• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Extremist group demands governors resign

donc said:
Anyone know what this means?:confused:
Click to expand...

PERMANENT TERMINATION OF TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS beginning with voiding of the Downes v. Bidwell monstrosity
Click to expand...

Working from memory, so allow for some fuzziness in the fine print please, territorial governments such as Puerto Rico have near Constitutional privileges and rights but are exempt from many requirements demanded of U.S. citizens.

I'm not sure, but I think this provision on the list is probably objecting to U.S. territories being practically autonomous and being required to assume little or no responsibility while being able to demand certain benefits and protections from the USA. I think Downes v Bidwell was a court decision that pretty well affirmed that situation.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Well I've read what they say they are about and what they advocate on their own website with the link posted on this thread an hour or so ago.

So who do you believe? A left leaning news organization who tends to label any activist group on the right as extreme? Or how the group describes itself?

Again what makes this group 'extreme' any more than any activist group, left or right?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have looked at their own website:

"ORDERS TO THE GOVERNORS AND THE MILITARY

The Declaration is a mere one page, and has been written to stand alone among history’s milestones. It is followed by Warrants and Orders of the De jure Grand Juries, each meticulously planned to solve your problems and issues (travel, diplomatic status, foreclosure, taxes, unlawful prosecutions) through cooperation rather than resistance. We are mindful that initiating a financial crisis, violence, or banker’s retaliation could be fatal to the cause. So every step has been debated and crafted with outcome in mind.

ADDITIONAL PHASES

Phase 2 is waiting in the wings. Shortly after the Declaration is presented, the De jure Grand Juries will re-absorb USDC, the Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court into their de facto counterparts, the

district court of the United States
circuit court of the United States
one supreme Court of the United States

In subsequent phases, we will also be:

- globally re-absorbing the corporate institutions into the de jure venue
- re-absorbing de facto policy enforcement officers into the People’s service, in particular the U.S. Marshals Service
- restoring the People’s wealth without triggering economic catastrophe.

THE POWER AND DUTIES OF THE DE JURE GRAND JURIES

As mentioned, re-inhabitation is self-actualizing. If needed, the De jure Grand Juries, as the one lawful authority on the land, operating IN the republics, protected by the Constitution for the United States of America, c. 1787, will commandeer those de facto institutions which fail to obey our lawful orders, remove corporate imposters, and lawfully appoint marshals to serve the district court of the United States and the De jure Grand Juries. Interestingly, Section 27 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 (Judiciary Act of 1789) does not provide for U.S. Marshals nor specify who is to appoint the district court marshals that are created by the Act.

Members of the Guardians of the Free Republics may also be called upon from time to time to appear in sufficient numbers professionally to emphasize our authority as the supreme lawful de jure institutions on the land. It is inherent upon the sovereign People to finally accept responsibility to ensure the posterity."
Guardians of the Free Republics

When a group states they have no regard for the rule of law, I think it is prudent they be kept under investigation.
 
Catawba said:
When a group states they have no regard for the rule of law, I think it is prudent they be kept under investigation.
Click to expand...

You conveniently left out this claus also prominently posted on their website:
And we will accomplish all of that – with your help – BEHIND THE SCENES, lawfully, peacefully, without violence and without risking civil war.
Click to expand...

That does not look to me like people who have no regard for the rule of law but who propose that they work to rescind or change bad law.

So again, what is extreme about that?
 
This kinda looks like at least someone is taken this s*** serous.:shock:

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PuXimMLEEo"]YouTube- Alert!!! What is this?[/nomedia]
 
AlbqOwl said:
You conveniently left out this claus also prominently posted on their website:


That does not look to me like people who have no regard for the rule of law but who propose that they work to rescind or change bad law.

So again, what is extreme about that?
Click to expand...

According to the law in 1789? :roll: Riiiiight!
 
AlbqOwl said:
Well since March 29 has come and gone without any major news stories being generated, this lady doesn't show a great deal of credibility does she?
Click to expand...

So you didn't hear about the letters to the governors she talked about?
 
Catawba said:
So you didn't hear about the letters to the governors she talked about?
Click to expand...

Sure, I read about them in the opening post. And I also read the website of the organization that sent them out. And what this lady is saying simply doesn't jive with that.
 
AlbqOwl said:
You conveniently left out this claus also prominently posted on their website:


That does not look to me like people who have no regard for the rule of law but who propose that they work to rescind or change bad law.

So again, what is extreme about that?
Click to expand...

See below: How do you suppose they will appear in sufficient number to emphasize their authority?

