Constitutional Emergency

News With Views

Penned By J.B. Williams
December 6, 2011


At first glance, I had some doubts about all the hoopla over the pending Defense Authorization Act and claims that it was essentially a declaration of war on American citizens, under the guise of national security and annual defense appropriations.


Then I read the bill and connected the dots that every American must connect immediately.


The treasonous text in that bill reads as follows; (pay close attention to the areas in bold)

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force [1] pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b) pending disposition under the law of war.[2]


(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:


(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.


(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,[3] including any person who has committed a belligerent act[4] or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.[5]


Before directly addressing this text and in an effort to fully grasp how this text is an act of treason against the American people, there are a few fundamental facts one must understand.


Our Armed Services exist for one reason alone, at the service of the people, to protect and defend the Unites States, The U.S. Constitution and the American people against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. This is the primary purpose and function of our federal government.


The Laws of War as written by William Winthrop, also known as Military Law or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, operate entirely separate and independent from the Civil Justice System, including the suspension of fundamental Constitutional Rights for both members of the Military and thosedesignated enemy combatants.


Following Bill Clinton’s lead in 1996 and immediately upon seizing office, the Obama Administration issued a Homeland Security Report directly identifying members of the US Military, Veterans and American citizens with dissenting views towards the current direction of our country as “potential domestic terrorists” and “right-wing extremists.”


The Obama Administration has been cross-training state and local law enforcement agencies on dealing with “urban warfare” aimed at so-called “right-wing extremists” which is now defined as anyone opposed to Global Governance and national socialism.


American courts no longer enforce the law or the Constitution. Instead, they make up the law as they go via unbridled interpretation powers exceeding their constitutional authority, all in the name of “social justice,” not to be confused with actual justice.


As a result, the language in Sections 1031 and 1032 of the Defense Authorization Act amount to treason against the American people, as an open-ended power of the Executive Branch to indefinitely detain, incarcerate and interrogate American citizens on the basis of suspicion or accusations without even bring any criminal charges, much less providing due process of the law.


What if the person sitting in the Oval Office is a foreign born domestic enemy of the United States? -- What if the Administration is willing to use the full power of the federal government and the U.S. Military to force its political will upon the people, deeming every dissenter as a “potential domestic terrorist?” -- What if the American courts make up laws as they go without any regard for written laws or the U.S. Constitution?


Guess what? That’s exactly what we have today!


The current Defense Authorization Act gives the President of the United States the unbridled power to use the U.S. Military against American citizens, their Constitutional Rights suspended under the Laws of War.


That’s what this text says and that’s how today’s courts will interpret that language.


Breaking Down the Text


1 - “authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force” – Appropriate force is not the same thing as necessary force. Military force against American citizens is entirely inappropriate. But if the federal government keeps destroying the constitutional republic, it may well become necessary. NO single politician can be trusted with this much power.


2 - “Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.” – Use of Military force against American citizens is entirely inappropriate and even unconstitutional, whether deemed necessary or not. Placing American citizens under the Laws of War is placing them under Martial Law, including the suspension of all Constitutional Rights. It is an act of war against the American people and that is an act of treason.


3 - “associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,” – What constitutes “associated forces” – “engaged in hostilities against the United States?” Are Wall Street protesters engaged in hostilities against the United States? Are college students protesting higher tuitions engaged in hostilities against the United States when they smash store windows or set cars on fire? Is someone engaged in hostilities against France or England a potential domestic terrorist? Are Tea Party rallies an act of aggression against the federal government of the United States? Is the mere accusation enough?


4 - “any person who has committed a belligerent act” – All of the acts described in item above can be deemed “belligerent acts.” Is there any such thing as wrongful prosecution under the Laws of War? You had better read the Laws of War.


