Post by SAMURAI36 on Jan 2, 2005 12:15:02 GMT -5
Many people do not know nor realize (due to the vague and ambiguous nature that the AMERIKKKAN government is ran and operated), that the AMERIKKAN constitution has been long since suspended--that is presuming that it was a valid document (or CONTRACT) in the first place.
ROBERT ANTON WILSON, in his book EVERYTHING IS UNDER CONTROL
reports:
In THE CONSTITUTION: FACT OR FICTION, EUGENE SCHODER and MICKI NELLIS argue that the CONSITUTION was nullified on MARCH 9, 1933 by PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT's declaration of national emergency. What has followed in the intervening 65 years, the authors describe in their subtitle: "The Nation's Descent From A Constitutional Republic Through A Constitutional Dictatorship To An Unconstitutional Dictatorship."
Senate Report 92549 written in 1973 says bluntly that since 1933 "the UNITED STATES has been in a state of declared national emergency.....A majority of people of the US have lived all their lives under emergency rule......(we now live in) a permanet state of national emergency".
The authors cite 470 Federal laws, since 1933, that have steadily increased the president's "emergency" powers. They claim this is why--although we haven't had a Declaration of War by Congress since 1941--American troops have been in battle continually in engagements great and small in one far-off place or another: our recent PRESIDENTS have trod the world like ROMAN EMPERORS rather than like the limited x-ecutives authorized by the CONSTITUTION that they are.
Under the 470 emergency power rules, the PRESIDENT may sieze property, send military forces anywhere without public or congressional approval, institute MARTIAL LAW [SAM7's NOTE: THE PATRIOT ACT], restrict travel seize and control all forms of communication, etc. And once the emergency had been declared by PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, nobody could end the dictatorial situation x-cept the PRESIDENT himself, by declaring the emergency over, or by a future PRESIDENT declaring the emergency over. TRUMAN, EISENHOWER, KENNEDY, JOHNSON, NIXON, FORD, CARTER, REAGAN, BUSH and CLINTON have all declined to do so. [SAM7's NOTE: BUSH JR has yet to do this either, but does anyone REALLY think that he will?]
That ultra-individualist, LYSANDER SPOONER (1808-1887), not only thought the CONSTITUTION was dead, but that it deserved to be dead. A life-long abolitionist, SPOONER hated slavery; but he hated the CIVIL WAR even more, and re-x-amining the CONSTITUTION skeptically, he wrote six pamphlets (NO TREASON, I-VI) arguing that the CONSTITUTION had no authority to bind later generations to remain subject to the Federal government. Defining the CONSTITUTION as a contract, in the common law sense, SPOONER, a superb lawyer, applies the rules of contract law to it and proves that, legally, it binds NOBODY but those who gave consent to it in 1789:
And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now x-sisting. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living 80 years ago (SPOONER wrote in 1869)......Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then x-sisting were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to x-press either their consent or dissent in any formal manner (BLACKS, women, and unpropertied white males had no chance to give consent or dissent).
Those persons, if any who did give their consent formally, are all dead now, Most of the have been dead 40, 50, 60, or 70 years, and the CONSTITUTION, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children.
SPOONER, following common law, also insists that the CONSTITUTION can only bind those who voted for it, for a contract cannot bind those who did not give written or oral consent. Thus I (the present author) can make a contract with HARPER-COLLINS, which call on me to write a certain book and requires them to pay me a certain sum; but such a contract does not bind NORMAN MALIER, DANIELLE STEELE, or STEPHEN KING to write anything, nor does it bind HARPER-COLLINS to pay them anything, nor does it bind any other publisher to pay me moneys, x-cept as specified in other contracts. Thus, if the CONSTITUTION is a contract, it does not bind anybody now alive to do anything whatsoever.
SPOONER also x-amines the evolution of the AMERICAN government and argues, like R. BUCKMINSTER FULLER and EZRA PUND, that it is owned and controlled by international bankers. He concludes:
"..........The writer think it proper to say that in his opinion, the CONSTITUTION is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; bu that by false interpretations, and nake usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the CONSTITUTION itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth, But whether the CONSTITUTION really be on thing, or another, this much is certain--that it has either authorized a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to x-sist."
