Is It Time To Take Up Arms?

SmarterthanYou said:
then aren't the borders of alaska wrong? it should be divided between what alaska really owns and what the federal territory is, IF the feds can actually own any property. which they can't.
Click to expand...

Even if the bullshit about the feds can't own land were true (it isn't)
there is plenty of legitimate reasons for federal ownership of land in Alaska, defence not being the least of them.
 
Rune said:
Again, smilly was lying. The Feds bought the land. Why don't you show when they transferred it to the state of Nevada?

Without doing so, your question is moot.
Click to expand...

it has to deal with how the nation was created. did the federal government create the states, or did the states and the people create the federal government? if the feds created the states, then you're position would be correct, however, if the states and the people created the federal government, then my position is correct.
 
christiefan915 said:
Bundy's a nut, pure and simple. He said “I believe this is a sovereign state of Nevada,” Bundy said. “And I abide by all Nevada state laws. But I don’t recognize the United States government as even existing.”

http://danaloeschradio.com/the-western-war-last-remaining-rancher-vs-the-federal-govt/
Click to expand...

stupidity is not against the law, is it? again, it comes down to who really owns the land and there's nothing in the constitution that permits the feds to own any property except for DC
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it has to deal with how the nation was created. did the federal government create the states, or did the states and the people create the federal government? if the feds created the states, then you're position would be correct, however, if the states and the people created the federal government, then my position is correct.
Click to expand...

It has to do with the fact that this entire thread, in fact the entire controversy in based on lies. Lies for the most part promulgated by Fox news and an obviously crazy free grazer.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
stupidity is not against the law, is it? again, it comes down to who really owns the land and there's nothing in the constitution that permits the feds to own any property except for DC
Click to expand...

Is there anything which prevents it? Please link up. This is getting very silly.
 
Rune said:
It has to do with the fact that this entire thread, in fact the entire controversy in based on lies. Lies for the most part promulgated by Fox news and an obviously crazy free grazer.
Click to expand...

yet the solid underlying foundation is the overreach of the feds. bundy being a fool and not paying some extra-regulatory fee notwithstanding, the feds fucked up and needed to be stopped in their tracks.
 
Rune said:
No, I would also need your precise delusionment in order to misinterpret it the exact same way.

Either point to your evidence or lose it is up to you.
Click to expand...

if the constitution does not permit the feds to do something, it is then prohibited. that is the entire gist of the constitution.
 
Rune said:
Anything not expressly prohibited is legal. No single document could possibly list every contingency.
Click to expand...

the founders did not write the constitution in that manner, which is why the wrote the 9th and 10th Amendments. It's also why EVERY commentator and delegate to the conventions before ratification stipulated to the people that the feds could ONLY DO what was prescribed to them. Your statement of anything not prohibited is therefore legal ONLY applies to the people.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the founders did not write the constitution in that manner, which is why the wrote the 9th and 10th Amendments. It's also why EVERY commentator and delegate to the conventions before ratification stipulated to the people that the feds could ONLY DO what was prescribed to them. Your statement of anything not prohibited is therefore legal ONLY applies to the people.
Click to expand...
Yes, we, the people.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
if the constitution does not permit the feds to do something, it is then prohibited. that is the entire gist of the constitution.
Click to expand...

If you are correct, then Russia still owns Alaska, France still owns the middle third of the Country, Native Americans still own from the Mississippi to the Atlantic and Spain/Mexico owns Texas, Florida and the entire left half of the country.
Every contract with every oil company, forester, miner etc. is Illegal, the National Park system doesn't exist, nor the interstate highways.
 
Rune said:
If you are correct, then Russia still owns Alaska, France still owns the middle third of the Country, Native Americans still own from the Mississippi to the Atlantic and Spain/Mexico owns Texas, Florida and the entire left half of the country. Every contract with every oil company, forester, miner etc. is Illegal, the National Park system doesn't exist, nor the interstate highways.
Click to expand...

29e062e3631110ba782eee7023494de2a38b630ae3348d87c8e1a5bfdfe62dbb.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top