When Americans Need Leadership
by Tom RemingtonMarch 2, 2010
When settlers came to this country, what began as a simple escape to perhaps a better life, a chance to expand, to own land and to grow, became a struggle for freedom and independence. It was not the dreams of most who came here that they were in search of freedom but after putting distance between the iron hand of the King and life in America, many settlers began to understand what true freedom was all about.
It certainly was no easy task. It took a great deal of time before Thomas Jefferson and the others could pound out a declaration of independence, especially knowing full well that it meant surely war with England but it meant freedom and the newly experienced freedoms were worth fighting for.
Most don’t realize that from the time the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776 and the Constitution was passed in 1787, on at least two occasions some of the people wanted to give up on the efforts to secure freedom. They postured for a dictator to take over. Some thought Patrick Henry could do the job. Americans were scared. Even though they liked the freedoms they had in America, it was a different lifestyle and fearing the unknown resorted to the ways of which they knew, those from their past. It took strong leadership and the words and example of someone who believed more strongly than the people that the path America had chosen was the right path.
History has taught us that the people have always needed leadership. Even though the entire concept of being a free American was our strength founded in independence, celebrating the God-given rights as was recognized by our founding fathers, even realizing the ownership of land and property in order to pursue life, liberty and happiness, as human beings we still look for leadership.
The antithesis to liberty and independence is a powerful government bent on controlling every aspect of a person’s life. For those who understand history and have a real appreciation of what constitutes liberty and independence, will push back against the tyranny of a dictator or a government usurping the limited powers granted it by the Constitution.
Jefferson explained to his fellow Americans, who out of fear and confusion sought the strong hand of a dictator, reminding them of their past.
One who entered into this contest from a pure love of liberty and a sense of injured rights, who determined to make every sacrifice, to meet every danger for the re-establishment of those rights on a firm basis, who did not mean to expend his love and substance for the wretched purpose of changing this master for that, but to place the powers of governing him in a plurality of hands of his own choice, so that the corrupt will of no one man might in future oppress him, must stand dumbfounded and dismayed when he is told that a considerable portion of that plurality had meditated the surrender of them into a single hand.
A leader will never impose himself or his rule over the people. A strong leader can direct the people and bring their focus back onto what has and will make them great, make them the free humans God intended. The people are feeling imposed upon and are not comfortable with the direction they are being taken. The time is ripe for a leader, someone who will not make false promises nor seek to destroy American’s liberties but to restore them. A leader, who by example, will bring the focus of the American people back to a strength rooted in independence and freedom.
Tom Remington
Related Articles
“Individual Mandate” at Core of ObamaCare is Unconstitutional, New Report Concludes
by Tom RemingtonMarch 1, 2010
Washington, D.C.: Arguments by backers of President Obama’s health care proposals that the U.S. Congress has the constitutional authority to mandate that individual Americans purchase health insurance through the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which permits the federal income tax, are incorrect.
So concludes a new “What Conservatives Think” publication, “Is a Health Insurance “Individual Mandate” Constitutional?” written by policy analyst Matt Patterson of the National Center For Public Policy Research.
Among the findings:
* Both the House and Senate versions of ObamaCare contain penalty taxes on Americans who do not have government-approved health insurance, the so-called “individual mandate.”
* Such a tax would function as a direct, or capitation, tax, as opposed to a tax on activity, such as excise or income taxes, and would therefore fall outside Congress’ authority to tax income granted by the 16th Amendment to the Constitution.
* The Constitution places strict restrictions on Congress’ power to lay capitation taxes under But Article I, Sec. 9, which reads “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”
* Exemptions for some people built into the Senate bill’s individual mandate tax would make it impossible for ObamaCare to meet this strict constitutional standard.
Says Patterson, “Some of the finest legal minds in the country have concluded that the enforcement provisions of ObamaCare’s individual mandate would violate the both spirit and the letter of the U.S. Constitution. Apparently, President Obama and members of Congress think they are smarter than these scholars – and smarter than the authors of the Constitution.”
“Is a Health Insurance “Individual Mandate” Constitutional?” is available online at http://www.nationalcenter.org/WCT.html.
Sheriff Richard Mack on Freedomizer Radio
by Greg FarberFebruary 27, 2010
Pt1 Sheriff Mack on Freedomizer Radio
Pt2
Pt3
Pt4
Pt5
Those CPACer Nut Jobs
by Tom RemingtonFebruary 23, 2010
Did you listen to any of the speeches at the CPAC convention? What a bunch of radical, angry nut jobs, saying things like we have to stop spending money we don’t have and referring to the U.S. Constitution, like that’s anything we need in our lives right now. And of course Glenn Beck took the prize with his way over the top keynote address, making statements saying it wasn’t good enough anymore just to suck less than the other guys. I mean really. Where does he come off saying such far right things?
