TargetFreedom.com

Congress is the Key

The Danger of a Constitutional Convention

Subterfuge: Call it “Convention of the States” instead of Constitutional Convention, and claim that these are not the same thing.

BUT at THE SAME TIME make it a call that is derived from Article V.
Article V is about a Constitutional Convention.
They are calling for an Article V Constitutional Convention, pure and simple, and nothing else.
AT THE SAME TIME, claim that all of the states that called for a Constitutional Convention, count in their tally.
If what they are calling for now, is not the same thing, why would these other calls for a Constitutional Convention, count in their tally?

The Constitutional convention is a way to destroy our republic: nothing more and nothing less.

The real question about Constitutional Convention is this:

Do we need to give the power to write a new constitution to the very people who have been ignoring, usurping, and trying to destroy the constitution that we have now?

The video below is made specifically for state legislators, by a state legislator.
Constitutional Convention is explained.
Beware Article V

 

 

Beware Article V (part 1 of 4)

 

 

Beware Article V (part 2 of 4)
Beware Article V (part 3 of 4)
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for making a small change.
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for enforcing an existing law.
A Constitutional Convention is a procedure for giving us an ENTIRELY NEW Constitution.

There is a misconception that every state will be required to accept any new constitution that is ratified by three fourths of the states. The only precedent that we have is the constitutional convention of 1787. In that constitutional convention all except one of the states ratified one constitution, but Vermont did not ratify that constitution. Vermont was a separate nation for 2 years before they decided to join the United States.

AGAIN, we will have every state offering their own constitution. After a constitutional convention there would certainly be many different suggestions for a new constitution:

There is a current movement for the creation of an independent Spanish speaking nation called “Atzlan”, which would be made up of the south western states of the current United States.

There is a current movement for the creation of an independent nation for what is now the state of Hawaii of the current United States.

There is a current movement for the creation of an independent nation for what is now the state of Alaska of the current United States.

There is a current movement for the creation of an independent nation for what is now the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, which is now a part of the current United States.

There is a current movement for the creation of an independent nation for the American Indian peoples, which would be made up of several states in the mid-west. These states are currently a part of the United States.

In the South East there are two different movements for the creation of a separate nation, which would result from a secession from the United States. “The Republic of New Africa” and the “Confederate States of America” are not likely to reach any compromise that will eliminate the cataclysm of a shooting war.
After a constitutional convention there is no doubt that one of the following will occur: 
1. A shooting war.
2. A division of the former “United” States into two or more new nations.

After a constitutional convention there will be a new definition of “unconstitutional”.
The idea that it will take three fourths of the States to ratify it is incredibly naive. We only have one precedent, and in that precedent the CONVENTION ITSELF changed the rules for ratification. Under the Article of Confederation ratification had to be with 100%. Vermont did not ratify so they formed the United States with the states that did ratify.
Vermont joined the United States years after ratification. 
There will always be only one precedent for a constitutional convention, because a constitutional convention will be the END of the United States of America, and the founding of a new nation. This is exactly how the confederation of the 13 states ended, and how the United States of America was founded.
A constitutional convention IS NOT FOR ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT WRITING A NEW CONSTITUTION. 
If you only want a limited change, then you use THE OTHER PROVISION of Article V:
The amendment process.
It is by proposing only well defined amendments that you can limit the changes.
A Constitutional Convention will allow them to do away with that pesky Bill of Rights: particularly the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th and 10th amendments. 
THERE IS NO WAY TO “LIMIT” a Constitutional Convention TO ONE ISSUE.
If you want one amendment, then you present an amendment.
You do not put the ENTIRE Constitution at risk for one amendment.
The only reason that Constitutional Convention is being promoted as the solution TO JUST ONE problem, is that the hidden agenda would be considered to be outrageous.

If it were possible to limit a Constitutional Convention there would be no reason to hold that meeting. Why travel and rent rooms if the outcome has already been decided?

 

Unbelievably, one outlandish argument for writing a new constitution, is the fact that government has ignored the constitution that we have. We are supposed to assume that the government could not possibly ignore any newly written constitution.
If government ignores the constitution, and usurps power now, what would the government do if we let them write a new constitution? 

 

 

Maybe then the government would stop ignoring the constitution, and usurping power, because then they would have a new constitution that they do not need to ignore. That would be because that new constitution says that the government has all the power that there is.
Constitutional Convention Promoters are Like Marie Antoinette Saying “Let them eat cake”
The statement “Let them eat cake” is commonly attributed to Queen Marie Antoinette, while being so ignorant and naive as to not understand the reality that when the people have no bread, that also means that the people have no cake.
Historians find it noteworthy that anyone could be so naive.
The mobs of the French people also certainly found it to be an outrage.
While we muse about the foolishness of the past, we should ask ourselves whether such naive foolishness still exists.

