Sadly there seems to be a great deal of confusion concerning the Interim government for The Confederate States of America’s purpose, efforts, and plan to restore the founders ideal for governance. There is a misunderstanding held in general by those private organizations and members who call themselves “Southern Nationalists”.  This article is an attempt to answer certain questions and respond to those who make uninformed accusation.  Please understand that this article is NOT aimed at division, but rather at unity through proper understanding and open dialog.

First there is the accusation by Mr. Cushman that The Interim Government for The Confederate States of America is……

“a group of people who fantasise that the CSA still exists.”

The League of The South, a large Southern Nationalist organization states on this link Freedom First ….

“The League has acknowledged from the start that the South is a conquered and occupied country. Our understanding of history tells us that the CSA never formally surrendered—only our armies in the field did. Therefore, legally speaking, the old CSA still exists.”

This is the opposite of what Mr. Cushman accuses The Interim Government for the Confederate States of America of when he states that The Interim Government for The Confederate States of America is……

“a group of people who fantasise that the CSA still exists.”

The League of The South agrees that Our Confederate States is an “occupied country” and that “Our understanding of history tells us that the CSA never formally surrendered—only our armies in the field did. Therefore, legally speaking, the old CSA still exists.”

So the Southern Nationalists do agree that “the old CSA still exists.”

So here we find Southern Confederates who have established an Interim government for the purpose of restoration,  Dr. Michael Hill and The League of The South, (A Southern Nationalist organization) are all in agreement. Here we are standing on common ground.

The League of The South states that…..

“The above de jure argument, however, while correct, does not speak to the practical de facto situation we face in the South today. The Southern people generally are ignorant of their own history. In addition, they are addicted to government largesse, and are patriotic supporters of the Empire, at least as long as it’s being run by so-called conservative Republicans in the White House and Congress. Re-asserting the South’s independence at present would be no more palatable to them than mounting a full-blown secession movement (if it were legally necessary to do so). Moreover, they surely would not support the idea of re-staffing the governmental posts within the CSA that have remained vacant since 1865, as some now advocate.”

Let’s address this thoughtful statement…..

The Interim government for The Confederate States of America is just that, An Interim government. We do not expect to gain full and immediate support. Let us view historically how government in America was formed. Governments do not simply spontaneously spring into existence, absent an event that causes a revolution and total breakdown of an existing government, governments begin in an interim stage, and evolve through consent of those who choose it, Example: Our Declaration of Independence states that…..

Governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

We all have the right of freedom of political will, and currently as stated by the above LS statement, our people are exercising their freedom of political will. Our Southern brethren are consenting to the occupation each time they participate in the occupying governments political processes.  How do we gain their consent? First we must establish an alternative for them to give their consent, and alternative outside of the occupier’s political arena: This is where the restoration through the interim process begins. The interim government offers to our Southern Brethren an alternative to offer their consent outside of the occupier’s political arena.

Southern Confederates and The Interim Government for The Confederate States of America agree with the LS statement that…..

“The Southern people generally are ignorant of their own history. In addition, they are addicted to government largesse, and are patriotic supporters of the Empire”

The Interim government for The Confederate States of America is under no delusion that consent to the restoration will be granted by a majority overnight, we full well understand that it is a process of evolution. Consider the colony’s in America; the political process was an evolutionary process beginning with the colonists establishing their own limited governments, these limited governments evolved into the First Continental congress, which had no real authority to govern the colonist, nor did they collect taxes; Why? Because the colonists had yet to grant the Continental congress consent or their authority to govern, that occurred through an evolutionary process, which resulted in The American Revolution.  The Interim Government for The Confederate States of America is following this early American evolutionary process in the restoration of our Confederate Constitution and re-seating of our government.

So as you can see the process stated above should fully reflect the League of The South’s Statement that…..

“In short, even though all that is necessary is for us to re-assert our de jure standing as an independent Southern republic, in truth we are going to have to convince the Southern people that independence would be advantageous and desirable. Again, legally, we won’t have to re-secede; however, we will have to gain the consent of a significant number of our people to make our de facto independence plausible and possible in the 21st century.”

“This is what the League means when we say in our new strategy statement that we are trying to create a climate among our people conducive to Southern independence. If by God’s grace we succeed, our Southern republic will be ‘new’ only in the sense that it has received the affirmation and support of Southerners alive today. Without this, all claims to the de jure existence of the CSA will be merely a scholarly exercise, devoid of real meaning for our people. This time around, we don’t want the consolation of just being right; we want to be right and win!”

The statement of the LS that…..

“Again, legally, we won’t have to re-secede”

Is a true statement yet many within the Southern Nationalist organizations continually advocate secession and at the same time call for an end to the occupation. Again the LS recognizes as does The Southern Confederate and The Interim government for The Confederate States of America that ….

“we won’t have to re-secede”

We recognise (recognize) that secession is an accomplished fact and that a restoration and negotiation for an end to the occupation is what is necessary.

Further the LS statement that….

