suggest that you look up the post I did titled The Gold Fringed Flag and learn a little. Here is the problem. Someone in the so-called patriot community makes a claim, and for the next ten years a bunch of so-called patriots run around in circles like chicken little, waving their arms wildly in the air and shouting that the sky is falling, the sky is falling! Most of this simply takes a little thought; if the federal courts are telling us something, perhaps we should step back and ask ONE question; Why are they saying that? And stop running off at the mouth about how THEY are violating the Constitution. The Constitution, very frankly, is one of the most complicated and vicious documents ever written. And it is VERY highly regarded in Washington, DC, because it is unquestionably one of the most successful illusions ever successfully pulled off by the elite of the world. Well, the illusion that Congress created in 1871 by so-called applying the Constitution to Washington, DC, was a pretty successful illusion as well, but, not on a par with the original illusion! Now, would you like another example of what I mean about listening and THINKING THINGS THROUGH? Today, the so-called patriot community is once again running around in circles screaming that the sky is falling! The sky is falling! There is no law that says I have to pay the income tax!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Whoopee. And federal judges will not address the issue, it is also claimed. Well, when they sentence someone to prison, as they do on this issue, they are addressing the issue, and they are telling you, there does not have to be a law mandating that you pay the income tax, and you keep yelling THEY ARE VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION!! You know, after awhile, you should wake up and listen to what they are telling you, and then think things through. From the Post, Who Controls the United States, Part 2; Social Security Enabling Act of 1935 The Social Security Act of 1935 (See Section 8; Income Tax) http://www.nationalcenter.org/SocialSecurityAct.html (You will note, I assume, that the above site is an official site.) TITLE VIII- TAXES WITH RESPECT TO EMPLOYMENT INCOME TAX ON EMPLOYEES SECTION 801. In addition to other taxes, there shall be levied, collected, and paid upon the income of every individual a tax equal to the following percentages of the wages … DEDUCTIBILITY FROM INCOME TAX SEC. 803. For the purposes of the income tax imposed by Title I of the Revenue Act of 1934 or by any Act of Congress in substitution therefor, the tax imposed by section 801 shall not be allowed as a deduction to the taxpayer in computing his net income for the year in which such tax is deducted from his wages. COLLECTION AND PAYMENT OF TAXES SEC. 807. (a) The taxes imposed by this title shall be collected by the Bureau of Internal Revenue under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury and shall be paid into the Treasury of the United States as internal- revenue collections. … Did you not sign a contract when you asked for and received a Social Security number, issued by the federal government? Perhaps you should consider this before you become involved in any tax protest movement. And perhaps as you begin to think things through, you should understand that the Income Tax is a contractual matter; is it necessary for me to explain contracts as well? So, Mr. Holdings, the STATE OF MISSOURI is a federal district state. Do you understand that now, and how the jurisdictions flow from this? Please pay particular attention to Supreme Court Rule 45.1. Now, I return to my original question, what happens, if for the first time, through a Constitutional Amendment, the Constitution is applied, for the first time in the history of the United States, to the Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause? As I stated it, what happens, if for the first time, through a Constitutional Amendment, the Constitution is applied, for the first time in the history of the United States, to Washington, DC? Knowing what I know, and after what I just wrote, you should think about what I think about the following posts; The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. The US Supreme Court is the court of last resort in the United States. In some situations, a state Supreme Court is the court of last resort. This all seems to be much ado about nothing. (My note; see Supreme Court Rule 45.1; State Supreme Courts are nothing different, as they still answer to the so-called Supreme Court) Posted by bwales in number 61 of Government thugs handcuff children, kill dog during $60 marijuana raid Same thread, posted by Christine in number 49; this is my understanding as well, but the feds are more and more blatantly and egregiously ignoring the