Indexes
February 9th, 2010
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- President Obama's first year (45)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (44)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
- Tasered suspect claims he is Yosemite Sam (25)
ADVERTISEMENT
States can't secede from the Union
Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:20 AM PDT
My incoming junk e-mail mentions numerous states of the Union having seceded from the Union; but I look around me and it sure looks like there still are 50 "states" out there.
Apparently, California adopted such a resolution over 10 years ago; Hawaii declared that a loophole in their original "contract" takes them out of the Union; and one of the Northern states has made strong verbal statements to secede.
What's happening here? They can't leave until the public debt is paid.
Few people are aware of the existence and importance of Article 6 of the constitution: "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation." In Black's Law 6th Edition Dictionary, "Constitutor" is defined as one who becomes responsible for the payment of another's debt. Is Article 6 not stating that the United States is assuming responsibility for the debt of the Confederacy?
The War of 1812, the Civil War, and the stock market crash of 1929 were all related to the bankruptcy of America, for which the original Constitution assumed responsibility but did not pay. The only possibility of the debt being paid might be at 1999, after 70 years of American slavery which commenced at the stock market crash, followed by FDR's seizure of the gold in 1933. This might explain the missing gold in Fort Knox.
The Civil War was about Southern states seceding without first paying the debt. President Lincoln was faced with the potential loss of cotton revenue, and the possibility of losing free-hold land in the South.
Any theory of American history and politics which does not respect the American bankruptcy is without foundation. This includes all federal campaigns, some state campaigns, national news broadcasts, and university political science theory.
The misunderstanding is manifested as Republican-Democrat, conservative-liberal and right-left competitions. Hollywood gives us fair notice. "The Matrix" illustrates a public entity that is harvesting labor energy from "coppertop" batteries to pay the public government. After taking the correct pill, to learn the truth, there's no turning back.
Daniel Hutchins
Acampo
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Robb wrote on Jun 4, 2009 9:50 AM:
ahh, nevermind.... not worth the effort..;) "
danielh wrote on Jun 3, 2009 5:46 PM:
Robb wrote on Jun 3, 2009 8:08 AM:
danielh wrote on Jun 2, 2009 6:04 PM:
When you're hurting, you won't be able to find my reports, or anyone to blame except yourself. "
Robb wrote on Jun 2, 2009 7:37 AM:
danielh wrote on Jun 2, 2009 2:32 AM:
You're talking cheap to someone that has informed you of such.
Perhaps you would prefer not to be told about your own captivity, just like a majority of the "US citizens" that preferred to remain ignorant in the "Matrix."
Animal House was an example of preferred ignorance.
1984 was an excellent example of "US citizens" and "Brits" who intentionally changed their mind to match that of their leaders.
Good job citizen Robb. "
Robb wrote on Jun 1, 2009 10:40 PM:
Run along boy, the lessons are complete.;) "
danielh wrote on Jun 1, 2009 7:27 PM:
Robb wrote on Jun 1, 2009 4:39 PM:
danielh wrote on May 30, 2009 12:10 AM:
The Republic lasted 7 years.
1782 National government went to the States and asked them to foot the bill for the Revolutionary War and the States said they would not pay the debt. National government was therefore forced to form a Constitution. The national government lost its sovereignty. A constitution (security, with sureties) is created by a constitutor – one who passes his debts to a 3rd party. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 10:33 PM:
You can complain and declare it is incorrect all you want, but you are wasting your time, except in the glory of your own theatre. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 10:31 PM:
Let's see if you can find it.
I'll probably have to eat crow, provided that you agree to eat crow back, if I later find that I am actually correct. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 10:28 PM:
The fact of the articles of confederation being for the United States of America does not disprove that a constitution had to be adopted to take responsibility for the debt, or face foreclosure.
That would be like saying that if you didn't make your payments on your mortgage, the bank couldn't foreclose if the previous owners had the same address.
You are using the same logic. "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 5:26 PM:
lodisafeway wrote on May 29, 2009 2:28 PM:
Nice try, though - and very entertaining - as always. "
lodisafeway wrote on May 29, 2009 2:17 PM:
Be that as it may your admittance of defect as you wrongly assume regarding the use of "confederation" and "confederacy" was directed at your other reliance upon Black's Law Dictionary to support your contention that the "Constitution" and "Constitutor" are somehow linked in nearly the same fashion. I submit that they are not.