“In the worst-case scenario, to act upon a legal claim of this sort without the support of an educated and willing public will lead to ridicule and the discrediting of our movement. A case in point will serve to illustrate. A few years ago, a rather bright young fellow from another Southern State claimed, and quite rightly we believe, that ever since Reconstruction, his current State government had been a legal fiction and thus illegitimate. Not content to patiently educate his fellow citizens and seek their support in putting things right, he declared himself to be the new Governor after an ‘election’, in which only his handful of followers voted. He saw the election as a mandate for governing the State. Last we heard, however, the illegitimate sitting Governor had not yet relinquished his seat in the Statehouse. So much for being right in a purely legal sense. We sincerely hope that those who presently are trying to re-staff the CSA government of our ancestors learn a lesson from this kooky example.”

The Interim Government for The Confederate States of America is in full agreement here: WE DO NOT EXPECT, OR WISH TO ASSERT A CLAIM TO GOVERN, OCCUPY ANY STATE, OR GENERAL GOVERNMENT SEAT SUCH AS WAS ATTEMPTED BY THE GENTLEMAN AFORE MENTIONED, EVEN THOUGH DEFACTO ENTITIES DO OCCUPY WHERE OUR DEJURE GOVERNMENT SHOULD. THIS IS A MISUNDERSTANDING HELD BY SOUTHERN NATIONALISTS AND OTHERS WHO HAVE NOT EXAMINED OUR INTENTIONS OR RESEARCHED OUR STRATEGY.

Mr. Flowers (A Southern Nationalist LS member writes…..

“I have no faith whatsoever in ‘reform’ or ‘restoration’. I do not desire establishing a ‘Republic’ in the typical sense as espoused in the previous Articles of Confederation or the modern form in which the U.S. Government claims it’s authority rests. These weak forms of government will yield the same corrupt fruits as their predecessors, and in that I have no interest to help along or facilitate it in any way. We need strong leadership, not weak irresponsible majorities that can’t be held accountable for their actions. Visiting your site and reading the material would be a futile exercise as far as I’m concerned, as it will change nothing.”

Mr. Flowers statement is not in keeping with the LS statement below….

“If by God’s grace we succeed, our Southern republic will be ‘new’ only in the sense that it has received the affirmation and support of Southerners alive today.”

“A few years ago, a rather bright young fellow from another Southern State claimed, and quite rightly we believe, that ever since Reconstruction, his current State government had been a legal fiction and thus illegitimate.”

The LS states …..

“So, what is the League of the South’s answer? Let us work our new strategy, creating a climate conducive to independence. Let us gain the confidence and support of our people by becoming their worthy servants. Then let us re-assert our independence and nationhood on the firm foundational principles of 1776 and 1861. Though the South is presently a nation by right, this means nothing until the South starts acting like a nation in fact. To bring Dixie to that point is the League’s goal. Then we can realistically claim the mantle of the CSA and give it new life in our own day.”

Here The Southern Confederate’s and The Interim Government for The Confederate States of America differ only in that we do not consider our Confederacy a “Southern Nation” but rather a Confederacy of nation States, each occupied individually, not as a nation under occupation, aside from that we here agree as well.

And last the LS states….

“While we argue about degrees of Confederateness, our borders are being overrun by a Third World invasion.”

It is our belief that our boarders will only be protected from colonization, (Southern demographic displacement) when our dejure system of government is restored.

Note: I use the LS instead of the LOS out of respect. I am aware of the ridicule that LOS has received.

James Everett…………

All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice.

A Proper Southern Confederate Point of View

Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1755 Edition

“To Secede means: To withdraw from fellowship in any affair.”

If we truly believe in our ancestors cause: If we truly believe in the statements made in our Declaration of Independence: If we truly do believe that States are Sovereigns, then we must as individuals take that mental step; we must withdraw from fellowship in every affair from the occupying government: We must change how we have been indoctrinated to view our States as a single nation, not just in relation to the U.S, as we are no longer party to their constitution, but also in relation within our Confederate States of America. We are as Gunning Bedford stated….

June 28. 1787…. “That all the States at present are equally sovereign and independent has been asserted from every quarter of this house. Our deliberations here are a confirmation of the position.”

Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1755 Edition

S o’v E R E I c N , adj/ Supreme in power ; having no fuperiour.

Sovereign Means: SUPREME POWER HAVING NO SUPERIOR.

The general government (the central government) was never to be superior to the States…..

James Madison, when speaking of the Senate, (The federal portion of the occupier’s constitution) as originally established under Article I section III stated that….

“It is recommended by the double advantage of favoring a select appointment, and of giving to the State governments such an agency in the formation of the federal government as must secure the authority of the former” (THE  STATES),  “and may form a convenient link between the two systems”.

The States were to be the….

“SUPREME POWER HAVING NO SUPERIOR” other than God and that power that they voluntarily granted to the general (central) government for as long as they remained voluntary members of the “Confederacy stiled The United States of America”, and only those specifically enumerated powers that they DELEGATED to the general/central government.

