Federal Judge Kathryn Forrest in NY, who was appointed by Obama, rejected this week the Obama administration’s legal motion to reverse her earlier injunction against the authority of the President to indefinitely detain Americans without trial using the U.S. military. The authority was granted in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012, which was signed into law by Obama in December 2011.
On May 30th, Judge Forrest granted a preliminary injunction blocking the President from gaining the power to detain citizens indefinitely without charge. Earlier in May, she held Section 1021 unconstitutional, saying it “failed to pass constitutional muster.”
All persons arrested and detained according to the provisions of NDAA 2012 section 1021, including those detained on U.S. soil, whether detained indefinitely or not, are required to be held by the United States Armed Forces.
The deviousness by the Obama Administration in NDAA runs deep: Democrat and “liberal” friends pay attention here. According to Senator Carl Levin, (D-Michigan):
“The language which precluded the application of section 1021 [of NDAA 2012] to American Citizens was in the bill that we originally approved in the Armed Services Committee and the Administration asked us to remove the language which says that US Citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”
Here is Levin on CSPAN YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO23HoRv6Ms
Levin’s comments are also in the Congressional Record on November 17, 2011.
Yet President Obama issued a signing statement in December, 2011 posing as the defender of citizens’ rights, claiming he had forced Congress to add language to protect “the safety, security and liberty of the American people.” Obama wrote:
“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.”
Obama says he will not use it, but why then did he ask for such authority if he did not intend to use it? Now, this past week Obama motioned to have the injunction dismissed, and he failed. Why would Obama fight the injunction if he did not intend to use this authority?
Ron Paul spoke about the nefarious NDAA in his editorial at the link below:
“Last week was discouraging and disappointing to those of us who value our Constitution. That the US government asserts the legal authority to pick up Americans within the United States and hold them indefinitely and secretly without a trial should be incredibly disturbing to all of us. Americans should check how their representative voted. Politicians should not be allowed to get away with undermining our liberties in this manner.”
The American Civil Liberties Union (an organization with whom I usually disagree strongly) has stated that “While President Obama issued a signing statement saying he had ‘serious reservations’ about the provisions of NDAA 2012 which is now law of the land, the President’s statement only applies to how his administration would use the authorities granted by the NDAA.” and, despite claims to the contrary, “The statute contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision… [without] temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.” The ACLU also maintains that “the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war.”
In addition to the NDAA 2012, President Obama has through a series of Executive Orders given himself the powers to declare martial law – especially in the event of a war with Iran. It is a sweeping power grab that should motivate every American to take action. Some in Congress have taken notice.
Rep. Sandy Adams of Florida stated in introducing her resolution, co-sponsored by 37 Representatives:
“President Obama issued a National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order on March 16, 2012 that raises some serious concerns in its wording and intent. The order has historically been based on the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.). However, unlike previous presidents, President Obama’s executive order broadens the definition of ‘national defense.’ This leaves the door open for the president to give himself control over American resources during both times of peace, and national crisis. In response to the order, I have introduced a resolution to make it clear the president cannot use this as an excuse to abuse his executive power.”
Rep. Adams’ bill presently has 37 co-sponsors — but she needs many more to get the bill to the floor of the House. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112%3AH.CON.RES.110:
We have learned from UK newspapers that there are now 63 active drone sites in 20 U.S. states. The government was forced to disclose the drones with the Freedom of Information Act. Do you have an unmanned surveillance drone over your neighborhood?
Libertarians and conservatives like Charles Krauthammer are verbally blasting the drones, even implying that Americans will shoot them down. http://www.salon.com/2012/05/17/conservatives_turn_on_drones/singleton/
“…the high court has ruled unanimously against the government on religious liberty, criminal procedure and property rights. When the administration can’t get even a single one of the liberal justices to agree with it in these unrelated areas of the law, that’s a sign there’s something wrong with its constitutional vision.”
The following link contains a somewhat exhaustive list of the Obama administration’s many legal transgressions. These are regulations and portions of laws which are today being repeatedly blocked by independent judges. The total number and comprehensiveness of Obama’s grab for power are shocking. But what about 2013 if Obama is re-elected? What would happen to us after another 4 years of Obama judicial appointments? Who will stop them? Hopefully some of my many lawyerly friends will comment.
Then there is the attempt to pass a so-called “fairness law”, i.e. affirmative action hiring and pay for women. Even the female Democrat senators pushing this legislation don’t have equal pay for their staff. Here’s why this is a Prison America issue:
“Once government gets to dictate to employers how they should value and reward individual employees, America as we’ve know it would cease to exist,” he said. “If we ever decide that Congress or executive branch bureaucrats have the sufficient knowledge, much less the integrity, to successfully undertake such a function, we’re all doomed.” http://freebeacon.com/equal-pay-for-play/
“Immoral beyond redemption” is an excellent dissection of the issue before America by Walter E. Williams, professor of economics at GeorgeMasonUniversity. http://www.desototimes.com/articles/2012/06/04/opinion/editorials/doc4fcd09b66c4a8109124187.txt
“The Energy Department’s inspector general has launched more than 100 criminal investigations” related to the department’s green-energy programs….Hoover Institution scholar Peter Schweizer reported in his book, “Throw Them All Out,” fully 71 percent of the Obama Energy Department’s grants and loans went to “individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party.” Collectively, these Obama cronies raised $457,834 for his campaign, and they were in turn approved for grants or loans of nearly $11.35 billion.”
But it’s not just the Department of Energy. U.S. Attorney General Holder and his Department of Justice are in up to their necks, and the “Fast and Furious” scandal is not the least of their problems. Their worse problem is rarely reported, but no doubt will be investigated in a subsequent administration: DOJ has failed to prosecute obvious cases of voter intimidation by Black Panthers and SEIU in the 2008 election, cases which federal prosecuting lawyers in DOJ were prevented from prosecuting.
“RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM.” (beginning pages 18 – 41) http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Update-on-Fast-and-Furious-with-attachment-FINAL.pdf
Congressman Darell Issa chairs the House committee investigating AG Holder and the DOJ’s involvement in the “Fast and Furious” scandalous sales of arms to Mexican drug gangs. Issa explains the case for holding AG Holder in contempt of Congress at this link below. Recent infighting within the White House between David Axelrod and AG Holder point to higher level approval than AG Holder.
In his novel 1984, George Orwell illustrated the technique of doublespeak…a deliberately ambiguous or coded form of speaking intended to have the opposite meaning, opposite to the truth or real intent. Each administration has its spin. Obama and his minions have their narrative, which is exposed in this 12 minute video. “Political Correctness Exposed” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhugUzUuPkE&feature=related
Democrat Senators Reid and Schumer want to create a tax wall to keep Americans and their money inside America so they can be taxed. This smacks of theSoviet Union’s iron curtain. But it is even worse. In this unconstitutional legislation you are guilty, fined and blocked from entry into America until you prove you are innocent of their created crime. Of course it is incomprehensible and huge IRS regulations, laws and rates that are the real problems causing Americans to want to take their money and leave. Government is erecting a regulatory wall to keep Americans inside Prison America.
President Obama and Democrats are pushing America into a class-based, social democracy styled after the EU and Obama’s several Executive Orders are openly intended to integrate and standardize regulations with Europe. Once regulatory integration is complete or harmonized, the foundation is set for a global government and Prison Planet.
So, what do Europeans think about their European Union? According to former president of Germany Roman Herzog:
“EU integration …. has become not just a process of depriving Europe’s peoples of their national democracy and independence. Within each member state it represents a gradual coup by government executives against legislatures, and by politicians against the citizens who elect them.” “Now that the communist threat of the Soviet Union has moved to the scrap heaps of history, we Europeans are faced with a new threat to our Liberty. That threat is not coming from a harsh, iron fisted, totalitarian regime, but from what best can be described as ‘soft totalitarianism’, directed by legions of bureaucrats with their centre of gravity lying in Brussels.” “Most people have a fundamentally positive attitude to European integration. But at the same time, they have an ever increasing feeling that something is going wrong, that an non-transparent, complex, intricate, mammoth institution has evolved, divorced from the factual problems and national traditions, grabbing ever greater competences and areas of power; that the democratic control mechanisms are failing: in brief, that it cannot go on like this.” “By far the largest part of the current laws in Germany are agreed by the (EU) Council of Ministers and not the German parliament…Therefore the question has to be asked whether Germany can still unreservedly call itself a parliamentary democracy.”
Then there is Nigel Farage, Member of European Parliament, speaking to the European government in a blockbuster “The Games is Up.” The leaders of the countries in Europe do not even know how the European Union leaders are chosen and in some cases have never heard of the European Union leaders. But Obama, Democrats, RINO Republicans and even some usually conservative Republicans like Senator Trent Lott are rushing to change America into the European model and world government.
“…the United States may be heading toward a two-tiered, European-style economic system, where taxpayers in prudent, prosperous states are forced by Washington to subsidize the imprudent and improvident governments of neighboring states.” ~ Senator Jim DeMint
Do not disregard the warning in this blog as a conspiracy theory. It is in fact a long running conspiracy and as illustrated in the above links it is in fact happening. It is so big and complex in scope that it is hard to believe, that’s part of their strategy, but the implications and scope of this global agenda come right down to your neighborhood, your private property and your individual freedom. The conspirators have been openly implementing the infrastructure very methodically for years.
Learn all you can about UN Agenda 21, The Law of the Sea Treaty, The UN Millennium Project and UN IPCC. These documents require diligent reading between the lines to understand the doublespeak and narrative. All of these programs are already being acted on by the U.S. government and are in different stages of completion. The legislation providing U.S. support for the UN Millennium Project is the only piece of legislation initiated by Senator Barack Obama during his partial term in Congress. It is lofty and noble sounding but impractical project for a worldwide war on poverty that would transform the entire planet into a global welfare state, where an international central bank redistributes wealth (0.7% of their GNP) from rich populations to poor ones to promote “the economic development and welfare of developing countries” and the wealthy countries subject their people to many types of monitoring by international agencies.
I have written many times about the many problems with the global warming agenda, now know as climate change. This is a program sponsored by the UN IPCC and 190 nations. According to the Congressional Budget Office and the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. alone has spent $68.4 billion on the climate change agenda just since 2008. Dr. Vaclav Klaus, an economist and President of the Czech Republic leaves no question about the real agenda in his now 5 year old book Blue Planet in Green Shackles:
“Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.”
If and when these several treaties are signed by a U.S. President (or given the status of international law via Executive Orders), then by law Americans will once again be subjects to be ruled over by external government agencies. In many cases we already are. For example, President Obama already signed an order subjecting U.S. citizens – including U.S. military and previous Presidents – for the first time to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court at the Hague.
Here is a short article on “Five UN Treaties You Must Know About.”
As you investigate more you will realize how serious and how far this conspiracy has progressed. And, by the way, the conspirators truly believe they are doing their best – noblesse oblige – doing their duty guided by the best and the brightest who know what is best for the rest of us.
Americans today still have an electoral means to throw off these chains. But, as has already happened in Europe, once the treaties are signed we will no longer have the legal means to throw off the chains of PrisonAmerica. The only option that will remain is violence and an American Spring.