5 - “has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces” – Is Ron Paul guilty of hostile acts in support of enemy forces for blaming the United States for all the attacks on the United States? Paul is one of only six House Republicans to vote against the bill. Is Code Pink guilty of aiding and abetting enemy forces? Are they subject to U.S. Military attacks on US soil for their hostile actions in support of our nation’s enemies? Are members of congress currently bankrupting the nation acting hostile and belligerent towards the United States?


The U.S. House passed this bill on May 26, 2011 by a vote of 322-96, including Tea Party darlings Michelle Bachmann, Marco Rubio and Allen West.


The Senate bill passed on December 1, 2011 by a vote of 93-7. Merry Christmas! Only three Senate Republicans voted against the bill, Coburn (OK), Lee (UT) and Paul (KY). Did all other Republicans know what they were voting for?


If you are still trying to figure out just how far your federal government is willing to go to complete implementation of UN Agenda 21 and the U.S. Global Governance Plan, look no further than the passage of the Defense Authorization Act for 2012, paying very close attention to the text discussed in this column.


Could this new law place American soldiers in direct violation of their oaths to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution and the American people against all enemies?

The legislation itself does not… but an order from the President of the United States to go to weapons against American citizens certainly would. How would American soldiers react to such an outrageous order? Only time will tell…


Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Our federal government is 100% committed to implementing a plan for Global Government which will bring about the end of American sovereignty, security and superiority in the world. Citizens willing to stand opposed may indeed fall within the provisional power just granted to the President in this legislation and could well find themselves persecuted under the Laws of War rather than the Civil Justice System.


More than ever in U.S. history, it is vital that the American people to know their enemies and their options. Unless they can find a way to keep Obama from signing this bill into law, their options will be limited to the broad interpretations of today’s broken legal system.


God help us!


© 2011 JB Williams - All Rights Reserved










Views: 838

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Here's what we all have to remember.  "They" can sign all the "laws" into effect they want.  Enforcing them is another question.  "They" (being the "elites") are outnumbered about 300,000,000 Americans to 1,000 or so of "them".  Now, break the math down.  Half of the Americans are pure pussies and won't do anything.  That still leaves us with 150,000,000.  And, as JB says, the original Revolutionary War was fought by about 2% to 3% of the people in the country at the time.  If we only get 2% to step up that's about 3,000,000.  Seems that in DC during 11-11-11 I overheard a discussion regarding numbers and one of the numbers I heard being bantered around was that to fix this thing it will take about 10,000,000 Americans to do it the "easy way" and about 2,000,000 if we have to do it the "hard way".

Personally, at this point, I don't care which way we do it.  Think about that.

There is a law called Posse Comitatus that restricts American military forces activity in the United States. According to a friend, Posse Comitatus has not been repealed.  Is this Bill limited to activity outside the United States?  Somebody in Congress better get wording in the law that says it defined to action outside the United States.......

The House and Senate versions of the Bill will have to be worked out in a conference committee........so we better be telling our reps and Senators what we want them to do........

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens- (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Rep. Tom Rooney R-FL has been appointed to the Conference Committee.  What does this mean??  I'm checking.....

This bill has now gone back to the House. It is in committee right now.  Call your Representative!

H.R.1540 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

http://www.thepeopledecide.us/index.php?bid=449

Today the House sent the military construction bill (H.R.2055) and the defense authorization bill (H.R.1540) to a conference committee to hammer out the differences between the Senate versions and the House versions. 

Here is a link to the actual bill

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540rh/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540r...

Funny how foreign (enemy maybe?) bills get passed in DC and OUR best technology (eg drones) land in enemy territories.

"TREASON IS THE REASON" THIS ACT IS HIGH TREASON.

How can these people pass a bill without first reading it?  What are they doing with the time it would take to read the bills?  Yup, its time to honor the oath we all took......and meant!

The military is our last hope of efficiently and effectively cleansing DC of traitors, if the "current" active military does not act ASAP -We The People will be treated like the "terrorists" by OUR own military...

Terrorists said to be infiltrating military 

Is The Passed Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (Retroactive) To Detain Americans?