The fact is that we cannot get 51% of the voters to demand that elected representatives balance the budget.
Of course 51% of the voters can also limit terms on any election day.
Yet today there exists a movement that goes beyond the naivete of Marie Antoinette’s statement: “Let them eat cake”:
The assertion is that; while we do not have enough public awareness to use a process that requires only 51% of the voters, we will be able to prevail with another process, which requires three fourths of the state legislatures.
There seems to be no notice taken of the fact that all of these state legislators are elected by the same voters, who could change the congressman at any election.
These state legislators are to select some assortment of delegates, who will not be elected directly by the people. The illusion is that this group of delegates, who will not be elected directly by the people, will save the people from these elected congressmen who continuously vote for an unbalanced budget.  
“They have no bread, so let them eat cake”
The illusion is that this group of delegates, will by men like those who were at that Constitutional Convention of 1789. Those were the leaders of a freedom movement; which had just defeated a tyranny.  Who will be the delegates to a convention this time? George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison will not be there. How many states are there TODAY, which would ratify the constitution for the “Union of Soviet Socialist America”?
Go down to your State House and talk with your current elected officials. Can you consistently pass legislation that protects you from unconstitutional usurpation now? What is to stop them from again throwing the whole thing out, and again changing the rules for ratification?
The problem is not what the constitution says now.
The problem is ignoring what the constitution says now.
The solution is by NOT ignoring what the constitution says now.
If we do not do that, then writing a new constitution will not help.
They will ignore that one too, if we do not reign in on them.
We must make them stop ignoring what the constitution says, BUT NOT BY GIVING THEM A CONSTITUTION THAT SAYS THAT THEY CAN DO ANYTHING THAT THEY WANT.
After a Constitutional Convention we would be certain to have a civil war unless every single state wanted to be a part of the new nation that was created by the Constitutional Convention.
Those who favor a Constitutional Convention should remove the word “indivisible” from the Pledge of Allegiance.
A Constitutional Convention is not a procedure for enforcing existing law. If the problem is the ignoring of the constitution then ignoring of the constitution is what needs to be fixed.
What would you do if a physician suggested a heart transplant because you have an upset stomach? 
What would you do if a mechanic said to replace the motor when your car is simply out of gas?
These arguments are so stupid that we have to wonder if this is something more sinister than mere stupidity.
 

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention “for a balanced budget”.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention “to return power to the states.”

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention “to stop illegal aliens.”

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention “to restore the right to keep and bear arms”.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention “to limit terms”.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a Constitutional Convention “to nullify Obamacare”.

THERE IS only one kind of Constitutional Convention.

THE only kind of Constitutional Convention; that can be convened is a Constitutional Convention to write a new Constitution.

A Constitutional Convention is a legislative body;

which operates ABOVE the limitations of the Constitution.

This makes it more powerful, and MORE DANGEROUS, than any other legislative body.

This is not an opinion, but it is a fact of law.

A Constitutional Convention is a means of DESTROYING the American Republic. A Constitutional Convention is opening a “Pandora’s box” for RADICAL change. Once the “genie is out of the bottle” no one can control it.

The last time that we had a Constitutional Convention was in 1787,

when we got the Constitution that we now have.

That Constitutional Convention was convened to make some small changes in the Articles of Confederation. Instead we got a new Constitution.

We were LUCKY that time.

Those who were at that Constitutional Convention were the leaders of a freedom movement; which had just defeated a tyranny.

There is a claim that we would be safe because our current constitution says that ratification would be required by three fourths of the states. What if the new constitution does not say that?

The last time that we had a constitutional convention one of the first things that they did was change the rules for ratification that were in place under the Articles of Confederation. That is why ratification now requires three fourths of the states.

So here is the only precedent that we have for a constitutional convention:

They initially met to make a few limited changes in the Articles of Confederation.

Then they threw out the Articles of Confederation and started over. They included changing the rules for ratification.

Now we are being told that the only thing that has ever happened previously, is what cannot happen!

Go down to your State House and talk with your current elected officials. Can you consistently pass legislation that protects you from unconstitutional usurpation now? What is to stop them from again throwing the whole thing out, and again changing the rules for ratification?
Our problem has NOTHING to do with the constitution.
Our problem has to do with the IGNORING OF THE constitution.
Those who ignore the constitution would like nothing better than to make their usurpation legal, by throwing out the constitution, at a Constitutional Convention.
It was ILLEGAL usurpation that has enabled an “elite” class to hijack our nation.
It is that “elite” class; who want to con foolish people into destroying the constitution.
The constitution is the best document for the protection of freedom, that has ever been written.
We only need to adhere to it.
If you want one amendment, then you present an amendment.
You do not put the ENTIRE Constitution at risk for one amendment.
The only reason that Constitutional Convention is being promoted as the solution TO JUST ONE problem, is that the hidden agenda would be considered to be outrageous.
If government ignores the constitution and usurps power now, what would we have if they could write a new constitution? 
A Constitutional Convention is a legislative body;
which operates ABOVE the limitations of the Constitution.
This makes it more powerful, and MORE DANGEROUS, than any other legislative body.
This is not an opinion, but it is a fact of law.
A Constitutional Convention is a means of DESTROYING the American Republic. A Constitutional Convention is opening a “Pandora’s box” for RADICAL change. Once the “genie is out of the bottle” no one can control it.
The last time that we had a Constitutional Convention was in 1787,
when we got the Constitution that we now have.
That Constitutional Convention was convened to make some small changes in the Articles of Confederation. Instead we got a new Constitution.
We were LUCKY that time.
Those who were at that Constitutional Convention were the leaders of a freedom movement; which had just defeated a tyranny.
Our problem has NOTHING to do with the constitution.
Our problem has to do with the IGNORING OF THE constitution.
Those who ignore the constitution would like nothing better than to make their usurpation legal,
by throwing out the constitution, at a Constitutional Convention. It was ILLEGAL usurpation that has enabled an “elite” class to hijack our nation.
It is that “elite” class; who want to con foolish people into destroying the constitution.
The constitution is the best document for the protection of freedom,
that has ever been written.
We only need to adhere to it.
The act of calling for a Constitutional Convention will be presented as permission of the people. This is not a theory about their plans. It comes from their  actual statements:

Reforming American Government: The Bicentennial Papers of the Committee on the Constitutional System (Paperback) ~ Donald Robinson 

In this book, those who want to destroy that American constitution train their followers. But  we can read it too.  

http://americanistbookstore.com/books/reforming-american-government/ 

 

The act of calling for a Constitutional Convention will be presented as permission of the people. This is not a theory about their plans. It comes from their actual statements:

Here is what they have to say:

 

“The framers of the U.S. constitution have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They designed separate institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail bridges, tinkering. If we are to ‘turn the Founders upside down’ — we must directly confront the constitutional structure they erected.” (a quote from  “The Power to Lead,” by James McGregor Burns, 1984, one of many promoting one world government.)

 

YES, The Founding Fathers saw a possibility of a situation,
where a need might arise for COMPLETELY SCRAPING THE CONSTITUTION. That is not what has happened TODAY.
The only thing that has happened is that there is now a cabal of would be tyrants;
who are getting tired of OCCASIONALLY having to adhere to the constitution.  
These would be tyrants would like to con enough ignorant people into letting them DESTROY THE CONSTITUTION, so that they can usher in totalitarianism.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like letting your worst enemy
give you a heart and lung transplant, and a castration,
as a cure for hiccups.
Having a Constitutional Convention would be like burning the house down
as a means of accomplishing pest control.
Article V of The Constitution lays out the only two ways to change The Constitution:
1.  The Amendment process: A specific, and clearly defined, change that is limited to what is written in the amendment.
2.  The Constitutional Convention: A process to scrap the entire constitution and replace it with something else. ANY type of amendment can be considered.
Here is a clear statement of the difference between the effect of The Amendment process and calling for a Constitutional Convention:
“If you have the best automobile in the world, you don’t throw it away if the carburetor is not working. You fix it,” he said. “The same is true of the Constitution. That’s what the amendment process is all about.”
  U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. Burger,
  Boston Globe, August 21, 1987
We understand that there are those who want to destroy the American constitution. We also understand that it would be foolish for those thugs to admit that it is their goal to destroy the American constitution. It would be much more clever if those thugs were to claim that they only wanted to make a few small changes. Of course, if it was true that they only wanted to make a few small changes, then they would not need a Constitutional Convention. They would simply propose those amendments.
Next time you are in your bank try this:
Tell them to go home over night with the all of the doors and the vault, unlocked and standing wide open, BUT to put a sign on the door saying that no one is allowed to steal the money.
What they tell you will give you a good understanding of the meaning of a “limited constitutional convention”.
RestoringTheRightsOfTheStatesAndThePeopleMNFP
Imagine this scenario:
You wake up in the middle of the night to a noise in your living room.
You grab your gun, and you find two thugs loading bags full of valuables.
You hold the gun at the ready.
One of the thugs says:
“Now that is a really fine gun. But you really need to clean it. Why not hand it over to me, and I will clean it for you.”
The other thug says
“Oh there is nothing to worry about. If you do not like the way he uses the gun then of course you can insist that he give it back!” 
You would say “How stupid do you think I am?”
If someone suggested handing over your gun to a mugger, after instructing him on all the rules that he must follow after he gets your gun, wouldn’t you question his motives? It is not rocket science. 
When we see someone asking us to hand over the gun of a constitutional convention, we must conclude that he is one of two things:
    1. He is an unbelievably stupid fool
OR
    2. He is a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
Does it really matter what reason the thug gives for why he says that you should give him your gun? Do we not understand that when the thug has the gun he will be making his own rules?
There is a limit to the amount of time for which it is possible to assume that this is an unbelievably stupid suggestion, being made because of mere stupidity. Eventually it will become clear that we are dealing with a thug, with an ulterior motive, who thinks that the WE are unbelievably stupid.
IT WILL BE JUST AS EASY to ignore a new constitution as it is to ignore the one that we have now.
IT just will NOT BE NECESSARY to ignore a new constitution,
since it will say what the New World Order wants it to say.
The problem is not what the constitution SAYS.
The problem is what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.
We need to change what OUR GOVERNMENT DOES.