If we truly wish to be free of the oppression and occupation of our Southern Confederate States by the occupying National government, then we must as individuals truly secede, we must “withdraw from fellowship in any affair” with the occupiers wherein we are not associated by force under the occupation. As individuals we must severe our political ties with the occupying government. The next generation of our young Southern Confederate men must no longer sacrifice their lives voluntarily fighting for the occupiers in their perpetual wars and hegemonic conquests. Our ancestors sacrificed, fought and died to “withdraw from fellowship in any affair” with the United States. Yet today Southern Confederates reject the secession of our ancestors every time that they voluntarily participate in the political process of the occupying government rather than immerse themselves in the effort to restore our own Confederate States political process. As Patrick Henry asked in his Give Me Liberty Our Gove Me Death speech….. “Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?”

We have been indoctrinated to view ourselves as part of the occupying government, and as a “nation”

Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1755 Edition

NATlON.’a. /. [»«//<!», French ; tmtio,

Latin.]

1. A people diftinguiOied from another

people ; generally by their language,

original, or government.

(A people distinguished from another by language or government).

Each State has its own constitution, and an individual government established by that constitution. Each State is suppose to be a sovereign, a nation of its own, simply united in a confederacy with a federal system established between them with the establishment of a central bureaucracy made up of appointed representatives from each State = The Senate as originally established under article I section III of their 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution, and as remains established under our 1861 constitution for he Confederate States of America.

Article I section III of our 1861 CSA constitution states…..

1. 1. The Senate of the Confederate States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen for six years by the Legislature thereof, at the regular session next immediately preceding the commencement of the term of service; and each Senator shall have one vote.

Each State is a Nation, we are NOT one nation!  We are 13 nations,

Thirteen sovereign States united in a confederacy with a compact between our sovereign States establishing a federal system through representatives from each Sovereign State sent to represent them in a central bureaucracy.

Patrick Henry spoke these words (June 5^th 1788)

“And those nations who have gone in search of grandeur, power and splendor, have all fallen a sacrifice, and been the victims of their own folly: While they acquired those visionary blessings, they lost their freedom”

The Articles of Confederation established a purely federal system with no National aspect, each State was a sovereign, a nation, not consolidated into a single nation, NOT “One nation under God”.

Unfortunately there were those who did wish to establish a single nation and did wish that nation to go in search of grandeur, power and splendor. Clearly they were successful in their endeavor because today we see that the U.S. is a single nation and has acquired those visionary blessings of grandeur, power and splendor, but as Patrick Henry reminded everyone back then of other such nations: freedom has been lost.

The actual transformation from a Confederacy stiled the United States of America to a single nation began long before Lincoln, it started with the 1787 Philadelphia convention and the Virginia plan for a national government.

There were those who are mislabeled as federalists who were in reality nationalists these men wished to consolidate the States and the Confederacy stiled the United States of America into a single national government. They wished to establish a single nation with all the “grandeur, power and splendor,” that Patrick Henry warned would lead to the sacrifice of our freedom.

The 1787/1789 U.S. constitution was composed of two opposing systems of government; one being national, the other being the federal system that was retained from the Articles of Confederation. Under the articles of Confederation each State appointed a representative to the central bureaucracy known as “congress”. The Senate (the federal portion) as established by the 1787/1789 U.S. constitution states in article I Section III that……

“The Senate of the United State shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.”

The House of Representatives, (the national portion) as established by the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution states in article I section II…..

“The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the people of the several States.”

So we can see that the Senate as State appointees retained the federal aspect from the Articles of Confederation, they were appointed by each States legislature to represent their State within the central bureaucracy.

The House of Representatives was the addition of a national component established to represent NOT States, but the people of the WHOLE of the United States as in a single consolidated nation. The House of Representatives were divided into representative districts without State affiliation. The House of Representatives members were NOT appointed by State legislatures to represent a State; they were and are elected by the people to represent the nation of the United States as a consolidation of the States into a single nation.

What Abraham Lincoln and his cronies accomplished was to carry the effort to consolidate the States into a single consolidated nation, a national government system by neutering the States and changing the view of the people toward the Confederacy of “equally sovereign and independent” States to a view of a single sovereign, a consolidation of the States into a national government system.

This unfortunately is how our people have been indoctrinated to view things.

We must regain……

A Proper Southern Confederate Point of View

We are and of right ought to be as our Declaration of Independence states……

“We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare,That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States.”

James Everett……

All rights reserved without prejudice.

Was Secession a legal act within the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution?

The Schizophrenia of the Texas V White Decision

Was session an unconstitutional act under the U.S. Constitution?   Apparently the 39^th U.S. Congress didn’t think Secession was un-constitutional otherwise the 39^th Congress of the U.S. would not have Argued that the former Confederate states had forfeited their statehood and returned to the status of territories, a joint committee of six Senators and nine Representatives declared that only Congress, and not the president, can readmit them to the Union.

