Timothy N. Baldwin, JD.
November 18, 2009
Evident intents and purposes, a long train of federal government abuses, and my utter disgust with (what is even hard to consider) my country anymore, among other reasons, compels me to be as frank and candid as I can possibly be, without fear of being labeled and marginalized by those who cannot seem to grasp the concepts and principles I am about to unfold, or by those who simply disagree. Anyone with an ear, who is able to hear; and with eyes, who is able to read; and a brain, who is able to think, should know about the Copenhagen Conference to take place from December 7 – 18, 2009, in which President Obama is to meet with other heads of state to address global governance concerns of the supposed global warming crisis and its impact on the nations of the world. Openly admitted, this meeting is to produce at the very least a politically (as compared to legally) binding agreement as a spring board for future agreements, whereby the governments of the world can create global regulations, controls and laws in response to global warming.
Now, it is no surprise that the President of the United States, Obama, is considering entering into a partnership-type agreement with other nations of the world. This model of foreign policy has been going on in the United States since the creation of the League of Nations under the Woodrow Wilson administration. G.W. Bush was no different as he entered into the Security and Prosperity Partnership agreement with Canada and Mexico during his administration. Likewise, John McCain, if he had become president, had plans on executing his League of Democracies idea, whereby more than 100 democracies around the world would enter into a political compact of what George Washington would have described as entangling alliances. The latest international alliance and compact under Obama comes as no shock as he continues the empire-building and global-unification legacy of the United States presidents for over 100 years.
Is the Copenhagen Conference to bring to fruition the goal of global unification, which previous presidents have attempted but have yet to completely succeed? Many have speculated that the Copenhagen designs would in fact create a global government. The result of this would in effect bind the citizens of the United States to a jurisdiction and authority it has never consented to, formed or authorized.
Please understand: the most fundamental and basic natural rights expressed by our forefathers is the right to be governed only by our consent, by a government we have created for our interests; by agents who act in trust of our freedoms, rights and liberties, who are accountable directly to their principals (the people who authorized their power); and by those who have non-conflicting interests to those they represent. It is philosophically, physically and politically impossible that the people of these states could retain their natural right of self-government under any type of global government under the circumstances posed in the Copenhagen Conference or under any other circumstances. Global governance, in any form, is unnatural, unbiblical and un-American.
Now, whether or not the Copenhagen Conference produces a global government, or whether it will be another attempt in the future, time will tell. But let us get something very clear and straight right now. As soon as our government attempts to subject the citizens of these states to the authority, jurisdiction, control and regulation of any so-called government not contained in our state and federal constitutions, at that exact point and time, our government has expressly declared itself to be at open war with the people of the states of America. Allow philosophical forefather, John Locke, to describe it his own way:
“[U]sing force upon the people without authority, and contrary to the trust put in him that does so, is a state of war with the people…[and] the people have a right to remove [such a force] by force. The use of force without authority, always puts him that uses it into a state of war, as the aggressor, and renders him liable to be treated accordingly.” John Locke and C. B. Macpherson, ed., Second Treatise of Government, (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1980), 80-81.
If the federal government, through the executive branch, tries to use the treaty power of the United States Constitution to override and circumvent the natural laws and principles as expressed in our Declaration of Independence, upon which the constitution was predicated, then that person and all those who comply with his orders to enforce such an act have undoubtedly placed us in a state of nature and a state of war, whereby each person of these states has a natural right to declare to the world that he is no longer willingly subject to the authority of the federal government; that he declares his independence from this totalitarian, despotic and tyrannical regime; that he invokes his God-given right to defend his natural rights to be governed by his consent only; that any and all attempts made by these despots to subjugate our natural rights will be resisted--with force if necessary; and in similar order, each state in the union has the natural right to dissolve all ties in the union created by the Constitution of the United States of America and to defend the powers granted to them by the sovereigns (the people) of the state constitution.
You slave-lovers can try to justify this (illegitimate) federal government’s “right” and “authority” to enter into such agreements (as well as all of the other myriad of unconstitutional actions forced upon us) with other nations all you want. I, along with millions of other Americans, will never accept your barbaric, brute-beast concepts of politics, where your conclusions of government power and citizen submission equate to a king-peasant relationship or worse. You can postulate all you want about the constitutionality or legality of any treaty made by the president as being the supreme law of the land. You can cite U.S. Supreme Court cases, legal articles, law professors, and politicians all you want. Go on: knock yourselves out.
But know where freedom-lovers stand now and forever. My forefathers rejected those notions as blatantly unjust, and so I must. My forefathers fought bloody wars to defeat the efforts of would-be despots so that freedom may thrive, and so will I. My forefathers insisted on creating a government that best reflects the evil tendency of human nature, to protect their posterity from the Nimrods of this world, and I will too.
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
If you find my beliefs to contain fallacy and error, well then, we will just have to agree to disagree, and I will let God be the judge of my actions and yours, if not here on earth, then in the places hereafter. And I will let future generations curse your name or mine for the beliefs and actions we hold and advance today. “But be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up." (Daniel 3:18)
Go to www.libertydefenseleague.com for articles, speeches and interviews of Timothy Baldwin.
� 2009 Timothy N. Baldwin, JD - All Rights Reserved
Timothy Baldwin is an attorney from Pensacola, FL, who received his bachelor of arts degree at the University of West Florida and who graduated from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham, AL. After having received his Juris Doctorate degree from Cumberland School of Law, Baldwin became a Felony Prosecutor in the 1st District of Florida. In 2006, he started his own law practice, where he created specialized legal services entirely for property management companies.
Like his father, Chuck Baldwin, Timothy Baldwin is an astute writer of cutting-edge political articles, which he posts on his website, www.libertydefenseleague.com. Baldwin is also the author of the soon-to-be-released book entitled, Freedom For A Change, in which Baldwin expounds the fundamental principles of freedom believed by America’s forefathers and gives inspiring and intelligent application of those principles to our current political and cultural standing.
Baldwin is involved in important state sovereignty movement issues, including being co-counsel in the federal litigation in Montana involving the Firearms Freedom Act, the likes of which is undoubtedly a pivotal and essential ingredient to restoring freedom and federalism in the states of America. Baldwin is also a member of freedom organizations, such as The Oath-Keepers, and believes that the times require all freedom-loving Americans to educate, invigorate and activate the principles of freedom within the States of America for ourselves and our posterity.
Web site: LibertyDefenseLeague