Irrefutable legal arguments supporting the right of secession

[Wry Catcher]

I think it's time to designate Palmyra Atoll [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmyra_Atoll]
as the new home for those Libertarian leaning kooks, like bripat & Kaz, who hate America as it is, and Americans.

They can live free of the common and codified law, write their own history and live free and unencumbered of those Americans who believe in the social contract, and that our government has a role in their general Welfare.

Let each as they choose follow the COTUS as they choose to understand it; each can be armed with as many weapons of the kind they freely choose, and develop or not the land which is given to them simply because of the accident of their birth on American soil.

I'd bet we'd see an example of Lord of the Flies in months, if not in days.

You love America like blood sucking leeches love their hosts. You're a parasite. We hate America ... what an idiot you are

You hate America, you dream of a different America, one which acts only in the manner to which you approve. You oppose democracy, you belittle the poor, working poor and have a callous disregard for anyone who challenges you.

Don't pretend to be a patriot. You're not.

 

[paperview]

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

LOL, liberals are so slow.

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter
The didn't, they dug in
Four months later South Carolina fought to remove them

But do you follow that? Nope. You come back with "Kentucky, for example, ... could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now"

LOL, you didn't follow the point at all, Holmes

You apparently seem to be the one who is not following.

Did you miss the post about land that was FEDERAL PROPERTY in South Carolina - that you think ....

pay attention now -- SC could just up and declare all the federal forts they had taken (and ship) theirs -- and say "hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now -- because that's pretty much what you're saying when you say:

"The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave."

You can't just steal Federal property. Idiot.

 

[kaz]

I think it's time to designate Palmyra Atoll [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmyra_Atoll]
as the new home for those Libertarian leaning kooks, like bripat & Kaz, who hate America as it is, and Americans.

They can live free of the common and codified law, write their own history and live free and unencumbered of those Americans who believe in the social contract, and that our government has a role in their general Welfare.

Let each as they choose follow the COTUS as they choose to understand it; each can be armed with as many weapons of the kind they freely choose, and develop or not the land which is given to them simply because of the accident of their birth on American soil.

I'd bet we'd see an example of Lord of the Flies in months, if not in days.

You love America like blood sucking leeches love their hosts. You're a parasite. We hate America ... what an idiot you are

You hate America, you dream of a different America, one which acts only in the manner to which you approve. You oppose democracy, you belittle the poor, working poor and have a callous disregard for anyone who challenges you.

Don't pretend to be a patriot. You're not.

Strawman. You just actually sense the danger in being a place where anyone can get away from blood sucking leeches like you, that's a precedent you can't allow

 

[kaz]

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

LOL, liberals are so slow.

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter
The didn't, they dug in
Four months later South Carolina fought to remove them

But do you follow that? Nope. You come back with "Kentucky, for example, ... could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now"

LOL, you didn't follow the point at all, Holmes

You apparently seem to be the one who is not following.

Did you miss the post about land that was FEDERAL PROPERTY in South Carolina - that you think ....

pay attention now -- SC could just up and declare all the federal forts they had taken (and ship) theirs -- and say "hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now -- because that's pretty much what you're saying when you say:

"The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave."

You can't just steal Federal property. Idiot.

Right, it's South Carolina ... land ... moron. South Carolina did not declare ownership of the possessions of the Fort, they told the Union to leave. And it was ... four months ... before they attempted to remove them. How stupid are you?

 

[Unkotare]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

The idiot revisionistas are not conservatives, they are just lamebrains.

 

[kaz]

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

The idiot revisionistas are not conservatives, they are just lamebrains.

So we say we are not conservatives, and your insult is that we're not conservatives?



Um...ouch?

And again, what does revisionism have to do with anything?

 

[Unkotare]

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter...

Illegally, illegitimately, by a bunch of traitorous dogs. They were put down, and to have delusional fools like you take up their treason is beyond absurd.

 

[Unkotare]

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

The idiot revisionistas are not conservatives, they are just lamebrains.

So we say we are not conservatives, and your insult is that we're not conservatives?

You're not. Your revisionist delusions do not represent a political position. They represent a psychological malfunction.

 

[kaz]

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter...

Illegally, illegitimately, by a bunch of traitorous dogs. They were put down, and to have delusional fools like you take up their treason is beyond absurd.

At that point, the Union was an occupying army. You should look up what "Federal" government actually means

 

[Unkotare]

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter...

Illegally, illegitimately, by a bunch of traitorous dogs. They were put down, and to have delusional fools like you take up their treason is beyond absurd.

At that point, the Union was an occupying army.

No, it was not.

 

[kaz]

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

The idiot revisionistas are not conservatives, they are just lamebrains.

So we say we are not conservatives, and your insult is that we're not conservatives?

You're not. Your revisionist delusions do not represent a political position. They represent a psychological malfunction.