We do not need to change what the constitution SAYS, other than repealing the 16th and the 17th amendment.

Constitutional Convention is perceived as a means of restoring power to the states. Yet it is possible to achieve this without writing a new constitution.
Judge Napolitano talks about the power of the States to nullify the Fed http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9184 
Constitutional Journal: A Correspondent’s Report from the Convention of 1787 (Hardcover)  by Jeffrey St. John (Author), Warren E. Burger (Foreword)

http://americanistbookstore.com/books/constitutional-journal/ 

Product image

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0915463423?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12

We Hold These Truths: A Reverent Review of the U. S. Constitution 1993 Revised Edition (Paperback) by Congressman Lawrence P. McDonald

http://americanistbookstore.com/books/we-hold-these-truths/ 
After a Constitutional Convention these will be our new founding fathers:
B. Hussein Obama Sotoro (or whatever his name is)
Rahm Emanuel
Harry Reid
Nancy Pelosi
Chuck Schumer
Diane Feinstein
Barbra Boxer
Maxine Waters
Ruth Bader Ginsberg, a founder of the ACLU
Sonia Sotomayor, the wise Latina
Elena Kagen
Jesse Jackson
Al Sharpton
God help us… 

Thomas Jefferson said:
“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”
We add this:
“The battle for liberty is never won, and is never lost.
The battle for liberty always continues.
It is never too late, and it is never soon enough, to defend freedom.
No matter how enslaved we are, we always have hope.
No matter how free we are we are never safe.
NOTHING EVER LIMITS THE GOVERNMENT, EXCEPT THE PEOPLE.
Any generation that fails to defend freedom will lose it.
The next generation will have to shed blood to gain it back.
When the defense of liberty becomes a crime, tyranny is already in force. At that point failure to defend liberty makes slavery at certainty.” John Perna

WARNING: This message has been intercepted and stored by the National Security Agency as part of its unlawful spying program on all Americans. The National Security Agency is the only part of the government that actually LISTENS to you. Do you wish that the government would read the Constitution? Just email it privately to your friends. What we formerly called “freedom of speech” we now call the “right to remain silent.” BUT they will now claim that you DO NOT HAVE the right to remain silent… if THEY are asking the questions.
The Patriot Act is constitutionally illegal, but was signed into law takes away your rights and turns them into privileges, which the government can grant or take away at will. If you remember we were told that this would just be temporary. Now it has been made permanent. But no one protested did they?

=============
PLEASE PASS THIS MESSAGE ON
Please visit the ultimate resource for defending liberty.
CLICK HERE:

If you get a message that says “address is not valid” then copy and paste the address into the address bar.

 

Ever Compiled:

John Perna
My email is:

JPerna at sc.rr.com

which, if not censored, will show as:

JPerna@sc.rr.com

Are you looking for a book about defending liberty?
Many rare and out of print books are still available.
Look here:

Then look here:

If you get a message that says “address is not valid”
then copy and paste the address into the address bar.

—————

To be removed from my address book,
reply to this message with the word remove or unsubscribe in the subject line.

To be added to my address book,
reply to this message with the word add in the subject line.

Send this to JPerna at sc.rr.com
which, if not censored, will show as:
JPerna@sc.rr.com

V ~ For Victory
THE CORRUPT FEAR US.
THE HONEST SUPPORT US.
THE HEROIC JOIN US.

HERE IS your Free DISCOUNT Card FOR Prescription and Lab work. UP TO 75% OFF
JUST CLICK HERE:

FOR MORE INFO:

Print Your Own and Get Paid to Hand out Free Prescription Discount Cards

or

Post Metadata

Date
February 1st, 2009

Author
John Perna

Category
Books, Civil Liberties, Film, Videos to Watch

Tags

Trackback URI

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


←
→