IT'S HAPPENING HERE!

I'm a bit behind here due to other obligations, but hope I can get things caught up over the next two or three days. In the meantime, this comes courtesy of Cal S. and points up the extremely dangerous nature of something that for some reason strikes some people as very attractive: a Constitutional Convention.

People should beware: were a Constitutional Convention actually called, everything would be up for grabs. The major players--who would doubtless include the investment-banker power elites that are the real rulers of America now--could very easily abolish Constitutional government altogether and establish a dictatorship. At the very least, they could abolish the existing Constitution and replace it with a document modeled on the UN Charter. The document would grant "rights except where proscribed by law" or some such. Given today's political ambience, it would clearly be an internationalist document, not something our Founding Fathers would have approved of.

Let's be very clear: under no circumstances should we permit a Constitutional Convention to be called. We could lose what little is left of Constitutional government altogether, without a Free Trade Area of the Americas. I would go so far as to say, as with the FTAA, if anyone attempts to force this kind of agenda down our throats, civil disobedience will be called for. I don't have a date for this article. That makes me all the more nervous.

The Effort to Dismantle Our Constitution

http://www.sweetliberty.org/concon.htm

States With a Standing Call for a Constitutional Convention

Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Delaware
Colorado
Georgia
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Maryland
Mississippi
Missouri
Nebraska
New Hampshire
New Mexico
North Carolina
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Wyoming

The remaining 18 states have not called for a convention. Citizens must keep a vigilant watch to block legislation in any of these states that calls for a Con-Con.

Although 32 states had initially passed resolutions calling for a Con-Con (for the alleged purpose of adding a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution), 3 states ­ Alabama, Florida and Louisiana ­ rescinded their calls.

The Nevada House of Representatives "purged" its resolution. However, since both chambers passed the resolution, it is questionable whether the one-chamber purge would be accepted as a rescission. Conversely, it has been argued that because the resolution was actually purged from the records it would negate the initial resolution, since it must pass in both chambers.

We should not consider Nevada's purge, nor the rescissions of Alabama, Florida and Louisiana as a safety margin.

According to Article V of the Constitution, Congress must call a convention when 2/3rds of the states apply. That magic number is 34 states. Since three states have formally withdrawn (rescinded) their calls, that would seemingly leave us 5 states away from having a Con-Con. However, we have been informed that the advocates of the convention are waiting to capture not five, but only two more. It is said that if they get two more states to pass resolutions for a Con-Con, they plan to challenge the rescissions of the three states and throw them into the courts while going ahead with a convention.

Considering the blatant corruption in courts at all levels today, it would be folly to rest on our laurels and feel safe that the courts would uphold those rescissions. For that reason, it should be considered at this time that only two states are needed to require the Congress to call a Constitutional Convention.

After experiencing the onslaught of lawyers (scribes, as in "scribes and Pharisees") in Florida's presidential election fiasco, can you imagine the hay-day they would have with a court battle of this magnitude and importance?