Our Ancestors were not Rebels

The Supremacy Clause within the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution does not declare that all laws passed by the general government, The United States, (the States in union collectively) are the supreme law of the land. Here is the entire clause: “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”
Notice the part that reads, “laws of the United States made in pursuance” of the Constitution. This basically says that all laws and treaties must first be constitutional in order for them to be valid and the supreme law of the land, in pursuance thereof, not in violation thereof.
There was no Article within the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution that makes any reference to secession. The tenth amendment to that constitution states very plainly….
“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.”
So, we see that there was no reference to secession in any Article within the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution therefore there was no POWER granted to the United States in their collective capacity to prevent a State from seceding; that POWER was reserved by each State INDIVIDUALLY.
There was, nor is an amendment to the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution that makes secession an unlawful or illegal act.
There was, nor is a law that states that secession is an unlawful or illegal act.
I reject the label “Rebel” that has been placed on the Southern Confederate,
I reject the label “Rebelling States” that has been placed on the Southern Confederate States.
The very definition of “Rebellion” is stated clearly in Johnson’s Dictionary of the English language (1755 edition)…..
“ReBc’llion. n, f. [rtbellion, French;
rcbellio, Latin ; from rebel j
Insurrection against lawful authority.”
If there was no article within the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution that makes any reference to secession, nor was there an amendment added that makes secession an unlawful or illegal act, then how could any one of our Southern States or the people thereof be in rebellion to a lawful authority if NO LAW EXISTS that make secession an unlawful or illegal act?
To allow such a fallacy to go unopposed is to allow our adversary’s to control the dialog, granting them free access to a moral ground that they have NO real claim to hold.
In the 1787 CONstitutional debates, the Nationalists quickly laid claim to the label “Federalists” in order to gain favor with the people of the sovereign States, placing the label of “Anti-federalists” on the actual Federalists. In this way the Nationalists gained an advantage based on a fallacy.
Such false labels need to be corrected.
In reality Abraham Lincoln and the people of the North were Rebelling against the lawful authority of the 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitutions tenth amendment, therefore they must be forced to bear the yoke of such labels as rebellion, insurrection, and rebels.

Article I, section 8, clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution gives the The United States, (The States collectively), ownership and control of 10 miles square of Washington DC. It further states that land within the boundaries of a state may only be acquired if they first have the consent of the state legislature. The United States. ( The States collectively, in union) is limited in its acquisition of land to four SPECIFIC purposes, that being…..
“Military forts, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings”= (“federal buildings).
These are the only cases within the United States in which all the powers of government are united in a single government.
Nowhere in the constitution does it grant the federal government the power to own land within a State, or to hold municipal jurisdiction, outside of these four SPECIFICALLY defined purposes.
The United States, (The States collectively, in union) hold ONLY temporary municipal jurisdiction over U.S. territories, through territorial governments.
The Louisiana Purchase is one example of a U.S. Territory. The territory purchased by the United States collectively was owned by the United States, yet when portions of that U.S. Territory reached a number of inhabitants and each formed a territorial government and then established a republican form of government under a constitution, establishing boundaries, and submitting a request to join the union: Once that territory was accepted as a member State within the United States union, that newly formed State then gained all the SOVEREIGNTY and JURISDICTION over the territory within its boundaries as any of the original States.
The SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States), rendered the opinion in Pollard’s Lessee v Hagan, that for the United States, (The States collectively in union) to hold municipal jurisdiction within a State that …….
“Such a power is not only repugnant to the Constitution, but it is inconsistent with the spirit and intention of the deeds of cession.”
“Then to Alabama belong the navigable waters, and soils under them, in controversy in this case, subject to the rights surrendered by the Constitution to the United States, and no compact that might be made between her and the United States could diminish or enlarge these rights.”