Tom Remington
Related Articles
Bill O’Reilly does not respect the 2nd Amendment
by Greg FarberFebruary 23, 2010
His own words on FAUX news prove it.. A weather disaster, and a “National Emergency” nullifies the Constitution according to Bill Oh Really.. Just another Roman Catholic supporting his Massa Knight of Malta And Popers ass kisser Rupert Communist Murdoch..
Bill O’Reilly vs OATHKEEPERS
What Are You “Required” To Give For Information For The Census?
by Tom RemingtonFebruary 17, 2010
What Constitution do you think we have ?
by Greg FarberFebruary 9, 2010
Senate Report 93-549
War and Emergency Powers Acts,
Executive Orders and the New World Order
The Introduction to Senate Report 93-549 (93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973) summarizes the situation that we face today – except it is far worse today than it was in 1973 !!
“A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years [now 77 years], freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency. The problem of how a constitutional democracy reacts to great crises, however, far antedates the Great Depression. As a philosophical issue, its origins reach back to the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. And, in the United States, actions taken by the Government in times of great crises have – from, at least, the Civil War – in important ways, shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.”
The Foreword to the Report states in part -
“Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four Presidentially proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.
These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law [hundreds more since 1973, particularly in the Clinton administration since Jan 21, 1993]. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes.
Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.”
When the Southern states walked out of Congress on March 27, 1861, the quorum to conduct business under the Constitution was lost. The only votes that Congress could lawfully take, under Parliamentary Law, were those to set the time to reconvene, take a vote to get a quorum, and vote to adjourn and set a date, time, and place to reconvene at a later time, but instead, Congress abandoned the House and Senate without setting a date to reconvene. Under the parliamentary law of Congress, when this happened, Congress became sine die (pronounced see-na dee-a; literally “without day”) and thus when Congress adjourned sine die, it ceased to exist as a lawful deliberative body, and the only lawful, constitutional power that could declare war was no longer lawful, or in session.
The Southern states, by virtue of their secession from the Union, also ceased to exist sine die, and some state legislatures in the Northern bloc also adjourned sine die, and thus, all the states which were parties to creating the Constitution ceased to exist. President Lincoln executed the first executive order written by any President on April 15, 1861, Executive Order 1, and the nation has been ruled by the President under executive order ever since. When Congress eventually did reconvene, it was reconvened under the military authority of the Commander-in-Chief and not by Rules of Order for Parliamentary bodies or by Constitutional Law; placing the American people under martial rule ever since that national emergency declared by President Lincoln. The Constitution for the United States of America temporarily ceased to be the law of the land, and the President, Congress, and the Courts unlawfully presumed that they were free to remake the nation in their own image, whereas, lawfully, no constitutional provisions were in place which afforded power to any of the actions which were taken which presumed to place the nation under the new form of control.
President Lincoln knew that he had no authority to issue any executive order, and thus he commissioned General Orders No. 100 (April 24, 1863) as a special field code to govern his actions under martial law and which justified the seizure of power, which extended the laws of the District of Columbia, and which fictionally implemented the provisions of Article I, Section 8, Clauses 17-18 of the Constitution beyond the boundaries of Washington, D.C. and into the several states. General Orders No. 100, also called the Lieber Instructions and the Lieber Code, extended The Laws of War and International Law onto American soil, and the United States government became the presumed conqueror of the people and the land.
Martial rule was kept secret and has never ended, the nation has been ruled under Military Law by the Commander of Chief of that military; the President, under his assumed executive powers and according to his executive orders. Constitutional law under the original Constitution is enforced only as a matter of keeping the public peace under the provisions of General Orders No. 100 under martial rule. Under Martial Law, title is a mere fiction, since all property belongs to the military except for that property which the Commander-in-Chief may, in his benevolence, exempt from taxation and seizure and upon which he allows the enemy to reside.
President Lincoln was assassinated before he could complete plans for reestablishing constitutional government in the Southern States and end the martial rule by executive order, and the 14th Article in Amendment to the Constitution created a new citizenship status for the new expanded jurisdiction. New laws for the District of Columbia were established and passed by Congress in 1871, supplanting those established Feb. 27, 1801 and May 3, 1802. The District of Columbia was re-incorporated in 1872, and all states in the Union were reformed as Franchisees of the Federal Corporation so that a new Union of the United States could be created. The key to when the states became Federal Franchisees is related to the date when such states enacted the Field Code in law. The Field Code was a codification of the common law that was adopted first by New York and then by California in 1872, and shortly afterwards the Lieber Code was used to bring the United States into the 1874 Brussels Conference and into the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.
In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917) was passed and which defined, regulated and punished trading with enemies, who were then required by that act to be licensed by the government to do business. The National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd Congress, Session I, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933), and Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260 prove that in 1933, the United States Government formed under the executive privilege of the original martial rule went bankrupt, and a new state of national emergency was declared under which United States citizens were named as the enemy to the government and the banking system as per the provisions of the Trading with the Enemy Act. The legal system provided for in the Constitution was formally changed in 1938 through the Supreme Court decision in the case of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 US 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188.