ROBERT ANTON WILSON, in his book EVERYTHING IS UNDER CONTROL
reports:
In THE CONSTITUTION: FACT OR FICTION, EUGENE SCHODER and MICKI NELLIS argue that the CONSITUTION was nullified on MARCH 9, 1933 by PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT's declaration of national emergency. What has followed in the intervening 65 years, the authors describe in their subtitle: "The Nation's Descent From A Constitutional Republic Through A Constitutional Dictatorship To An Unconstitutional Dictatorship."
Senate Report 92549 written in 1973 says bluntly that since 1933 "the UNITED STATES has been in a state of declared national emergency.....A majority of people of the US have lived all their lives under emergency rule......(we now live in) a permanet state of national emergency".
The authors cite 470 Federal laws, since 1933, that have steadily increased the president's "emergency" powers. They claim this is why--although we haven't had a Declaration of War by Congress since 1941--American troops have been in battle continually in engagements great and small in one far-off place or another: our recent PRESIDENTS have trod the world like ROMAN EMPERORS rather than like the limited x-ecutives authorized by the CONSTITUTION that they are.
Under the 470 emergency power rules, the PRESIDENT may sieze property, send military forces anywhere without public or congressional approval, institute MARTIAL LAW [SAM7's NOTE: THE PATRIOT ACT], restrict travel seize and control all forms of communication, etc. And once the emergency had been declared by PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, nobody could end the dictatorial situation x-cept the PRESIDENT himself, by declaring the emergency over, or by a future PRESIDENT declaring the emergency over. TRUMAN, EISENHOWER, KENNEDY, JOHNSON, NIXON, FORD, CARTER, REAGAN, BUSH and CLINTON have all declined to do so. [SAM7's NOTE: BUSH JR has yet to do this either, but does anyone REALLY think that he will?]
That ultra-individualist, LYSANDER SPOONER (1808-1887), not only thought the CONSTITUTION was dead, but that it deserved to be dead. A life-long abolitionist, SPOONER hated slavery; but he hated the CIVIL WAR even more, and re-x-amining the CONSTITUTION skeptically, he wrote six pamphlets (NO TREASON, I-VI) arguing that the CONSTITUTION had no authority to bind later generations to remain subject to the Federal government. Defining the CONSTITUTION as a contract, in the common law sense, SPOONER, a superb lawyer, applies the rules of contract law to it and proves that, legally, it binds NOBODY but those who gave consent to it in 1789:
And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now x-sisting. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living 80 years ago (SPOONER wrote in 1869)......Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then x-sisting were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to x-press either their consent or dissent in any formal manner (BLACKS, women, and unpropertied white males had no chance to give consent or dissent).
Those persons, if any who did give their consent formally, are all dead now, Most of the have been dead 40, 50, 60, or 70 years, and the CONSTITUTION, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children.
SPOONER, following common law, also insists that the CONSTITUTION can only bind those who voted for it, for a contract cannot bind those who did not give written or oral consent. Thus I (the present author) can make a contract with HARPER-COLLINS, which call on me to write a certain book and requires them to pay me a certain sum; but such a contract does not bind NORMAN MALIER, DANIELLE STEELE, or STEPHEN KING to write anything, nor does it bind HARPER-COLLINS to pay them anything, nor does it bind any other publisher to pay me moneys, x-cept as specified in other contracts. Thus, if the CONSTITUTION is a contract, it does not bind anybody now alive to do anything whatsoever.
SPOONER also x-amines the evolution of the AMERICAN government and argues, like R. BUCKMINSTER FULLER and EZRA PUND, that it is owned and controlled by international bankers. He concludes:
"..........The writer think it proper to say that in his opinion, the CONSTITUTION is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; bu that by false interpretations, and nake usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the CONSTITUTION itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth, But whether the CONSTITUTION really be on thing, or another, this much is certain--that it has either authorized a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to x-sist."