So the secession of the Southern States was recognized by the U.S. as an accomplished FACT.

. In the occupying governments Supreme Court decision Texas v White, their opinion states in part…..

“The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States. When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation.  All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.

Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union. If this were otherwise, the State must have become foreign, and her citizens foreigners. The war must have ceased to be a war for the suppression of rebellion, and must have become a war for conquest and subjugation.

Our conclusion therefore is that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union, notwithstanding the transactions to which we have referred. And this conclusion, in our judgment, is not in conflict with any act or declaration of any department of the National government, but entirely in accordance with the whole series of such acts and declarations since the first outbreak of the rebellion.”

The argument for this decision by the occupiers Supreme Court of The United States…. (SCOTUS)….. was based in the question……

“Did Texas, in consequence of these acts, cease to be a State? Or, if not, did the State cease to be a member of the Union?”

The occupiers SCOTUS response this question is as follows…….

“It is needless to discuss at length the question whether the right of a State to withdraw from the Union for any cause regarded by herself as sufficient is consistent with the Constitution of the United States.

The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to “be perpetual.” And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained “to form a more perfect Union.” It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?

But the perpetuity and indissolubility of the Union by no means implies the loss of distinct and individual existence, or of the right of self-government, by the States. Under the Articles of Confederation, each State retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right not expressly delegated to the United States. Under the Constitution, though the powers of the States were much restricted, still all powers not delegated to the United States nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. And we have already had occasion to remark at this term that the people of each State compose a State, having its own government, and endowed with all the functions essential to separate and independent existence, and  that, “without the States in union, there could be no such political body as the United States Not only, therefore, can there be no loss of separate and independent autonomy to the States through their union under the Constitution, but it may be not unreasonably said that the preservation of the States, and the maintenance of their governments, are as much within the design and care of the Constitution as the preservation of the Union and the maintenance of the National government. The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.

For The Constitutional Court for The Confederate States of America to arrive at a proper decision concerning Secession we first must return to the founding principles on which the union was based, and that founding principle is stated most succinctly in our Declaration of Independence in 1776.

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them,”

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

“We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do”

This principle that governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed and that it is not only the right of the people to abolish that government it is also their duty, this is the foundation on which the union was established. Now that the principle on which the foundation of our State governments were established. It is in this very Declaration that it is stated that the colony’s were to become FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES, (note plural, “STATES” not a single sovereign State ). Let us now move forward to the Articles of Confederation, which established our Confederacy,(our union of States).

Article I. “The Stile of this Confederacy shall be the United States of America”

Note here that the Founders were establishing a CONFEDERACY of States, NOT a Consolidation of the “FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES” that they declared to King George and all the world…..” That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States;”

Article II. “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”

Clearly the intent of the Founders upon establishing the Articles of Confederation (THE CONFEDERACY OF FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES) was that they retain their “sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” Further let it be noted that the Confederation of States delegated “EXPRESSLY” (meaning specific, CLEARLY STATED) IT WAS EXPRESSLY, CLEARLY STATED THAT….“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence”

Article III. “The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.”

So we can see that article three explains the PURPOSE of the formation of our Confederacy of sovereign and Independent States being for the protection of among others listed THE DEFENCE OF THE INDEPENDENT STATES “SOVEREIGNTY”. We can also see that the States united in this confederacy did so with the intent that the States be united…. “into a firm league of friendship with each other” Meaning a loyal friendship. Friendship IS NOT BY FORCE. A Confederacy, is NOT BY FORCE, a confederacy is formed by mutual agreement, and the mutual agreement between the States was that…..“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” No authority was given to the United States either by the Articles of Confederation, or the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution to hold a State against its will thereby not only attacking the Sovereignty that was to be retained, but by its complete and utter destruction, not only of its sovereignty, but of its existence as a State. To deny its “sovereignty, freedom, and independence” is to reduce it from its status as a State to the lowly position of a province. Force cannot be employed in friendship or union.

Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.

Herein rests much of the claim that no State can secede from the United States as it was intended to be a perpetual union.

The definition of perpetual at the time the Articles of Confederation were established is as follows…

“Continual; uninterrupted; perennial”

One must keep in mind that a revolution was just fought and a Declaration made that…… “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The Founders did not forget their Declaration overnight. The intent that the union be perpetual was based in their hope that they would remain in a league of firm friendship, not that every State be forced to remain within, but that they remain a union based in a league of friendship: That union would be “Continual; uninterrupted; perennial” and in existence if only two States remained, as it only requires two to be united in a confederacy, or league of friendship.

The Supreme Court of the United States in the Texas V White decision stated……

“In the Constitution, the term “state” most frequently expresses the combined idea just noticed, of people, territory, and government. A “state,” in the ordinary sense of the Constitution, is a political community of free citizens, occupying a territory of defined boundaries, and organized under a government sanctioned and limited by a written constitution, and established by the consent of the governed. It is the union of such states, under a common constitution, which forms the distinct and greater political unit which that Constitution designates as the United States, and makes of the people and states which compose it one people and one country.”

