Ed. note:
This update regards the
upcoming historic Continental Congress 2009 event
to be held Philadelphia. As part of CC 2009,
delegates selected by the People from each of the
fifty states will convene to discuss the
Government’s ongoing violations of the
Constitution and strategies the People can employ
to peaceably curtail the abuse. Although these
violations have been widely debated for years, it
is the Government’s patent refusal to respond to
any and all First Amendment Petitions for Redress
that now compel the People to justly and actively
resist the tyranny.
We strongly encourage our readers to review
each of our
latest updates.
At a minimum, please be sure to read our “Summit
Call”
and “Line
in the Sand” web
articles
which provide a good overview of the
constitutional crisis and CC 2009
initiative.
A
big, warm thank you to all who have stepped forward
to offer their assistance with local arrangements
for the Prep Tour for CC 2009. All the pieces are
falling into place. We could not think of
undertaking the Tour without the assistance of our many
local volunteers. Again, thank you.
Based on input we have received from many of you, we
have made some significant revisions to the
schedule.
Everyone is encouraged to note the changes and to
continue spreading the word about the Prep Tour for
CC 2009 through their Internet contact networks and
associations with other Freedom-minded
organizations.
Continental Congress 2009 will be an historic event
of unprecedented importance for our Republic as we
enter a period of significant turmoil and distress
resulting from our government’s unrelenting attacks
on our Liberty and the Constitution.
DELEGATE SELECTION
CRITERIA
A
woman from Montana wrote:
“I am writing about your rules for finding delegates for the Continental
Congress 2009. I notice that you have excluded ALL
those with a felony. There are some people out here
who are NOT a danger to others, are not those who
would disgrace the convention but on the other hand
are very much in tune with what it means to hold
this historic conference. I have a friend I do not
know just what his felony was for but I do know this
about him. He is a true patriot. He believes in the
Constitution and for standing up for the country our
Founding Fathers created. He would be a true asset
yet because of something in his past you would hold
it against him from contributing. I have learned so
much from him about this country, about what our
government is suppose to be doing and what they are
not. He has a wealth of knowledge but you and the
others won't get to know that because you are
excluding him and others like him. I do understand
you are looking for people that are not going to
draw negative attention to the cause but this is
discrimination. You are doing a GREAT disservice to
the cause of Liberty in order to try and be
politically correct. I wonder would our Founding
Fathers have left people out who may have had a bad
reputation for fear of how it would look to others?
I don't believe they would have. They put their
lives on the line for what they believe in and there
are many of us out here who would do the same yet
your are willing to exclude them so there is no
chance for someone to be questioned. The ONLY
questions should be are 1.Does the person know the
Constitution and what it stands for? 2. Are they
willing to sound out about the injustices the
government is doing? 3. Do they know what being a
true Patriot really means? 4. Do they love this
Country with all their heart?
“If they are not currently in prison I don't really see what the problem
is. I think it is awful that you are looking to
discriminate against a person with out knowing
exactly why they may have that felony, or what it
was. I would hope you rethink your policy and give
some of our True patriots a chance.”
Another person wrote:
“I am sorry but you must hear my thoughts on this subject as I am one of
those patriots with a felony conviction that is not
allowed to have a say in the CC because I hold
constitutional rights above the states rights to
subvert it. I was convicted in New York for
criminal possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree,
a felony conviction that basically is rooted in the
infringement of the second amendment. I was
convicted in 2000 and my rights obviously still not
fully restored as I am not allowed to own a firearm
in the United States due to my felony conviction.
You claim to cherish people who have "proven passion
for the Constitution" so let me show you my
passion...
I would rather be exposed to the
inconveniences attending too much liberty than those
attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson
Americans have the right and advantage of being
armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose
governments are afraid to trust the people with
arms.
James Madison
These folks are correct. We know that throughout
history innocent people, including Patriots and
solid citizens of their communities, have been
victimized by “directed verdicts” and convicted of
one “crime” or another. In any case, those who have
“repaid their debt to society” ought not, in every
case, be the victim of a blanket policy that would
prevent them from serving as a Delegate to the
Continental Congress 2009.
As such, we have reconsidered our policy regarding
the exclusion of those with felony convictions and
will instead now consider accepting such potential
delegates for inclusion in the nominee voting
process following the submission of additional
information by such nominees regarding their
conviction(s). Additional details will be announced
shortly as part of our release of the on-line
nominating system.
Democracy or Republic?
To many, these two words appear to by synonymous,
but in fact are terms of art which define specific,
but vastly different forms of government. The first
defines government by majority rule, i.e., a
“democracy.” In a democracy, the powers of the
government, the law and even the rights of the
citizens are ultimately considered relative to, and
defined by, only the will of the political
majority.
In
a republic, the government is forced, by design, to
honor and be bound by the existence of fixed
Individual Rights – i.e., unalienable Rights
– which forever remain beyond reach of any
government or political majority to either define or
grant. In a republic, the Law is the express
protector of these Rights for each and every
Individual, regardless of the will of the political
collective.
It is the latter – a republic – that our Founders
gave us through the Declaration of Independence and
the Constitution, and it is our Republic that
separates our form of government from all others on
the planet. It is our Republic, and our unalienable
Rights, that we hope to reclaim as a result of
Continental Congress 2009.
As part of our ongoing fund-raising efforts to help
fund CC 2009, please consider making a donation to
receive copies of the educational pamphlet, “Democracy
or Republic, Which is It?” Copies can be
obtained through the WTP
online store.
CLICK HERE for the
meeting schedule.
|