lines/laws which separate jurisdiction just as it is becoming apparent that there is little to no separation of the three branches of government. Same thread, number 62 by bwales; And I don't disagree with that. And the federal judiciary has abused and tortured the Commerce Clause in this effort. Perhaps Richard's goals would be served by merely re-affirming the Ninth and Tenth Amendments which were descimated--effectively repealed by military action/violence 1860-1865. Same thread, posted by BTP HOLDINGS in number 76; This is basically correct. The two federal juridictions occur in how Congress writes legislation. One jurisdiction is the for federal zone and the other is for the several states. The hang up is that federal agencies administer things as if they are one and the same. They are not! This highlights the tyranny of the bureaucracy, and the ignorance and dishonesty of our public servants. So, Mr. HOLDINGS, let me take a look at what you said, and in respect to what you are doing for a solution. In the STATE OF MISSOURI, the federal district state, there are tens of thousands of cars; probably more than 250,000 cars. How many cars are there in Missouri state (defined as cars with private plates being driven by un-lic. operators(?))? Let us make this a multi-part question; 1. More than 1,000. 2. Less than 100. 3. Somewhere in between. Ummmmm…. I vote for number 2!, In fact, let us change number 2 to less than 25, and I still vote for number 2. And why should that not be so? Very few people, at this point in time, can make a living and support their families in Missouri state; just ain´t going to happen. But, possibly most of the dedicated people in the 4um agree with you that this is the solution, un-license and drive cars in Missouri state or some other state, with private plates. Ummmmmm…. Naw. I bet there are not six people active in 4um who do such, and why would they? Just makes them into a target, and when the anticipated round-up occurs, THEY will say, thank you kindly, sir, for marking the most dedicated enemies of the state for us so carefully. Nope. Don´t think that is a solution. So, that being said, you guys are doing those things necessary to make you and your families as safe as possible in the federal district states, right? I mean, you all know about Aid and Abet, correct? And, you are not talking about this, BUT, you have read the book, Vampire, and you have made an appointment with your local sheriff/Chief of Police, shook his hand, talked with him and thanked him for the great job they are doing, and explained, by the way, that we are not your enemy. We understand the need for the police, and we support you. BUT, we are worried about where America (you did notice I said, America, and not the United States, right?) is going. Oh, and by the way, here is a copy of a book written by police FOR police and military. Would you like more copies for your fellow officers? Now, you guys are doing these kinds of things, right? No? Why not? And, why are you not talking about these things on 4um, and passing along tips and info, AS YOU WORK TO CHANGE THE COMMUNITY AWARENESS, THUS MAKING THE COMMUNITY SAFER FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. This is not even difficult to do, so, what is the problem? Too busy passing notes back and forth in 4um to really get involved, or, are you bunkered in? I told you, Christine, that is the problem with the guns; people start to think that those are the solution, and they are not. Yeah yeah yeah. I have seen the macho BS, heard it all before, and saw how people use it as an excuse to not do the things that are necessary, like using the greatest tool the so-called patriot community has; Jack McLamb and Aid and Abet. You can have all of the guns you want, and when something happens, there will be 4 or 5 flash bangs go off in your house at 4 in the morning, and before you even realize what is going on, you will be on the floor with some thugs knee on your head as your hands are hog-tied behind you. Then, you AND YOUR FAMILY will disappear into the gulags, the detention/re-education/labor camps of the New America. And why will this happen? Because when you had the opportunity, you did not make friends with the police, so that one day, maybe, you get a heads-up; ¨Hey, Bart, I don´t know what is going on, but there are a bunch of jack booted feds running around here today with lists of people to get picked up, so be aware.