“By the preceding course of reasoning, we have arrived at these general conclusions: first, the shores of navigable waters, and the soils under them, were not granted by the Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the States respectively. Secondly, the new States have the same rights, sovereignty, and jurisdiction over this subject as the original States.”
“Alabama is, therefore, entitled to the sovereignty and jurisdiction over all the territory within her limits … to maintain any other doctrine, is to deny that Alabama has been admitted into the union on an equal footing with the original states … to Alabama belong the navigable waters and soils under them.”
It must also be understood that each coastal State has jurisdiction and control over water within three miles of its coast, the normal limit for nations.
Once each Southern State LEGALLY, and LAWFULLY seceded from the U.S., each gained all of the sovereign jurisdiction of any State/Nation outside the U.S. hence South Carolina held jurisdiction over the waters within three miles of the South Carolina coast. Fort Sumter, while was a U.S. Fort, hence a U.S. Territory wherein the U.S. did hold legal jurisdiction; The U.S. did NOT hold jurisdiction over the waters that surrounded the Fort, hence South Carolina was acting within its LEGAL and LAWFUL AUTHORITY in the prevention of the U.S. resupplying the Fort. It would be up to the U.S. to negotiate with the Government of South Carolina, and The CSA and reach an agreement in which the U.S. would be allowed to navigate South Carolina waters to resupply the U.S. Fort Sumter. Since the U.S. reached NO such agreement with either South Carolina, or the Confederate States of America, its attempts to resupply Fort Sumter via invasion of the sovereign jurisdiction of South Carolina waters, such an act constituted an act of war.
THE UNITED STATES, (THE STATES IN UNION COLLECTIVELY) DO NOT OWN A STATE, ITS LAND, ITS WATERS, OR THE LAND UNDERNEATH ITS WATERS: EACH STATE IS A SOVEREIGN NATION, AND GAINED SUCH STATUS WHEN IT WAS FORMED INTO A STATE, ONCE A STATE HAS BEEN FORMED FROM A U.S. TERRITORY AND ADMITTED AS A MEMBER STATE WITHIN THE UNION, THE U.S. (THE STATES COLLECTIVELY IN UNION) CEDE ALL MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION THAT IT HELD TO THAT NEWLY FORMED STATE: AND AS THE U.S. (THE STATES IN UNION COLLECTIVELY MAY ONLY OWN LAND UNDER THE PROVISIONS WITHIN THE 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution…..
Article I, section 8, clause 17 of the 1787/1789 U.S. Constitution which gives the The United States, (The States collectively), ownership and control of 10 miles square of Washington DC. It also further states that land within the boundaries of a state may only be acquired if they first have the consent of the state legislature. The United States. ( The States collectively, in union) is limited in its acquisition of land to four SPECIFIC purposes, that being…..
“Military forts, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings”= (“federal buildings).
THE UNITED STATES,(THE STATES IN UNION COLLECTIVELY), COULD NOT, NOR, DOES NOT OWN A SOVEREIGN STATE, OR ITS LAND, HENCE A STATE IN ITS SOVEREIGN CAPACITY, MAY SECEDED FROM THE UNION OF STATES, STILED “THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”.

James Everett Sui Juris….

All rights reserved without prejudice

7 Responses to “Our Ancestors were not Rebels”

  1. Paul Townsend (Georgia) says:

    On behalf of my entire family, we are proud Confederate citizens.

  2. Michael C Williams says:

    Virginia is waiting for the call to arms….

  3. james says:

    Mr. Williams,
    It is not a call to arms that we ask of Virginia, but rather a plea to the people of Virginia for their consent to the restoration. That consent begins through the registration project and grows from there through the establishment of our own political venue, and election process outside that of the occupiers political venue, and election process. Under the principle of individual consent, the little government that mankind need, is not only practicable, but natural and easy; and that our Cause authorizes no government, except one depending wholly on voluntary support, not by force, or duress, and not by coercion.

  4. Michael C Williams says:

    Ok then,

    Well my question for you is how are we going bring about the restoration after the US government falls from the death of the dollar?

    (This would be the best time to start the restoration)

    There are those that currently live in the south that will not like the thought of a new CSA and will fight to make sure that it doesn’t happen.

    What happens then?

    • Adrian G. says:

      Enemies who will fight to stop us have no true power to stop us; the liberation efforts are practically invincible; all we need are to start our elections,this we can only do by getting enough Citizens signed up in each Confederate State to grant consent, and then we can get the Peace Treaties signed to liberate each of these Confederate States.

  5. Mike says:

    If your ancestors were rebels, what the hell were we in 1776? Oh right! We won that war so those ancestors were “patriots”, but the CSA lost the war of aggression, so naturally, they were “rebels”. People are not taught that the first established government in this country was a Confederacy. I see the Federal government growing more & more strong each year. The states are almost to the point of being totally subjugated to the Feds. The state governors better wake up before it is too late, or would necessitate an armed conflict. Which by the way, is just what the damned terrorists would make use of.

    • Adrian G. says:

      Hi Mike, it is a common error of history that Confederates lost the war – and that error is what the occupying power thrives on. In order for a war to come to a formal end there must be either a formal GOVT surrendered or Peace Treaties between the GOVTS at war, or both.
      It is of utmost importance for everybody to realize Generals only surrender ARMIES – GENERALS CANNOT SURRENDER GOVERNMENTS.
      In WW2, even the Dutch Army surrendered to the Germans (the Battle of the Netherlands.-1940)
      But the Netherlands was LEGALLY restored and liberated (1945)
      Ww2 and the history of the Netherlands stands as proof of the legitimacy of this Confederate Liberation Movement. (Because the same thing that happened to the Netherlands happened to each of these Confederate States, accept we are still at this point under illegal US occupation and a cold war status.
      What we need in order to put an end to this cold war status and open rebellion from the Northern USA, we must liberate the Confederacy of States that still legally exists, the CSA.

      You also speak of a “Federal Government” as if one still exists in place today – the Federal system of the founders was replaced under durress with a wholly NATIONAL system.
      There are tons of Articles on this website explaining that.

      Last but not least, are you a registered Confederate State citizen? That’s the first thing you should do, is affirming your State Citizenship on THIS WEBSITE so we can start the elections to reseat the CSA Federal and State Governments so we can get the liberation of the Confederacy to finally occur!!!
      Thank you for your time.

Leave a Reply