Note this portion of the SCOTUS statement…… It is the union of such states, under a common constitution, which forms the distinct and greater political unit which that Constitution designates as the United States, and makes of the people and states which compose it one people and one country.”

This is an incorrect statement of understanding. The States were party to the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution, the “distinct and greater political unit” was a product of the agreement, and the States DICTATED to this product that they were establishing, what specifically enumerated powers it was to be granted. SUPERIORS DICTATE TO INFERIORS, INFERIORS DO NOT DICTATE TO SUPERIORS. The States by each individual agreement dictated and agreed to the specific and LIMITED powers that they would be ALLOWING the central government to hold. James Madison made this clear in his explanation of the purpose of the Senate in the Federalist #62 …….

“It is recommended by the double advantage of favoring a select appointment, and of giving to the State governments such an agency in the formation of the federal government as must secure the authority of the former, and may form a convenient link between the two systems.”

The authority of which James Madison was speaking was the STATES. The purpose of the Senate under article I section III of the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution was to secure the  AUTHORITY of the States over the central bureaucracy (central government) the very entity that the SCOTUS claimed to be, “the distinct and greater political unit”

The SCOTUS opinion appears to be in direct conflict with James Madison (THE FATHER OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION). This explanation of the Senate and the “AUTHORITY” that the States were to retain and hold over the central government that James Madison gave was to convince the States that “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” under the newly proposed 1787 Constitution that they held under the Articles of Confederation so that the States would ratify this proposed 1787 constitution.  The tenth amendment to the proposed 1787 U.S. Constitution clearly states that….. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

States respectively: Meaning individually.

Let us review what Alexander Hamilton assured the States in the Federalist #32

“An entire consolidation of the States into one complete national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them, would be altogether dependent on the general will. But as the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States. This exclusive delegation, or rather this alienation, of State sovereignty, would only exist in three cases: where the Constitution in express terms granted an exclusive authority to the Union; where it granted in one instance an authority to the Union, and in another prohibited the States from exercising the like authority; and where it granted an authority to the Union, to which a similar authority in the States would be absolutely and totally contradictory and repugnant.”

So we have Alexander Hamilton’s assurance to the States January 2, 1788 that if they agree to this proposed constitution the States would NOT be consolidated into a complete national sovereignty (The National sovereignty that exists today as a result of Lincolns War), but that the States would retain all the rights of sovereignty that they before had, that WERE NOT delegated by the States to the United States EXPRESSLY (meaning: Clearly stated) There is nothing clearly stated concerning secession, and there was no express authority delegated to the United States (general government) to prevent secession by a State, therefore each State CLEARLY retains that SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY UNTO ITSELF.  The States formed the central government not the other way around. Therefore, silence on any subject leaves the governance of the subject to the individual State.

No authority was ever given to the United States (central government) or to any group of States to act to prevent an individual State from seceding from the union (Confederacy of States), therefore that authority was retained by each Individual State. Again let us review the very foundational principle on which our Sovereign States were established when they rose from the status of English colonies to Sovereign and independent States……

“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness”

What would at first appear to be Schizophrenia in the SCOTUS opinion is in reality a poor if not pathetic attempt to use the Texas V White case to justify the unconstitutional revolutionary acts of Abraham Lincoln and his Northern cronies.

The SCOTUS makes the assertion that…. The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. Meaning that the States from the end of our revolutionary war were never meant to exist by their own individual judgment but rather at the will of the whole of the United States, somehow dismissing the statement of Article II of The Articles of Confederation…. “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”

The SCOTUS then goes on to state that…. “But the perpetuity and indissolubility of the Union by no means implies the loss of distinct and individual existence, or of the right of self-government, by the States.”

On the one hand the SCOTUS states …. “The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation.” (were never meant to exist by their own individual judgment)

Then on the other hand states ….

“But the perpetuity and indissolubility of the Union by no means implies the loss of distinct and individual existence, or of the right of self-government, by the States.”

The very fact that the occupying government created an illusion that the Seceded Confederate States were being readmitted to the “Union” is proof enough that the Confederate States were not then, or now under the jurisdiction of the SCOTUS, as the States that seceded are no longer party to the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution.

The SCOTUS further states, referring to the States secession that….

“These new relations imposed new duties upon the United States. The first was that of suppressing the rebellion. The next was that of reestablishing the broken relations of the State with the Union.”

“broken relations: Meaning: Severed relationship, as in NO LONGER A PART OF THE UNION UNDER THE 1787/1789 U.S. CONSTITUTION.

The undeniable reality is that our Constitution and our Confederate government were never surrendered to the occupying government, that each exists in exile, our States under occupation, and that our State governments and Constitutions were replace by defacto institutions, while our dejure constitutions and governments await their restoration that they may take their place among the nations of the world under the one and true sovereign of the universe, Almighty God.