¨ So you get the heads-up, and before you die, you take a couple of the cannon fodder with you, and THEY say, why, thank you kindly, sir, now we will have another show-case public funeral celebrating the death of another of our multitude of cannon fodder, and more of your fellow Americans will organize behind us against you terrorists. Yes, sir, thank you kindly, sir. And those jack booted feds are just as patriotic as you are; they are just not educated, and in that regard, Jack McLamb is one of the most intelligent and dedicated men I have ever met; so, why are you not using this tool? Just asking, because a man standing in front of 10,000 charging barbarians shouting about how free he is, is just a dead man waiting to fall down. He will be free when there are 100,000 of his friends standing beside him shouting the same thing. So, you are not using Aid and Abet. OK. Then we have been handed another, even more powerful tool, the 9/11 video. If you are not using Aid and Abet, you are using the 9/11 video, correct? You know, holding block parties, invite the friends, neighbors and relatives over to your house to watch the video together…. Even if you have to ask them to help you pick holes in it! And then after they watch it, and get mad about how they have been lied to, encourage them to hold their own party, right? And hold a second party with the video explaining who is behind the terror bombings in Spain and England, right? I mean, you are doing these things and talking about how well it works on 4um, right? Passing info back and forth, hey, this works, that doesn´t. This flyer is great! Got a lot of attention! Made hot dogs for the children while the adults watched the video, and you know what?! The children wanted to watch also! Worked great! So, you are doing these kinds of things, right? No. Ummmm. I guess I just don´t get it (I think I have mentioned this before.) I have a very simple philosophy of life; lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way. From everything that I have seen on 4um, I would have to assume that everyone here is just busy getting out of the way…. Until such time as THEY decide that the game is over. Today, in America, I have never seen more anger aimed at Washington, DC. It is finally, perhaps, time to make inroads into the hold that the Republicrats hold on Congress. THAT is what I am talking about with a Constitutional Amendment. I started to explain that in NUTSHELL, but hey, what do I know?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: richard9151 (#0)
The constitution is a museum relic. Please put aside any notion that it applies to anyone living in the new North American Entity. Thank you and G*d bless.
The courts have treated parts of the Constitution as dead letters, yes, but other parts, like some of the Bill of Rights, they have eagerly enforced.
Katrina was America's Chernobyl.
The point, Jethro, is that the Constitution always was nothing but a relic, and it applied AS A RESTRICTION UPON THE SO-CALLED GOVERNMENT ONLY, I REPEAT, ONLY UNTIL the majority of the PEOPLE BEGAN CONTRACTING INTO THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF CONGRESS. That was the entire point of Social Security; it was bait for the hook, to entice people into the jurisdiction, because there were too many free men around who were not con-tributing their share to their masters. Con is Spanish, derived from the Latin and means with. Contribute is WITH tribute.
The Solution is to apply, for the first time in the history of the United States, the Constitution to Washington, D.C.
As is their right within their Exclusive Jurisdiction.
The Solution is to apply, for the first time in the history of the United States, the Constitution to Washington, D.C.
Ah....I thought you were pitching to amend it.......
Perhaps a link to a BS to English program is in order.
Hmm... ??
Really? Professor Irwin Corey? Nada??
Nope. I'm only 23. ;)
baby, baby, baby........
Read it again, Jethro. The Amendment is the hook to get the attention of the people, and begin to educate them about what is really wrong. The possiblity of passing such an amendment is nearly nill; but, it can be used as a very powerful tool to reach tens of thousands of people. The people who are finally, finally getting fed up with Washington, DC. The people who count; what is left of the middle class in America.
The Solution is to apply, for the first time in the history of the United States, the Constitution to Washington, D.C.
LOL!
Better to buy lead, large guns and practice on local pols.
#2. To: Jethro Tull (#1)
#3. To: Jethro Tull (#1)
The constitution is a museum relic.
#4. To: aristeides (#2)
they have eagerly enforced.
#5. To: richard9151 (#3)
The point, Jethro, is that the Constitution always was nothing but a relic
#6. To: Jethro Tull (#5)
#7. To: jessejane (#6)
#8. To: Jethro Tull (#7)
#9. To: jessejane (#8)
#10. To: Jethro Tull (#9)
Really? Professor Irwin Corey? Nada??
#11. To: jessejane (#10)
I'm only 23. ;)
#12. To: Jethro Tull (#5)
I thought you were pitching to amend it
#13. To: Jethro Tull (#11)
#14. To: richard9151 (#12)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest