The coming civil war and the tenth amendment center

[nadinbrzezinski]

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

Lovulian posted what is going on in Texas, where essentially they are pushing for states rights.

Well, it is not just Texas... it is the who's who of the Old Confederacy, with Minnesota and Alabama. Folks, this is a call for states rights, which is following a pattern that we, well we have read in history books. This is what led to the Civil War and the tenth amendment was also code for Feddies stay out of my state during the Civil Rights

To put it bluntly, now that a N****o got elected, they will push for this dissolution

Some of us were expecting this, but not this fast

So the coming civil war will come, unless these guys are exposed and the funding (I am willing to bet Scaiffe and company) are exposed and loose some thing since they are pushing what essentially is treason (1871 USSC of Texas vs US)

[LakeSamish706]

1. It's past time to round these Repugs up and jail them for there Treasonous...

actions. These pukes have all but destroyed this country, and won't rest until they complete the task.

[seemslikeadream]

2. RESOLVED, That this serve as notice and demand to the federal

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/pdf/HC00050I.pdf
By:AACreighton H.C.R.ANo.A50
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States reads as follows: "The powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people";
and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of
federal power as being that specifically granted by the
Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment
means that the federal government was created by the states
specifically to be an agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated
as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Many federal laws are directly in violation of the
Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of
the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union
of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal
government may not usurp; and

WHEREAS, Section 4, Article IV, of the Constitution says,
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a
Republican Form of Government," and the Ninth Amendment states that
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not
be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people";

and

WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New
York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that congress may not
simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the
states; and

WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations
and some now pending from the present administration and from
congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States;
now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the 81st Legislature of the State of Texas
hereby claim sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise
enumerated and granted to the federal government by the
Constitution of the United States; and, be it further

RESOLVED, That this serve as notice and demand to the federal
government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective
immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these
constitutionally delegated powers; and, be it further

RESOLVED, That all compulsory federal legislation that
directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal
penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation
or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and, be it
further

RESOLVED, That the Texas secretary of state forward official
copies of this resolution to the president of the United States, to
the speaker of the house of representatives and the president of the
senate of the United States Congress, and to all the members of the

Texas delegation to the congress with the request that this
resolution be officially entered in the Congressional Record as a
memorial to the Congress of the United States of America.

[marketcrazy1]

3. here they are

These 11 states -- Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas -- have passed 10th amendment resolutions...

[struggle4progress]

55. I think you mean "a few wacko hacks have introduced resolutions" in a handful of states

and not that these bullshit resolutions are really going anywhere

[NoPasaran]

4. Nothing is going on in Texas

Nothing is going on in Texas beyond some idiot legislator filing a resolution that will go nowhere.

As one of our state senators once observed, if you took all the fools out of the legislature, it wouldn't be a representative body anymore.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Read the center, because it is not just some fool in Texas

may I remind you how we ended up going to civil war?

[NoPasaran]

12. Gee

Gee, imagine how much worse things would have gotten if Jefferson Davis had had a blog! :scared:

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. He didn't have a blog, just the southern press

care to tell me how that history went?

It may not come to pass, but it is foolish to dismiss this

[NoPasaran]

50. If the rantings of a few states rights boobs on the internet meant anything in reality

If the rantings of a few states rights boobs on the internet meant anything in reality then Ron Paul would be sitting in the Oval Office today. But he's not. And, all Chicken Little alarums to the contrary, at no point over the previous eight years was martial law imposed nor were liberals herded into detention camps.

Real, 1860s secession came about after decades of political struggle over sectional issues, first and foremost slavery. The intensity of the conflict increased as the annexation of Texas and the war with Mexico reopened the question of extension of slavery into the territories. Pro and anti-slavery supporters sent settlers and arms to Kansas and waged guerrilla war on each other. One great national party (the Whigs) became extinct; the other shattered on sectional lines (the three Democratic conventions of 1860 resulting in competing Douglas and Breckinridge tickets.) The actual secession process itself was abetted by the inaction of the Buchanan Administration and perhaps aided by the treason of some of its officials. (I am referring primarily to the allegations that Secretary of War Floyd shipped heavy artillery to federal arsenals in the South where it could be easily seized by state forces.)

The Federal Union was strong enough to overcome the rebellion of the 1860s and a century later we made our way through the Second Reconstruction of the Civil Rights Era. While I don't doubt the bad intentions of the latest crop of fire-eater crackpots, I don't fear them either.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. You can dismiss them as much as you want

by the way, you are describing the problem that leads to civil wars, decades of this kind of speech

[LanternWaste]

51. No more, nor no less foolish than it is to dismiss the

No more, nor no less foolish than it is to dismiss the fringe 'Republic of Texas' movement, or the the fringe 'Reconquista' movement.