Confederate States of America Interim government Constitutional Court Justice

[Foot note: Texas V White was not a case concerning secession, but rather a case concerning ownership of bonds issued to Texas for the resolution of a boundary dispute, Justice Chase simply used the opportunity to try and justify the invasion and conquest of our Southern Confederated States as if a State could never by the will of its citizens sever relations with the U.S.]

James Everett………….

WE ARE LOSING OUR RIGHTS: ARE YOU ARE TO BLAME?
As many of you may be aware; The occupying US government and their military have been buying up all the ammo. The occupying governments EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) just shut down the last lead smelting plant which happened to be in our Confederate State of MISSOURI.
About 145 employees of the Doe Run lead smelter [in Herculaneum, Missouri] learned they will lose their jobs at the end of December because of the plant’s closure, the Doe Run Co. said Wednesday. An additional 73 contractor jobs also will be eliminated. The occupying governments EPA raised their regulations by 10 fold and it would have cost the plant $100 million to comply. The occupying governments Environmental Protection Agency said the company….. “made a business decision” to shut down the smelter instead of installing pollution control technologies needed to reduce sulfur dioxide and lead emissions as required by the Clean Air Act.
Why would the Doe Run Company, the owners of the Missouri lead smelting facility, agree to being run out of business by the occupying governments EPA? One word: EXTORTION. This falls under the legal definition of DURESS.
Duress any unlawful threat or coercion used by person to induce another to act (or refrain from acting) in a manner he or she otherwise would not (or would). Subjecting person to improper pressure which overcomes his will and coerces him to comply with demand to which he would not yield if acting as free agent [Henry-Campbell: Black, Blacks Law Dictionary®, Sixth Edition, West Publishing Co. St. Paul Minnesota, 1990]
Having been placed under Duress through extortion by the occupying government, the Doe Run smelting plant has been coerced into shutting down. Doe Run said the fine and the required upgrades to its facilities were “too financially risky.”
Without ammunition, a gun is nothing more than a club. The on going assault on our right to bear arms (Which is beyond governmental authority, occupying or NOT) the ongoing project of arming their government agencies to the teeth with millions of rounds of ammunition and military-grade weapons and vehicles, the occupying governments closing of the Doe Run plant, is just another assault on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and just another step toward civilian disarmament.
You can own all the guns you want, but if you can’t get ammo, you are out of luck.
The occupying governments closing of the last lead smelting facility follows close on the heels of the occupying governments Secretary of State (John Kerry) signing of the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) “on behalf of the occupying government.
Article 3 of that agreement outlaws the buying, selling, trading, or transferring by civilians of all “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms.”
By making it impossible to manufacture ammunition, it becomes impossible for civilians to own it; such prohibitions do not apply to government. In fact, under the Arms Trade Treaty, the national governments of member countries are given monopoly control of the entire ammunition stockpile of their counties as well.
WHO IS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS ACTION?
ANSWER: EVERY INDIVIDUAL SOUTHERNER WHO HAS YET TO REGISTER AS A CONFEDERATE CITIZEN AND BEGIN WORKING AND SUPPORTING THE RESTORATION EFFORTS OF OUR CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT.
If our government had not been held back by the apathy of our Southern people, we would have already restored our confederate States and not only would the MISSOURI plant not be forced to shut down by extortion, our Confederate States are NOT party to any of these international agreements, nor member States within the United Nations and would promote the general welfare of those who support our individual armament .
WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO PROTECT YOUR LIBERTIES?
ARE YOU STILL FOOLISH ENOUGH TO CONTINUE IN THE OCCUPIERS POLITICAL PROCESSES, OR ARE YOU READY TO JOIN THE RESTORATION EFFORTS OF OUR CONFEDERACY SO THAT WE MAY USE IT TO RESTORE THE FOUNDERS INTENT?
END THE OCCUPATION NOW!
James Everett……..

Were our Confederate ancestors guilty of Treason?
The short simple answer is NO!
Under Article III, Section 3 of the occupying governments constitution;
The Treason Clause applies only to disloyal acts committed during times of war. Acts of dis-loyalty during peacetime are not considered treason under their U.S. Constitution. Nor do acts of Espionage committed on behalf of an ally constitute treason. For example Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted of espionage, in 1951, for helping the Soviet Union steal atomic secrets from the United States during World War II. The Rosenberg’s were not tried for treason because the United States and the Soviet Union were allies during World War II.
At the time each of the Southern States seceded, they each did so as sovereign States, and at the time of these secession’s our Southern States were allied with the other States by the 1787/1789 U.S. constitution, therefore being allies, our ancestors by secession could NOT have committed TREASON. The conquest of our Confederate States of America which resulted in a defensive war on our ancestor’s part could not have been TREASON because our ancestors were NOT citizens of the U.S. at the time they were at war with the invading armies of the U.S. The war did not come until after the secession’s, at which point our ancestors could not be U.S. citizens, nor was the fourteenth amendment to their Constitution yet in existence.
From a legal standpoint, the accusations and charge of TREASON are baseless.
Yankees like to view the fact that charges of treason were never pursued by their ancestors as a kindness, and desire to reunite the Southern Confederate States in peace and harmony, but the truth lies in the fact that they knew, that to do so would expose the truth that it was Lincoln and his Northern cronies who committed treason.
THE OCCUPATION OF OUR CONFEDERATE STATES CONTINUES, AND WILL UNTIL WE STAND AND SHOUT THE TRUTH FOR THE WORLD TO HEAR!
James Everett……………

The only way to accomplish this is to point out their differences.