I love ya man, we're usually on the same side. And I know you're trying to insult me, so I'm trying to be offended. It would be easier though to work with you on that if you could make more sense

 

[kaz]

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter...

Illegally, illegitimately, by a bunch of traitorous dogs. They were put down, and to have delusional fools like you take up their treason is beyond absurd.

At that point, the Union was an occupying army.

No, it was not.

Sure it was, they were on the land of a sovereign State they had been told to leave. If that's not being an occupying army, what is?

 

[Bombur]

Lincoln Douglas debates are a good place to start but there is plenty of other examples of his position. There is also the point of view of the South which is also very important.

The Lincoln-Douglass debates prove your claim is wrong. Please post an example that proves Lincoln gave a damn about the slaves.

"This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world—enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites—causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty—criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest."

And yet he promised repeatedly not to abolish slavery, otherwise he would never have been elected. Herr Lincoln Uber Alles was first, last, and foremost a politician who ran for office several times until he found the magic words to win. Like Obama, he lacked even an ounce of geniune character. It's all a light show and suckers like you fall for it every time.

In order to preserve the union. Once the South rebelled he changed his plan because it no longer made sense. He didn't hide his feelings towards slavery when he was campaigning, but he campaigned on a solution to slavery that didn't involve war. War was thrust upon him by the south.

Lincoln had incredible character. He was incredibly clear in his arguments which were often presented concisely and logically. This can be hard for people like yourself who are not logical thinkers but emotional ones.

That's pure made up horseshit.

Lincoln was the Supreme liar and ultimate hypocrite. He was a mass murderer. He wiped his ass on the Constitution. He supported crony capitalism and doled out huge sums to his favorite business cronies.

That's the liberal conceptions "character."

lol

You are absolutely terrible at staying on topic. It is like you can't help but deflect every conversation into something else because it is so obvious your world view is delusional nonsense.

Everything I said is correct. Deal with it.

 

[there4eyeM]

No state could or can legally unilateral separate from the Perpetual Union it joined. Repetitively ignoring this is arguing for arguing's sake.

 

[Skylar]

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter...

Illegally, illegitimately, by a bunch of traitorous dogs. They were put down, and to have delusional fools like you take up their treason is beyond absurd.

At that point, the Union was an occupying army.

No, it was not.

Sure it was, they were on the land of a sovereign State they had been told to leave. If that's not being an occupying army, what is?

The obvious problem being that they weren't a sovereign state. They State shared jurisdiction over the territory in question with the federal government. Both had concurrent jurisdiction. Once a state joins the union it ceases to be a sole sovereign. And instead is one of a pair of sovereigns over the territory, with the laws of each sovereign applying within the State.

The State alone couldn't make territorial decisions, just as the federal government alone couldn't do it. You'd need the agreement of both sovereigns for any such territorial decisions to be valid. Which is why unilateral succession doesn't work. No matter what decision the State makes, without the consent of the *other* sovereign of the territory, nothing changes.

And the other sovereign never granted consent for territorial changes. Meaning that their jurisdiction still applied. And the land was still part of the United States. Thus, a state government fired on federal troops stationed on land that the federal government had jurisdiction over. Also known as a rebellion.

 

[Skylar]

No state could or can legally unilateral separate from the Perpetual Union it joined. Repetitively ignoring this is arguing for arguing's sake.

Nope. No State could. Any such territorial decisions would have to be made by both sovereigns who share concurrent jurisdiction; the State government and the Federal Government.

 

[paperview]

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

LOL, liberals are so slow.

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter
The didn't, they dug in
Four months later South Carolina fought to remove them

But do you follow that? Nope. You come back with "Kentucky, for example, ... could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now"

LOL, you didn't follow the point at all, Holmes

You apparently seem to be the one who is not following.

Did you miss the post about land that was FEDERAL PROPERTY in South Carolina - that you think ....

pay attention now -- SC could just up and declare all the federal forts they had taken (and ship) theirs -- and say "hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now -- because that's pretty much what you're saying when you say:

"The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave."

You can't just steal Federal property. Idiot.

Right, it's South Carolina ... land ... moron. South Carolina did not declare ownership of the possessions of the Fort, they told the Union to leave. And it was ... four months ... before they attempted to remove them. How stupid are you?

^ kaz.

Too stupid for words, and always, always wrong.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Image of what a coward with a firearm can accomplish.

Now imagine a Democrat standing behind a taxpayer and you're starting to get it

Democracy is murder?

Do you have a better system?

Democracy often is murder. Remember Waco?

Waco was not passing tax legislation you retard.

Jesus.

 

[bripat9643]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

You're wrong, Stalinist bootlicker.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter...

Illegally, illegitimately, by a bunch of traitorous dogs. They were put down, and to have delusional fools like you take up their treason is beyond absurd.

At that point, the Union was an occupying army. You should look up what "Federal" government actually means

No it wasn't it was still the Federal army on US soil.