The Defense Authorization Act of 2012) appears more threatening to Americans than Hitler's (1933 DISCRIMINATORY LAWS. Hitler's laws set time limits that Germans could be incarcerated for e.g., Serious Disturbance of the Peace and Rioting. But Senators Carl Levin and John McCain’s bill broadly mandates holding Americans indefinitely in Military Custody for being a Belligerent.

Why should anyone be surprised President Obama insisted on indefinite detentions of U.S. Citizens in The Defense Authorization Act? It was widely known that Obama gave a speech in May 2010 at a Security Conference that proposed, incarcerating anyone in indefinite detention without evidence of wrongdoing that government deemed a “combatant” or likely to engage or support a violent act in the future; including U.S. Citizens.

Now that Obama has signed The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, Obama like Hitler, will have the power to arrest members of Congress, drag U.S. Citizens off the street and from their homes to be imprisoned indefinitely based only on Government’s premise someone is a “Combatant” or Belligerent” having or likely to engage in or support a violent act in the future or do something that (might) threaten National Security.

Now that Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, could millions of lawful U.S. activists be subject to indefinite military detention. When you examine Obama’s May 2010 speech, it appears Obama wanted (retroactive power) to incarcerate anyone that government alleged had (prior) committed or supported violent acts on the premise he or she is likely to engage in or support violent acts in the future: some U.S. activists may be vulnerable because no activist knows what other activists or groups they associated or networked did in the past or might do illegally in the future domestically or overseas. U.S. Government need (only allege) a person; group, organization current or former inmate—has committed or might commit a violent act or threaten U.S. National Security to order Indefinite Detention of Americans in military custody with no evidence whatsoever.

Historically when countries have passed police state laws like S.1867, many Citizens abstain from politically speaking out; visiting activists websites or writing comments that might be deemed inappropriate by the Government, i.e. cause someone to be investigated or detained in Military Custody. Are some writers dead-meat with Obama’s signing of S. 1867? It is foreseeable any “American” who writes on the Internet or verbally express an opinion against any entity of U.S. Government or its coalition partners may under the Patriot Act and The Defense Authorization Act of 2012 be deemed by U.S. authorities a “Combatant or Belligerent” or someone likely to engage in, support or provoke violent acts or threaten National Security. U.S. Government can too easily allege an author’s writings inspired Combatant(s) or Belligerent(s) in the past; could in the future or currently, to order an author’s indefinite military detention.

It is problematic that indefinitely detained U.S. Citizens not involved in terrorism or hostile activities, not given Miranda Warnings or allowed legal counsel that are interrogated, will be prosecuted for non-terrorist (ordinary crimes) because of their (alleged admissions) while held in Indefinite Military Detention. Obama will have the power to override the U.S. Constitution. Obama will have the power to detain indefinitely any American without probable cause or evidence. What American will dare speak out against the U.S. government now that Obama has signed The Defense Authorization Act of 2012.

Obama appears to be centralizing the power of federal Government, by getting legislation passed that U.S. government can potentially use to intimidate and threaten any individual or corporation. Hitler got passed similar laws shortly before the burning of the German Parliament building blamed on the communists: immediately after the fire, Hitler used his prior passed police-state laws to coerce corporations and influential Citizens to support passage of fascist legislation e.g., the (1933 DISCRIMINATORY LAWS / DECREE OF THE REICH PRESIDENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE AND STATE that suspended provisions of the German Constitution that protected Citizens’ freedoms and civil liberties. Senators Carl Levin and John McCain’s (Defense Authorization Act of 2012) appears more threatening to Americans than Hitler’ (1933 DISCRIMINATORY LAWS. Hitler’s laws set time limits that Germans could be incarcerated for e.g., Serious Disturbance of the Peace and Rioting. But Senators Carl Levin (D) and John McCain’s ® bill broadly mandates holding Americans indefinitely in Military Custody for being a Combatant or Belligerent. A U.S. Police State Government can use The Defense Authorization Act; and Patriot Act that includes more than 350 civil asset forfeiture laws to threaten or seize the assets of any corporation or individual; to strong-arm U.S. corporations, institutions and others to support government actions including passage of more Police State (Fascist) legislation that will intimidate, threaten and curtail the civil liberties of Americans.