Southern Confederates identify themselves as Confederates, not Nationalists, that each State is in itself a sovereign nation connected only by our 1861 Compact/Constitution, allowing only specifically enumerated powers to be placed on loan to the central bureaucracy of our confederacy. We recognize that Session is an accomplished FACT and that we currently exist under occupation by a foreign government.

Southern Confederates understand that our Confederate government and constitution were never surrendered, that generals cannot surrender governments, that our President never signed a peace treaty between our Confederate government and the occupying government, therefore our Confederate constitution remains as a legal and binding compact between our thirteen Confederate States until such time as our Confederate constitution is restored from its forced exile, our Confederate governments re-seated an and a constitutional convention can be held in which our Confederate constitution may be amended or our Confederacy dissolved by the re-seated Confederate State governments.

If our Confederacy is not dissolved through this lawful and legal act, then it will be the charge of our Confederate States of America to begin negotiations with the Occupying government of The United States of America to begin the end of the occupation of each of our Sovereign Confederate State Republics including the Confederate Territories of Arizona and Oklahoma.

Southern Confederates embrace our Confederate symbols; we do not allow others to define who we are, what we stand for, or what our symbols represent. We recognize that our government was not flawless in 1861 through 1865 and that no earthly government is flawless. With this understanding we are able to recognize all of the occupying governments past evils and present misdeeds such as its systematic irradiation of the Native American Indian population, the massacre of innocent women and Children at Sand Creek Colorado, the government abduction of Native American Children from their parents sending them to reeducation camps to rob them of their identity and cultures. The U.S. Eugenics program, the Tuskegee syphilis programs, is defacto State governments “Jim Crow laws” ETC……. Once our Confederate States and central governments are restored we may move forward and chart our own destiny as a people unencumbered by the United States tyranny.

Southern Nationalists do not support the restoration of our Confederate government. Michael Hill of the Southern Nationalist organization “The League of the South stated in his book, “The Grey Book”, (Blueprint For Southern Independence), that he is in agreement that to reinstate our Confederacy is the dumbest thing he ever heard. David Jones of the Southern Nationalist organization The Southern National Congress stated that “The Confederacy is DEAD get over it”.

Southern Nationalists do not wish to restore our Confederacy, our Constitution, or re-seat our Confederate government. Southern Nationalists do not recognize Session as an accomplished fact, choosing rather to ignore the sacrifice that our ancestors made to accomplish this goal; they choose to ignore secession as an accomplished fact choosing to recognize the defacto puppet governments and constitutions that the occupiers put in place of our Dejure Confederate State governments and Constitutions, therefore asking that these Defacto governments secede rather than recognizing that our ancestors already accomplished secession. To claim that we need to secede today is to ignore that we exist under occupation today, which is what these “Southern Nationalists” claim; How can we exist under occupation if session is NOT AN ALREADY  ACCOMPLISHED FACT?.. They choose instead to gain “Southern Independence” without recognition of either our 1861 Constitution for The Confederate States of America, or our State constitutions prior to the occupation. To recognize any of these established constitutions would mean that they first must restore them re-seating those governments before proceeding in the establishment of whatever new government it is which they wish to establish for the South or each of the Southern States.

Southern Nationalists have long used our Confederate Symbols while proclaiming that our “Confederacy is DEAD, get over it”, or that to reinstate our Confederacy is the dumbest thing ever heard. They chuse to recognize our symbols as symbols of heritage rather than symbols of our government in forced exile.

Southern Nationalists have recently established a new Flag as a symbol for themselves; some stating that it is good because it does not carry the same baggage as our Confederate Flags carry. Southern Confederates hope that this trend will continue and that these Southern Nationalists will in time cease to highjack our Southern Confederate symbols which has created confusion among our people. Our Confederate symbols belong to those who support our Confederate government and Constitution which those symbols were designed to represent.

The occupiers have ignored their 1787/1789 U.S. constitution, how are Southern Nationalists any different when they choose to ignore our 1861 Constitution? Simply because we exist under the occupation of a foreign government does not allow those from within to use this unfortunate situation to institute a new government without following our Constitutions amendment process. Southern Confederates seek redress, (To right a wrong), NOT to create another wrong on top of an already existing wrong.

Yes, there is a difference between a Southern Nationalist and a Southern Confederate.  Which are YOU?

James Everett……..

All Rights Reserved without prejudice.

Herein I will endeavor to be as short and simple in explanation as possible with the understanding that this is only a small glimpse into the twilight zone wherein we currently exist.