I will allow it all the consideration it is due-- that being none; and if that leads some to conclude I am foolish or a historical illiterate, so be it-- as it's more illustrative of them rather than me.

[seemslikeadream]

7. Isn't there about 45,000 Mexican troops on the boarder?

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. And???? They are fighting an internal threat in THEIR COUNTRY

[seemslikeadream]

10. "IT'S A WAR"

http://projects.latimes.com/siege/#/its-a-war

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. So? Been in them front lines, got the T-Shit, didn't like it one bit

and you know what? That WAR is coming north, STILL those troops are FIGHTING AN INTERNAL THREAT... They are NOT crossing the border...

Now the drug dealers on the other hand... no promises there

Hell, they'll even shoot at ambulances, I know, again, went there, got the T-Shirt, and didn't like it one bit

[Posteritatis]

16. Meh, there's about 80,000 Canadian troops on your other border

That doesn't mean we're planning to invade again.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Hmm I wonder, how about Canada AND mexico invading again

both at the same time this time.

:-)

[Posteritatis]

23. Alas, not as likely this time

The president has a higher approval rating up here than anyone in our government that isn't an independent MP. ;)

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. And I suspect the same goes south of the border

where Calderon is probably even less popular than Harper

[foxfeet]

65. Well, hell, that "boarder" is going to be awfully sore in the morning.

:P

[L0oniX]

49. "There once was a congressman and there was an idiot, but then I repeat myself" - Samuel Clements.

[seemslikeadream]

5. RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America.



http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

HCR 6 – AS INTRODUCED

2009 SESSION

09-0274

09/01

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 6

A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

SPONSORS: Rep. Itse, Rock 9; Rep. Ingbretson, Graf 5; Rep. Comerford, Rock 9; Sen. Denley, Dist 3

COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs

ANALYSIS

This house concurrent resolution affirms States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

09-0274

09/01

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine

A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2, Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire; and

Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised;” and

Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia, included an identical or similar recommended change; and

Whereas these recommended changes were incorporated as the ninth amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, and the tenth amendment, the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people, to the Constitution for the United States of America; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:

That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and

That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and

That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;” and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:” thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and

That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” and “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,” goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and

That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and

That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court; and

That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and

That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.

[seemslikeadream]

9. 25 States Claiming / Planning Sovereignty

25 States Claiming / Planning Sovereignty


There are those among us these days that clearly do not have the interest of the country in mind and seek to take a bad situation and make it worse, much worse. Makes me wonder if this has not be the Republicans game plan all along.

This morning, which is actually past noon now, I come across on of the websites of these people which I thought should be shared. This is one of the secessionist websites of which there seems to be a push on for right now.

Arrive at your own conclusions.

http://www.mrstep.com/politics/az-wa-mo-nh-ok-claiming-sovereignty /

[struggle4progress]

60. I'd love to portray the Rs as the secessionist party in 2008, but in fact these idiotic

resolutions aren't going anywhere: the map merely suggests that there are at least 25 complete idiots in state legislatures around the country, which won't be news to anybody who has ever walked around a state house some afternoon

[foxfeet]

66. Done, schmone, a bill has been introduced by a few Repub hacks

in the the WA State legislature. This bill will NEVER make it out of committee, even if it's debated there. And some of our Repub hacks would give anyone, anywhere a run for their money where craziness is concerned.

[Selatius]

13. Google the 9 Nations of North America, a book written in 1981.

The Nine Nations of North America is a book written in 1981 by Joel Garreau. In it, Garreau argues that North America can be divided into nine regions, or "nations", which have distinctive economic and cultural features. He argues that conventional national and state borders are largely artificial and irrelevant, and that his "nations" provide a more accurate way of understanding the true nature of North American society. Paul Meartz of Mayville State University called it "a classic text on the current regionalization of North America".



While Garreau wasn't advocating secession, it does provide a map of the cultural fault-lines found inside the United States and in North America in general.

If the USA ends up dissolving the same way the USSR did, it might provide a picture of what North America could look like if the 50 states reorganized themselves. I guess the only thing to note about the map is that Mexamerica might be a bit bigger now than it was in 1981.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Pick a copy of early Shadowrun, core book

you can find it at places used.

It is a roleplaying game, but the ORIGINAL authors used that book as a basis.