On April 25, 1938, the Supreme Court overturned the standing precedents of the prior 150 years concerning “COMMON LAW” in the federal government.
THERE IS NO FEDERAL COMMON LAW, AND CONGRESS HAS NO POWER TO DECLARE SUBSTANTIVE RULES OF COMMON LAW applicable IN A STATE, WHETHER they be LOCAL or GENERAL in their nature, be they COMMERCIAL LAW or a part of LAW OF TORTS.” (See: ERIE RAILROAD CO. vs. THOMPKINS, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L. Ed. 1188)
The significance is that since the Erie Decision, no cases are allowed to be cited that are prior to 1938. There can be no mixing of the old law with the new law. The Common Law is the fountain source of Substantive and Remedial Rights, if not our very Liberties. (See also: Who is Running America?)
In 1945 the United States gave up any remaining national sovereignty when it signed the United Nations Treaty, making all American citizens subject to United Nations jurisdiction. The “constitution” of the United Nations may be compared to that of the old Soviet Union.
Documentation -
Executive Order 1 – http://www.historyplace.com/lincoln/proc-1.htm;
General Orders No. 100 (April 24, 1863) “Lieber Code” -
http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fletcher/multi/texts/historical/LIEBER-CODE.txt;
Senate Report 93-549 (93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973) -
http://www.barefootsworld.net/war_ep1.html;
The Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917);
National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd Congress, Session I, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933);
Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6, 1933); Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933);
Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260;
Title 12 USC, Section 95a – http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/12/95.html;
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 US 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188;
and the United Nations Treaty.
All documentation is available through your local government document repository library branch or at the Library of Congress.
Observations – Arguments which suggest that the Treaty of Paris of 1783 was not a lawful or legal treaty of peace between warring nations and that the American Colonies never really attained or obtained lawful or legal sovereignty, must also presume, by their own argument, that the Constitution for the united States of America and the Bill of Rights were never organic documents of true lawful or legal standing.
Conclusion – The Constitution for the united States of America and the Bill of Rights are no longer in effect in their original form or where they conflict with the United Nations Treaty and other international agreements. Citizens of the several States of the Union who were formerly sovereigns protected by the common law are now United States citizens and are thus subjects to International Admiralty jurisdiction.
Now that you know what you are up against, I hope the above data and the Senate Report 93-549 causes you to see red, pisses you off enough to start thinking and doing something about it. I am fighting for my freedom and my country, to defend and restore the Constitution, our Nation’s Sovereignty, Your Sovereignty, and Mine.
Are You??
The “New Fascism” At Work In North Carolina
by Tom RemingtonFebruary 8, 2010
Snow storms dumped ample amounts of the white stuff on parts of the mid-Atlantic states over the weekend. Unfortunately, some town’s leaders either have never heard of a U.S. Constitution or Bill of Rights or somehow they think, like what happened in New Orleans, that just because the town declared an emergency, all of a sudden people give up their God-given and constitutional rights.
Other restrictions include a ban on the sale or purchase of any type of firearm, ammunition, explosive or any possession of such items off a person’s own premises.
I guess they thought they were doing everyone a favor ALLOWING them to possess a gun on their own property. Uh, uh, uh! This cannot be allowed.
Tom Remington
Related Articles
USA Has A History Of Attacking Themselves To Go To War!
by Greg FarberFebruary 8, 2010
When you find Knights of Malta in the details, over and over again, expect deception.
This film goes in detail through the untold history of The Project for the New American Century with tons of archival footage and connects it right into the present. This film exposes how every major war in US history was based on a complete fraud with video of insiders themselves admitting it. This film shows how the first film theaters in the US were used over a hundred years ago to broadcast propaganda to rile the American people into the Spanish-American War. This film shows the white papers of the oil company Unocal which called for the creation of a pipeline through Afghanistan and how their exact needs were fulfilled through the US invasion of Afghanistan. This film shows how Halliburton under their “cost plus” exclusive contract with the US Government went on a mad dash spending spree akin to something out of the movie Brewster’s Millions, yet instead of blowing $30 million they blew through BILLIONS by literally burning millions of dollars worth of hundred thousand dollar cars and trucks if they had so much as a flat tire. “A stunning film. It should be seen as widely as possible, in cinemas, bars, clubs, at meetings and, of course, through the internet. I’m sure the film will continue to be a source of debate and political education for many years. Maybe until the war criminals have been brought to trial.” – Ken Loach While Massimo Mazzucco’s first political documentary, GLOBAL DECEIT (2006), focused on the long list of inconsistencies in the official version of the 9/11 attacks, THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY explores the historical, philosophical and economic background that suggests a matrix for such events that is much closer to home than the so-called “Islamic terrorism”. The film provides solid evidence for the true reasons behind the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, whose unfolding is described in chilling detail in a document called “Project for the New American Century”, published in the year 2,000, that seems to have served as the actual blueprint for such dramatic events.
The New American Century
A Time For Anger
by Tom RemingtonFebruary 7, 2010
