Sovereign Citizens As our Founding Father's intended!

by CynicalPatriot | June 13, 2009 at 08:06 pm
1433 views | 35 Recommendations | 10 comments

Photos

Our Fathers

Our Fathers

see larger image

uploaded by QueensHart

Videos

"A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan

see larger video

sourced by CynicalPatriot

"A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan

In my various writings I have made reference to a Concept of the Founding Father's known as Sovereign Citizens.  Based on the feedback I have gotten, especially from younger persons, it appears our government has instructed to Public Schools to further "dumb-down" and "Cuckold" the Citizens of American by leaving out the Founding Father's concept of "Sovereign Citizens"

Briefly, before the drafting of the American Constitution previous governments had vested Sovereignty in the hands of one or a few people. With the American Constitution, American Citizens became the Sovereigns by their ability to vote for politicians and with the provision that certain human rights were inalienable. [For the Record, the United States is not a Democracy, it is a Representative Republic. (The American Republic form of government acknowledges that the sovereign power is founded in the people, individually, not in the collective or whole body of free citizens, as in a democratic form. Thus no majority can deprive a minority of their sovereign rights and powers.)]

I was moved to right this article after viewing this YouTube Video "Ronald Reagan - A Time For Choosing (October 27, 1964)"  Please pay close attention at 2:59m-6:25m.  This is a speech by former President Ronald Reagan long before he was president.  If time permits, please also listen to the entire tape and see if you hear any similarity to current situation and the situation the USA was in then. Though I heard this speech for the first time today, I think you will find it compatible with thoughts I have been promoting.

I hope this reference to Sovereign Citizenship by a former US President will convince your that the concept of Sovereign Citizenship is real and proposed by the Founding Fathers of our Country.  I hope this speech serves to edify those of you that the Public Schools deprived of learning and knowing the POWER the Founding Father's intended you to have! It should also help you to understand this is not a concept that I made up out of thin air.  Finally, you should know that your teachers and the public schools intended to deprive you of power and knowledge when they failed to educate you upon this subject.

Your can learn more about Sovereign Citizenship, as intended by the Founding Fathers here.

All that having been said, I say to you: My loyalty to my principles and my Country transcend party loyalty; where do your loyalties lie?

As a Sovereign Citizen it is your duty to put loyalty to Country and your personal principles over loyalty to party.

These thoughts were on my mind.

Respectfully Yours,

Don Mashak
In Propia Persona
Your Fellow Sovereign Citizen
The Cyncial Patriot

recommend This comment thread is now closed
0
QueensHart

“I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live,
the more convincing proofs I see of this truth:
that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a
sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice,
is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?
We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings,
that ‘except the Lord build the House they labour
in vain that build it.’ I firmly believe this; and I also
believe that without his concurring aid we shall
succeed in this political building no better, than the
Builders of Babel . . . I therefore beg leave to move—
that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance
of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations,
be held in this Assembly every morning before
we proceed to business, and that one or more
of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate
in that Service.”
Benjamin Franklin, June 28, 1787

2
Paschen

It does sound good on paper, however even the funding fathers would have worded their the constitution much differently would they have to right it today and with a population explosion as it happened in the last century.

Many other issues would have to be taken into account. The World has changed and we are all in it together. Isolation does not longer work.

Every problem has more then just one anther and a different anther may not be the wrong one either.

1
CynicalPatriot

Hello Paschen

I can agree that the Founding Fathers would have written some aspect of the constitution better, but the overwhelming general them would have remained the same, Sovereignty of the Citizens and the existance of inalienable rights of the individual. I think they did a pretty good job, in allowing the constitution to survive more than 200 yars.

I am against one "One World Government" in part for your arguement, that more than one, not wrong answer/solution to a question/problem can exist.  With many Governments and Countries, multiple "not wrong" answers/solutions can be tried. And the obviously superior answer.solution will emerge and can be adopted by the other countries if the difference in outsome, merits the cost of changeing.

Thank you for your comments.

Repsectfully,

Don Mashak

The Cynical Patriot

3
Babel-Fish

What went wrong as I see no patriotism. Sovereign means supreme rulers, wow kings, queens and emperors. lol

Your history is built on much pomp and really these founders where merchants that did not want to pay the high taxes but they soon taxed their citizens. lol 

America was built on greed, nothing much changed in the elitist circle. Its always been about whos pocket the money ends up in.



   


3
Roy C

"Your history is built on much pomp and really these founders where merchants that did not want to pay the high taxes but they soon taxed their citizens. lol "

The Founding Fathers were mostly gentlemen farmers. Taxes were extremely low. The federal government was small and people thought of themselves as "Virginians" and "Pennsylvanians" first and "Americans" second.

People set local policy and made laws in town meetings, a form of direct democracy.

Without a working insight into the nature of the human psyche, what freedom is and what sovereignty is cannot be understood.

"Always been about greed" would not explain the women's suffrage movement, the Civil Rights movement, or the dedication to developing universities that produce our Nobel Prize winning scientists in record numbers, let alone our participation in World War II and our role in founding the United Nations.


