0 votes

We ain't what we was meant to be.

I posted this as a response to the "secession?" thread. I know a majority of you know this, but some may not, read up on it.

What we were taught in school isn't true. The "official story" on how our government was set up to work is no better than any other "official story" they give us.

It is amazing the number of folks that see the need to get out of the United Nations, but can't fathom the States being free.

We were originally set up as a group of "united states" a state being a nation. The States weren't subservient to the United States, the United States was supposed to be subservient to to the individual States. The "united states" was set up to be like the united nations, a peace time confederacy used for joint protection and bargaining with other nations or "states".

For most all of history a "state" was defined as a free country or nation, only in the last 148 years or so has the definition of a "state" been relegated to a subservient position to a higher power. The individual sovereign "states" or nations agree to voluntarily join the "united states" just as nations join the UN. If a nation wants to leave the UN due to its oppressive and tyrannical rules, then you would cheer them on and be happy.

Well, it is the same thing with the "united states" the "states" were meant to be able to leave at any time, they just couldn't join into another political body while still members of the "united states" But, it was understood they could leave at anytime, since the were their own free nations.

Why did King George recognize each of the colonies individually at the end of the revolution? Because the whole world recognized each, colony to be a free and independent nation or "state"

Just because our alleged leaders can't understand this and it has been demonized by them, and our GOVERNMENT RUN education system teaches the exact opposite that doesn't make the facts change.

It is further apparent that the larger any entity becomes the more wasteful and corrupt it becomes, so to use the logic of, " we can't be divided" is just plain silly. If each "state" or nation was allowed to be free again, then how much more manageable and transparent would our government be?

Folks are always harping on how the UN is too big and too powerful, well open your eyes the federal government is the same dang thing. Just much more entrenched into our daily lives than the U N will ever be. Yet, you except it as gospel that that is how it was supposed to be? It wasn't, and it is not!!




Comment viewing options

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

Lately seems like we're still trying to understand that war

1871 words of the invader, Gideon Welles, Scty of Union Navy: http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/florida/docs/f/ftpickens.htm
Sumter was the "intended" trap while Florida sovereignty and a 2 month old truce, considered non-binding to a non-sovereign nation, was ignored:
...
This, order, which I read to Lieutenant Worden when he called, and gave into his hands unsealed, he committed to memory before he reached Richmond, and then destroyed the writing. Hurrying on with all possible expedition, he contrived to elude detection, and arrived in Pensacola on the 11th. Here he had an interview with General Bragg, the rebel commander, to whom he stated he had a verbal communication from Secretary Welles to Captain Adams, and received a pass to visit that officer. He was put on board the Sabine on the 12th of April, and communicated my orders to Captain Adams, who promptly obeyed them. That night the boats of the squadron, under the command of Lieutenant Albert N. Smith, successfully landed the artillery company of Captain Vogdes, consisting of 86 men and a detachment of 115 marines. The garrison in Fort Pickens, which was previously composed of only 83 men, was reinforced, and for the time made secure. The success of this movement was satisfactory, and of immense importance. It saved to the Government this important fortress on the Gulf of Mexico, and that at a critical moment which the delay of a single day would have imperilled. The expedition for the relief of Fort Sumter sailed on the night that Lieutenant Worden left Washington for Pensacola, and President Lincoln had decided that he would, when the squadron sailed, notify the authorities at Charleston of his intention to provision the fort in their harbor peaceably, or, if resisted, by force. The messenger with this communication to the Charleston authorities left, if I mistake not, by the same conveyance with Lieutenant Worden. "Neither of them knew of the mission of the other"...

The only way to restore America..

..Is to restore what it stands for. Liberty. And Liberty starts with independence. And secession is independence in action.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

Go deeper

Read Murray Rothbard's Conceived in Liberty.

Have fun.

INTENT INTENT INTENT

YEA you are right, but the Civil War ended the honeymoon...
you-no

We never had a civil war here in alabamastan

we got invaded by an occupying force, and have been occupied by them and ruled by them ever since.

"What was taken from the boomers, it ain't there, what was taken from the X'ers it ain't there, what is being taken from their great, great, great squared grandchildren it ain't there. Some generation just has to have the guts to quit passing it on." Me

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

nice.

thanks for sharing that.