Have you wondered how it is that the occupying national government has ignored your right to keep and bear arms? How is it that they can get away with this flagrant violation of the second amendment to their U.S. Constitution, or why their “Supreme court” has allowed this to occur?

The first mistake that you have made is in the belief that their constitution holds the occupying national government in check.

The common law became the basic law of most States due to the Commentaries on the Laws of England, completed by Sir William Blackstone in 1769, which became every American lawyer’s bible. Today almost all common law has been enacted into statutes with modern variations by all the states except Louisiana which is still influenced by the Napoleonic Code. In some states the principles of common law are so basic they are applied without reference to statute.

Common Law:

You are free under the Common Law to do anything you please, as long as you do not infringe on the life, liberty or property of someone else.

Equity Law:

Equity law is law which compels performance. It compels you to perform to the exact letter of any contract that you are under. In Equity law there is no criminal penalty, only civil liability.

Admiralty/Maritime Law:

Admiralty law is civil jurisdiction of Compelled Performance which also has Criminal Penalties for not adhering to the letter of the contract, but this only applies to International Contracts.

Article I, Section.10 recognizes our unlimited right to contract as long as we are not in doing so infringing on the life, liberty, or property of another.

ArticleI section.10 of the occupying government’s constitution states……

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts,”

The occupying government has created a colorable law in order to subvert our rights under common law. This colorable law is known as “Uniform Commercial Code” or UCC. Under this colorable law, one can face criminal penalties for not adhering to the letter of the contract.

Colorable is something that appears real, but is not, such as the “Federal reserve note”. A “Federal Reserve Note” is not a United States Note. (Too complicated for study here).

One difference between Common Law and the Uniform Commercial Code is that in Common Law, contracts must be entered into: (1) knowingly, (2) voluntarily, and (3) intentionally. Under the Uniform Commercial Code this is not so. First of all, contracts are necessary. Under this new law, agreements can be binding, and if you only exercise the benefits of an agreement it is presumed or implied that you intend to meet the obligations associated with those benefits. If you accept a benefit offered by government, then you are obligated to follow, to the letter, each and every statute involved with that benefit.

The bottom line here is that when one obtains a Gun permit, a conceal and carry permit, one is asking the occupiers for permission to do what one has AUTHORITY to do recognized as a RIGHT; in doing so one contracts thereby entering himself into UCC jurisdiction wherein he forfeits his constitutional right via his right to contract under Article I section.10 of the occupiers constitution. The benefit to you is a colorable benefit, because you already had the RIGHT to bear you firearm before you contracted it away under UCC jurisdiction.

The simplest remedy to this calamity is to exercise ones right of inheritance and freedom of political will by registering to become a citizen of The Confederate States of America or simply affirming ones citizenship at http://csagov.org/ in doing so one is not standing alone but uniting with others in the cause of the restoration of the Founders intent through the restoration of The Confederate States of America.

James Everett…..

All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice.

Disclaimer

The material presented in this document are for educational purposes only. This article should not be considered as legal advice. All readers are advised to check all references on their own. Although all attempts have been made to report accurate information, no such accuracy is guaranteed.

The Articles of Confederation were established, NOT by the people of the U.S.

Were they established by the people, then it would not have been a confederacy of sovereign and independent States but rather the act of a single State, however; the U.S. did not yet exist. The Articles of Confederation were established by free sovereign independent States, as a compact/treaty/constitution between those States, not a contract between the people.

If, “We the people” establish a constitution, then it becomes a contract between “We the people” instead of a Compact/treaty/constitution between sovereign and independent States forming a confederacy.

If the Compact/Treaty/Constitution is not made between the States then we have NO confederacy of States.

If we have a contract between “We the people” the people have established a democracy.

If a contract is made between “We the people” then it is only binding on those who are alive at the time the contract is agreed to, once those alive at the time the contract is agreed to pass away, then the contract passes away with them, as people cannot establish a contract to be binding on someone who does not yet exist. A compact, treaty, or Constitution is between the States forming a Confederacy, and as long as the States which agreed to the compact/treaty/Constitution exist, then the compact/treaty/constitution is binding.

The 1787, contract begins with “We the people” therefore it established a contract binding on those alive at that time it was established. The States did establish this as a compact; however by wording “We the People” they established a contract on behalf of the citizens alive at the time as agents of the people.

The interesting thing is that the States have been dissolved into a national government (a consolidated government), therefore the 1787 “constitution” had it actually been a compact/treaty/constitution between States then it would no longer exist, as the States as sovereign entities no longer exist.

If indeed the 1787/1789 U.S. constitution had actually been a constitution, then it was established between the States as a compact/treaty, then the States were the party’s to the constitution, the general government was only a product of it, not a party to it, therefore if the party’s which established it no longer exist, then the product of it no longer exists.

In either instance what currently exists today is neither a contract between “We the people”, nor a compact between sovereign States.

James Everett…………

Sui Juris