1
CynicalPatriot

Hello Babel Fish

Sometimes we don't realize that people do not share our perspective.  To wit, I erred in not clarifying that I meant the "people" as individuals were the sovereigns in terms of power, not that they should recieve the same pomp and circumstances as kings and queens.  Mia Culpa.

I am sorry you feel that the Founding Father's were just Merchants.

No, they were men of principle. Many, like Washington, were already made men.  They would have lived lives of relative ease and respect if they remained loyal to the British Crown. They risked their families and fortunes on principle. However, they placed their concerns for their fellow man and differentiation of right from wrong over their own personal comfort.  It would have been far easier to "go along, to get along." Not only did they forego a more easy and certain future, they risked personal death and subject their loved ones to treatment as "Spoils of War" should they have lost. So i must disagree that they were just merchants motivated by greed.

Part of the problem with America now is that too many people are willing to "go along, to get along".  Instead of standing up to injustice, they go along to get along to be rewarded the security and certainty that appeasement brings.   Ben Franklin said, "They who would trade liberty for security, soon have niether and deserve none"  To my fellow American Sovereign Citizens I say, "What say you?" Will you go along to get along until you have no liberty left?  Will you go along to get along until all hope of success in holding our politicians accountable and no hope of restoring our liberties?

Next, I will agree that at times in her history, America was built on greed when the citizenry was unwilling or unable to resist the power of the greedy elites.  It was not foreseeable to the Founding Father's that the Public Media would sell out to Corporate and Government Greed and Propaganda.  In there defense, Thomas Jefferson pondered the likelihood that revolution would break out every 20 years or so, to correct the excesses of the powers to be, when such correction was not possible within the framework of the constitution. 

But i think the internet has leveled the playing feild in the battle for the minds of America.  The common man is organizing to hold the poliiticians accountable and to end "government by the highest bidder".

In closing, I refuse to yeild to your proposition that elitist greed will continue to run America into perpetuity.  I am not prepared to abandon all hope to despair just yet.

Thank you for your comments.

Respectfully,

Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot

0
Yellow Guitar

The problem with carte-blanche cynicism as reflected in this commment is, as usual, the baby gets tossed out with the bath water.

To ignore the profoundly humanistic gist of the American's attempt at democracy is to be blind to one of the most important developments/experiments in human history, or at least in the history of humans trying to govern themselves with some measure of justice and communal commitment, and it says more about the mindset of the post modern cynic than that of men like Jefferson, Franklin, et al. And dismissing them as mere 'merchants' is to completely underestimate the profound radicalism of what they proposed when speaking of concepts like citizen sovereignty, and miss entirely what they meant by 'pursuing happiness' ...

1
mark staples

"democracy"? this is not a democracy, have you seen the word once mentioned in the Delaration or the consititution?...NO, it was despised by the founding fathers because it ALWAYS fails. it is the stepping stone to Tyrrany, majority rule is mob rule, when the "Rights" of the many outweigh the rights of the Individual, then nobody has any rights. Socialism is based on majority "Opinion", not natural rights that are inalienable.The state does not give you your rights, it takes them away.the constitution is not a living document that changes with "Social conditions", it is the rock that government must adhere to to remain fair and just as possible.

1
QueensHart

Hello Babel Fish,  Your  comment has a little truth to it concerning the elitist circle. However your minimized "assessment" of America is radical.  There are many Patriots here and many people ride boats, crawl thru tunnels, hide in cars and lie to come here.  The elitist is NOT AMERICA ....we the people my friend you have not seen and do not know who they are. They are not getting the attention because of the corrupt institutions influenced by the elite.  We still have more people here than any other country that are free , moral and honorable...  you don't want to see.  These people have been behind the scenes trying  to stop the corruption.  Now with the real freedom of the computer and no longer influence you will see the country fall and rise again.  I say again which I think I may be repetitive.

Where is a country better?  Where is a country that does not have an elitist circle or worse dictators.  Share something about your country with us . 

This response is about feeling from the heart.  I don't know all the real facts of how much we saved Europe.  ...we know why it got that way.

 

To end your nasty comment about the USA WITH A            LOL.  ????  People connecting on the web without their elitist governments will not be contributing to the efforts of thousands who want to save the world with finger pointing and laughing at each other's errors in judgement by corrupt leaders.  Talking with people like your Ha Ha at us is going togo  no where just like trying to negotiate with Iran and North Korea.  Communication  between people who  really want to try .  There are no easy answers.  Ultimate communication between people that is healthy is about love which we certainly cannot do here.

One to one thos can be respectful..  You are entitled to laugh at our troubles.  There are  people who are seriously trying to  stop the governments errors.  I want to join the wave who will create the shift. 

 

1
Yellow Guitar

Challenging and timely piece - thanks for posting.

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Roy C
First Flagged at 8:50 PM, Jun 13, 2009 by Roy C
These members have powered this story:

Related Stories

Recommendations (35)

Most recently recommended by:
 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from