Leave the magic out and just look at the map

Science fantasy, but the map is a must... let me see if google behaves

[bushmeister0]

47. Now, the United Nations is a good thing?

From their manifesto:

"Was the 'United States of America' indeed, as our popular Pledge of Allegiance claims, 'one nation, indivisible?' Or was it, rather, a union of sovereign nations, bound only to each other by mere treaty, as with any other treaty – such as the current United Nations?"

I thought the United Nations was some kind of Trilateral Commission plot to take over the world. Now they're citing it as an expample of what the US shoud be? Huh?

[conscious evolution]

71. Interesting map

I would have to say that Atlanta would not be the capital,though.
The city of Atlanta would be more like Berlin during the cold war.

[Baikonour]

14. I don't think these idiots understand...

Just how swiftly and violently they will be dealt with if they even begin to try to spawn a civil war.

[RoyGBiv]

15. Been fighting these people since the 80s ...

They're worse than anyone realizes.

Google League of the South (I won't link there) and ignore the Confederate apologia. Seriously. Ignore it. It's a distraction.

Dig around awhile until you find their governing documents, resolutions, etc. and take note of the names. Then, when you have time, look for connections between those names and one or several hundred people now serving in various levels of government, including a Senator or two and some Representatives ... and more than a few in state legislatures, state level boards of education, sheriff's offices, etc. These people know their history very well.

They have a smattering of academic backing, couched within Libertarian economic dogma. (I like putting the words "Libertarian" and "dogma" together. Makes them furious.) I had the misfortune of being taught Intro to Economics by one of these gasbags back in something like 1988. I didn't do well 'cause I knew how full of crap he was. Took it again later and did much better .... I digress.

Anyway ... this isn't tinfoil conspiracy stuff. It is, basically, a social movement that stays below the radar most of the time.

[Selatius]

17. If they want a civil war, then they might agitate for one when the United States is weakest.

That point might come when the US is in a full-blown depression with a bankrupt federal government borrowing heavily against a Dollar that is on its death bed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Like they did during the Depression? Now that I think about it

[Selatius]

24. That depends on who you were talking about in the 1930s. Neo-confederates or Industrialists?

The industrialists wanted an American version of Hitler's Germany. They were more than willing to topple FDR if they had the chance, but their coup plot failed. The Neo-Confederates of that era? I figured they were more interested in splitting off the Southeast from the rest of the United States.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Father Coughlin and the rest of the neo confederates.

Too much inside baseball

:-)

Now the industrialists, don't doubt for a second they are planning that too, but perhaps not on the web

[Selatius]

28. People think Rush Limbaugh's power is out-sized. They haven't seen Father Coughlin.

Rush Limbaugh wishes his total listenership was a whopping 40,000,000+. That's an army.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Difference is, coughlin's was mostly regional

rush is national and has a hell of an echo chamber

But, just as coughlin, this recession is cutting down on the willing victims who listen to the crap and are enraged by it

That gives me some hope

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. I suspect. though will have to sharpen my research tools again

that they are tied to some of the militia movement as well

I don't discount them

And lord knows I did a lot of research into the militias right until Columbine for a possible novel

People who think this is tinfoil will deserve their surprised faced.

[RoyGBiv]

25. Oh yes ...

One of my friends -- I call him a friend, but I sadly have not had contact with him for about five years -- got his PhD in history and was immediately hired to work on researching militia movements. He's been doing that in one form or another ever since. Now that I think of it, I need to get in touch with him. I'm curious what is take on recent events is. I did a little grunt work for him back in the day, documenting the routines of some militia big-wigs 'round about where I lived at the time. Weird stuff, this was. One never realizes what goes on right under their nose until they actually start looking.

Anyway, the LoS is definitely tied to several militia organizations, both in formal and informal ways.

The thing that people miss often is that many of these groups are connected but appear separate due to the masking of surface ideology. That is, they spout one thing, and another group spouts another thing, but underneath it all are directing agents that use both for a more subversive purpose. So, it's bigger in scope than it seems. Additionally, much of it is discounted as extremism, which plays into this separation. Group A is just a bunch of racist quacks. Group B is just a bunch of looney lefties. For the purposes of the groups that use these other fringe groups, this is irrelevant. Their only point is as a recruiting tool into a base system of opposition, militant if necessary.

For the most part all of it has been fringe until recently. These guys wear business suits and have wives that run the local charity drives.

And most of them are *deeply* religious, in the worst possible use of the term.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Maybe it is time to write a novel based on this

try to get people edujimacated this way

After all... fiction is stranger than facts when it come to these things

Hell, the Turner Diaries... many folks do not realize just how much Oklahoma City followed that novel... well right until the point of sparking the revolt.