Article 6 is not as convoluted as you attempt to make it out to be. It simply made clear that since the rules were changing for the United States (abandoning the Articles of Confederation in favor of the Constitution) those debts incurred under the former would be honored by the latter.
While I would have likewise abandoned this futile discussion with you yesterday, your insistence upon being our "teacher" leaves me begging for any semblance of logic in the curriculum. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 1:57 PM:
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 12:26 PM:
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 12:25 PM:
… continued:
So if the people can’t pay any debts, how are our debts being paid?
Answer: Reference House Joint Resolution 192 (1933). This resolution is a remedy for FDR seizing the gold. Since the citizens are not given any currency with which they can pay their debts, HJR 192 informs the people of a PUBLIC policy for US Treasury to discharge our debts for us.
This is going to be a wild stretch of imagination to think anyone will get this upon first-time reading: All of the PUBLIC debts are pre-paid, because of HJR 192.
QUESTION: So what’s happening?
ANSWER: The bankers are stealing these pre-paid payments. If they confirm any of them, the secret will get out.
QUESTION: Why don’t we know about this in school?
ANSWER: because PUBLIC school educates us and indoctrinates us to become DEBTORS. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 11:36 AM:
I already established that the gold has been stolen, and I think we already agree on that.
Not only has the gold been stolen from Fort Knox, but in 1933, by executive order, FDR ordered the seizure of gold (and silver?) from the people within 1 week of his being sworn into PUBLIC office.
Subsequently during either Nixon or Ford administrations, gold was completely disconnected from the currency.
Consequently, your Federal Reserve notes are worthless debt instruments.
So tell me: How can America use these worthless debt instruments to pay for anything?
Answer: NOT! (Hence I wrote about gold 2-months ago.)
continued… "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 11:35 AM:
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 11:26 AM:
Here, I am not referring to the Southern States during the Civil War. I am referring to the 13 separate "colonies" which were loosely organized under a document named the "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union," ratified March 1781.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_confederation
This document was not capable of holding financial responsibility for the debt.
The US Constitution became a necessity because of the debt. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 11:19 AM:
However, the Revolutionary War was PRIOR TO the constitution.
The Louisiana "Purchase" [loan] was a re-financing of the original loan. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 11:18 AM:
I think this shows that yes I can admit to my own defects.
However, I cannot use an alleged blemish to lose sight of the primary topic. "
danielh wrote on May 29, 2009 11:14 AM:
Can I impress you first of all: The Article 6 definitely is printed in the constitution, and one would think the authors had a reason to put it there. "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:40 AM:
Whereas, our Treasury, given authority by the Constitution has the right to print money sans the interest we pay the Federal Reserve. Question is: Why don't they? "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:38 AM:
You then mention why we had a Civil War, and granted, what you state may be a possibility; however, I would contend that what you list is only one of many of the reasons. Then you write of respecting bankruptcy laws which made me scratch my head unless you were referring to the U. S. government being in receivership. "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:38 AM:
What you follow up with seems to be some confusion between government and central banking; which is why I linked to that article and here reference it a third time. ;) Alexander Hamilton was a huge proponent of central banking; banking based on the European system which the fledging America was trying to free itself from. "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:37 AM:
You then state, “The War of 1812, the Civil War, and the stock market crash of 1929 were all related to the bankruptcy of America, for which the original Constitution assumed responsibility but did not pay.” "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:37 AM:
You then ask, “Is Article 6 not stating that the United States is assuming responsibility for the debt of the Confederacy?” "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:36 AM:
“He who promised by a simple pact to pay the debt of another; and this is always a principal obligation.”
Slightly different from how you defined the word. Now, if you go back to the wording of the first paragraph of Article 6 of the Constitution, “All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.” "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:36 AM:
Public debt is defined as: “The total of the nation's debts: debts of local and state and national governments; an indicator of how much public spending is financed by borrowing instead of taxation.”
Why is this? Please explain.
You then go on to cite Article 6 of the Constitution, moving into Black’s Law 6th Edition definition of “Constitutor” which you said was, “one who becomes responsible for the payment of another's debt.” "
wtf wrote on May 29, 2009 9:35 AM:
You open with mention of numerous states of the Union having seceded from the Union and included in this list, is the comment that California apparently adopted such a resolution over ten years ago.
