Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [FSP] Re: The Free State Project is NOT a "secessionist movement"

Expand Messages
  • Tim Condon
    Yes, as you can see, they were written in 1798. That s not the way people write, or talk, today. Hence my wish for someone to decipher the language of the
    Message 1 of 13 , Feb 11, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, as you can see, they were written in 1798. That's not the way people
      write, or talk, today. Hence my wish for someone to decipher the language of
      the proposed legislative resolution into common, everyday, current American
      English. --Tim


      On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Chris Lawless <dreepa@...> wrote:

      > 'turgid, archiac, prolix language.'
      >
      > Much of the language is taken from the Original Kentucky Resolutions.
      >
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_Resolutions
      >
      > ****************************************
      > I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And
      > let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no
      > virtue!
      >
      > --- On Wed, 2/11/09, Tim Condon <tim@...> wrote:
      >
      > From: Tim Condon <tim@...>
      > Subject: Re: [FSP] Re: The Free State Project is NOT a "secessionist
      > movement"
      > To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 6:11 AM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > The passage below is from a bill that has been submitted to the Free State
      > House and Senate by several libertarian- conservative legislators.
      > Regretfully, however, it is written in turgid, archiac, prolix language. I
      > wish someone would simply re-write it in clear, contemporary English so
      > that
      > everyone can have a clear, simple understanding of exactly what the bill is
      > espousing. ---Tim Condon
      >
      > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:49 PM, GaryT <garyonthenet@ yahoo.com> wrote:
      >
      > > Well, it is nice to see that some people at the higher echeolons of govt,
      > > actually "get it".
      > >
      > > Most poignant to me was the passage:
      > >
      > > " That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so
      > palpably
      > > against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that
      > > that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General
      > > Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States,
      > of
      > > all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of
      > the
      > > States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government,
      > with
      > > a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal,
      > > (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with
      > their
      > > consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to
      > > surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one
      > deriving
      > > its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the
      > > co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal,
      > will
      > > concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take
      > > measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others
      > of
      > > the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the
      > > Constitution"
      > >
      > > Which is exactly what the federal government has managed to work over the
      > > years.
      > >
      > > Gary T
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: Carol Moore/Secession. Net
      > > To: freestateproject@ yahoogroups. com
      > > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 3:42 PM
      > > Subject: Re: [FSP] Re: The Free State Project is NOT a "secessionist
      > > movement"
      > >
      > >
      > > http://www.gencourt .state.nh. us/legislation/ 2009/HCR0006. html
      > >
      > > Hmm, next thing you know the NH may be seceding without FSP :-)
      > >
      > > --
      > > Carol Moore in DC
      > > http://carolmoore. net/
      > > http://carolmoorere port.blogspot. com/
      > > http://youtube. com/carolmoore
      > > http://secession. net
      > > http://stopthewarno w.net
      > > http://whatwouldgan dhido.net
      > > http://radicalbutto ns.com
      > >
      > > NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders,
      > > the National Security Agency may have read this
      > > email without judicial or legislative oversight
      > > or warning, warrant, or notice. You have no
      > > recourse nor protection save to secede from the union.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------ --------- --------- ------
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.