Way too much inside baseball...

[Selatius]

32. What you just posted sounds, frankly, terrifying if true.

I wonder if the Army of God, often blamed for blowing up abortion clinics, is just another tentacle of the octopus. Did you friend research that group?

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. From the research I did into these groups for a novel back in the 90s

yes, they are related

So are my local Neo Nazis groups in the back country

What is scary when people talk of terror as a threat to the nation... they are right... problem is that it is mostly internal

[RoyGBiv]

36. I imagine so ...

I didn't get a lot of names out of him, just the ones that were rather public at the time he would talk about whatever it was. His research was nominally funded by government agencies, and he had to be careful about what he said and when. There's nothing really nefarious in that, just a fear of losing funding for making the "wrong" statement that could be taken by a politician as fodder for cutting off the people he worked for.

This, he said, was also one of the problems. The very people he was investigating had ties to people who, eventually, had ties to people who controlled cash flow for investigating them.

But, I do know his particular area of expertise moved him into looking at those who targeted minorities and public institutions with violence, which often included religious extremists like the Army of God. Some of his work ended up being used by the SPLC for some of their cases not too long ago. Groups like the SPLC are a natural extension of the organization he worked for, one that is not beholden entirely to public coffers.

[conscious evolution]

72. They are creating their militias

in right wing churchs thru the youth groups.

[bertman]

30. 28 replies, only 3 recs. This is worth reading, folks.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

33. This probably isn't good, is it? nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. No... the RW militias became extremely active during the Clinton presidency

listen to Shelby, same shit different decade

What is more, read some of the crap regarding slavery leading to the First Civil War.

This has been brewing for more than just a month, more like two decades, but truly became virulent in the 1990s

There is a saying that any country involved in a cold civil war that lasts more than ten years, ends up fighting a hot one. Guess what this is? Cold civil war

Suspected for a while that it would go hot, now I am positive it will

[RJ Connors]

37. HJR108: State Sovereignty for Tennessee

I was just watching a YouTube video tonight on the Skopes Monkey trial which was in Dayton Tn. Looks like they haven't evolved much since then.

[struggle4progress]

58. Whoop-de-doo. Rightwing nutcase Susan Lynn filed a resolution last week

She seems to be a non-descript Repub hack -- and frankly the Tennessee State House Republicans currently look like they don't have $#!% for brains

[file83]

38. When a WHITE GUY is passing the most dangerous executive orders it's OK...

...but when the BLACK GUY inherits those powers, it's time to secede from the union.

Fucking racists, in the millions too.

Maybe it's time to have a Civil War so we can surgically remove this Nation's racist cancer once-and-for-all.

[RJ Connors]

67. I tend to agree with you but still it is hard to tell

if they are that racist or more just plain fucking insane. It's a close call either way.

[starroute]

39. Is the John Birch Society coming back round?

I keep being surprised every time I see evidence that they still exist -- though I suppose I shouldn't be. They were the granddaddy of a lot of this stuff after all.

You can still find them at jbs.org, and from anything I can tell, they seem more like garden-variety libertarians these days than anything like the raging crazies of old.

On the other hand, here's "Oklahoma House Votes 83 to 13 to Restore Sovereignty Under the 10th Amendment Over All Powers Not Granted to the Federal Government." So you never know.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. I wish these folks were as innocuous as the birchers were

then again, they are, as you said, the origin of a lot of this crap

Thanks for the reminder... am sure you dig, you will find a link

[bobthedrummer]

41. They are located in Appleton WI

http://www.jbs.org/

[1]

42. my head gets all sweaty when i wear this tinfoil... does it help to poke holes in my cap?

inquiring minds want to know...

:rofl:

[seemslikeadream]

43. Residents on notice of upcoming police training

http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=9752120

NEW ORLEANS -- The New Orleans Police Department is warning residents not to panic if they see helicopters flying around the city after dark.


The department will be hosting military training in and around the city between Jan. 27 and Feb. 8.

The training includes the use of military helicopters flying after dark throughout the city.

Police say they want residents of New Orleans and outlying areas to know it's a training event. The activities, authorities say, have been carefully planned and are safe.

[seemslikeadream]

44. Text of H.R. 645: National Emergency Centers Establishment Act

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645


111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 645

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 22, 2009

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.

(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--

(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;

(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;

(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and

(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.

(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--

(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;

(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;

(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;

(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;

(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;

(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:

(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and

(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and

(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.

(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:

(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.

(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.

(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.

(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.

(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.

(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.

(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.

(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.

(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.

(g) Reports-

(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;

(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;

(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;

(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and

(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).