As I’ve already stated, I have heard of the 10th Amendment movement, and periodically there have been rumblings of secession as well as several movements to break up the state into smaller states; yet I am not aware of any resolution being adopted by the state of California regarding secession. Please cite your reference for this statement. "
lodisafeway wrote on May 29, 2009 7:01 AM:
But folks believe whatever they choose - I'm just trying to separate fact from fiction as well as counter Mr. Hutchins' claims that I (and perhaps others) don't understand what it is we're talking about. For me I simply don't believe in his theories; yet I am being as respectful as I possibly can to make my point. "
lodisafeway wrote on May 29, 2009 6:55 AM:
He has us believe that the word "constitutor" derives itself from the word "constitution" at least as far as his letter is concerned. The problem here is that "constitution is not the root of "constitutor" or vice versa. As defined according to its use here, constitution means precisely what most understand it to mean: "The system [and its accompanying document(s)] of fundamental laws and principles that prescribes the nature, functions, and limits of a government or another institution." (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/constitution) There's no underlying concept of governmental ownership of its citizens or anything of the sort.
Suffice it to say Hutchins continues to create outlandish ideas out of whole cloth, with absolutely no basis in fact or in history. This truly is an attempt to lead others astray with fancy footwork hoping that no one might possess the temerity to perform the simplest of examinations into his claims. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 10:01 PM:
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 10:01 PM:
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 9:38 PM:
I can concede that the article might not be written very well; however, the content is there, and everybody has a choice of whether or not to learn.
I've been studying it for a very long time. One diversionary reference to some other article is not going to change my studies of hundreds of articles over a long period of time. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 9:33 PM:
1933 House Joint Resolution 192 proclaims public policy that the federal government will forgive the people for their debts [because we were in bankruptcy, and FDR seized the gold].
Now, today, all PUBLIC debts are forgiven, and the people just don't realize it. "
Giovanina wrote on May 28, 2009 7:12 PM:
Now, the American people are stuck in the same situation, paying the debts and the heavy taxes.
The Northern states never paid their war debt, and did not pay the majority of the tariffs. Oh choices! choices! Plan A keep letting the central government rip you off, or plan B fight them off....hmmmm Now the American people get to make those choices. "
Billy Rubin wrote on May 28, 2009 6:47 PM:
Static, no doubt - from the tinfoil hat. "
wtf wrote on May 28, 2009 6:13 PM:
danielh, once again, I must bow to lodisafeway's words which aptly describe our current impasse i.e., "...you didn't clarify your thoughts clearly enough..."
Also, danielh, I think you might want to re-read my posts s-l-o-w-l-y since I **never** said **I** didn't understand; I suggested that perhaps you were confused, and, if you'd bother to have read the article I have now mentioned twice, that perhaps **you** didn't understand it. ;) "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 5:34 PM:
lodisafeway wrote on May 28, 2009 5:11 PM:
That statement seems to imply that those of us who do not agree with him only lack understanding; that it is he who is correct to the exclusion of all other opinions or evidence to the contrary. That's a rather haughty attitude to take. Of course he is entitled to his opinions, as long as he accepts that there might be those who begin to view him more as Chicken Little even when the sky might very well be falling; I can't take him seriously about anything (not that he cares). Sadly, he's not the only person who behaves in this fashion
But he ignores the evidence regarding Confederation vs. Confederacy. Doesn't seem to wish to address the fact that he might be wrong about something. Kind of like the Fonz who could never bring himself to even utter the word.
But again, I'm not surprised considering the history behind danielh and his ideas. As always he does bring a smile. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 4:50 PM:
People who prefer to remain in custody are free to exclaim that they don't understand. That's OK. Just remain the same as a slave. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 4:47 PM:
It is not the 10th amendment.
Simply put, the constitution represents 13 separate jurisdictions coming together to avoid foreclosure, and the debt hasn't been paid, except until 1999. "
sven31 wrote on May 28, 2009 3:23 PM:
I think we agree that double checking what is said, stated, written, etc. should be fact checked before we move forward and post comments. Unfortuantely many of these are taken in by get rich quick schemes of isolating hydrogen from the air, or carborators that get 100 mpg (as though anyone still has a carborator). There is nothing we can do to help them. "
lodisafeway wrote on May 28, 2009 2:18 PM:
Absent even a small amount of investigation by readers so inclined to believe whatever is placed before them, this is how rumors are started; and by the time they might be exposed for the nonsense that they are, the Internet becomes flooded with folks literally scared to death that we're all going to be rounded up and placed into internment camps.