I thought the people would be in charge. Sounds like the Guardians plan on replacing the government with themselves. Doesn't it?



Catawba said:
Members of the Guardians of the Free Republics may also be called upon from time to time to appear in sufficient numbers professionally to emphasize our authority as the supreme lawful de jure institutions on the land. It is inherent upon the sovereign People to finally accept responsibility to ensure the posterity."[/I]
Guardians of the Free Republics

When a group states they have no regard for the rule of law, I think it is prudent they be kept under investigation.
Click to expand...

Indeed!

donc said:
This kinda looks like at least someone is taken this s*** serous.:shock:

YouTube- Alert!!! What is this?
Click to expand...

Wow! Sure seems they are serious.

They are replacing money and suggesting stocking up on water and food "in case of a disruption of services". Why would services be disrupted?
 
Last edited:
AlbqOwl said:
Well since March 29 has come and gone without any major news stories being generated, this lady doesn't show a great deal of credibility does she?
Click to expand...

sad-cat.jpg
 
Gina said:
I thought the people would be in charge. Sounds like the Guardians plan on replacing the government with themselves. Doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Of course. Despite the benign rhetoric of this and other groups, what they dream of is somehow being able to run the country themselves. I would choose even the darkest days of the Bush administration over the incompetent and ignorant leadership of a partisan militia. This is how governments change hands in places like Somalia....while our Freedom of Speech allows these groups to make fools of themselves, fortunately our rule of law will prevent them from achieving any sort of political control.
 
Gina said:
See below: How do you suppose they will appear in sufficient number to emphasize their authority?
Click to expand...

They won't. Like the teabaggers, they don't know the difference between being loud and actually having wide ranging support.

Gina said:
I thought the people would be in charge. Sounds like the Guardians plan on replacing the government with themselves. Doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Same old "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" mentality that virtually every "revolutionary" thug has.

Gina said:
Wow! Sure seems they are serious.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they are and when they push it too far, as nutballs often do, they will find out just unprepared they actually are to take on the most powerful military on the planet. Which is sad, as some of their anger is quite on target and justified.

Gina said:
They are replacing money and suggesting stocking up on water and food "in case of a disruption of services". Why would services be disrupted?
Click to expand...

"Services" won't be "disrupted" to anyone except their members. It's all bluster, false bravado, and implied threats.
 
Gina said:
See below: How do you suppose they will appear in sufficient number to emphasize their authority?

I thought the people would be in charge. Sounds like the Guardians plan on replacing the government with themselves. Doesn't it?





Indeed!



Wow! Sure seems they are serious.

They are replacing money and suggesting stocking up on water and food "in case of a disruption of services". Why would services be disrupted?
Click to expand...

Freepers??? I wonder if they have Redline into Fresno? :2wave:
 
Gina said:
See below: How do you suppose they will appear in sufficient number to emphasize their authority?

I thought the people would be in charge. Sounds like the Guardians plan on replacing the government with themselves. Doesn't it?

Indeed!

Wow! Sure seems they are serious.

They are replacing money and suggesting stocking up on water and food "in case of a disruption of services". Why would services be disrupted?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I'm just not up to a stampede to demonize another group of people exercising their Constitutional right to petititon their government for perceived grievances. Even the most wacko members of government admit that those letters going out to the governors do not suggest or constitute any kind of threat. Governors get angry or demanding letters, faxes, emails, telephone calls, petitions, etc. demanding this or that on a frequent basis and many are far more strident than these recent round of letters.

I think this group happened to hit a slow news week and have received much more publicity than they would have if they had acted during some other event of national interest.

Some more strident leftwingers have accused me of being extreme and radical, but I'm pretty sure that I'm pretty normal among the rank and file of politically interested conservative. And I would very much like to change some laws currently in place in the Federal government and I'm doing my damndest to replace a lot of elected leaders currently in place in Washington and the President, Senate Majority Leader, and Speaker of the House head the list of those I would like to replace.

What purpose would there be in political activism at all if it was not to change some existing laws or some or all of the people in power?

I'm still not seeing how this group is somehow more extreme (or dangerous)than any other political activist group on the left or the right. But it sure is popular these days to demonize anybody on the right who speaks up, isn't it? And that is what I suspect is happening in this case.
 
Uncola and AlbqOwl:

I have highlighted elements of their statements like "using sufficient numbers to emphasize their authority" and the possibility of "disruption of services" to draw attention to the fact their plans, if they were to attempt them, wouldn't be peaceful.