(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);

(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);

(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and

(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.

(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);

(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and

(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.

(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.

SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

This Act does not affect--

(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or

(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.

SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act, the following definitions apply:

(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term ‘closed military installation’ means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:

(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.

(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.

(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.

(2) EMERGENCY- The term ‘emergency’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).

(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term ‘major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).

(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term ‘military installation’ has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

[seemslikeadream]

45. Crazy helicopters over The University of New Orleans

Crazy helicopters over The University of New Orleans

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCbLSTdAwd4

[seemslikeadream]

46. Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/30/AR2008113002217_2.html?hpid=topnews

[dixiegrrrrl]

64. Looks like Bernanke does not believe what he said

about recessin lifting in a year.

Sounds like somebody is expecting trouble.

[BlooInBloo]

48. The only thing better than race-war bullshit from their side...

is race-war bullshit from "our" side.

[newtothegame]

52. This will go nowhere. The world ain't as interesting as stuff like this makes it sound. n/t

[Edweird]

53. ZOMG! Some lame ass website with 3 comments on it! This is HUGH!!! I'm series!!11!!

Fearmongering must be getting hard if you're resorting to this....

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. This is not rear mongering, but if you think so, why don't you just put me on ignore?

save yourself the hassle

[BuelahWitch]

57. I don't want to live in Jesusland!

:cry:

[dixiegrrrrl]

59. Oh honey, nothing will be done in Alabama.

The 2 parties in the State Legislature, which only meets for a few weeks, hate each other so much they won't even speak to one another and they have passed only one bill at all this session.
That bill was to give themselves a pay raise.

Even fire ants are more productive than Al. legislators.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. that's the kind of ahem, hate that leads to these crisis

thank you.

But that's just me and some history.

Now if it was just Alabama...

And I could say the same about Cali, but they did pass this crap too

[struggle4progress]

61. Docket of HCR6 (NH)

... 02/19/2009 H Majority Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate for Mar 4 RC (vote 11-7)
02/19/2009 H Minority Committee Report: Ought to Pass ...

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_docket.aspx?lsr=274&sy=2009&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2009&txtbillnumber=HCR6&q=1

[struggle4progress]

62. HCR 0004 (MI)

Looks like the House Government Operations committee just plans to sit on it

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(32ni2arrowsasg3tc0kuiz45))/mileg.aspx?page=CommitteeBillRecordSearch&session=2009-2010&CommitteeName=Government+Operations&chamber=house

[pnutbutr]

68. States Rights has my full support

And should have the support of everyone. It would eliminate the fed interfering in medical MJ laws like in CA and tons of other issues that the states should be able to decide for themselves. The fed need not be legislating for the states what is not specified in the constitution.

[mmonk]

69. The problem is the tradition of some of these states

not recognizing settled law in the area of Civil Rights established throught the courts through constitutional means.

[pnutbutr]

70. 14th amendment

gives congress the power to legislate to prevent that which I believe has been done through various civil rights and discrimination laws. Not everything would be turned over to the states.

[seemslikeadream]

73. Obama administration is considering swarming the border with agents & possibly U.S. military support

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5134511

[seemslikeadream]

74. Guardian UK: Mexico is in free fall

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/25/mexico-drugs-trade
Mexico is in free fall
With cartels taking over cities and killing all anti-drug officials, the country is crying out for help – but is unlikely to get it from the US

David Rieff
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 25 February 2009 22.00 GMT


Shortly before the US elections last November, then vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden was widely criticised for predicting that an Obama administration would almost certainly be tested by what he called a "generated" international crisis, in much the way that the Soviet Union "tested" John F Kennedy shortly after he assumed office. Biden did not point to a specific region of the world, but mentioned the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent and Russia as the likeliest sources of trouble for the new president.

Impolitic or not, Biden's anxieties seem to have informed several of the administration's early foreign policy decisions. These include his own extension of an olive branch to Russia at the recent Munich security conference, and Barack Obama's appointment of Richard Holbrooke as special envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan – and of George Mitchell to a similar post for Israel-Palestine.

But, as pressing as the Middle East, south Asia, and Russia (as well as Iran and North Korea) are, another crisis far closer to home could create as much peril as a nuclear-armed Iran, an aggressively resurgent Russia, or even an Islamist-dominated Pakistan.

That crisis is located in Mexico, which is in free fall, its state institutions under threat as they have not been since at least the Cristero uprising of the late 1920s and possibly since the Mexican revolution of 1910. While the Obama administration is obviously aware of what is happening south of the Rio Grande, the threat simply does not command the attention that its gravity requires.