Naturally, I encourage everyone to do their own research on anything presented in any newspaper, news program or the Internet. "
lodisafeway wrote on May 28, 2009 1:32 PM:
lodisafeway wrote on May 28, 2009 1:28 PM:
wtf wrote on May 28, 2009 1:13 PM:
The title of your letter is 'States can't secede from the Union' As a result, I received the impression you were confused regarding the recent 10th amendment movement by many states.
Regarding your mention of Article 6 of the Constitution; again, I direct you to the link entitled: "Rethinking the Articles of Confederation" which covers the history of this "debt" quite well. By your response, it would seem you either did not read this article or you did not understand what was written. ;)
http://mises.org/story/1296 "
lodisafeway wrote on May 28, 2009 10:20 AM:
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 10:17 AM:
lodisafeway wrote on May 28, 2009 9:48 AM:
I do have to qualify these remarks because there were some who did miss the mark regarding the Article vs. Amendment reference in your letter - that's on them. But still, you didn't clarify your thoughts clearly enough for the masses to follow along. And now you're reduced to having to explain practically each and every word that I am sure you had hoped would take a different route by those now responding. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 9:37 AM:
Interesting: When they created the 14th amendment to pass the federal bill of rights down to the states, they did not include the 7th amendment.
Also, the 7th amendment applies to common law. I don't know how to interpret that. Common law cannot be written. Any attempt to write it down makes it statutory. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 9:32 AM:
Count to ten.
Read it again.
Every statement has a meaning.
Then you get to the "Matrix" movie, which gave us fair warning. "
danielh wrote on May 28, 2009 9:31 AM:
The "Constitution" takes responsibility for the debt, which the separate Confederacies could not pay for.
There was a debt, and it always has been huge.
I am not talking about amendments. This is Article 6 of the constitution.
Article 6 probably is the most important little passage that has dominated American history. "
wtf wrote on May 28, 2009 8:55 AM:
"And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors."
http://www.sundayschoolresources.com/lordsprayerbcp.htm "
wtf wrote on May 28, 2009 8:13 AM:
"...a new campaign called the Tenth Amendment Movement is now sweeping state legislatures across the nation. This is not an effort by the states to secede from the Union, but an attempt to persuade the federal government to abide by the Constitution."
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/881-tenth-amendment-movement-taking-on-the-feds
http://www.sodahead.com/question/267206/majority-of-us-states-join-sovereignty-movement-assert-10th-amendment-rights-is-your-state-on-the-list/
Daniel, you mention Article 6 of the Constitution which references the Articles of Confederation. This is an excellent article concerning that subject.
Rethinking the Articles of Confederation
http://mises.org/story/1296
Interestingly enough, Alexander Hamilton, the main author of the Federalist Papers arguing for a centralized (federal) government, was also all for a central bank.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo151.html
When push comes to shove, however, perhaps we should go further back to the Biblical Jubilee.
Debt Cancellation: Biblical Norm, Not Exception
http://www.jubileeusa.org/get-active/jubilee-congregations/faith-worship-resources/debt-cancellation-the-biblical-norm.html "
jughead wrote on May 28, 2009 7:50 AM:
sven31 wrote on May 28, 2009 7:48 AM:
Why don't we work on the 7th amendment so I can sue someone who owes me more than $20 in a jury trial? Everyone else can to! We can sue each other. It will be a party.
Are you confusing the "missing gold" with the Mission Imposible episode where they heated up the gold vault, melted it and then collected it from a drain that someone (up to then) thought would be a good idea to install? It was a landmark episode. It was one Jim and the rest of the mission impossible team decided to take. All the other missions they didn't really want to go on but they were bored and needed something to do.
Trivia: The distinguished black guy's (Greg Morris I think) son played the attorney on Seinfeld. "Jackie some thing" "an innocent bystander is just that' a by stander that's innocent, that's why they call them innocent bystanders" (paraphrased) "
Comments on this story are now closed.