Courtesy Letter to Reps.

[FredGomez™]

Big thanks to Robert-Arthur of the Menard Family for helping out with this. Thanks to Jack;Slevkoff for an interesting site. First of many letters that will be sent out to these suppose reps. Enjoy

[robhalford88]

Thanks for that, much appreciated.

[weishaupt1776]

Which Florida Constitution ya Using Fred ?

Sure hope it's not any post 1868 one.

[FredGomez™]

Its in the current one.

[weishaupt1776]

Okay, by using any post 1868 Constitution (state or fed), you are recognizing as legitimate; a defacto body politic which is seated as a result of constitutionally repugnant martial law powers.

Does that give you any cause for concern?

If not, then I don't believe I could be of much help to ya

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

Okay, by using any post 1868 Constitution (state or fed), you are recognizing as legitimate; a defacto body politic which is seated as a result of constitutionally repugnant martial law powers.

Where's the support for this view? If "martial law" is repugnant to the constitution, it is void. Thus, how is it suppose to have all this power over both state and federal constitutions?

“Every act [contrary to] a delegated authority...is void. To deny this would affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize but what they forbid.” -Hamilton, Federalist No. 78

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by BOBT12

Where's the support for this view?

The Reconstruction Acts of 1867 imposing Amendment 14

Have you ever studied, with diligence & not skimming; the background and effects of the Reconstruction Acts?

If your answer is "no", then you wouldn't understand my answer.

Originally Posted by BOBT12

If "martial law" is repugnant to the constitution, it is void.

There are 3 forms of martial law authorized by the constitution, but the RECON ACTS didn't follow any of them

Originally Posted by BOBT12

Thus, how is it suppose to have all this power over both state and federal constitutions?

What is the "it" you are referring to?

If it is the martial law, then that is what imposed the reconstruction acts which in turn implemented the 14th amendment

The new citizenship under that unlawful amendment is what formed a NEW SINGULAR body politic of a "U.S. Citizen" status which disenfrachised MULTIPLE body politics of a "state national/[citizen]" status

since each state adopted the 14th Amendment into their constitutions, they all became unified under the power of D.C.

So, if you voted for Ron Paul, your voter registration is evidence of you recognizing this unlawful body politic and unwittingly puts you in rebellion to your true lawful dejure state

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

The Reconstruction Acts of 1867 imposing Amendment 14

Have you ever studied, with diligence & not skimming; the background and effects of the Reconstruction Acts?

If your answer is "no", then you wouldn't understand my answer.

I have looked into issues of this nature, such as The Red Amendment. I have not reached any firm conclusions on the matter, however. I have raised the issue of status, as it related to my personal issues in the past, just to cover any presumptions that might conceivable be use against me. Many these events are documented within this forum.

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

There are 3 forms of martial law authorized by the constitution, but the RECON ACTS didn't follow any of them

Well, if it didn’t follow the delegated authority that was provided, they there is no valid “martial law”, correct? Out of curiosity, what are the three forms of martial law?

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

What is the "it" you are referring to?

“martial law”.

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

If it is the martial law, then that is what imposed the reconstruction acts which in turn implemented the 14th amendment

Well, if “martial law” was not authorized, then all that flows from it are void.

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

The new citizenship under that unlawful amendment is what formed a NEW SINGULAR body politic of a "U.S. Citizen" status which disenfrachised MULTIPLE body politics of a "state national/[citizen]" status since each state adopted the 14th Amendment into their constitutions, they all became unified under the power of D.C.

This seems like a strained view, I am pretty shore there was no specific adoption in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Constitution. Do you have any examples of this supposed adoption to support this view?

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

So, if you voted for Ron Paul, your voter registration is evidence of you recognizing this unlawful body politic and unwittingly puts you in rebellion to your true lawful dejure state

Here again, you speak of some unwitting thing that is done. Yet, if it is unwitting, it is involuntary! IF one is then charged with rebellion, they have a basis to claim innocence. However, if they are never charged, then there is a presumption of innocence. Thus, who is charged with this rebellion, do you have any cases?

It is clear that the government is doing things that are not authorized by the Constitution, such as allow fiat money (coin Money only), the states are not to make and Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts, the unauthorized funding of public schools, passing ex post facto laws (FISA), torturing suspects (Military Commissions Act), ignoring protections of free speech, there seems to be no authority for presidential Signing Statement or Executive Orders which act like congressional legislation (which seem to attempt to over-ride congressional legislation!), interfering with religious groups, spying on the people against the Forth Amendment, policing a drug war, within the states, without any Amendment, fighting Wars (do the Iraqis fall under the 14th Amendment, is this the basis of our war with them?) around the world without Constitutional authority (there has been no declaration of War since WWII), so on and so forth. However, I am not clear that the views you put forth are the source of the problems. Maybe it is just plain old fashion usurpation and tyranny at work?

[FredGomez™]

It is clear that the government are doing things that are not authorized by the Constitution, such as allow fiat money (coin Money only), the states are not to make and Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts funding public schools, passing ex post facto laws, ignoring protections of free speech, there seems to be no authority for presidential Signing Statement or Executive Order which act like legislation, interfering with religious groups, spying on the people against the Forth Amendment, policing a drug war, within the states, without any Amendment, fighting wars (do the Iraqis fall under the 14th Amendment, is this the basis of our war with them?) around the world without Constitutional authority (there has been no declaration of War since WWII), so on and so forth. However, I am not clear that the views you put forth are the source of the problems. Maybe it is just plain old fashion usurpation and tyranny at work?

This should help out with your views.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKiY8_0UNSk

In God We Trust
Fred