Immediately Below: compare The 1933 Nazi Decrees with Senators Carl Levin and John McCain’s National Defense Authorization Act of 2012.

1933. ROBL. I 83.

 DECREE OF THE REICH PRESIDENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE AND STATE

Note: Based on translations by State Department, National Socialism, 1942 PP. 215-17, and Pollak, J.K., and Heneman, H.J., The Hitler Decrees, (1934), pp. 10-11.7

In virtue of Section 48 (2) of the German Constitution, the following is decreed as a defensive measure against Communist acts of Violence, endangering the state:

Section 1

Sections 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. Thus, restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the right of assembly and the right of association, and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications, and warrants for house-searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

Section 2

If in a state the measures necessary for the restoration of public security and order are not taken, the Reich Government may temporarily take over the powers of the highest state authority.

Section 4

Whoever provokes, or appeals for or incites to the disobedience of the orders given out by the supreme state authorities or the authorities subject to then for the execution of this decree, or the orders given by the Reich Government according to Section 2, is punishable—insofar as the deed, is not covered by the decree with more severe punishment and with imprisonment of not less that one month, or with a fine from 150 up to 15,000 Reichsmarks.

Whoever endangers human life by violating Section 1, is to be punished by sentence to a penitentiary, under mitigating circumstances with imprisonment of not less than six months and, when violation causes the death of a person, with death, under mitigating circumstances with a penitentiary sentence of not less that two years. In addition the sentence my include confiscation of property.

Whoever provokes an inciter to or act contrary to public welfare is to be punished with a penitentiary sentence, under mitigating circumstances, with imprisonment of not less than three months.

Section 5

The crimes which under the Criminal Code are punishable with penitentiary for life are to be punished with death: i.e., in Sections 81 (high treason), 229 (poisoning), 306 (arson), 311 (explosion), 312 (floods), 315, paragraph 2 (damage to railroad properties, 324 (general poisoning).

Insofar as a more severe punishment has not been previously provided for, the following are punishable with death or with life imprisonment or with imprisonment not to exceed 15 years:

1. Anyone who undertakes to kill the Reich President or a member or a commissioner of the Reich Government or of a state government, or provokes to such a killing, or agrees to commit it, or accepts such an offer, or conspires with another for such a murder;

2. Anyone who under Section 115 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious rioting) or of Section 125 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious disturbance of the peace) commits the act with arms or cooperates consciously and intentionally with an armed person;

3. Anyone who commits a kidnapping under Section 239 of the Criminal with the intention of making use of the kidnapped person as a hostage in the political struggle.

Section 6

This decree enters in force on the day of its promulgation.

Reich President                                                                                                                                                        Reich Chancellor                                                                                                                                                       Reich Minister of the Interior

Reich Minister of Justice

RSS

About

Old Rooster created this Ning Network.

This effort is focused on sacrifice to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Fox News

Tech Notes

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11



HOW TO JOIN YOUR STATE GROUP

1. Click on State Groups tab at the top of the page.
2. Find your State Flag
3. Click on Flag.
4. Look for link to join Your State Group near the top of the State Groups page.
5. Click on it.

Follow the Prompts


How to post "live" URL in posts at PFA............. Adding URLs in blog posts that are not "live" is a waste of everyone's time.....
Here's how....if anyone has better guidance send to me.....
First........type your text entry into the post block to include typing or paste the URL you want us to view........when finished with the text, highlight and copy the URL in the text.......then click the "add hyperlink" tool in the B, I, U box just above the text entry, after clicking, a window will open asking for the URL...paste the URL in the box and click "OK". You have now made the URL "live"...........it shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......

Events

© 2020   Created by Old Rooster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service