Do I want them arrested? No, they are just exercising their free speech, for now. Should they be watched? Of course. The implication is they would like to take some kind of action that goes beyond voting and actively participating in our political system as it is right now. It's only prudent.
 
donc said:
This kinda looks like at least someone is taken this s*** serous.:shock:

YouTube- Alert!!! What is this?
Click to expand...


As an Arkansas citizen, I can say that what you are seeing on this video is mostly LIES. Yes, there were approx. 15,000 mobile homes just outside Hope, Arkansas. However, there is nothing new about them. The city thought they could make some money by renting the land to FEMA. I hope they made a killing. These trailers have been sitting on those otherwise empty acres of a former local airport ever since just after Hurricane Katrina...geez guys! This was simply a disastrous Dubya-era blunder carried out by FEMA to house the thousands of Katrina refugees, but never happened.

FEMA either had to destroy the trailers (they are getting older and older sitting out there) or sell them off. So, FEMA sold them to various mobile home business around the nation -- cheap, I might add.

There is no conspiracy here, folks. Inept government blunder? Expensive boondoggle? Of course. A precursor to some end-of-the-world event? Hardly. You misguided religious fanatics will latch onto anything if it even remotely conforms to your "anti-Christ", Armageddon world views.

If anything, the United States is currently being threatened by the very far-right, religious fanatics whom you might see posting Armageddon comments in this very thread.

Oh, those chemtrails that was mentioned in the video? Little Rock AFB is home to only C-130 training base in the world. There have always been planes flying around in the skies of Arkansas. Hell, there is a regular training route over the town I live in; nothing sinister or bad (unless on crashes into my house, that is).
 
Last edited:
dirtpoorchris said:
My thoughts? There are internet pop ups that say "This person did this, remove them from office. Put in your information to auto send a letter!" Now. What is extremist?
Click to expand...

A person that thinks political activism beyond the rule of law is hunky dory.
 
Gina said:
Uncola and AlbqOwl:

I have highlighted elements of their statements like "using sufficient numbers to emphasize their authority" and the possibility of "disruption of services" to draw attention to the fact their plans, if they were to attempt them, wouldn't be peaceful.

Do I want them arrested? No, they are just exercising their free speech, for now. Should they be watched? Of course. The implication is they would like to take some kind of action that goes beyond voting and actively participating in our political system as it is right now. It's only prudent.
Click to expand...

I agree, tough talk doesn't necessarily lead to real action. Most bullies back down when people stand up to them.
 
The Uncola said:
I agree, tough talk doesn't necessarily lead to real action. Most bullies back down when people stand up to them.
Click to expand...

Exactly and the white hot spot light of media attention this week, may be enough to give them pause. Nothing like a little sunlight. ;)
 
WillRockwell said:
Of course. Despite the benign rhetoric of this and other groups, what they dream of is somehow being able to run the country themselves. I would choose even the darkest days of the Bush administration over the incompetent and ignorant leadership of a partisan militia. This is how governments change hands in places like Somalia....while our Freedom of Speech allows these groups to make fools of themselves, fortunately our rule of law will prevent them from achieving any sort of political control.
Click to expand...

That's what I've been thinking lately, with all these militia factions, it is like they want to disavow the rule of law and take our country into a situation like that in Somalia or even similar to Afghanistan.

Elections have consequences. They need to shake off the loss and work within the system like Democrats did after 2004.
 
[ame=http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fe9_1270368270]LiveLeak.com - New TARGET For The Tea Party?[/ame]
 
WillRockwell said:
Your thoughts?

Extremist group demands governors resign, FBI says - CNN.com
Click to expand...

This article is 100% worthless...

Do you HONESTLY believe that they couldn't have figured out the source of the fax and put a face to this 'extremist group' if there was any REAL threat??

Not to mention that this 'group' (not an individual acting out of his basement), that is SO EXTREME in his opinions (writing letters to congressmen telling them they will lose a vote... like that's never happened).

Oh it's SOO SCARY that governors have been warned to watch out for : THE LETTER!!!

They even brought in x-ray scanners and the whole deal.... come on.

BE SCARED BECAUSE WE TELL YOU TO!! And later on *insert news station here*...
 
Gina said:
That's what I've been thinking lately, with all these militia factions, it is like they want to disavow the rule of law and take our country into a situation like that in Somalia or even similar to Afghanistan.

Elections have consequences. They need to shake off the loss and work within the system like Democrats did after 2004.
Click to expand...

Really?? You REALLY think this is as simple as a matter of 'republicans that are upset cause they lost'... this isn't kindergarden.

I'll spare you the rant I was going to add to this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom