Demons Dialog & Revelation

Log in and share your knowledge
Demons Dialog & Revelation
Welcome to Demons Dialog & Revelation..Please join us in the fight against lies and the noble task of digging up the truth.
Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:
Eight N.Y. High School Students Test Positive for Swine Flu, N.Y. Mayor Says

The federal government declares a public health emergency, as the number of cases of swine flu in the U.S. rises to 20.

Who is online?

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 1 Guest

None


[ View the whole list ]


Most users ever online was 17 on Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:14 pm

Statistics

Our users have posted a total of 371 messages in 187 subjects

We have 6 registered users

The newest registered user is crzy.beautiful

Navigation


    Newswatch Magazine April 25, 2009

    Share
    avatar
    michael144/Admin
    Admin
    Admin

    Newswatch Magazine April 25, 2009

    Post by michael144/Admin on Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:56 am

    A New Editorial Every Saturday!
    The Truth About Secession!
    By Editor: David J.
    Smith 4/25/09


    With Governor Rick Perry's strong stance about the Tenth Amendment – States' Rights – and his allusion to the fact that Texas will not be oppressed any more, the liberal media and democrats began to label him a "secessionist!" What is the truth about secession, and what did the colonists who framed our Constitution have to say?


    Several sources have stated that after the Constitutional Convention, several states balked at the idea of a strong centralized government. According to a booklet published by the Women for Constitutional Government, seven states included the right of secession in their acts of ratification of the Constitution.


    According to this booklet, four of these states were New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. These states could not be considered the "Heart of Dixie."


    The delegates for the nation-state of Virginia, in their ratification statement, expressed the right of secession most clearly when they wrote:

    "We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected … do, in the name and behalf of Virginia, DECLARE AND MAKE KNOWN, that the powers granted by the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be RESUMED [taken back again] by them, WHENEVER the same shall BE PERVERTED to their INJURY OR OPPRESSION."


    New York's ratification statements regarding the right of secession are just as clear. They stated:


    "That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people, whensoever it shall become NECESSARY to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction and right, which is not, by the said Constitution, DELEGATED to the Congress of the United States, or the departments thereof, REMAINS TO THE PEOPLE OF THE SEVERAL STATES, or to their respective State governments, to whom they have granted the same" (James M. Bulman, Is It Their Right, p. 62).

    The ratification papers of several States clearly recognize the States' right of secession UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS. More importantly, by accepting these ratification statements, with the RIGHT of secession CLEARLY spelled out, THE OTHER STATES FORMALLY ACCEPTED THOSE SECESSION PRINCIPLES THAT WERE SO STATED for themselves.


    Ultra-nationalist Alexander Hamilton, by his own admission, was forced to recognize that the right of State secession existed. In regard to Hamilton, Alexander Stephens has written:

    "Even Mr. Hamilton must have believed that this RIGHT was incident to the systems, for in his urgent appeals to Mr. Jefferson, as early as 1790, for his influence with members of congress, in aid of the bill for the assumption of the State debts, he presented the STRONG reason, that if the measure should not pass, there was great danger of a SECESSION of the members from the creditor States, which would end in a 'SEPARATION OF THE STATES' … he was Secretary of the Treasury. Would he have urged such an argument if he had not believed that those states had a RIGHT TO WITHDRAW?" (Alexander Stephens, A Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States, Vol. 1, p. 502).

    William Rawle, U.S. District Attorney under President George Washington, said:


    "The Union is an ASSOCIATION of the people of Republics; its preservation is calculated to DEPEND ON THE PRESERVATION OF THOSE REPUBLICS … It depends on the State itself, TO RETAIN OR ABOLISH THE PRINCIPLE OF REPRESENTATION; BECAUSE it depends on itself, whether it will continue a member of the Union. To DENY this RIGHT, would be inconsistent with the principles on which ALL our political systems are founded; …" (P. 9 & 235).

    William Rawle's book was taught to our military leaders at West Point in 1825-26. The eleven Southern States that seceded in 1860-61 knew their right of secession was their legal Constitutional Right. Their generals attended the military academy; therefore, they knew what was taught was Constitutional. They were even taught HOW to properly proceed in seceding. All eleven States followed the procedures taught at the military academy in the smallest detail. That is why President Lincoln sent ships under cover of night. He was declaring war on eleven sovereign nation-states.

    Alexis de Tocqueville addressed the question of secession by writing:

    "The Union was formed by the VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT of the States; and these, in uniting together, have NOT FORFEITED the Nationality, nor have they been REDUCED to the condition of one and the same people. If one of the States chose to withdraw its name from the contract, it would be DIFFICULT to DISPROVE its right of doing so …" (Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. 1, p. 387).

    Rawle and de Tocqueville nailed down the LEGAL question of secession. States have the LEGAL RIGHT to secede under the original Constitution made between the various Nation-States, IF the Federal Government becomes oppressive and a THREAT TO IMPOSE TYRANNY upon the peoples of these separate Nation-States!!!

    Utopian socialist Horace Greeley, who was NO friend of the South, also accepted the right of secession as a given in the Union. He wrote:
    Newswatch Magazine


    The Truth About Secession (p. 2)



    "We hold with Jefferson that governments are made for the people and NOT people for governments … When any portion of the Union large enough to form an independent nation shall show that, and say authenticcally, 'we want to get away from you,' regard for the PRINCIPLE of SELF-GOVERNMENT will constrain the residue to say 'Go.' We shall willingly DO NOTHING that looks like bribery or wheedling any state or section to remain in the Union…" (Henry Luther Stoddard, Horace Greeley, p. 208).

    The crowning irony of the secession question was a speech given in Congress on January 12, 1848, by none other than "Honest Abe" Lincoln. He said in part:

    "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit" (Charles L. C. Minor, The Real Lincoln, p. 66).

    The right of secession was more than just a "Southern notion!" Secession was often on the minds of those in our early days who could not lay claim to being Southerners. Eben Greenough-Scott wrote in 1895:

    "How little weight must be given to the profession of loyalty to the Union by EITHER section may be estimated from the fact that, down to the Civil War of 1861, there had RARELY been a time when the DANGER of dissolution, at the hands of one side or the other was not threatening the Union" (Eben Greenough-Scott, Reconstruction During the Civil War in the U.S., p. 213).


    Secession was also part and parcel of the Northern mindset and was amplified by Scott on page 213:

    "Nor, as the public utterances and the private correspondence of New England leaders disclose, was there reason or propriety in the threats of dissolution of the general Union, and the FORMATION of a particular one, embracing the New England states only, merely because the rampant Federalism of the locality had met with a rebuff. The conduct of New England during the Embargo and the War of 1812 has ever since then received such unsparing condemnation, that merely to mention it is to reopen a mortifying chapter of our history; …" (Ibid, p. 213).



    IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

    When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. (Quoted in part).

    The case of LAWFUL SECESSION has been made – from the Declaration of Independence through, and including Abraham Lincoln's words.

    May Nature's God, our Lord Jesus Christ, bless you in considering the "Truth About Secession." Our own Declaration of Independence states it is legal, if necessary!!!

    Thank you,
    The Editor
    david j smith





      Current date/time is Thu Jul 19, 2018 8:29 pm