Thanks

"What was taken from the boomers, it ain't there, what was taken from the X'ers it ain't there, what is being taken from their great, great, great squared grandchildren it ain't there. Some generation just has to have the guts to quit passing it on." Me

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Nice:

I have been trying to explain, or should I say, get this through to my friends and family and they think I'm off my nut. I am currently trying to sell my house to move to a state that I would appreciate more and they don't understand why.
This is why.
I know none of them are perfect, but some are better then others and I want out of this one.
Good post, Thanks

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love my country
I am appalled by my government

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love my country
I am appalled by my government

Why don't we see this CNN poll.

Do you think if sovereign people of a sovereign State vote and decide to secede from the Union, that Obama should send troops to those States and kill men, women and children?
grant

Declaration of Independance says

.."Resolved, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States,..."

Notice how both "colonies" and "states" are plural.. This is not an accident.

People need to ask questions, and this begins with children in school, I mean government indoctrination facilities...

I understand and

and agree that the states are little nations but I can't help remember seeing that map that showed the country in sections and if seceding is just a step in the NWO agenda. We might think it is our doing but what we want is what the NWO wants as well only for different reasons.

Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.

When people are free

like minded people group together. When people are not free, all people are forced to co exist under the authority of whoever uses or has the most capability to use force.

We are joined in one land mass now, but are we joined because it is a group of like minded people, or are we joined because of the use and threat of force?

See 1861 - to present for clarification.

"What was taken from the boomers, it ain't there, what was taken from the X'ers it ain't there, what is being taken from their great, great, great squared grandchildren it ain't there. Some generation just has to have the guts to quit passing it on." Me

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Publish an article

and get it circulating.

Good post

I agree. I have stopped saying the "indivisible" part of the pledge, I find it to be an outright lie, and a not-so-subtle form of indoctrination into a lie.

Truth exists, and it deserves to be cherished.

I can't in good conscience say any of it.

"What was taken from the boomers, it ain't there, what was taken from the X'ers it ain't there, what is being taken from their great, great, great squared grandchildren it ain't there. Some generation just has to have the guts to quit passing it on." Me

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Why do we pledge allegiance

to the 'flag' and not to the constitution? That's what I wonder.............

Colchester, New London County, Connecticut

Make your yes mean yes and your no mean no.

I never understood the importance of taking a pledge to either a flag or an oath to the Constitution. Honest men don't need to take a pledge and dishonest men won't keep it anyways.
grant

A very good question.

A very good question.

I was thinking about this

I was thinking about this the other day, and while this may get a bit of a backlash... I wonder if one of the key things we lost along the way was the requirement that all voters be landowners. Think about it for a minute without trying to be politically correct.

Landowners show a solidarity, a commitment to their land and their communities. Further, they show a certain degree of prosperity that also leads to better stability. Would you give a starving man the keys to your house? Not to be insensitive, but when we give the poor the right to vote, would it not be natural for them to vote so that their stomachs are filled? Would they not seek out the man who promised them a hand-out? This is just a fact of human nature. Further, if most of the voting public are renters, why wouldn't they want more property taxes? They don't have to pay them (well, they do, of course, but people probably wouldn't see it that way).

By only allowing land-owners to vote, you would promote a nation with more long term goals that would protect businesses and property owners and encourage economic growth and investment.

Thoughts?

hmm... never thought about this before.

i'll contemplate it. thanks khomar!

Excellent point

Thats why I come to this site. It amazes me what the founding fathers knew and how they tried to preserve freedom for us. Only property owners should be allowed to vote.

It gives you an incentive to own property also.

Interesting points, then there is the other extreme

No such thing as "land ownership."
I am not going to waste time going into this, I know no one but the Native Americans are likely to "get it" but it really is the ultimate truth.

Truth exists, and it deserves to be cherished.

Political correctness has killed much common sense.

"What was taken from the boomers, it ain't there, what was taken from the X'ers it ain't there, what is being taken from their great, great, great squared grandchildren it ain't there. Some generation just has to have the guts to quit passing it on." Me

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

You are absolutely right.

With a smaller state, the government would naturally have to reflect the will of the people. More transparent. More accountable. Liberty would rule because people would feel empowered again.

"Angelic Realities: The Survival Handbook" @ azuritepress.com

"Be wary of those who know the truth. Align yourself with those who are questing for the truth." L. Gardner