3 votes

HuffPost hit piece on Secessionists, Alex Jones

"Dismissing the United States as hopelessly corrupt, secessionists are picking up the breakaway-for-purity motif and running with it. Radio host Alex Jones, whose show airs in 60 markets, alleged on Nov. 15 that "foreign megabanks have hijacked the government" and have made secession necessary.

"We do not want to secede from the Union to destroy the republic, but to restore it," Jones said. "Go to the White House website. Do your own petitions to reinstall the Declaration of Independence. ... It's now time to launch the second American Revolution."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/secession-theology-...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It is funny to me that the debate on secession contains

Constitutional questions and arguments, when the reality is the constitution is a non issue in the US today. The leadership in Washington has entirely abandoned the constitution, and in doing so broken their oath of office and are no longer a legitimate entity in the bounds of the constitution.

What that means for us is that they are illegitimate in their positions and are no longer fit to represent the people, how do you think health care and the bailouts would have looked in 1970 when they were trying to keep the illusion of constitutional government alive, where today they do not try hiding behind the facts?

Why do the people look to the constitution to legitimize secession? The fact is that if the government of the people, for the people, by the people disregard the constitution, then certainly the people are not bound by a false contract or government that only uses it against them when the constitution was originally designed to protect them.

The court system holds no power as it is a created entity now disregarding constitutional rights at every turn, they now are for profit the same as the Supreme Court who we watched being bought off to support forced health care. I am not sure why these arguments continue, or why the Liberty movement even recognizes them?

While I will state that the legitimacy of the government is held at the end of a rifle, our representative government is dead and without so much as a vote from the people. One question for all to ponder is this, if all laws that are repugnant to the constitution are null and void, then how legitimate are law makers whose legislation focuses only on the repeal of the constitution? The answer is that they are not. Here is some food for thought:

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution, are null and void." Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 5, U.S. (Cranch) 137, 174,176

"Where the meaning of the constitution is clear and unambiguous, there can be no resort to construction to attribute to the founders a purpose of intent not manifest in its letter." Norris v. Baltimore, 172, Md. 667; 192 A 531.0.

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.

"If the legislature clearly misinterprets a constitutional provision, the frequent repetition of the wrong will not create a right." Amos v. Mosley, 74 Fla. 555; 77 So. 619.

"It is the peculiar value of a written constitution that it places in unchanging form limitations upon the legislation and thus gives a permanence and stability to popular government which otherwise would be lacking." Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412.

"The courts cannot rightly prefer, of the possible meanings of the words of the constitution, that which will defeat rather than effectuate the constitutional purpose." United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299.

"The constitution is an instrument from the people and a construction thereof should effectuate their purpose from the words employed in the document; and the courts may not color it by the addition of words or the ingrafting of their views as to how it should be written." Ervin v. Collins, Fla. 85 S. 852; 59 ALR 706.

"The basic purpose of a written constitution has a twofold aspect, first the securing to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined fields." DuPont v. DuPont, Sup. 32 Ded. Ch. 413; 85 A 2d 724.

"The State cannot diminish rights of the people." Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516

"Constitutions are not primarily designed to protect majorities, who are usually able to protect themselves, but rather to preserve and protect the rights of individuals and minorities against arbitrary action of those in authority." Houston County v. Martin, 232 A 1 511; 169 So. 13.

"In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution." Thomas Jefferson.

"Thus it is easy to understand how law, instead of checking injustice, becomes the invincible weapon of injustice. It is easy to understand why the law is used by the legislator to destroy in varying degrees among the rest of the people, their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppression, and their property by plunder. This is done for the benefit of the person who makes the law, and in proportion to the power that he holds." Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850).

"Our Bill of Rights curbs all three branches of government. It subjects all departments of government to a rule of law and sets boundaries beyond which no official may go. It emphasizes that in this country man walks with dignity and without fear, that he need not grovel before an all powerful government." Justice William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court.

From:http://www.garymcleod.org/con-quot.htm

So here is my question, if the constitution is all powerful in law, then how is it we allow for a government that disregards this document to hold any legitimacy? If the government no longer is bound by the constitution then surely the government, which was created by man, are not held to account either, the entire system is illegitimate. This is not to say that they cannot put you in a cage, that they cannot gun you down at their discretion, that they cannot rape your wife and steal your children, the fact is that the only thing that makes them legitimate is the use of force, and the peoples fear of such. Take away their ability to harm an individual, then what powers do they hold over that individual?

Always remember:
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." ~ Samuel Adams
If they hate us for our freedom, they must LOVE us now....

Stay IRATE, remain TIRELESS, an

Alex Jones just always

has to hop in front of any new movement that comes along. It's like he's so desperate to be the leader of everything- he claims credit for Ron Paul's success (I know, he did help put him on the map with his radio show) but still....Ron Paul's merits stand on their own. Alex even wrote some kind of seccessionist "manifesto" once the movement took hold in Texas, like WTF?'

He takes credit for "waking up" anybody and everybody who is "upset with the TSA" and it goes on and on. Either he is a giant narcissistic egomaniac, or he is trying to jump ahead of any kind of new movement to ruin it's credibility in the eyes of the masses (in some kind of psy-op), who knows.....

Personally, I don't like how cozy he has gotten with DRUDGE. Drudge is a Neocon rag...Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin, Ingraham, Beck etc etc etc ALLLLL praise/plug and promote Drudgereport daily......that in itself makes me suspicious. And now Alex Jones has started to do the same thing, he praises Drudge every...single....day. Sometimes hourly...something smells like fish, imo.

"I am Troll fighter, number one"

-Ernest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxWb-ViejPg

well ya know what they say....

The best way to deal with opposition, is to control it.

"I am Troll fighter, number one"

-Ernest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxWb-ViejPg

Good some recognition

But in my opinion; the huffington post is a disgrace to all media, its a pure example of propaganda. In better words I hate the huffington post

True

It has devolved into a kind of Pravda for the internet, I thought this article was significant as it is the first time I have seen Alex Jones name mentioned on the site. I think we can expect more of this sort of thing, with everyone opposing government policy being labelled a "secessionist".

bump

Thanks for posting.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15